Volume XL Tuesday Province of Newfoundland FORTIETH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NEWFOUNDLAND Second Session VERBATIM REPORT {Hansard) Speaker: Honourable Patrick McNicholas ' Number 6 25 March 1986

The House met at 3:00 p.m. MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): Order, please! DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I move that this House resolve itself into a Committee of Ways and Means and that the Speaker do now leave the Chair. MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that the House resolve itself into a Committee of Ways and Means and that I do now leave the Chair. The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Hr. Speaker, This day I bring you good news, and, through you, good news to the people of this Province.

Excepting only its first year in office, the Peckford Administration, from late 1980 to early 1984, had to labour against adverse economic events brought on by a world-wide recession, exacerbated by national policies in Ottawa out of tune with regional realities. The year 1984 saw the beginning of the end of that dark night and today, on behalf of a battle-scarred but victorious Government, I rejoice in proclaiming, Kr. Speaker, the certainty of a new era in the fortunes of the long-suffering people of this Province.

L277 Karch 25, 1986 Vol XL The worst recession since before the War, struck this Province a year before it was visited upon the rest of the Country. By reason of the . export nature of the major sectors of our resource economy, the recession here persisted a year longer than elsewhere in Canada.

Those four recessionary years saw the average annual rate of increase in Govenunent•s Current Account revenues decelerate to 10.6 per cent (less than 1 per cent a year net inflation) whilst persistent demands for public services permitted the restraining of public expenditures to no less an average annual growth rate than 12. 8 per cent. The widened gap between our means and our expenses stemmed, of course. from a sharp contraction in our Provincial economy of 6.9 per cent in real terms, and it was only in the latter part of 1985, in fact, that our Gross Domestic Product approached the level attained in 1979.

Only history will fully document the multitude of measures which this Goverrummt constructed to stem the hemorrha~ in public finances during· -- that . benighted period. Fortunately, we were successful to a degree hardly matched elsewhere in the nation. Fortunately, we were successful to a degree hardly matched elsewhere in the nation. Nevertheless, the toll was heavy, and debt has accumulated on current Account of over $230,000,000.

The strain was shared also by our people, by our public servants required to forego salary increases despite continuing inflation, by our pensioners, and to a limited extent by all those relying on health, education, and other social services, as well as certain business undertakings No. 6 R277

accustomed to promotional and other public assistance. Even during the worst of times, however, Government reacted to an almost complete disappearance of private sector investment by a deliberate loosening of its purse strings for public capital expenditures on schools, hospitals and other building projects, supplemented by loan guarantees and cash investments in the fishery, the paper manufacturing industry, mining and other industrial undertakings.

Again, I believe that history will applaud this Government's drive and daring for stepping with such firm determination into. the breach to shield the Newfoundland workforce from the worst effects of the 1980's recession. It was a necessary and noteworthy rescue mission, which exacted its own financial toll, as our Capital Account accumulated new debt totalling $618,200,000 during the recessionary period. Kr.

Speaker, With economic recovery in the United States, which saw its Gross National Product advance fully 10.5 per cent over the two-year period, 1983 - 1984, with the vital ingredient of a determined new management team in Ottawa as of September, 1984 , and with the welcomed return of sanity in interest and exchange rate policies, the Newfoundland economy advanced 5.6 per cent over the past two-year period, ending December 1985.

We stand today, therefore, at the outset of fiscal 1986, with the expectation of 2.7 per cent growth in the Newfoundland economy, a low 3. 5 per cent inflation rate, probably a 10 per L278 Karch 25, 1986 Vol XL cent real growth in our seminal fishing industry, a modernizing paper making industry in Central and Western Newfoundland, a secured offshore oil industry, and a strengthened service sector anticipating 2.5 per cent real growth. In a word, Kr.

Speaker. notwithstanding the unwelcome vicissitudes of recent international events, the solid base for the Newfoundland economy which this Government has laboured so hard to emplace is beginning to produce results which bid fair to accelerate at a pace unlikely matched throughout the long and varied history of our Island home and Labrador. FIIWJCIAL REVIEW AllD OUTLOOIC Mr. Speaker, let us at this stage review the financial progress of the Government itself during recent years, and that in prospect for the fiscal year ahead.

This can probably best be capsulized by focusing our attention on the deficit status of our CUrrent Account; the-~-plotting of shortfalls in reverwes _against expenditures provides a -·.useful graph for assessing our financial progress during these early post-recession years. The deficit for 1984 -- 85 totalled $87,000,000 in round numbers, despite the vigorous application of a restraint program to all Government activities.

During the year now ending, that is, fiscal 1985 - 86, I am happy to report to this Honourable House that the deficit will be down to $51,700,000 - over $21,000,000 lower than projected in the Budget estimates last Kay. Kr. Speaker, Adjustments to revenue estimated by Federal authorities account for No. 6 R278

much of that welcome improvement, due in no small part to persistent efforts by ourselves and our counterparts in Ottawa. The printed version of my Address, Mr. Speaker, will contain a table setting out our financial performance for the year just ending. I am equally delighted to report that we are projecting an even lower $49,300,000 deficit for 1986 - 87, down more than $23.000,000 from the deficit I felt necessary to project in the Budget I presented last Kay, and some $2,000, 000 below the revised 1985 - 86 deficit I have just announced. Again, ~n the printed version, there is a table setting out those facts.

Kr. Speaker, that is part of the good news promised at the beginning of my Address. Although unexpected addi tiona! expenditures were encountered during 1985-86, particularly for teachers' salaries and various social assistance programs, our taxation, transfer and other revenues increased even more, giving the improved year-end results relative to the Budget estimate. Similarly, even though net expenditures during 1986-87 are projected to grow by 6.8 per cent, Current Account revenues will grow by 7 .1 per cent, giving the lower deficit.

In other words, we are beating the deficit problem that has plagued us since 1982, we have stepped of the "slippery slope'' which was our fate for four trying years from 1981 onward, we have turned our Budget around through assiduous effort during the three most recent considering. years we are Kr. Speaker, Let no one think L279 Karch 25, 1986 Vol XL that this happy trend of declining deficits has been achieved with ease or with luck.

With most careful and painstaking financial management; with pressing emphasis on economy and productivity in all our operations, whilst preserving those investments and promotions critical to economic and social development; with continued deferral to more affluent times of certain planned initiatives (such as construction of a new House of Assembly, car allowances for senior staff, particular new constructions, etc.); and with relentless consultations and representations to the Federal Government pertaining to regional assistance which have met with considerable success, this Government, over the past three years, has employed the limited means at the disposal of the public purse to put in place a remedial budgetary process hardly matched anywhere else in Canada, by either the Federal or any provincial government.

With continuing care, we will maintain and accelerate a hastening pace towards a fully balanced Current Account budget within the near future. GOD P.APD OB HEALTH CARE Kr. Speaker, Honourable Members are aware that, as part of our drive for rational funding of public services, Government published a Green Paper on health care expenditures late in the year and received over 60 submissions of recommendations and suggestions from the public in time for consideration during the Budget preparation.

Of the four main options spelled out in the Paper for handling the health care system funding problem, none found favour with our respondents. Accordingly, I am pleased to Ho. 6 R279 . -- ~· ..... -.

announce that GoveLnment has readily accepted that verdict of the public - there will be no deficit financing of the health care system itself in this Province, we will not privatize major elements of the system, there will not be reductions in needed health services beyond Royal Commission recommendations, and no new forms of taxation or premiums will be levied to finance health. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! DR.

COLLINS: Rather, GoveLnment has embraced the majority opinion of _respondents that GQvernment should continue vigorous pursuit of its campaign to enhance cost-effectiveness, as laid out by the Royal Commission on Hospital and Nursing Home Costs, and should persist in active, innovative co-operation with hospital management and other authorities in the field to deliver ever greater services more effectively and at lowest unit cost. We are pleased that our policies in this area have been roundly commended by the public through their responses to the Green Paper. Mr.

Speaker, particularly on behalf of my bon. colleague, the Minister of Health, Government formally extends to all respondents for their thoughtful efforts towards their fellow citizens, and each will receive an individual reply now that government's decision is made known. lPISCAL I!EASURES Mr.

Speaker, the second item of particularly good news I bring to this House and to the people is L280 March 25, 1986 Vol XL that GoveLnment has attained its notable budgetary success for 1986-87 with only small recourse to fiscal and revenue measures, the implementation of which will provide an additional $20,200,000 in 1986-87, * Government has decided it is no longer necessary to maintain the special stimulative reduction in * Retail Sales Tax on building materials, temporarily instituted in 1982, with the result that the tax rate will return to the 12 per cent level as in effect for most consumer items, effective immediately.

The Insurances Premiums Tax will be replaced at the same level, by a Retail Sales Tax on insurance, to take effect April 1st, 1986.

This will be administratively easier to deal with and will affect only certain public corporations, but not individuals or private businesses. * The relatively low taxation level on loose tobacco will be increased somewhat, yielding an additional 50 cents on a 200 gr~ - tin, effective immediately. * An increased marlwp by the Newfoundland Liquor Corporation on spirits will yield an additional $1,000,000 in profits, but there will be no increase in the Corporation • s markup on beer sales. * No. 6 And, certain increased fees will be modestly, R280

..... including Motor Vehicle Registration, Drivers' Licences, the Registry of Deeds, and tuition fees in vocational schools and colleges, the last mentioned by 5 per cent, not much more than the rate of inflation. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Shame! Shame! BXPDDITURE PROGJW!ME Mr. Speaker, I have been pacing myself somewhat impatiently in getting to this next

section of my good news Address. The Estimates for the coming fiscal year provide . incr~ased funding amounts for a wide range of needed ongoing public services and programs, and reflect our assessment of the most cost-effective use of our financial resources. It is my pleasure now to announce the more significant items of public interest, on which my bon. colleague~, the ministers of the departments concerned, will elaborate later. Pensions An annual increase of 4 per cent, with a floor of $240, is approved for all individuals receiving Government pensions, effective April 1st, 1986. SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Hear, hear! DR. COLLINS: Bducation I am pleased to announce that a 6 per cent increase in per pupil operating grants is provided to all school boards and the special L281 March 25, 1986 Vol XL grant to compensate for lost revenues related to declining pupil enrolments is continued.

With the continued decline in interest rates, the special temporary interest subsidy introduced when rates were extremely high a few years ago will be eliminated, but I am pleased also to announce that an additional $1,000,000 will be distributed, on the basis of greatest need, to boards primarily serving rural areas of the Province. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! DR. COLLINS: The $20,000,000 per year school construction program is extended beyond the three-year period initially announced to include a fourth year in 1988-89.

Post-secondary Bducation As indicated recently, projects totalling $34,000,000 have been approved from the Federal/Provincial Offshore Development Fund, specifically: $25,000,000 for a Centre for Earth Resources Research at Memorial University; $1,000,000 for a computer-aided design facility at Memorial's Engineering School; $5,000,000 for an Offshore Survival Training Centre for .-the Marine Institute; and $3,000,000 for equipment for Occupational Trades Skills Training at the College of Trades and Technology and at various vocational schools. Cash flows on these projects in 1986-87 will be $10,500,000.

Let me announce three further significant expenditures for post-secondary education: No. 6 R281

* First, Memorial University's operating and furnishings/equipment grants, on which the Honourable Minister concerned will later comment more fully. These grants are increased overall by 9.6 per cent. one of the largest increases in the Budget. to a total of $78 1 900,000; * 2,ooo.ooo out of a total $5,100,00 for the School of Fine Arts at the Sir Wilfred Grenfell College in Corner Brook - further evidence of this Government' s ·strong commitment . to t~e Arts; * Initial funding of $1,000,000 for a $3,000,000 extension to the Faculty of Business building at Memorial University. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! DR.

