Volume 3 PROVINCE OF NEWFOUNDLAND THIRTY-SIXTH GENERAL ASSEMBL V OF NEWFOUNDLAND 3rd. Session VERBATIM REPORT FRIDAY, MARCH 8, 1974 SPEAKER: THE HONOURABLE JAMES M. RUSSELL Number 25

March 8, 1974 The House met at 3:00 P.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER: Order please! Tape no. 646 Page 1 - KW It is a pleasure for me to welcome to the galleries today eight students from St. Bernard's School at St. Bernard's and St. Joseph's School at Terrenceville, with their teachers, Mr. Bynes and Mr. Madden. I would like to welcome as well seventy Grade V students from the Woodland Elementary School at Dildo, with their teachers, Mr. Reid, Mrs. Sheppard and Mr •. Cranford. I would alao like to welcome nine Grade IV students from Point of Bay Elementary School at Point of Bay, with their teacher, Mr.

Dawe. I trust that your visit to the galleries and to the Bouse and to the city is most interesting and informative. MR. R. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, on a point of personal privilege or a person.,.J. explanation perhaps. The "Evening Telegram" of Tuesday in reporting on my comments in the House on the previous day, Mon.day, quoted me•• advocating that there would be a freeze of the existing teacher,:.pupil ratio in schools. Hr.

Speaker, what I said on that occasion was not that but rather as Hansard points out on page 1837, that I advocated that government institute a freeze of the pupil-teacher allocations for high schools not for all school • MR. SPE.&JCD.: I think the matter that the Bon. Member for Hermitage raised is perhaps out of order. 1 • not convinced that he .raised it at the first possible opportunity. If 1 heard hi• correctly, it was the "Evening Telegram" of four or five days ago. MR.

SDH>NS: I wanted to see Hansard which I did after the begiDGing of yesterday's session · so it was I feel my first opportunity to raise the point having confirmed what I did sayr MR. SPEAn:R: I will take a further look. at the whole matter and rule on "it later. PETinONS: MR. S. A. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition on behalf of the residents of the Community of Parkers Cove in the Electoral 2029

March 8, 1974 Tape no. 646 Page 2 District of Placentia West. The prayer of the petition, Mr. Speaker, is that the Department of Municipal Affairs approve a new water system for the Community of Parkers Cove in the Electoral District of Placentia West. The existing system, Mr. Speaker, is inadequate to provide the needs of the people and in the winter months over fifty per cent of the residents lose their water. If the prayer of this petition, Mr. Speaker, is not granted, the town council will be forced to resign in a body. Now, Sir, we on this honourable side of the House support the petition. I may, Mr.

Speaker, point out to the honourable House that in a letter accompanying the petition signed by the chairman of the community council, March 5, signed by (three days ago the letter was written) the Chairman of the Col!llllunity Council in Parkers Cove indicating that the petition had been sent to the member for the District of Placentia West - Mr. Speaker, they have not heard a thing about it since. BON. L. BARRY (Minister of Mines and Energy): It has been tabled in the House. MR. NEARY: As a matter of fact he said: "I enclose a petition to be presented in the House.

We gave one to Leo Barry on February 9 to present in the House and to date we have not heard a thing about it." Sir, it gives me great pleasure to present this petition on behalf of the members on this honourable side of the House and Sir, I ask that it be laid on the table of the House and referred to whatever department to which it relates and in this case I think ... it is the Department of Municipal Affairs. MR. BARRY: Mr.