COLLINS: .Job Creation Mr.

Speaker, it is my privilege now to announce the main components of our short-term creation program for the year ahead: L282 * $2,000,000 for a Student Summer Employment Program in conjunction with the Federal "Challenge '86" Program; * A total of 770 seasonal jobs in silviculture activities through the through the Department of Forest Resources and Lands and in co-operation with Karch 25, 1986 Vol XL * the pulp companies; $3,500,000 as towards the Canadian .Job Program; and paper our share $35,000,000 Strategy * $27,000,000 for the Community Development Program in the Department of Social Services which will create up to 12,000 short-term jobs in 1986 as happened in 1985.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! DR. COLLINS: Municipal Assistance I am pleased to announce a recent decision which Government has taken with respect to municipal assistance to the City of Corner Brook. It has been decided that Government will reimburse approximately 15 per cent of the annual fire protection costs of the City of Corner Brook in order to compensate for the costs of fire protection for non-taxable Provincial Government properties within the city's boundaries. Additionally.

Government is increasing its municipal firefighting equipment allocation to $750 1 000, representing a $230,000 increase over 1985-86 1 to assist municipalities to acquire essential new equipment under this 75125 cost-shared program. Health In the area of health care, Government is announcing significant expenditures to improve services in all areas of !Jo. 6 R282

the Province: L283 * $6,000,000 for the Peninsula Hospital; Burin * * * $4,500,000 construction $16,000,000 of the Grand to commence of the redevelopment Falls Hospital; $1,800,000 to construct an extension for ou~patients and ambulatory care at the Baie Verte Hospital; Funding to enable the Clarenville Hospital to become operational this year; * Construction funds totalling $3,700,000 to commence the new 75-bed chronic care/clinic facility at Botwood; * Funds have been provided through the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation for a total of 105 new chronic care beds to be added to the Agnes Pratt Senior Citizens Home in St.

John's and the Golden Heights Manor Home in Bonavista; * Funding for the operation of the following new chronic care facilities: the 7 5-bed Lion • s Manor Senior Citizens Home, Placentia; the 40-bed Harbour Lodge extension, Carbonear; and, the 50-bed extension to Bay St. George Senior Citizens Home; * Funding to provide for 40 new staff positions in existing nursing homes around the Province to upgrade nursing care, a 4 March 25, 1986 Vol XL per cent increase rates to licenced home operators and for additional home beds. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! DR.

COLLINS: Social Services in the boarding $200,000 boarding It is a pleasant duty to announce significant expenditures for improvements in the social services area: * A 4 per cent increase is provided for all components of the Social Assistance Program to take effect April 1st, 1986; * Five additional group homes are funded for various categories of children in need; * $150,000 is allocated for assistance in purchasing a new "Good Will Centre•• building in St.

John's; * $145,000 is allotted for a physically disabled group home to be operated at the Orange Home; * Three new group homes .-and a specialized open custody group home for young offenders are funded; * $450,000 is assigned to begin development of a new closed custody facility for young offenders. SOME HOH. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! DR. COLLIHS: Ho. 6 R283

Fishery Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure now to outline major initiatives for our fishery: L284 * A new type of middle distance fishing vessel will be designed at Marys town Shipyard Limited, which will construct one new such vessel, and will participate with other local shipyards in the construction of a second new middle distance fishing vessel.

These two vessels will operate in conjunction with the two existing middle distance vessels owned by the .Department of Fisheries, purchased for pilot program purposes; * Over $400,000 is provided for an expanded acquaculture development program, and as well a Retail Sales Tax exemption is granted on certain equipment and materials used in commercial aquaculture operations; * $350,000 has been supplied for expanded departmental quality and productivity enhancement programs; * * * $6,500,000 will be supplied through the Fisheries Loan Board for loans and other assistance to the inshore fishery; $3, 000, 000 is provided for completion of the Marine Service Centre in Green Bay and for a new straddle crane and related wharf facilities at Harbour Grace; An additional $1,300,000 Karch 25, 1986 Vol XL over that expended in 1985 will be spent on other fisheries infrastructure; * $2,400,000 is provided as the Province's portion of an $8,000,000 contribution from the Burin Peninsula Development Fund towards the expansion of the secondary processing facility and the construction of the trawler refit centre at Burin by Fishery Products International.

SOME HOH. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! DR. COLLINS: Small Business It is especially exciting to announce new thrusts for small business promotion: * The limit on Rural Development Authority loans has been doubled to $$50,000, and the limit for the Farm Development Loan Board has been increased from $30,000 to $75,000.

In both cases, preferential interest rates are maintained at three points below bank prime; * The Agriculture Development Fund has been boosted to $1,300,000 for 1986-87 so that our farmers can improve buildings, breeding stock, and land development; * An allocation of over $1,000,000 has been provided to the tourism advertising budget, aimed particularly at Eastern Ho. 6 R284

Canadian and Northeastern United States markets. This more aggressive promotional campaign is expected to result in an additional $10,000,000 in tourism expenditures in the Province.

In addition, the Tourism Development Subsidiary Agreement is expected to inject $5,000,000 into the industry this year, levering a further $12,000,000 from the private sector, for improved tourist facilities and attractions in the Province; * We are prepat:ed to support financially a new private business engaged in car wreck and metal recycling in the Province this year, which will have highly desirable environmental spin-off benefits; * The incubator mall at Pasadena will be brought to completion and planning is in its final stage to allow commencement of the Port-aux-Basques incubator mall.

This will be complemented by the newly opened Federally sponsored Innovation and Entrepreneurial Management Corporation .(TIEM) Enterprise Centre in St. John's. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! DR. COLLINS: Forestry The Budget includes several initiatives aimed at strengthening L285 March 25, 1986 Vol XL .. the contribution made to our economy by the forestry sector.

Over $27,5000,000 is provided for forest resource management programs including more than $11,000,000 under a new forestry agreement with the Government of Canada expected to be signed in the near future, and $3,500,000 for spraying against the hemlock looper insect under cost-sharing arrangements with the paper companies. Also cost-shared with the paper companies and with the Government of Canada is the $248,000,000 pulp and paper modernization agreement, and in 1986-87 our Provincial contribution is $1,500,000.

For forest fire protection, $8,700,000 is allocated towards the acquisition of the Province's new fleet of waterbombers being built under the Federal/Provincial National Air Tanker Fleet Program. Kinin& Mr. Speaker, this Government has regularly displayed a lively concern for the welfare of the mining industry in the Province, and for those gainfully employed in mining, as witnessed by our prompt response to family hardships in Labrador West when recession-dictated layoffs occurred there, and as witnessed by our successful efforts in recent years to stimulate exploration in all areas of the Province.

That policy is being maintained with high priority, as the following announcements demonstrate: * $2,700,000 will be spent to JJo. 6 R285

promote and support mineral exploration and development under the Canada/Newfoundland Mineral Development Subsidiary Agreement; * The Budget contains an equity investment of $6,000,000 for Baie Verte Kines Limited, the first instalment of a total $12,000,000 investment to maintain efficient operations with resulting jobs over the long-term; * The Budget also includes $1,300,000 from the Burin Peninsula Development Fund for the react.ivation of the St. Lawrence Fluorspar Kine and construction of an on site processing mill, making it a more advanced enterprise than the previous mining operation.

Offshore Development I am pleased to announce today the formation of a partnership between Marys town Shipyard Limited and Moss Rosenberg of Norway. This new partnership, to be known as Vinland Industries, will pursue major contracts relative to the construction of the gravity based structure and associated work stemming tram the Hibernia development.

Ross Rosenberg is one of the most capable and technically advanced offshore contracting firms in the world and we are confident that this "marriage", coupled with our earlier technology transfer agreement, will enable Marys town to become a significant player in this exciting new development. In addition to the cash flow for the Offshore Development Fund L286 Karch 25, 1986 Vol XL projects referred to earlier. a further $29,500.000 is provided under the Fund for other initiatives and projects to be announced in conjunction with the Government of Canada during the year. Construction Industry Kr.

Speaker, the construe tion industry is of vital importance in our Provincial economy, not least because of its capacity for rapid response in enhancing rates of employment, given appropriate financial and market conditions. Many sectors, such as housing, transportation and others, influence the level of construction activity.

Accordingly. with employment opportunities largely in mind, government is particularly gratified to be able to make the following announcements: * Gross capital expenditures by the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation (NLHC) will exceed $78,000.000 in 1986-1987, and amongst the projects funded will be industrial land developments at the Octagon Pond, Donovans, o•Leary Avenue, and Springdale industrial parks and several other areas for a total of $3,600.000, and $4,500,000 to upgrade corporation-owned market rental units in st. John's.

Stephenville and Goose Bay; * The Provincial road and bridge construction program comprises the following three initiatives: The highway and bridge rehab ill tat ion program will No. 6 '· R286

be continued and $13,700,000 has been · provided for the coming year; Over $22,000,000 is provided for highway improvement and construction projects; $4,300,000 will be spent on bridge and causeway projects; L287 * Spending under the Canada/Newfoundland Highway Funding Agreement will increase in the new fiscal year to $33,600,000, primarily for the Trans-Canada .

Highway and the Trans-Labrador Highway, but also including some secondary road construction; * $8, 000, 000 will be spent under the Coastal Labrador Air Strip Program; * $3, 800, 000 will be spent to continue construction of a new Department of Transportation depot at Deer Lake, the f ina! cost of which will be $5,700,000 when completed in 1987; * $300,000 is allocated for planning and site work for a new $1,100,000 depot at Baie Verte; * During the coming fiscal year, $25,000,000 will be made available through new guaranteed loans to enable municipalities to provide water and sewer services and to construct and pave roads; * $2,000,000 will be expended out of the recently signed March 25, 1986 Vol XL $7,500,000 Canada/Newfoundland National Conservation and Alternative Energy Initiative Agreement with emphasis on labour-intensive demonstration projects and wood-chip fuel priorities; * A total of $1,800,000 will also be spent on energy conservation projects for public buildings.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I believe that Honourable Members without exception will agree that what I have just read constitutes indeed a "Good News" message, especially for those employed and unemployed who are striving to participate in work activities for the improvement of their standards of living. As the year ahead unfolds, Government will continue to search out every possible opportunity to create and stimulate gainful employment in all areas of our Province. COIICLUSIO. Mr. Speaker, the best news of all, in Government's view, may be distilled from my concluding remarks.

Let me first state that, in the minds of some people, it may appear unusual to present this type of "Good News" Budget at such an early stage in the renewed mandate of any Administration. The tone of the Budget may be more reminiscent of the closing days of a Government's mandate. No. 6 ·. R287

If such perceptions exist, they can be readily dispelled. The tone and good news in today' s Budget bears no relationship to this Government's time in office, but, rather flows directly from past performances of the Administration and from economic circumstances, current and in early prospect. Mr. Speaker, I submit it is a fair assessment to say that if one single trait is characteristic of the Peckford Administration, that trait is a propensity for, and a belief in, fon~ard planning.

We have initiated studies, established Royal and other commissions, published White, Green and other paper~, appointed councils and task forces, and partaken of conferences and consultations on the widest possible range of activities appropriate to Government's attention. Indeed, we have sometimes been criticized for words and not deeds. However, we believe it axiomatic that rational, definitive planning is a prerequisite of success, contributing in no small measure to our good news Budget today. Of course, we also recognize that other events contributed importantly to our present circumstances.

There is alive and well throughout Canada today a__ self-image of confidence and optimism, standing in stark contrast to the confusion and doubt so prevalent in the era of ''stagflation" which epitomized the 1970's and early 1980's. In those days, Canada was beset with regional antagonisms, management improvisations, and confused objectives of awful proportions.

Incoherent government interventions, particularly at the llational level, in all manner of L288 March 25, 1986 Vol XL activities were rife, frequently for less than noble purposes~ A radical sweeping aside of time-encrusted methods of governmental activities and interactions with other societal players was urgently needed, and the prescient insight of the Canadian electorate achieved that handsome result in the latter part of 1984.

I believe the most biased observer will now agree that West talks to East, all sectors have resumed the pursuit of invention and productivity, and the multiple challenges of our time are being faced by all segments of society with vigour rather than dread. OUr Province is sharing visibly in this new Canadian awakening, and, indeed we have our own social rejuvenation dating a decade beforehand. llewfoundlanders now occupy a respected and enlarging place in the Canadian society; we have not as yet seen that develop into equivalent economic prosperity or comparable public services.

However, the point we insist upon, as a Government, is that the stage is now set for the attainment of a new plateau. On all sides, our sectoral economy and our social arrangements are solidly poised for "take-off". Who can doubt that our fishery has found its feet, realizing the success of the restructured offshore division, and the aquacultural and other innovative stirrings of the inshore? Despite temporary dips in petroleum prices, can there be any doubt that our proven offshore treasures will see early development?

Can the further unlocking of Labrador hydro potential be long delayed considering the new realities in Quebec and the mounting appetite for electrical energy in Eastern IJo. 6 'R288

Canada and the Northeastern United States? Will not the present hectic pace of mineral exploration throughout our Province bring new bounties to rival past developments? Can the rapidly escalating skills and educational status of our population fail to find early outlets of attainment and standard of living? Are Newfoundlanders now not immeasurably better ordered in their community organization, artistic attainment and social stability? The answer to all these questions is more confidently affirmative than at any other stage in our history. There is no doubt, Mr.

Speaker, that Cat:iada is on a forward move, and the good news is that Newfoundland and Labrador is about to match the marching pace. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I move that the debate be adjourned until tomorrow. MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that debate be adjourned until tomorrow. You have heard the motion. Those in favour 'Aye•, those against 'Nay•, carried. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr.

Speaker, I wish to inform the L289 March 25, 1986 Vol XL House that I received a message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor. MR. SPEAKER: This message is addressed to the bon. the Minister of Finance. "I, the Lieutenant Governor of the Province of Newfoundland, transmit estimates required for the public service of the Province for the year ending the 31st day of March, 1987, in the aggregate of $2,126,904,800, and in accordance with the provisions of The Constitution Act, 1867, I recommend these estimates to the House of Assembly." (Sgd) ----- --------- --- W.

Anthony Paddon Lieutenant-Governor We will just take a few moments now to distribute documents to all bon . members. MR. POWER: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I move that the message, together with the estimates, be referred to a Committee of SUpply. MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded - MR. BARRY: Hr. Speaker, we understand this is a debatable motion. We refer Your Honour to - MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of Opposition. MR. BARRY: the We understand that this is a No. 6 R289

debatable motion. If there is any question we refer Your Honour to Beauchesne, page 311 of the Fifth Edition. It is my intention to proceed to debate this motion. Does Your Honour wish a moment to check that? MR. SPEAKER: I would like that reference. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I would like to be heard on it, if I may. MR. BARRY: Well, it is not a point of order. I am rising to debate the motion, Mr. Speaker. MR. MARSHALL: Well, I rise on a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. One does not ask the Speaker a hypothetical question.

In accordance with the rules of the House, one gets up on a point of order, and the points of order and/or points of privilege are then debated. Otherwise the Speaker is drawn into the debate. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I did not rise on either a point of privilege or a point of order, I rose to commence debate on this matter. I raise the question with Your Honour, if you had any questions about our entitlement to so debate it, and referred Your Honour to page 311 of Beauchesne. But I will procedure now with debate on the motion made by the Minister of Finance. MR. SPEAKER: Just one second. MR. BARRY: Mr.

Speaker, normally on a ceremonial occasion we would not do this. L290 Karch 25, 1986 Vol XL KR. SPEAKER : Just one moment, please. MR. BARRY: Is there a problem, Mr. Speaker? MR. SPEAKER: Yes. I would rule that the motion of the Minister of Finance that the message of His Honour, the Lieutenant-Governor, and the estimates be referred to a Committee of Supply, is a form of a dilatory motion. Having considered the procedure of the House of Commons, such motions have been put without debate since 1955, and are quite clearly not substantive motions capable of expressing a decision of this House.

This type of motion could be further clarified in accordance with Beauchesne as a subsidiary motion. I refer bon. members to pages 151 and 152, paragraph 417 of Beauchesne. MR. BARRY: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the bon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: It is an interesting method of proceeding that Your Honour has adopted in this matter. Normally one would hear argument, with respect, iLthere was a question, as to whether or not a debate was in order or a motion was in order. Your Honour, there will be a number of other motions that will be made this afternoon.

We would ask Your Honour to give us an opportunity to establish whether or not we are entitled to debate. We would ask Your Honour to listen to argument with respect to whether or not a debate is permissible before Your Honour stands up and makes a ruling, with N'o. 6 R290

all due respect. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I have already ruled on that matter. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I think it is rather regretable that the bon. the Leader of the Opposition would get up after Your Honour has made a ruling and, in effect, question the ruling of Your Honour. It is perfectly plain there on page 151 of Beauchesne that a dilatory motion, as Your Honour indicated, is not debatable. One such dilatory motion is that the debate be now adjourned or . it proceed to Conunittee. I would also like, just for the sake of the House, Your Honour, to refer you to Standing Order 1.

That is the first Standing Order that we have. ..In all cases not provided for by sessional or other orders, the usages and customs of the House of Conunons of Canada as in force at the time shall be followed so far as they may be applicable to this House." But, of course, it is the primary usages and customs, Mr. Speaker, are the usages and customs of this House as they have existed after Confederation and as they existed prior to Confederation. If Your Honour or anybody in this bon.

House does any research into the proceedings that have been adopted over the years, they will find that this type of motion is not debatable. They will also, I submit, Your Honour, find a well eng rained procedure that the bon. the Minister of Finance is leading this House into now on Budget Day. I think it is appropriate that we follow that and there not be attempts to adjourn it or L291 Karch 25, 1986 Vol XL sabotage proceedings that have been handed down to us by our forefathers for generations in this House. SOME HON'. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

BARRY: I assume Your Honour, having heard argument after the fact from the Government House Leader, might consider some argument after the fact from this side of the House as well. MR. SPEAKER: I have already ruled on that particular-matter. MR. BARRY: Your Honour, there are two sides to this House and there are two sides to most arguments. Now, Your Honour, the Government House Leader - MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order. MR. BARRY: I will rise on another point of order. I will rise on a point of order as to what is happening here today - MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR.

BARRY: as to what procedure we are involved in here today. There are Standing Orders for this House which provide, Your Honour, an opportunity for the Opposition to make certain points at various times in the proceedings of the House. The Government House Leader has said that it has not been the practice, the procedure, to do this on Budget Day. Your Honour, that may be correct, but No. 6 R291

rarely have we had a situation on Budget day as we have in this Province today. Rarely have we seen, Your Honour, an illegal strike with certain - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I do not know what the point of order is the bon. member is trying to make. MR. BARRY: What I am saying. Your Honour. is that the fact that debate has not been urged as a matter of practice since 1949 does not answer the question.

A precedent is only established if there is an attempt to debate and a ch~llenge made, and I am submitting to Your Honour that the reason that has not occurred before on Budget Day is because it is normally taken as a ceremonial occasion. But ceremony, Your Honour, must be put aside when you have workers in this Province out on an illegal strike, when you have some of them being arrested and some not, when you have judges of the Supreme Court being forced to enforce injunctions because of lack of action by the Attorney General of this Province (Ms Verge). SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

BARRY: We have an unusual situation occurring in this Province today. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! There is no point of order. On motion that the message from His Honour, the Lieutenant-Governor, together with the estimates be referred to a L292 March 25, 1986 Vol XL Commit tee of Supply, Mr. Speaker left the Chair. MR. CHAIRMAH (Mr. Greening): Order, please! The hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again. MR. BARRY: Kr.

Chairman, I am afraid that I have to debate this motion because I have not seen on this side of the House a lot --of progress made, despite all attempts by Your Honour to make such progress. MR. OTTENHEIKER: A point of order, Mr. Chairman, has come up. MR. CHAIRMAN: A point Minister Affairs. of order, the bon. the of Intergovernmental MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Chairman, the matter which is now before the Chairman's attention, a point of order being submitted, is that the motion now before you is not debatable.

If the authorities, the officers of the House and yourself will examine the uninterrupted practice_ of the House of Assembly, going back from Responsible Government up until the withdrawal of parliamentary government in 1933, beginning with Confederation in 1949 up until now, it will be seen that on no occasion with respect to the day on which the Budget is delivered have any of these motions been debated. Now, I think first what we have to establish is what Standing Order No. 6 R292

one says, and that is clear. That says that what governs in the House are our Standing Orders and the practice of the House, and if they are not clear or are not definitive, then the practice in the House of Commons. So the practice in the House of Commons, I would suggest, is not the matter here. Obviously we have had a parliament in Newfoundland and budgets in Newfoundland and we do not need on this occasion to go to Ottawa, we are competent within our own jurisdiction and our own practice. So it is our own Standing Orders and our own practices. Now our own Standing Orders are silent, so it is our own practice.

Our own practice has shown, since parliamentary government in 1832 was initiated in Newfoundland, up until its temporary interruption in 1933, and from its re-establishment again in 1949 up .until now, this matter has never been challenged. Now I am somewhat anticipating, but obviously since the bon. the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Barry) referred to it a few moments ago I can address myself briefly to that argument which I am sure will be his, and that is that because nobody has challenged that procedure, that does not mean that the procedure has become law merely because it has never been challenged.

What I submit with respect to that is that compliance, uninterrupted, unchallenged for the period of time that we have in mind, 1832 until 1933, and 1949 until 1986, that there is a point where uninterrupted usage crystallizes into practice, and I think that that has happened. The bon. gentleman's arrogance is so apparent that when anybody does not agree with him, what is his L293 March 25, 1986 Vol XL answer? Do not be so silly. All he can do is show his arrogance and try to undermine the Chair as we have seen a number of times.

However, I did not intend to get into that but I was provoked by the interruptions of the bon. Leader of the Opposition which are not facts but are merely allegations of 'Silly, silly.' Let the bon. gentleman practice his own form of debate and I will practice mine. The submission is that the practices which have gone from 1832 up until now, with the interruption when there was no opportunity to practice them because there was no parliament, have now crystallized into practice which is law governing the procedures of the House of Assembly. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR..

CHAIRMAN: To that point of order, I refer all bon. members to Standing Order No. 45, "A motion that the Chairman leave the Chair is always in order, shall take precedence of any other motion, and shall not be debatable. Such motion, if rejected, cannot be renewed unless some intermediate proceeding has taken place.'' MR. BARRY: Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The bon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: That is a very interesting approach taken by Your Honour. One side 1s heard with respect to a point of order and the other side is not - a very interesting approach.

I would refer Your Honour to Beauchesne, page 311 which lists debatable motions. Ho. 6 R293

Paragraph 32 says, "The following motions are debatable. " Go down to (j) "for the consideration of a ways and means order (Budget)" and (k) "for the consideration of any motion under the order for the consideration of the business of supply. " Any motion, Your Honour, is what is set out there. Now, Your Honour, this is not a minor point, for the administration to say that they are now going to redo the Standing Orders of this House by calling on ceremonial occasions dating back to 1832, or 1492.

Your Honour, there is a right in the opposition of this Province that has been established over a long period of time, that the Opposition is entitled to debate Supply, and. it is not the right of government to force the closure of this House when there are matters that should be debated. We have a very serious situation in this Province today that should be debated, and it is the reason that we are not prepared to accept that this is a merely ceremonial closing that takes place here. I ask Your Honour to look at those sections in Beauchesne.