Speaker, I would support the petition if it were not redundant for me to do so in that several weeks ago, as the record of this honourable House will confirm, the same petition was presented by me. When I met with the council in Parkers Cove, I told them, as any COlDlcil in Newfoundland knows today, that at the present time lDltil the estimates of the Department of Municipal Affairs are brought before this honourable House, no commitments can be made for future 2030

March 8, 1974 Tape no. 646 Page 3 water and sewer services or anything e~ae. AJJ I pointed ou_t. ·Mr. Speaker, when I presented tbe petition several weeks ago. t should mention, there is a need in Parken Cove .for additional water and sewer facilities. 2031

March 8, 1974 Tape No. 647 NM - 1 There is a need because the facilities that were put in there orir,inally were totally inadequate. We got money last year I think ,in excess of $13,000 in their attempt to try and patch up the system that was there but the conclusion now is that the systeJn that was put in by the previous Liberal Administration is so bad, so useless that we need a completely new system and Mr. Speaker, as I say, this petition presented by the honourable member has already received my support and I hope it will receive the support of the entire House. NOTICE OF MOTIONS: MR.

SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Justice. HON. T. A. HICKMAN, MINISTER OF JUSTICE: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the honourable Minister of Education I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill, a Bill, "An Act Further To Amend The Schools Act." I also give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following bills, a Bill. "An Act Further To Amend The District Courts Act," a Bill, "An Act To Amend The

Interpretation Act," a Bill, "An Act Further To Amend The Judicature Act," a Bill, "An Act Respecting Fraudulent Conveyances." MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Forestry and Agriculture. BON. E. MAYNARD, MINISTER OF FORESTRY AND AGRICULTURE: Mr. Speaker, I give notice I will on tomorrow introduce a Bill, "An Act Respecting The Appointment And Powers Of The Newfoundland Geographical Names Board." MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Health. BOB. DR. A. T. ROWE: Mr.

Speaker, I give notice I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce into this honourable liouse a Bill, "An Act To Amend The Communicable Diseases Act." MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Provincial Affairs and Environment. HON. GORDON DAWE. MINISTER OF PROVINCIAL AFFAIRS AND ENVIRONMENT: Mr. Speaker, I give notice I will on tomorrow introduce a Bill, "An Act Further To An1end The Conditional Sales Act." 2032

March 8, 1974 Tape Ho. 647 MM - 2 MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Mines and Energy. HON. L. BARRY, MINISTER OF MINES AND ENERC::V: Mr. Speaker, 1 giv~ notice that on tomorrow I will ask leave to introduce a Bill, "An Act To Amend The Undeveloped Mineral Areas Act." ORDERS OF THE DAY: HR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Bell Island~ HR. S. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, before we get on to the main attraction of the afternoon, I have a number of questions to put to the Premier and ministers, Sir. My first question is directed to the Minister of Justice.

Will the minister inform the House if he has yet been served a writ from the State of Florida for alleged kidnapping? HR. HICKMAN: Mr. Speaker, that question is very much out of order. It is frivolous and vexacious and it can only come from a man with no sense of responsibility in this House. MR.. NEARY: That is the kind of an answer you would expect to get from the other side of the House, Sir. Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the honourable the Premier.

Would the Premier inform the Bouse if he has yet received a proposal from the Federal Departaeat of Transport requesting the provincial government to remne jurisdiction of inter-provincial ferry transportation services in the province, that is all ferries operating from a point within the province to another point within the province? MR.. SPEAKER: That quetion could be placed on the Order Paper. MR. REARY: Mr. Speaker, the Premier vu pre1>ared to answer the question. Could the Premier answer the question? MR. SPEAKER: That question could be placed on the Order Paper. MR.

NEARY: Well we ara still batting zero today, Sir, as paual. ~- Speaker, could I put another question to the Minister of Justice .and this 1a rather urgent, Sir, this is an urgent matter. Would the minister infona the House when I can expect a reply to my 2033

March 8, 1974 Tape No. 647 NM - 3 request to the minister about three and a half weeks ago that a commission of enquiry be establish to investigate the Saunders resignation scandal? MR, SPEAKER: I think that question could be placed on the Order Paper. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, we are doing well so far today. Could the Premier or the Minister of Finance, Sir, I · am not sure which, indicate to the House how much down time the linerboard mill in Stephenville is going to have in the current year? MR. SPEAKER: I think that question is hypothetical,predicting what down time they might have.