These deal with ••the consideration of any motion under the order for the consideration of the business of supply. •• That motion affects the business of supply, it is directly dealt with by Beauchesne and we submit we are entitled to have that motion debated. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. MARSHALL: If I may just respond to that. MR. CHAIRMAN: The bon. President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: I will just respond briefly. In L294 March 25, 1986 Vol XL this particular instance Beauchesne has no relevance. What has relevance always is our Standing Orders, our usages and our customs.

Our Standing Orders first, and our usages and our customs. Your Honour has correctly read Standing Order 45 which says a motion to leave "the Chair is always in order, shall take precedence over any other motion, and shall not be debatable." KR. CHAIRMAN: Once again I wish to remind all bon. members that this House is governed by its own Standing Orders of the House of Assembly of Newfoundland, and I refer you again to Standing Order number 45. I will now leave the Chair and report progress. KR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The bon. the member for Terra Nova. KR. GREENING: Kr.

Speaker, the Committee of the Whole reports that it has considered the matters to it referred, has directed me to report progress, and asks leave to sit again. On motion, report received and adopted, Committee ordered to sit again on tomorrow. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Kr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow move that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider certain resolutions relating to No. 6 R294

the imposition of a tax on tobacco. And I give notice that I will on tomorrow move that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider certain resolutions relating to the imposition of a tax on retail sales. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I move that the remaining Orders of the Day do stand deferred and this House on its rising do ~djourn until tomorrow, Monday, April 7, and that this House do now adjourn. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, there should be no doubt about this motion as being debatable. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I am rising to debate this motion and I have precedents established by this House, by Your Honour and by others, if there iss any question about my right to do that. Now, Your Honour, this is a debatable motion and we on this side of the House intend to see that it is debated. We have a situation in this Province, Mr. Speaker, that has - MR. MARSHALL: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. L295 March 25, 1986 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: There are two points of order. First of all, Mr.

Speaker, the hon. gentleman is too eager. I do not think, Your Honour, has put the motion yet to the Chamber, so that is the first thing. Second, Mr. Speaker, and I want to urge this on, Your Honour, normally, of course, adjournment motions are debatable with respect to the ordinary business of the House. Mr. Speaker, this is not, I would submit to Your Honour, the -ordinary business of the House. This is an instance which occurs just once a year, the budget debate. As we have already pointed out in our arguments, there is an accepted procedure on Budget Day, it is really a ceremonial occasion.

Your Honour, I draw to your attention that Your Honour will note that we do not on Budget Day. for instance, go through the ordinary routine of the day, so the ordinary rules do not apply. We do not go through Oral Questions and we do not go into Petitions and the other elements, neither do we enter, as is customary, Your Honour, into debate. That being the case, I think we have to look just to what the usage is and the customs are which, certain~ we have in . this House.

I would suggest to Your Honour that the usages and the customs quite clearly in this House, since 1832 up to the present day, have had budgets delivered by Ministers of Finance, have gone through the proceedings right up the present proceeding. my adjournment motion, and that adjournment motion has been decided without debate. So I would recommend to Your Honour that Your Honour take into No. 6 R295

consideration the normal usages and customs, and the normal usages and customs are different than the ordinary routine of the day, ordinary business. An ordinary motion to adjourn the House, were we in ordinary business, certainly is debatable, I would concede that. But this is another situation. We have a specific type of procedure that is set down, and I would submit to Your Honour that that procedure entails an adjournment motion being entertained without there being any debate, for obvious ~easons. MR. BARRY: To that point of order, Kr. Speaker. KR.

SPEAKER: To that point of order, the bon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: We are on very dangerous here, and Your Honour is asked by the Government Leader to do something - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR ; BARRY: ground being House Your Honour is being asked to do something here which could result in a severe infringement of the rights of the Opposition, and a severe restriction, Mr. Speaker, on democracy in this Province and on democratic principles.

If the Government House Leader's point were correct, why did Your Honour come and ask for my consent and the consent of the member for Menihek for the televising of these proceedings? If, Kr. Speaker, you were entitled to throw out the Standing Orders L296 March 25, 1986 Vol n. .. because this is ceremonial occasion, come? a so-called why do you MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I am prepared to hear what the member has to say, and I consider the matter then. MR. BARRY: quite bon. will Well, thank you, Your Honour. I had every expectation that that would happen.

The point I am making is that that fact in itself, the fact that Your Honour would come and ask for consent, is in itself a clear refutation, rebuttal of the point made by the Government House Leader. The ordinary rules are not thrown out. This is the House of Assembly. This is a day in the life of the House of Assembly. Normally, Mr. Speaker, it would be just a ceremonial occasion because the Opposition would not feel the need to stand and attempt to continue debate and to have this House remain open to deal with a very serious situation that exist in this Province. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR.

BARRY: I would ask Your Honour, if you do not mind, if you would control the members opposite, because this · is a tactic that is all too often used, to try and shout down members on this side when valid points are being made. I ask for the protection of Your Honour, the protection of the Chair. Now motions to adjourn the House, Beauchesne, page 91, Paragraph 283, 'A motion to adjourn the House may not have conditions attached, otherwise it becomes a substantive motion which may be No. 6 R296

moved only after notice.' Mr. Speaker, this has come up before. It came up as late as last Fall's sitting of the House, Your Honour may recall, and there was a ruling. The fact that the Government House Leader has set a specific date - it is not just adjourned over until tomorrow, it is adjourned over until April 7 - that is the attachment of a condition which makes the motion substantive and therefore makes it debatable.

And I refer Your Honour to the Hansard of December 6, 1985, at page L4123, Volume 40, No. 75, where the member for Fortune - Hermitage rose and referred Your Honour to an early precedent, a precedent of the Minister of Finance . when he was sitting in the Chair, where the Minister of Finance said, "The motion which we are considering here and which was ruled in order was that the House adjourn to a certain date. This is not a dilatory motion. This is a substantive motion ." Your Honour went on to say, "To that point of order.

I did have an opportunity of looking at Hansard of February 15," which was the Minister of Finance's earlier point, "while I was waiting to get my advice and help from Ottawa and also before that.

In connection with the first ruling that I made, that exact question did come up on this particular date in the House and it was ruled at that time that the motion was in order and that it was debatable." Your Honour, that is the exact same motion that is now before us today and we submit that if Your Honour is to accept the point of the Government House Leader it is to make a total mockery of this House, of its Standing Orders, of democratic principles and of the rights of the Opposition in this L297 March 25, 1986 Vol XL House.

We ask Your Honour - it is a very serious matter - to recognize the precedents of this House and rule the same way that Your Honour did on December 6, 1985. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. MR. OTTEUHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, briefly to this point of order. First of all, the references cited by the hon.

Leader of the Opposition, with respect to a previous ruling of Your Honour and a previous ruling of another member who was in the Chair at that time with respect to the debatability of a motion because it was substantive and not dilatory and had a condition and all of that, I suggest are totally irrelevant because these did not take place on any of the two extraordinary - they can be called 'ceremonial,' I prefer to call them 'extraordinary,' outside of the ordinary - days which are in the session of a House. They are the opening of the House with the Speech from the Throne and the Budget day.

So I submit that that _ is irrelevant. We come back to Standing Order 1, which shows that the practice in the House of Commons and Beauchesne, which governs that, is only operable if our Standing Orders or our own practice are silent. It is clear here that our own practice is not silent when it comes to Budget days. So I think what is important to consider here is whether it is an ordinary or llo. 6 R297

extraordinary day. Now the bon. the Leader of the Opposition says, to show you it is an ordinary day, you, Mr. Speaker, asked the consent of the Leader of the Opposition and the bon. the member for Kenihek about whether the television could come in or not. One of them said, no they could not or under certain conditions they could not, or whatever. I suggest that that shows that it is extraordinary because I do not think Your Honour goes around every day asking members do they give unanimous consent. That shows that it is extraordinary. Secondly, if words .mean anything , Standing Order 14 says.

"The ordinary daily routine of business in the House shall be as follows," and it goes on and lists the six things; the Statements by Ministers, the Oral Questions, the Answers to Questions, Petitions, etc. There are only two days on which that does not happen, when the Speech from the Throne is delivered and on Budget day. Again, without wishing to repeat it, our whole Parliamentary history since 1832 establishes that practice and the government submits it has now crystalized into usage and it is part of the law of this Parliament.

With respect to opportunity to debate, the bon. gentlemen opposite will have ample opportunity to debate. They have had during the past number of days and they will from April 7 on. It is not a question of whether they have the opportunity to debate or not, it is a question of whether the practices over a century old of this House are to be subverted or respected. L298 Karch 25, 1986 Vol XL MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, to that point of order. KR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, the bon. the member for Fortune - Hermitage. MR. SIMMONS: Mr.

Speaker, first of all, Standing Order 1 says in part, and I quote, "In all cases not provided for hereinafter or by sessional or other orders, etc. " Mr. Speaker, the first point I want to make is that contrary to what the gentlemen on the opposite side have submitted, there is no provision in our rules that we be governed by our practice, only by our Standing Orders. Where our Standing Orders do not provide, then we follow the customs and usages of the House of Commons. The second point I want to make, Mr. Speaker, is that the effect of the motion put down by the gentleman from St.

John's East a few moments ago would be dual. First of all, it would have the effect of concluding today•s sitting, and it would have the second effect of shutting down the House for about two weeks, until April. Now, Mr. Speaker, in the first respect, even if you buy ,. the argument of the gentlemwn from Waterford-Kenmount (Mr. Ottenheimer) and from St. John's East (Mr.

Marshall) that this is a ceremonial occasion and we have done certain things on ceremonial occasions that we do not normally do, etc. , etc. , even if you buy that particular argument in terms of their desire I presume to conclude today' s sitting, because that was the brunt of their argument, to conclude today's No. 6 R298

sitting, you still have to address the other half of the problem; that in voting for this motion the House shuts down itself for the next two weeks. Mr. Speaker, when it provides that such a motion with conditions attached, in this case the condition of time of reopening, that is the point that is addressed by Beauchesne, that as soon as the House resolves, or somebody in the House moves that the House ought to shut itself down for an extended period, two weeks or whatever, then the membership of that House ought to have say in that, ought to be able to debate that particular issue.

So while we have no difficulty with the argument that this is an extra-ordinary or ceremonial occasion - we have no difficulty with that - we have great difficulty with the proposal that the House be closed for the next thirteen days and that is what we want to debate. I would suggest to the gentleman from St. John's East, the Government House Leader, there is a way out of this dilemma here.

He can do what has been done on other ceremonial occasional; instead of putting a time definite in his motion, he can seek the concurrence of the House to change the date - drop the April 7 altogether - and that would have the effect of concluding today's sitting, ceremonial as it is, until tomorrow, and we come back tomorrow and then we deal with the substantive matter of whether the House ought to go on sitting or indeed conclude, as he would like it to do until April 7. In conclusion, Mr.

Speaker, he has created the dilemma today in that we would not normally want to debate this on a ceremonial occasion, but he has given us a very difficult choice; he asked us L299 March 25, 1986 Vol XL to conclude the sitting, which in terms of ceremony we do not mind doing, but he asked us also in the process to be party to shutting the House for two weeks, which we have no intention of being party to.

I would appeal to him, if he is as concerned about ceremony as he purported this afternoon, to resolve the issue very quickly by seeking the concurrence of the House to remove the date from his motion, that would have the effect of, one, concluding the session in the next few minutes, and, secondly, getting us back here tomorrow where we belong. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I have heard enough on this particular matter. I am going to recess the House for a few minutes. Recess MR. SPEAKER: I have had an opportunity of looking into this matter.

Certainly this is one of our two ceremonial occasions, the opening of the House and Budget Day. However, I have also read through the ruling that I made in December last and I am satisfied that this is a debatable motion. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of Opposition. No. 6 the R299

MR. BARRY: Your Honour, we intend to debate this just as long as we can. We intend to debate it this evening. We intend to debate it as long as the rules of practice and the rules of this House penni t us to debate this motion. I mention this just for the benefit of the guests in the Gallery. We would understand completely if some of them found that they might have to leave before six o'clock tomorrow morning for one reason or another. Mr. Speaker, we have seen in recent weeks in this Province a situation develop that has caught the attention of all of Canada. Why has it caught the attention of all of Canada, ~.

Speaker? Because it is something that rarely occurs in the history of a Province. I guess we have to go back to the IWA strike to see anything close to the current situation in labour relations in the public sector in this Province. We have seen, Mr.

Speaker, a government react in an arrogant, intolerant, heavy-handed fashion to employees who took the position that they had been pushed to the wall, that they had been sitting at the bargaining table for over a year, that government had not been making any reasonable proposals to correct what government admits, what the Premier admits, is an unjust situation that now exists within the public sector of this Province, namely, that you have employees doing exactly the same job in different units and one of them is earning $12,000 and another is earning $14, 000 or $15,000 for the same job .

I had a gentleman call me up a week ago, and I have to say, Mr. Speaker, he is a gentleman who has called me up fairly frequently and L300 March 25, 1986 Vol XL he was a member of another party until this happened. He would call me up when any issue of importance or significance arose in the House of Assembly and he would attempt to persuade me of the error of my ways in taking the line that we were taking in Opposition. That gentleman called me up last week, Mr. Speaker, on one occasion and said, "Boy, I do not know. I do not think there is much I can say to criticize the approach you are taking this time.

I have got two sisters. One of them is covered by the unit of collective bargaining responsible for health employees and the other sister is in the General Service. •• He said, "My sister in the health care service of this Province is earning $3,000 more than my sister who is in the General Service and they are doing exactly the same work. That is not fair and you have to do something about it." Now, Mr. Speaker, that is the issue of parity. That is the issue that the strikers have had emblazoned on their buttons. That is the issue, Mr.

Speaker, on which they have said, "We are pushed to the wall and we have to go out on strike." There are other issues, of course. One of them has to do with the arrogance of the approach, the heavy-handed approach. We have an entire historical process that has gone on here, a process that started as long ago, Mr. Speaker, as when the Premier sent a letter off to the paperworkers in Grand Falls and said, "Now, don't you dare ask for too much .money," before they ever had an offer on the table. It goes back to the teachers • strike of last year.

Before that, it goes back to the wage freeze that was brought in without any No. 6 R300

consultation with labour leaders in this Province. Now if there had been that consultation maybe we would not have these inequities, this lack of parity, Kr. Speaker. If the Premier had not been as heavy-handed and as arrogant, perhaps, Mr. Speaker, he would have been aware of the fact that he was locking in various units, one unit locked in at a higher level because their bargaining took place in a period of inflation, another unit locked in at a lower level because they concluded their agreement during the period of disinflation or recession. That is what the freeze has done, Kr. Speaker.

It has perpetuated this disparity between the salaries of public employees in this Province. So it is in that context, the context of arrogance, and intolerance and heavy-handedness, that we have to understand the frustrations that have built up amongst the public sector employees. We do not condone their breaking the law - anybody who breaks the law in this Province must suffer the consequences; the courts will deal with that - but everybody is suppose to be treated equally before the law. If the law is applied for one group, it should be applied for everybody.

And we have a very unique situation which has developed in this Province where the Attorney General (Hs Verge), despite the fact that her lawyer had drafted the injunction, gets up in this House and says, "Well, I do not know whether the injunction applies to the General Service," when the clear wording of the injunction says that it is to apply to all the members of the IIAPE, and the General Service employees are members of IIAPE.

It is a funny situation in this L301 March 25, 1986 Vol XL Province when we have to have a Justice of the Supreme Court get out of his car and take on the enforcement of the injunction himself, Hr. Speaker. What does that bring respect for the law and respect for the courts to in this Province? That is what members opposite are bringing about in the course of their bungling of this labour dispute. llow why do I say, 'bungling'? Well, if ever you saw their heavy-handed approach boxing themselves in, Mr. Speaker, we saw it in this labour dispute.

I think it was within two days after the strike started there was an applications for an injunction and then, a day or so after that, we have the statement by the President of Treasury Board (Kr. Windsor) that any employee who returns to work is going to be suspended for thirty days. Now he has not explained how it is that if these employees are essential why he is going to suspend them. If they are so essential, why are they going to be suspended? How can they be suspended? We saw the President of Treasury Board react, Kr.

Speaker, in an insensitive fashion, and that has led to an impasse, and it has led to an escalation of this labour dispute. All of a sudden we saw a very interesting thing happen in this Province. llormally the general public is not · very sympathetic to government employees asking for more of the taxpayers • dollars. llormally the general public says, ' I am paying enough taxes now, and those guys are earning enough, and they should get back to work.' That was the attitude again in this strike I think, Hr. Speaker.

In the first day or so the strike was on, I travelled around this Province and I would hear people say, 'Well that Fraser March, he llo. 6 R301

is a bit of a radical, you know. That Fraser March he is out to crave out a career for himself now, he is out to make himself a martyr.' Mr. Speaker, when the time arrived, however, that we had Newfoundlanders being hauled off in paddy wagons, when the ordinary Newfoundland saw the heavy hand of the law being brought in to throw these workers into jail for exercising what is a normal democratic right in any other part of the country, it is then that the tide of public opinion started to turn. Now, what did government do? Did they then take a conciliatory approach, Mr. Speaker?

Did they then say, 'Well, w~ obviously made a mistake, we cannot go on because we are going to have to arrest another 3,500 workers, and then it is going to escalate and there are going to be others walking out and we are going to have to arrest some more and the whole court system is going to bog down and the jails will be full.' They said, 'Well, we obviously cannot continue on this course.• But did they remove the suspension? Did they admit that that was a flagrant provocation and did they say, •we will correct that by removing the suspension'? Did they offer a bone or a sign of good faith? No, Kr. Speaker.

Do you know what they did? They said, 'We are going to apply the law selectively. We are going to have political influence brought to bear on the police function of this government.' Normally, the Director of Public Prosecutions in Department of Justice decides whether or not there are going to be investigations and criminal charges laid. It is not for the Premier or any politic ian to L302 Karch 25, 1986 Vol XL decide who is to be charged or not charged.

But that is what we heard the Premier say, standing up in this House, that he had decided that they would not clarify using his words - clarify the injunction to decide whether or not it applied to the General Service. There was no clarification needed, Mr. Speaker. What do you need to clarify? The injunction says it applies to all the members of NAPE, nothing needed to be clarified.

What the Premier was saying was that he is going to decide who will be charged and who will not be charged, he, the Premier of the Province - not the Director of Public Prosecutions, not the police, not the Department of Justice - the Premier, as a politician. MR. J. CARTER: Keep your voice down please. MR. BARRY: Sorry, • John • , am I keeping you awake? MR. J. CARTER: Yes you are. some sleep tonight. MR. BARRY: I want to save up in preparation for Mr. Speaker, we have this situation now where the rest of the country is looking down to Newfoundland and saying, 'What is going on here? Is it anarchy?

What is happening? • We have laws being applied unfairly, unequally. I have had, Mr. Speaker, a businessman call me up and say that he was about to do an important deal, a joint venture with somebody from outside the Province that would see many jobs No. 6 R302

loi!. provided in this Province, and the other person said, • Hey, hold on now. I am not sure I want to come down and do business here. The whole thing seems to be falling abroad. Is it safe for me to invest my money in a Province where you have a government unable to control things and willing to take a course of action that leads to this type of disrespect for law and order and, in fact, where government is encouraging a lack of respect for law and order?' Mr.

Speaker, another reason why this matter has occurred, why we had the initial walkout, was the provocation caused by an administration that was saying, 'We must have restr~int, we cannot increase your salary, ' while, at the same time, we had the renovations to the Premier's Office proceeding full tilt, we had car allowances for deputy ministers and assistant deputy ministers, we had massive expenditures on government propaganda in newspapers and on the radio, we had the political hacks and the backbenchers getting their car allowances, Mr.

Speaker, and the government employees are saying, 'What does the Premier mean when he says there must be restraint?' It is obvious, Mr. Speaker, the restraint is only for others, not for them. MR. PATTERSON: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker~ MR. SPEAKER (Greening): Order, please! On a point of order, the bon. the member for Placentia. MR. PATTERSON: I am wondering if the Leader of the Opposition has a car assigned to his offices? Could he answer L303 Karch 25, 1986 Vol XL that? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. Opposition. MR. BARRY: the Leader of the Kr.

Speaker, I have answered that question, I think, about three times for the member for Placentia. MR. PATTERSON: You said no but you have a car. MR. BARRY: The fifteen members of the Liberal Opposition caucus have a car assigned because, Mr. Speaker, the government would not supply us with the messenger service which we asked for and which we said we needed. We did not need a car. We told them we did not need a car. We wanted a messenger service. MR. PATTERSON: You took the car. Queen's silver. KR. MARSHALL: You took the All you are are a bunch of messengers yourselves. MR.

PATTERSON: A bunch of messengers is all you are. MR. BARRY: They refused to reintroduce · the messenger service, Mr. Speaker, and there is a - MR. PATTERSON: You took the Queen's shilling. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, the member for Placentia (Mr. Patterson) has been trying now for ten years to get himself into Cabinet. He will not get into Cabinet, Mr. Speaker, by continuing with that sort of No. 6 R303

incompetent comment. MR. SPEAKER (Greening): To that point of order, there is a difference of opinion between two bon. members. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker. KR. SPEAKER: The bon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Kr. Speaker, I just say to the bon. gentleman, on that point, I do not see why the Opposition need messengers because all they are really capable of doing is delivering messages _themselves. KR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, there is no point of order. The bon. the Leader of the Opposition. KR. BARRY: Kr. Speaker, again we see the level of debate from the Government House Leader (Kr.

Marshall). I want the protection of the Chair. I want the member for Placentia and any other who tries to interrupt kept quiet or thrown out. KR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Could we have silence while the bon. the Leader of the Opposition is debating please? The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. KR. BARRY: Your Honour, we have a situation where there is no restraint shown by members opposite. They are L304 Karch 25, 1986 Vol XL lining their own pockets. The Public Service is able to see this. KR. J. CARTER: On a point of order, Kr. Speaker. KR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the member for St. John's North. KR. PATTERSON: You lined your pockets on the Ocean Ranger. KR. J. CARTER: Kr. Speaker, it is one thing to have debate but it is another thing to have personal abuse. I think the Leader of the Opposition should take back that statement, that members over here are lining their own pockets. It is an unacceptable statement in this House of Assembly and I urge Your Honour to take action. KR. FUREY: To that point of order, Kr. Speaker. KR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, the bon. the member for St. Barbe. KR.

FUREY: I think it is very relevant when Parliamentary Secretaries, some of which have ridings where there are unemployment rates of 80 per cent, are given an extra $5,000 above and beyond the $12,500 for their duties as Parliamentary Secretaries, while the ordinary citizens of this Province are out there manning picket lines in high winds and foul weather trying to just get one simple piece of justice called parity. That is called lining your own pockets, Kr. Speaker. No. 6 R304

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, there is no point of order. The hon. Opposition. the Leader of the MR. BARRY: Of course there is no point of order, Your Honour. There is no point of order when a truthful comment is made in this House. I repeat, the public servants of this Province are able to see first hand, they experience every day, Kr. Speaker, the lack of restraint shown by members opposite when it comes to expenditures for their own purposes. They have been able to look, Kr. Speaker, and see the member for Torngat (Kr.