I have to rule it out of order. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, only in today's newspaper there was an announcement of down time, Sir. MR. SPEAKER: The question is hypothetical and it is out of order. MR. NEARY: It is not a hypothetical question, Mr. Speaker. It is a legitimate question. I do not know if I can rephrase it, Sir, so that it would ,be in order. 'HR. SPEAKER: Order please! I am sure the honourable member for Bell Island is aware of the procedure he can follow if he is not satisfied with the ruling made from this Chair,and I did rule his question out of order. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, I am just merely trying to rephrase my question, Sir. Would the Premier indicate to the House if there will be any more down time than the six days .that was announced in today's morning news at the linerboard mill at Stephenville? Will there be any more down time apart from the six days 2034

'March 81 1974 Tape 648 n-1 and have already been announced. HON. F. D. MOORES (PREMIER): Mr. Speaker, referring to that question and in the fustrations of the honourable the Member for Bell Island I am sure he will have all of the day to make his presence felt in this House. The fact that he feels that the main attraction is coming up, I think he is probably accurate.

As far as the Linerboard Mill is concerned, Sir, u soon aa we know, as soon as the directors of that company know,being a crown corporation, I am sure that upon the knowledge of down time it will be released in the appropriate manner and not by guesswork or suspicion by any member of the House. MR.. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, another question for the Bon. the Premier. I am ao glad to have him back in his seat, this is about the third time he baa been in attendance at sittings. Mil. SPEAKER: Order, please! HR.

NEARY: Would the Premier indicate to the Bouse what steps the province inten~to take to oppose a CN freight rate increase in this province? MR. PmRES: Mr. Speaker, any freight rate increase in this Province will be opposed by the government. As a matter of fact with the cost of living being such as it is in this province, I think that possibly more freight rate sudsidies by the Federal Government in Ottawa would be more in line, if ~e are talking about equalization of Canadian opportunity. This, Sir, will be the intent of this government to make sure that any action in that regard will be taken.

One other point, Mr. Speaker, in the introduction of his quetion, the honourable the Member for Bell Island mentioned about the lack of time in the House, I hope he is as lucky. · MR. REARY: Mr. Speaker, not if they use the big stick. M'lt. SPEAKER: · Order, please! KR. REARY: Not if they - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! KR. NEARY: Not if they abused their 111ajority, Sir. KR. SPEAKER: Order, please! 2035

Mat"ch 8, 1974 Tape 648 PK - 2 MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the Hon. the Premier. Would the Premier be a little more specific and give us some details of what steps his government have taken to oppose this proposed freight increase in the province? Rathel' than just a vague generalization, could we have some details? MR. MOORES: Yes, Mr. Speaket', last week when I was out of my seat ma.king personal representation to the Federal Government in Ottawa. MR. NF.ARY: Which, Mr. Speaker, MR, SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question.

I wonder if the Hon. the Premier could tell us what department of government he made these representations? MR. MOORES: The Newfoundland representative, Mr. Jamieson, Mr. Speaker, and I am sure with his usual understanding that on behalf of the Federal Government he will undertake to do all he can to make sure that federal freight rates do not go up in Newfoundland. MR. SPEAKER: The honourable the Member for Fogo. CAPT. E.W. WINSOR: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Hon. the Premier.

Did the Premier or has the Premier been successful in getting the Hon. ltinister of Social Services, who is unfortunately ill at this time, to change his mind or reverse the decision on making welfare apply to fishermen who were compensated by the federal government by the amount of $300 for l~ss of time owing to ice conditions last spring? MR. MOORES: I will take notice of that question, Mr. Speaker. MR. WINSOR: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. I asked the Hon. the Premier,maybe he has forgotten it, the same question about' two weeks ago. MR. MOORES: Unfortunately, Mr.

Speaker. not only was I out of the province ~ut the Minister of Social Assistance is in hospital after an operation>but I will follow through and let the honourable member know in a few days. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I wonder now if the Premier i_s in a position now to inform the House, I have already aPked this question a number of 2036

March 8, 1974 Tape 648 Pk - 3 times. The Premier indicated that when the information became available be would present it to the House. Is the Premier DBW in a position to give us any of the details of negotiations for to rent space from Trizec Corporation? AN HON, MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. NEARY: Pardon? AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible, MR. NEARY: No, Mr. Speaker, we did not get it yeste~ay. The Preaier vas not in the House yesterclay,to my knowledge. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. NEARY: If be waa, he did not stay very.long. MR. SPEAICER: Order, please! MR.

NEARY: What we want to kuow, Sir, we vent aome details about the dealings of this government with the Trizec Corporation, Sir, who are going to put up this big skyscraper downtown. Is the Premier in a poaition now to give us the information? MR. MOORES: Mr. Speaker, as soon as the government hffe made a commitment with Trizec or any other corporation I will only be too glad to make it available to thia Rouse. ORDERS OF TBE DAT Mil. SPEADR: Motion (5): The Motion moved by the Bon. Minuter of Finance. BON. J. C. CROSBIE (MINISTER or FllW1CE) : Thia mt1on will be IIOftd by me and seconded by the Ron. the Premier.

The aotioa ia'on the Order Paper and it deals with matters that occurred in this Bouse on Monday of this week, March 4, when as I mentioned yeaterday ·I was 4,500 ailes away.in the Province of British Columbia.on public business. 2037

March 8, 1974. Tape 649 RH - 1 and the motion has to do with certain statements made by the member for Bell Island on that day which statements and allegations were scandalous and libelQus and which are summarized in the motion that is before the House. Those three statements, Mr. Speaker, which were unparliamentary and I do not understand how he was permitted to make them but in any event they were made, were:

(1) That the Minister of Finance deliberately misled the House, was guilty of barefaced deceit, and deliberately deceived the honourable House and misled the people of Newfoundland; The second main charge or allegation appeared -to be: The Minister of Finance conmiitted a very grave conflict of interest in acting as both the Chief Officer of the Government in negotiating the cancellation of debt to the Province (by the way it is entirely incorrect) while, at the same time, he was associated in at least two ways with the purchasing corporation which had the most to gain by said cancellation of debt; (That is quite incorrect too but I will come to that later)

(3) That the Minister of Finance abused a privilege of the honourable House and abused the privileges of his office for his own personal interest so that immediate steps should be taken to consider his impeachment. Mr. Speaker, I am afraid that I do not have to worry about impeachment. That is something the President of the United States has to worry about. We do not have any impeachment process in this House. , Now, Mr.

Speaker, these are three serious and grave charges that could not be more serious or more gr_ave and I am quite prepared to resign my seat if any one of those charges or allegations are substantiated. I · have no fear of resigning my seat because it is impossible for them to be substantiated. Mr. Speaker, these charges were made maliciously and with intent to injure ~he character and reputation of myself as is quite obvious, by the way in which it was done.

If the member for Bell Island had some doc~ntary copies of ·letters and so on and so forth, which gave him cause to think that there was some e,q>lanation, further explanation needed about what had occurred ~hen ~ison areweey sold their assets 2038

March 8, 1974. Tape 649 RH - 2 at Stephenville to Labatt Breweries of Canada Limited then the normal practice would be for the member for Bell Island to ask questions, to table ques~ions about that or to contact the Minister of Finance himself and say that he has some suspicions or he had sone matters before him which appeared to cast doubt upon the transaction or which appeare _d to be contrary to what had been stated in the House and to inquire into it.

Even if, last Monday, the member for Bell Island had simply raised some questions, either in the debate in the House or some other mannet had raised questions and said that he had this and the other reason to need more information on this transaction, that there seemed to be some­ thing suspicious or something wrong about it, if he had done that last Monday or just asked for infonnation or raised some doubts that now were in his mind because of information that he had, that would be quite nor­ mal practice. · The member for Bell Island, Mr. Speaker, did not do that.