Warren) get a car allowance when there are no roads in his district to drive a car on; when they see, Kr. Speaker, car allowances being given to executive assistants who not only do not have any cars, Kr. Speaker, they do not even have driver's licenses which proves, Kr. Speaker, that the car allowance was nothing more than a hidden salary increase, Kr. Speaker, for certain members opposite through the backdoor. Backdoor salary increases when they are asking government employees to show restraint - an intolerable provocation, Kr. Speaker. Rubbing their nose in - MR. WARREN: Who pays for your gas? KR.

BARRY: Your Honour, I would ask that the member for Torngat (Kr. Warren) and any other member be just kept quiet. L305 Karch 25, 1986 Vol XL KR. SPEAKER: Once again I would ask all hon. members to please be silent while the Leader of the Opposition is debating. MR. BARRY: I do not intend to go on every minute either, Your Honour. I would ask Your Honour to intervene and keep them quiet when they open up. Kr. Speaker, I am entitled to have quiet when I address this House and I ask for the protection of the Chair. Your Honour, we have that flagrant provocation, that rubbing of their noses, Kr.

Speaker, into the lack of restraint shown by the administration. The public servants of this Province had their noses rubbed in this every day, Kr. Speaker, every day the elevator stopped on the eighth floor and they saw the sumptuous renovations to the Premier's Office. Every day, Kr. Speaker, there was a new announcement with respect to a new hidden salary increase. The same day that picketing workers were being hauled away in paddy wagons, the Order in Council was being signed for these car allowances, the same day exactly. Your Honour, if that is not provocation, what is? You have, Mr.

Speaker, brilliant investments being made. KR. TOBIH: What about your car? KR. SPEAKER (Greening): Order, please! Could we have silence. Once again I will ask all bon. members to please be silent while the bon. the Leader of the Opposition is debating. KR. BARRY: H'o. 6 RJOS

Your Honour, we have the situation where - KR. J. CARTER: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. KR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the bon. the member for St. John's North. MR. J. CARTER: I quite agree with Your Honour • s sentiments that this side of the House should keep quiet and allow other members to speak in silence. But when we are faced with someone who is bawling at the top of his lungs, it is only natural that we should object. If this side is going to be kept quiet and respect . Your Honour's wishes, we would respectfully ask that you keep the level of decibels of the Leader of the Opposition's (Mr.

Barry) speech down to a tolerable level. KR. SPEAKER: I ask all members of this bon. House to please be silent. MR. W. CARTER: Mr. Speaker. KR. SPEAKER: The bon. the member for Twillingate. MR. W. CARTER: That, coming from the member, Mr. Speaker, who, yesterday, referred to a majority of the voters in a district of Newfoundland as scum, is a little laughable, I think. In fact, if it were not so serious it would be laughable. Yesterday, the hon. member for St. John's North (Mr. Carter) suggested that my colleague from Port de Grave (Mr.

Efford) was elected by the scum of that district, which makes up for more than half of the entire population in the district. L306 March 25, 1986 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, there is no point of order. The bon. Opposition. MR. BARRY: Thank you. the Leader of the Mr. Speaker, that is not the only provocation that occurs. The provocation of watching the brilliant investment decision of the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) and the Minister of Public Works (Mr.

Young) when, in order to save $2 to $3 million in rentals, where government employees were out in rental space, they were going to build an extension to the Confederation Building to save all that money. Now they have not explained yet why it is they are saving money or how they are saving money when 'that extension cost $40 million. If the money is borrowed at only 10 per cent, that is $4 million a year. What a brilliant investment decision! They are going to save $2 or $3 million a year by paying $4 million.

The public employees of this Province look at that and they say, 'Now this is a good example of restraint.' The public employees in this Province look at the hiring, Mr. Speaker, of the defeated Tory candidates in the last election - MR. PATTERSON: What about the Red Trench over there? MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! Could we have silence, please. KR. TULIC: Mr. Speaker, send him home and let him have a rest. No. 6 R306

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of Opposition. the MR. BARRY: Kr. Speaker, the hon. member has drawn my attention to another brilliant investment decision by this government. Paying for a piece of art to decorate some basement where nobody can ever see it. It reminds me, Mr. Speaker, of an old question. If a tree falls in the desert and nobody can hear it, does it make a noise? Does a painting that is hidden in the basement of some building, Mr. Speaker, in this Province, have beauty or does it .have ugliness? Is it the same as one hand clapping, Mr. Speaker? MR. PATTERSON: No two hands. MR.

SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. BARRY: That is another investment decision. $12,000? MR. PATTERSON: brilliant What was it You posed for it, you should know. MR. BARRY: Twelve thousand dollars was lashed out for that particular work of art and it was hauled off to the basement. Now, Kr. Speaker, the other thing that the public employees of this Province really appreciate as an example of restraint is the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) losing $5 million on his way home from his last borrowing. They were delighted, Kr.

Speaker, they were absolutely ecstatic when they L307 March 25, 1986 Vol XL saw the restraint that was being shown by the administration with that particular brilliant investment decision. MR. TOBIN: What about your car and government credit card? MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, how many times must I intervene to ask Your Honour for protection? I want to be able to speak in silence, Kr. Speaker. I ask Your Honour to give me the protection of the Chair. MR. SPEAKER (Greening): Once more I am going to ask all hon. members to please be silent while the Leader of the Opposition is debating. Please be silent.

The hon. the Leader of Opposition. MR. BARRY: the Kr. Speaker, the other great example of restraint, as I just mentioned a while ago, are these expenditures on advertisements. Remember that advertisement a week or so ago, Hr. Speaker? Right across the top it was written: 8,056 Jobs. Remember that? A bald-faced lie, Mr. Speaker. Now you ask me can I prove that that is a bald-faced lie? Well, Mr.

Speaker, I have referred you to Statistics Canada figures which show that between 1981 and 1986 this Province lost 5,000 jobs but, if Your Honour is not prepared to accept that, how about a statement right out of the mouth of government itself, out of this document just tabled, The BconOIIIJ' 1986 , page nine, Kr. Speaker. Look at the last sentence there on page nine. "Economic output in the Province has finally surpassed pre-recession levels," and, Your Honour, note this, "and employment llo. 6 R307

losses since 1981 have nearly been recovered." MR. TULK: What does that mean? MR. BARRY: "Employment losses since 1981 have nearly been recovered." Does that sound like, Mr. Speaker, 8,056 jobs being created in this Province? Liar, liar, liar, Kr. Speaker, is what has to be attached to the draftsmen of that advertisement. Propagandist, propagandist, propagandist, and the sad thing about it, Mr. Speaker, is that it is being paid for by the taxpayers• dollar. If they are going to have propaganda, Mr. Speaker. let the Tory Party pay for the propaganda. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear. hear! MR.

BARRY: The public employees of this Province look at that and they say, "Is this restraint?"' And of what benefit is it? Even if it were true, of what value would it be to the unemployed of this Province, to anybody in this Province, to have government pat itself on the back and say, ·~oopee! Look at all the jobs we have created." Well, Mr.

Speaker, let that nefarious lie be put to rest once and for all because we have the government now admitting in this document, and I am sure it was done inadvertently because they would not admit it in this House earlier, employment losses since 1981 have not yet been recovered is what they are saying here, have nearly been recovered. We do not have as many jobs yet as we had in 1981 is ~what is being said here. Mr.

Speaker, for a number of days L308 March 25, 1986 Vol XL we have been attempting to question government with respect to its position on the strike and I think it is very clear what their tactic has been. They sent the Minister of Labour (Mr. Blanchard) and the President of Treasury Board (Mr. Windsor) back to the bargaining table so that they could avoid questions in this House by pretending that negotiations were underway.

Look. we have the union negotiators telling us very clearly that negotiations are not underway, that all they are doing is trying to keep us quiet here in the House of Assembly and trying to get the House closed as quickly as possible. Mr. Speaker, we saw it here again this afternoon. They fought hammer and tong to try and close this House so that we would not have a continuing debate on the matter of that serious strike that is now ongoing. Mr. Speaker. the Liberal Party has made a proposal that would see the settlement of this strike.

We have proposed government kill Bill 59, which has not worked, which is not working now and which will never work because it has been tainted. It has been tainted by bad faith on the part of government. If you wanted to see an example of bad faith all you had to do was look at that recent statement by the President · of Treasury Board (Mr. Windsor) where he lists the number of essential employees in the Department. It is now four hundred and something and in 1984 the document that was supplied to NAPE set out over 600 employees as being essential, almost 50 per cent more than they are now claiming as essential.

That is again. out of their own mouths, proof of their bad faith in the implementation of Bill 59. No. 6 R308

Bill 59, Mr. Speaker. was an experiment and I think if good faith had been shown, it is very, very doubtful if Bill 59 could have ever worked in hindsight because of the fact. and the most significant fact is that you would have a situation, even if you accepted that the 400 were essential - you are talking about 20 per cent, I guess - a situation where 20 per cent of a bargaining unit would be in earning a full salary and 80 per cent would be out on the picket line. That is not something. Mr. Speaker, that would go over well with members of the union because people are then not being treated the same.

One sector of the bargaining unit would be getting full benefits and salary. would not be hurt by the process of striking, while the other members would have to sacrifice their salaries and go out and go through the turmoil of the picket line. Kr. Speaker. we have suggested Bill 59 must die. kill Bill 59. The second thing we have suggested that should be done and probably the first thing in order of priority is for the President of Treasury Board (Mr. Windsor) to stand up and admit that a mistake was made when these suspensions were imposed and to withdraw the threat of suspension.

The third thing that should be done, Mr. Speaker. is to set up an industrial enquiry, have government commit itself to set up an industrial enquiry to look at the whole state of collective bargaining in the public sector. The fourth thing is. and I think the Premier made some conciliatory statements along these lines, he indicated he would look at having a proposal on the table that would L309 Karch 25, 1986 Vol XL go towards parity or move towards parity. Kr.

Speaker, there is another thing that has to be done now as a consequence of the bungling of government and that other thing is that there has to be a conuni tment by the Attorney General (Ms Verge) and the Premier of this Province to go down to the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and ask that charges be dismissed against those that have been arrested so that we do not have a situation in this Province where some people are treated one way under the laws of the Province and other people are treated in another way.

The Attorney General, the Premier and the administration is going to have to explain why he would get up and advocate in this House contempt for a court order, contempt for an injunction; why he would direct the public employees of this Province turn a blind eye to whether the injunction applied to General Service members. The Premier is going to have to explain that and the Attorney General (Ks Verge) is going to have to explain that to the Chief Justice of Newfoundland before this is all over. Mr. Speaker, we think that if the proposals that I have made - MR. PATTERSON: The media wants to talk to you.

They want you to go on the television news. MR. BARRY: Yes, I am going to break now for a few minutes and I will have another opportunity to speak later. Since this is an amendable motion, there will be lots of time for all of us to speak. Mr. Speaker, we have made a No. 6 R309

proposal that we think would very likely lead to a breakthrough in talks, and we made it after very serious consideration and after consultation, Mr. Speaker, with NAPE. We made a proposal that we thought would help expedite a settlement of this dispute. We will continue to push for government adoption, recognition and acceptance of that proposal. Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that we have seen government recognize so late in the game that it was making a mistake, but it did, I think, when it stopped the process of arrests. It did recognize that it had turned public opinion against it.

It recognized that it had made a very serious mistake when it started the process of arrests and, Mr. Speaker, we think that once that admission was made, then government should go further. It is not a matter of saving face any more. They have lost face. They have no face any more, Hr. Speaker. Their face has disappeared.