He did not do that because that was not his motive or intention. He did not do that because he wished to destroy and injure the character end reputation of a member of this House. The material that he had last Monday was only his pretext for making these unsubstantiated charges against the mi.nister. If, Mr.

Speaker, he had tabled questions in this }louse or raised these questions and had not been given any satisfactory answer or if I had been in the House and he had done this and could not explain it satisfactorily, then he would be quite justified in saying that it seems to him that the minister had misled the House or deceived the House or that there might be a conflict of interest or whatever. But, no, Mr. Speaker, he did not raise these questions when I was in the House because he only wanted an excuse to launch a character assassination attack on a member of this House. 1 am not objecting, Mr.

Speaker, on this motion to giving infor­ mation to this Rouse on the Labatt-Bison transaction or any other trans­ action but I have never been asked to give any information except for a question raised orally by the member for Bell Island on February 8, 1974 and have had no request for any information since he raised that oral 2039

March 8, 1974. Tape 649 RH - 3 question on February 8. Between February 8 and when I left the Province on February 26, Mr. Speaker, there were eighteen days,of which the House sat during, I suppose, thirteen or fourteen of them. On any one of those days, questions could have been raised about this. 2040

March 8, 1974, Tape 650, Page 1 -- apb I left the province on February 26, and returned here on yesterday at one thirty in the afternoon. During my absence and on a facile pretext that the matter had to be brought up at the earliest possible opportunity,he launched this vicious and calculated attack last Monday. The honourable gentleman was not seeking information, Mr. Speaker. The honourable gentleman was not dealing with any matter in a legitimate manner as one would expect the opposition is entitled to do.

No, the honourable gentleman wanted to besmirch and slander me while I was away and prevent me fro~ defending myself until I got back four or five days later. As the whole House knows, Mr. Speaker, that a libel or a atatement once issued you have to run pretty hard to catch up with it. Be is well aware of that. That honourable gentleman is well aware of that. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I will give full iliformation on that matter this afternoon, Bison and ·the Labatt transaction,but that is only incidental to this motion, because the whole point of this motion is whether a member of this House can be permitted by the House to launch unjustified libels and attacks upon another member· of the Hous~ without the House taking any actton at all to defend the character and reputations of the member• therein. I want to refer to Beauchesne first. Beauchesne, page (95) deals with the privileges of parliament which includes this House of Assembly.

On page (94) first; "The House has always asserted the right to provide for the constitution of its own body the right to regulate its own proceedings and the right to enforce its privileges. The House has the exclusive right to regulate its own internal concerns." Page (95) •The Speaker's function and ruling on a claim of breach of privilege does not extend to deciding the 'question of substance whether a breach of privilege has in fact been committed - a question which can only be decided by the House itself." That is 2041

March 8, 1974, Tape 650, Page 2 -- apb what I am asking the House and this motion to decide. Has there been a breach of the privileges of this House or does this House permit one member to libel and to slander another with no justification whatsoever? Further,on page (95); "Certain urgent matters,such as assaults upon or insults to members if they should occur during a sitting of the House, may be raised at once in spite of the interruption of a debate or other proceedings.

The right of making a complaint of a breach of privilege is open to any member of the House, and, even if an individual member alone is affected, is not confined to that member." This breach of privilege is not confined to me, Mr. Speaker. This is a breach of the privileges of the members of this House because if the members of this House are going to allow this kind of tactic to be used in the House against one another then the House itself is badly damaged. "A dispute," Mr.

Speaker, and this is quite clear, "arising between two honourable members as to allegations of facts hardly fulfills the conditions of a privilege question." This is not that case, Mr. Speaker, This is not a difference of an opinion as to allegations of facts. Not at all. This is three serious charges, and I will refer to the Hansard in a moment; made by the Member for Bell Island against the Member For St. John's West. Not a difference of fact. Not for one second is this a difference of fact. There might be a difference of opinion about the facts of the Bison - Labatt transaction or different

interpretations of what this or ·that means but the fact that I am charged with being a liar and deceitful to this House and have abused ny own office for my own personal interests and have been in a position of conflict of interest, these are not differences of facts between the Member for Bell Island and myself. These are charges made which · can only have the consequence of .my 2042

March 8, 1974, Tape 650, Page 3 -- aph resignation and if he had a streak of decency in bis whole body, of bis. To go on with Beauchesne, page (98) "Libels on members have also been constantly punished: . but to constitute a brea.ch of privilege they must concern the character or conduct of members in that capacity, a,:id the lib~ must be based on matters arising in the actual transaction of the business of the House." Now, },fr. Speaker, this libel is four square within that paragraph of Beauchesne. It concerns my character or conduct as a member in that capacity and in addition to being based on matters outside the House it is based on matters arising in the actual 2043

March 8, 1974 Tape 651 IB-1 transaction of the business of the House. Since the member for Bell Island claims that on February 8,1 lied when I answered his question in the House, this is clearly within the four square corners ~f a libel on a member. There is further material on page 98 about that. Page 100 repeats that rule again: "To constitute a breach of privilege a libel upon a member must concern his character or conduct in his capacity as a member and the conduct or language on which the libel is based must be actions performed or words uttered in the actual transaction of the business of the House.

Bad faith must be imputed and the charge cannot be indefinite." I will show you, .Mr. Speaker, that charge is not indefinite and that bad faith is imputed. "The same rule applies to a charge against a member for conduct which renders him unworthy to sit in parliament," and so on. On page 101, another libel, "Imputations against members of corruption in the execution of their duties." I am charged, Mr. Speaker, by the member for Bell Island of corruption in the execution of my duties. Make no mistake about that. That is what I am charged with.

Page 101: "Both Houses will punish not only contempts arising out of facts which the ordinary courts will take cognizance, but of those of which they cannot, such as contemptuous insults, gross calunm.y, foul epithets by word of mouth not within the category of actionable slander or threat of bodily injury." On page 102: "A question of privilege should be dealt with by a 1110tion giving the House power to impose a reparation or apply a remedy." So, Mr.

Speaker, quite clearly this motion which I have before the House is properly before the House and the matters that are now being discussed is a breach of privilege of a member of the House. Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to just refer to Beauchesne at page 45. It points out that a member can be expelled from the House, that is expulsion from the House for good. 2044

March 8, 1974 Tape 651 IB-2 Page 44 deals with suspension. "Suspension is a part of procedure which should be resorted to with great caution." I agree with that. There should be great caution but I think that this is a case that falls within that rule. ''If a member, in the heat of debate, is charged by his opponent$ with laying serious accusations against a colleague, using unparliamentary language or indulging in tmcalled for personalities, it is the Speaker's duty to insist on a withdrawal on pain of the member being named and liable to suspension by resolution of the lfouse.

The use of improper words may sometimes be a minor breach of order; but it becomes serious if the member refuses to explain or gives an unsatisfactory explanation; he is then amenable to discipline in the form of admonition, suspension or in extreme cases expulsion," and so on. "Suspension from the services of the House is effected by a resolution." The Speaker . cannot do that. There has to be a resolution. So, it is quite clear that the remedy suggested in this motion is one that is within the powers of this House. Now, Mr. Speaker, what is all this about?

First I want to refer to the Hansard of February 8, Friday, February 8,when I was asked a question by the member for Bell Island. That is page 406 or the question was asked on page 404. "Would the minister give the House some details of the agreement that was negotiated with the Barvarian Brewery, I think it is Labatt's, to take over Bison Brewery? I would like the minister especially to tell us what has happened to the OUtStftnding taxes that are due the province by Bison Brewery," My answer, Mr. Speaker, the important part of it is on page 406.