They have admitted when they had to stop the process of arresting Newfoundlanders that they had made a serious mistake and they had misjudged the basic decency and fairness of the people of this Province, a fairness and a decency which said, 'By heavens, there is something not right about this situation. There is something not right about having these men and women, who were trying to get a basic living wage, being thrown in jail. That is not what happens in a democracy. ' It is not what happens, Mr. Speaker, under a fair and reasonable government.

It is unfortunately what happens when you have a government which is arrogant, which is intolerant, and which engages in labour relations with a very heavy hand. L310 March 25, 1986 Vol n. It is the same bullying type attitude that they have in this House of Assembly. It is the same bullying type attitude that sees them trying to shout us down, Hr. Speaker, when we get up here to debate a legitimate point affecting the public interest in this Province. Bully, shout, scream, trying to interfere with the train of thought, that is the tactic, Hr. Speaker.

Those were the tactics of the Brown Shirts, those were the tactics of fascists throughout history, Mr. Speaker. It is a commonly accepted tactic when you do not have a strong argument, when your arguments are weak, Mr. Speaker. MR. PATTERSON: Who barred the doors of the Confederation Building? MR. SPEAKER (Greening): Order, please! Could we have silence, please? The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: That is an example of what I am talking about, Mr. Speaker. That is an example of the bully boy tactics, the fascist, Brown Shirt tactics engaged in by members opposite. Hr.

Speaker, we have seen thi~ all too often in this House and it is easy for us who experienced it every day in the House to understand what is going on at the bargaining table, to understand how intolerant and how arrogant the government is, Hr. Speaker, when they deal with these striking employees. It is, Mr. Speaker, this intolerant and arrogant approach that has led to the problem that now exists in this Province. No. 6 R310

Well, Mr. Speaker, we have said that we will do what we can to keep the pressure on government. We will keep this House of Assembly open as long as we can. We know there are religious holidays. We know, Kr. Speaker, there are days that normally we should not be involved here in the House. Do you know something? Whether it is a Christian religion, a Jewish religion, a Buddhist religion, a Moslem religion, any religion in the world, they are all based upon caring for their neighbor. They are all based upon concern and passion for the individual. That comes first or should come first. MR.

DECKER: It is not wrong to do good on a Sabbath. MR. BARRY: As our member for the Strait of Belle Isle (Mr. Decker) has had some direct experience in this aspect of conununity life, he mentioned that it is not wrong to do good on the Sabbath or Good Friday or Easter Saturday or Holy Thursday. MR. SIMMONS: There have been elections called during Holy Week. MR. BARRY: Yes, there have been a few elections called during Easter Week. Mr. Speaker, I think we can do good work over this Easter holiday right here in this House of Assembly. We can do good work that will help a lot of our fellow Newfoundlanders. SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. BARRY: L311 Karch 25, 1986 Vol XL We need not be shy, Kr. Speaker, about saying that we are going to continue to debate this motion and we are going to see that this issue of the arrogance and the intolerance and the high-handedness and extravagance of members opposite is aired and aired fully and completely. MR. PATTERSON: You are a jealous Tory. You asked the Premier for your place back in the cabinet and he said no. MR. SPEAKER (Greening): Order, please! I would like to remind all bon. members that if they wish to speak, they may stand up on a point of order.

Apart from that, please be silent. The bon. the Leader of Opposition. MR. BARRY: the Mr. Speaker, every time it happens it just confirms my basic thesis which is one of arrogance, which is one of intolerance, which is one of lack of respect for the basic institutions of democracy and for the rules of democracy. It just underlines and stresses the point that I am making, Kr. Speaker. We have had a very responsible and a very reasonable approach. A lot of people are out on these picket lines. But, Kr. Speaker, behind the scenes I can tell you I lmow things are starting to get very, very dicey.

The executive of NAPE is having one very difficult time in keeping other employees at work. Other units , Mr. Speaker, Who are totally committed to those members now on the picket lines, have offered their full support and are prepared to carry that No. 6 R311

support as far as they have to in order for it to be effective. Unless we see government doing more than they have done so far, we are going to see a serious deterioration of services for the people of this Province. Members opposite are trying to blame us for holding up cheques, Mr. Speaker. Whose decision is it to close the House today? Who is trying to close the House today without finishing debate on Interim Supply, Mr. Speaker? Now that the House is open and now that the House will continue to be open this evening and subsequently, we will be happy, Mr.

Speaker, to agree to have the Government House Leader reintroduce Interim Supply. We are going to be here anyhow. Interim Supply will give us an opportunity to debate these points. Mr. Speaker, if Interim Supply is not passed, - MR. SIMMS: You listen to 'Open Line• by the sound of it. MR. BARRY: it will be because of the actions of the Government House Leader (Mr. Marshall) in trying to close off debate in this House. • Open Line' the member for Grand Falls (Mr. Simms) says. You know something, Mr.

Speaker, we on this side of the House are prepared to communicate our beliefs, our positions, and we are prepared to change attitudes if necessary, when necessary. We are prepared, Mr. Speaker, to make polls. We are prepared to go out and fight for what is right, and have trust and confidence in the basic decency of Newfoundlanders to accept that. When we take a position as we are doing now, we L312 March 25, 1986 Vol XL will not have a very hard time in persuading the people of this Province that what we are doing is right because there is a lot of sympathy out there for those workers on the picket lines. Mr.

Speaker, what is the administration proposing? They are proposing to leave these men and women on the picket lines for another couple of weeks while they take off for their holidays, get away from the sight of these workers out there in the sleet and the slush and the rain: 'Let us head off to some sunny sandy beaches and get this picture of these nasty picket lines out of our sight. • out of sight out of mind, that is the approach taken by members opposite. One or two of them actually might have a heart, Mr. Speaker.

It would be hard and it would be cold, I am sure, if you found one over there, but there might be one or two with a heart. Mr. Speaker, even a cold, hard heart would have to be touched by the hardship that these men and women on the picket lines are experiencing. MR. TOBIN: Turn in your car and credit cards, if you feel that way. MR. BARRY: Thank you for the protection of the Chair, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Once again the Chair is asking for silence while the hon. member is speaking. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, the member for Burin Placentia West (Mr.

Tobin) received a public rebuke yesterday in this House from the Premier; No. 6 R312

the Premier had to turn around and tell him to shut up. Now maybe we will have to get the Premier up to keep him in line again this afternoon, Mr. Speaker. It was a very obvious and public rebuke. When a mouth like a torn pocket gets going in this House, Mr. Speaker, obviously even the Premier recognizes it is not going over very well. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Tell us about your car. Tell us about the car. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! order, please? MR. BARRY: Could we have Mr. Speaker, we have a new Minister of Labour (Mr. Blanchard) in this Province who came into office with a great promise of reform.

He was going to look at Bill 59, conveniently concealing the fact, of course, that he had been one of the architects of Bill 59. He was going, Mr. Speaker, to consult with the working men and women of this Province; he was going to be the great mediator, the great conciliator, and what happened? At the first sign of a labour dispute, he went into hiding. You could not find him, Kr. Speaker, you could not hear him, you could not see him. He saw his own shadow the day of the strike and he went underground. Well, we will bring the Minister of Labour out of hiding, . we will bring the President of Treasury Board (Mr.

Windsor) out of hiding, and we will bring the Premier out of hiding before debate on this issue is finished. The Minister of Justice (Ms Verge) I do not know if we will ever get out of hiding, because I am not sure she knows where she is most of the time. I thi~k when this strike is L313 March 25, 1986 Vol XL finally settled there will be a couple of things that will stand out: The arrogance and the heavy-handedness and the intolerance will be one of them, and the other one will be what it has done to the concept of justice and to the administration of justice.

Now, how are we going to see injunctions enforced in the future? In the private sector, how are we going to expect workers in this Province to show respect for court injunctions when government itself is not showing respect for them, when government itself is refusing to enforce them, and when they are forcing a judge of the Supreme Court to become involved directly in the enforcement of the injunction? I have never heard of it occurring anywhere else in the British Parliamentary system, that a judge of the Supreme Court had to hit the picket lines and go out and threaten arrests himself. MR.

DECKER: They should arm the Chief Justice, I guess, if they are going to do that. MR. BARRY: No, this fellow does not need to be armed. Mr. Speaker, I tell you it is a very, very strange situation that members opposite are permitting to develop in this Province. And what is going to be the end result? The strike at some point, God knows, we hope will be settled, but what is the residue that is left in this Province? What are the messages that will be left for the people of this Province after the strike is settled?

A government that is prepared to ignore the law; a government that has no more respect for the laws of this House No. 6 R313

than it does for its own restraint measures; a government that is communicating to the people of this Province it is all right, Mr. Speaker, for a few people to be arrested, but when a lot of people do the same thing, we are not going to arrest them. Now, I am not too concerned about what people outside the Province think of us, whether it be in other parts of Canada or whether it be internationally, but I am concerned about what it may be doing to the economy ·· of the Province. We have a large number of people who are unemployed in this Province, and we have to try and find jobs for them.

We do not have enough capit~l in this Province to create those jobs, we have to attract capital from outside the Province. How are we going to attract investors? How are we going to encourage people to invest for job creation in this Province with the state of anarchy that is being communicated on the media throughout Canada and throughout the world? We are making headlines internationally. The International Labour Organization has identified this Province as having repressive legislation.

We heard the Premier get up and say, and pay for again not just full page ads but double page ads to say the ILO supports Bill 59. Here is what the ILO says: "The ILO calls on the Premier to give back full bargaining rights.

" A story hot off the presses today: "The workers group of the International Labour Organization called on the Newfoundland Government on Monday to drop charges against Provincial Public Sector workers who are striking illegally and to resume bargaining. 'We strongly urge that full bargaining rights be restored to the employees of L314 March 25, 1986 Vol XL the Province of Newfoundland' the ILO group said in a statement which it released via the Canadian Labour Congress and sent by telex to Premier Brian Peckford." "The National Labour Federation said the Province should drop charges against members of the Newfoundland Association of Public Employees and resume bargaining with a view to speedy negotiation and a new contract to replace the one which expired two years ago." Now, Mr.

Speaker, that again puts the lie to these advertisements that the Provincial Government has been paying for, this propaganda that the Provincial Government has been paying for out of taxpayers' dollars. MR. DECKER: They should have a Department of Propaganda. MR. BARRY: Yes, well, they do have a Department of Propaganda, it is called the Premier's Office. MR. DECKER: Oh, I see! MR. BARRY: It is just hidden, the name is hidden. They do have a Department of Propaganda.

The Premier's office churns out all these little pamphlets which you can get in the liquor stores, it churns out all these advertisements you see in the newspapers. One of these advertisements in all the major newspapers of the Province costs $10,000 for one day only, when they get into these double page ads it is probably $20,000 dollars, and when they get into radio advertising, as well - now just picture this, Kr. Speaker: Let us assume that it is only one No. 6 R314

ad a day - how many working days are there? - let us say there are at least 200 working days, probably 260 - MR. TULK: There are 210. MR. BARRY: Two hundred and ten working days? Is that all? MR. TULK: Yes. MR. BARRY: There must be more than that. Okay, 210 working days. That is over $2 million in advertisements if there is only one ad, but, Hr. Speaker, every day y~u look in the newspapers you see five, six, seven ads, with smiling faces of ministers. MR. TULK: I am sorry, there are 310 working days if you count Saturdays, and Saturday is a working day. MR. BARRY: Saturday is a newspaper day, sure.

So it is over $3 million, Hr. Speaker. Just think of the hospital beds that could be provided every year. Think of the chronic care beds that could be provided, Hr. Speaker, with that $3 million. Think of the repairs to schools. Think of the new programmes that could be implemented in our schools. Think of the job creation programmes for young people that could be implemented. What we have is a government that has its priorities distorted; it is more interested in trying to keep itself from sliding down that slippery slope that the Minister of Finance thought he was off.