"Unfortunately after we assumed office and investigated that whole matter, it turned out that there was no agreement between the government and Bison Brewing Company Limited that had any binding effect whatsoever, that Bi~on Brewing would repay this amount of $410,000,approximately. Although we tried 'to pursue the matter and have the revenue 2045

March 8, 1974 Tape no. 652 Pagel - MW bonds forwarded to us, that was never resolved and our le~al advice from Labatt's said that they were interested in acquiring the Bison assets and the question which arose in connection with the $410,000 is that we had no claim against Bison Brewing Company Limited at all in connection with the $410,000. The simple position is that the $410,000, negligently left uncollected from Atlantic . B-rewing vill always remain uncollected. The matter ,, therefore, is no part of the arrangement between Labatt's Brewery and Bison. Now every word of that, Mr. Speaker, is true and correct.

I will read what I consider relevant. If the honourable gentleman wants to read any more of it, he can. The rest of it is not relevant. Now, Mr. Speaker, in connection ~ith the purchase by Labatt'• from Bison we have said that there would be no sales tax exemption. It is not our policy to grant sales tax exemption 1 and so on. It is not relevant to this question at all. We will collect sales tax now on the transfer of the assets. The $400,000 odd will never be collected. It could not be collected now from Bison because we have no legal way of getting it from them and they did not volunteer to pay us the $410,000.

Now, Mr. Speaker, what happened on March 41 I am not going to refer to Hansard at all because it is one of the sorriest Hanaards that I have ever read. The Hon. gentleman from Bell Island got up and extensively claimed that he had a breach of privilege and quite a hassle went on. Shortly in the debate, the Bouse Leader for the Opposition and the Member for White Bay South explained what he thought the Member for Bell Island was getting at. As I understand it, Sir, page 1789: "It is the case of my honourable friend the Member tor Bell Island that the Hon.

Minister of Finance misled the House or lied to the House, He is attempting to establish that by putting forward the statement that the minister made and as I further understand it he has documentary evidence to support .his allegations, 2046

March 8, 1974 Tape no. 652 Page 2 the Member for Bell Island's allegation, that the minister lied to the Bouse or seriously misled the House. It is a very grave charge which the Member for Bell Island will be making against the Minister of Finance." The Hon. gentleman for White Bay South knew what was up, Mr. Speaker. It was not plain until he spoke. Re .knew what was up and he agrees that it is a very serious charge and, of course, he is doing his best to aid and abet the Member for Bell Island. Mr. Speaker, further in the Hansard, page 1799_, the Member for Bell Island spoke: "Mr.

Speak.er, what we have before us is ample ~vidence that the Minister of Finance not only deliberately misled this Bouse but committed, Sir, a very grave conflict of interest in that the minister acted as both the chief officer of the government in negotiating a cancellation of debt ••• while at the same time was associated in at least two ways with the purchasing corporation which had mo•t to gain by such cancellation of debt." -- Mr. Speaker, further on page 1800 - Mr. Speaker; this i  barefaced deceit, all of it c0111pletely unparliamentary language..

It should have been withdrawn or been named but that has not happened and that ia why I had to bring in this motion. I should not have had to bring in this motion and I should not have been put in the position where I have to bring in this motion. I bringing it in and my character and reputation is worth more to me than anything else in this province, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, on page 1807: "Mr.

Speaker, I charge the Minister of Finance, Sir, with deliberately deceiving this honourable House, misleading the people of Newfoundland, Sir, and in view of the seriousness of this matter, I recommend that appropriate action be taken by this honourable House, that drastic action be taken against the Minister of Finance for abusing a privilege of this honourable House, Sir, for abusing the privilege of his office for his own personal interests and that immediate steps be taken to consider his impeachment." 20'1.7

March 8, 1974 Tape no. 652 Page 3 Mr. ·speaker, the honourable gentleman may smile over there and thin,k that this is all co!lli.cal but perhaps he has no· character or reputation that is worth defending. I th1nk I do and I do not think it is COJDieal and I do not think it is amusing and I am not amused whatsoever by it. Mr. Speaker, what this is about, it is not about Buon-Labatt's, although that 18 going to be amplified and cleared up here by me this afternoon ., it is about theee three libels on me, a member of this Bouse who is entitled to the protection of the Bouse. &.