If you ever saw anyone whistling in L315 March 25, 1986 Vol XL the dark as he passed the graveyard, Hr. Speaker! But it is a long walk through that political graveyard, and the minister is not out of it yet. As a matter of fact, I think it is probably - MR. TULK: He is whistling past the graveyard. MR. BARRY: I do not want to be too unkind to the minister, because I think this might be his last budget. MR. DECKER: It will be, definitely. MR. TULK: Think so? MR. BARRY: Well, you know, we have yet another year where his projection of the deficit has been way off.

Now, it was way off on the high side this time, and he thinks that is a good thing. MR. TULK: But that is trying to blindfold the devil in the dark, right? HR. BARRY: Yes. He decided he would go high enough in the last time so that he would not be humiliated. MR. TULK: He could have really made a name for himself by saying the deficit was going to be $150 million. MR. BARRY: Last year he should have projected a deficit of $500 million, and he could then have come in this year and said that he had saved $450 million.

His only mistake was that he was too modest last year in his exaggerated figures that he threw out. No. 6 R315

Mr. Speaker, the member for the Strait of Belle Isle, I think, put his finger right on it. What we see happening today in Newfoundland has happened in other provinces, in other countries, in different times and places. It is the throes of agony of ·a corrupt administration in its dying days, that is all. There is nothing complicated about it. MR. TULK: The minister is like Stomping Tom Connors, spending money he does not have. MR. BARRY: Yes. Mr. Speaker, when you have the dying days of a corrupt administration what .takes place is that they just cannot do anything right. Nothing can be done right.

Now there are a lot of factors that explain why this strange phenomenon occurs, and it has occured in places other than Newfoundland. In the late sixties we saw it in Newfoundland. We saw Mr. Hiller in Ontario, we saw Hr. Levesque in Quebec, we are seeing Hr. Hatfield in New Brunswick, Hr. Lee in Prince Edward Island, Hr. Buchanan in Nova Scotia, but the most obvious one is right here in this Province. MR. PATTERSON: Tell us about your buddy, forger Fox. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. BARRY: last thing The Hr.

Speaker, since the election we have seen one after another go wrong. reaction of the Premier, course, is to blame it on press; 'Nobody understands anymore' he says . Now he L316 March 25, 1986 of bad me is Vol XL starting to say, 'Nobody believes me anymore.' The poor fellow, nobody believes him. Why is it that nobody believes the Premier anymore? I wonder if it would have anything to do with the fact that you see these advertisements, '8,056 jobs all around the Province' and then we see the statement in the Budget papers 'Employment losses since 1981 have nearly been recovered'? Let us explain that one, Mr.

Speaker. Why is it that nobody believes the Premier anymore? Is it that difficult to understand? Is that why the Government House Leader (Mr. Marshall) is more and more taking over the prerogatives of government and the prerogatives of the Premiership? MR. TULK: He is the real Premier. MR. BARRY: Is the Government House Leader now the real Premier? Is he the one who is calling the shots? You know, Hr. Speaker, members opposite should realize that the Government House Leader has had it, he is not running anymore. He has recognized his string has run out.

He has declared that he is now a lame duck going into retirement. We will never have the opportunity, Mr. Speaker, the pleasure of having another run at the Government House Leader because he is going to be plucked next time around, if he runs, and he knows that. And that is why it is very dangerous for members opposite to permit the Government House Leader to take over the responsibilities of Premiership, because he has nothing to lose. Now the Premier himself has given up because nobody believes him anymore. No. 6 R316

MR. TULK: That is not the way he said it. He said, "How come nobody believes me anymore?" MR. BARRY: Why is it nobody believes me anymore? Mr. Speaker, he has just about washed his hands of the whole kit and caboodle and he has left it up to the Government House Leader to exercise the office of Premier. You know, there are a few movements underfoot there in the benches. The President of Treasury Board had a very strong campaign going for the leadership; he had his eye on the Premiership; I think he might ~ave blotted his copybook a little bit. Mr.

Speaker, we have to wonder to what extent do we have a strike being continued out there because of the internal political wheelings and dealings of that party opposite. To what extent does the Premier want to try and damage the leadership aspirations of the President of Treasury Board? To what extent will the President of Treasury Board be hung out to dry by that brilliant thirty day suspension decision that he put in? MR. HEARN: (Inaudible) all for one and one for all. MR. BARRY: Have I missed something? The President of Treasury Boad does not have leadership aspirations. Has that changed recently?

Did that take place after the Premier warned him to stop collecting money, during the last campaign, for his leadership race? as it only after the Premier called him in and said now listen, cut it out, cut out these statements that I am not running any more and that ' L317 March 25, 1986 Vol XL you are going to be the next Premier, and cut out these collections for your leadership campaign? Was that why the Government House Leader (Mr. Barry) put the President of Treasury Board (Mr. Windsor) in that sensitive position? Is that why the President of Treasury Board ended up in that graveyard of potential premiers?

MR. TULK: Do you think that the President of Treasury Board might be enjoying this strike? MR. BARRY: Now that is other side of this coin. Is the President of Treasury Board enjoying the strike? Does the President of Treasury Board chuckle when he goes home at night, realizing the difficulties that are being created for the current Premier? These are all, Mr. Speaker, the types of questions that arise. In the dying days of a corrupt regime, we see all these different factors coming to the fore.

So we have, Mr.Speaker, to keep this House open so that we can look over and eyeball members opposite, so that we can eyeball the Government House Leader and eyeball the President of Treasury Board and eyeball the Premier and make sure that we know when the President of Treasury Board is about to make his move for the leadership, and make sure that it is not the workers of this Province who will be sacrificed for those leadership aspirations. MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): Order, please! The hon. the member • s time has elapsed. MR. BARRY: No. 6 R317

Just when I was having fun. Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave? MR. BARRY: By leave? SOME HON. MEMBERS: No. MR.. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, I shall not be long, but I will move the previous question. I move that the question be now _put which, of course, is the previous question which we have had before. All members are aware of the procedure there, I can see them scuffling around in the alleys of their minds. MR. MARSHALL: In the back alleys of their minds. MR. OTTENHEIMER: No, the front alleys. MR. MARSHALL: Question, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the question be now put. MR. TULK: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the bon. the member for Fogo. MR. TULK: I refer Your Honour to Standing Order 42: 'A motion for the previous superseded ( question may be by a motion to adjourn L318 March 25, 1986 Vol XL or for reading the Orders of the Day. • MR. OTTENHEIMER: It has not been superseded, it is just put. MR. TULK: That motion, Mr. Speaker. I would submit to you is out of order, that the motion to adjourn is a motion of a higher order than the previous question.

I would ask that Your Honour rule on that point of order. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the President of the Council to the point of order. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, we had this over and over again, I remember. Now Your Honour relies on Your Honour's own wise and sagacious precedents, and Yo~r Honour came in today and relied on Your Honour's wise ruling which is just as wise today as it was when you made it in December, mind you. Your Honour.

During that hearing or that session, the previous question was moved and exactly the self same point was brought up by the bon. gentleman and exactly the self same point was ruled out of order. This is under Standing Order 40: ••The previous question, until it is decided, shall preclude all amendments of the main question, and shall be in the following words, 'That the question be now put. • •• That question is that we adjourn, and now the hon. gentleman wants to supersede it with another motion that we adjourn. No wonder the hon. Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs (Mr.

Ottenheimer) referred to the back alleys and recesses of the hon. gentlemen's minds. KR. OTTENHEIMER: No. 6 R318

I said the front alleys. you said back alleys. MR. MARSHALL: The wonder is that the bon. gentleman could discern any mind let alone any alley. "If the previous question be resolved in the affirmative," it says - Mr. Speaker, I know Your Honour knows, but the bon. gentleman may not know. that means if it is carried - "if it is resolved in the affirmative. the original question is to be put forthwith without any amendment or debate." Now. Mr. Speaker, the bon. gentlemen are playing a little game here, and this is the type of game they have b~en playing all the time with this House of Assembly.

They have, within the rules. proposed that the motion be debatable and they are debating it. We· have. within the rules, proposed the previous question. The previous question is debatable, but when it is resolved, then the question is put. under Standing Order 40. We do not need hours of adjournments, Mr. Speaker, it has already been decided. MR. SPEAKER: I rule that the motion of the bon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs is in order. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the member for Bellevue. MR. CALLAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker. during the hour that L319 Karch 25, 1986 Vol XL the Leader of the Opposition took to make the points he was making. he was interrupted almost continuously. MR. SIMMS: He was not by us, there was nobody in here. MR. CALLAN: No. a lot of people were out having a few, and that is fine. It is Budget Day, there is a reception and so on, and if you had coffee or tea, that is fine. But, Mr. Speaker, the Leader was continuously interrupted, and most of it was nonsense. You see, Kr.

Speaker. the Premier likes to chastise us on this side of the House for comparing apples and oranges rather than comparing apples and apples or oranges and oranges, but what he fails to do, Mr. Speaker, is look at some of the comments that he himself makes from time to time, and also the comments made by some of his Cabinet colleagues. Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance is here and I am glad he is, because I want him to contemplate a statement that he made several days ago in answer to a question regarding the $3,600 up to $5, 000 car allowances paid to parliamentary secretaries and senior civil servants.

The Minister of Finance in defending that new allocation, which comes into effect on April 1, as I understand it, said, well, it is on a par - AN HOH. KEMBER: Read the budget. boy. page 4. MR. CALLAN: It is on I am talking about the answer the minister gave several days ago. Why did not the minister say there Ho. 6 R319

are no car allowances, several days ago?. MR. SIMMS: He said it today. MR. CALLAN: Here is the answer the Minister of Finance gave: 'These are the same as allowances paid in the private sector, they are on par.' In other words, they have parity with allowances paid in the private sector from time to time. Forget what is in the Budget, Mr. Speaker, what I am talking about is the minister's answer of several days ago. Mr.

Speaker, the peop_le who are on strike today around this Province are not asking for parity with the private sector, as the Minister of Finance suggests is a good thing for parliamentary secretaries and deputy ministers and so on, the people who are on strike today are looking for parity with their colleagues who work for government. As an example, I have a brother-in-law who is a mechanic with the Department of Transportation, at least he was before this started. Whether he will be afterward, in a dictatorship, is a fair question, and we are coming closer to that every day. Mr.

Speaker, this gentleman who is a mechanic did his mechanics course as a one year course, or whatever it was, several years ago. MR. BAIRD: What is his name? MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. CALLAN: His name is Baird. L320 March 25, 1986 Vol XL MR. TOBIN: Could I ask you a question? MR. CALLAN: No. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker, the same gentleman who was interrupting the Leader of the Opposition is persisting in doing the same thing with me. Now, when I finish, he will have lots of time. MR. TOBIN: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A point of order, the hon. the member for Burin - Placentia West. MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, for the record, the member opposite refers to car allowances for the political staff. I think it is clearly outlined in the Budget Speech, •with continued deferral to more affluent times and certain planned initiatives (such as the construction of the-') MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! That is not a point of order. MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if his leader is prepared to throw away his car allowance, as well? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the member for Bellevue. MR. CALLAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Kr.

Speaker, I noted the member for No. 6 R320

Burin - Placentia's comments about the Leader of the Opposition's car allowance. I am coming to that, and it has to do with comparing apples and apples or apples and oranges again. Anyway, Kr. Speaker, I have, as I have said, a brother-in-law who works with the Department of Transportation as a mechanic, and he is earning just over $9. 00 an hour. Now, he is not looking to be on par with his brother who works with ERGO Industries at Long Harbour and earns over $13.00 an hour. That is not the kind of parity he is looking for. MR. SIMMS: The guy at ERGO, is a mech