Speaker, a matter !!ltated 1n this Rouse, you cannot take legal action on it outside. 'the parli8D)etltuy immunity prevents that. This Bouse has to protect its own 2048 1'

March 8, 1974 Tape 653 PIC - 1 members from statements made in this House by members of the House. I can assure the honourable gentleman for Bell Island that if he will say those three things outside of the House clearly without equivocation as they are in that Hansard he will also be in the courts. MR. NEARY: Inaudible. MR. CROSBIE: You have not. Well the honourable gentleman let me know where he did. AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. CROSBIE: He has not got the tapes. I heard you on CBC and you were weasel-worded enough to avoid it.

If the honourable gentleman will say outside of this House just read the parts of Hansard I have read here today, then the honourable ge~tleman will certainly be dealt with in the courts as well, make no mistake about that. The honourable weasel-worded Member for Bell Island. Now, Mr. Speaker, AN RON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. CROSBIE: Pardon? Ml.. NEARY: No character asassination. MR. SPEADR: Order, please! MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, you know it is amusing, not amusing it is . pathetic. It is sick. Sick! The honourable member does not know what he is doing.

He has not got, I suppose,the senae of discrimination to know what he is doing. Now, Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned before.that no explanation was asked for by the Member for Bell Island, no information was asked for just the reading of some correspondence, inco111J>lete correspondence, only part of the correspondence given to him by his friends in Canadian Javelin, Mr. Doyle or one of his agents, given to hia by them, not the complete record,but the complete record will be tabled here today, Mr. Spe_aker.

Then after doing that these unparliamentary and slanderous accusations where I am accused of all these matters that I have just mentioned, aided and abetted by the Leader of the Opposition and the Member for White Bay South, both lawyers, both of whom should have some appreciat~on of what is happening, both of whom should 20d9

March 8, 1974 1·ape 053 PK - 2 know that a member ehould be given a chance to explain himself before such accusations are made. Both of them completely disregarding that 1.n their ambition to somehow smear this· government and the members of it so that they can creep and crawl their way back·into power in the province. That is the only explanation I can come to - two lawyers naming themselves and aiding and abetting in this foul conspiracy. I do not understand it of them. Perhaps they will clear that up today. Now, Mr.

Speaker, what are the facts, I will just go for a moment to them, the immediate transaction - Bison, the Bison transaction. I would like to file these copies of letters. I have supplied the Leader of the Opposition with a copy of them and one for the House. Nov, Mr. Speaker, just to get this in perspective; In December 1970 Bison Brewing Limited agreed to take over Atlantic Brewing Company Limited or whatever the name of the company was that had established the brewery out in Stephenville.

Atlantic Brewery established out in Stephenville on April 27,or around that time in 1968 - they started operations on April 27, 1968. Their operations ceased on May of 1969. They only operated for thirteen months. They had been given a letter by the Hon. Mr. Smallwood at the end of December 1966 informiug them that they did not have to pay any taxes or any commisson on beer. Mr. Smallwood did not have the legal power to give that c011D11itment but they ·had :this letter. Every brewery in Newfoundland, Mr.

Speaker, is required to submit to the Newfoundland Liquor Commission, it then vas to the Newfoundland Liq\.Or Corporation,their commission they collect for the government on beer for the previous months. In 1' •. other words this is March, by the 15th. of March every brewery has to give to the Newfoundland Liquor Corporation the commission on the beer they sold in February, If that is not done they should itmnediately be gotten after to pass over that commission.but Atlantic Brewing was allowed to go thir ·teen months without paying the co11D11issions, the government co11D11ission on beer.

It is now, I think, one dollar, twenty-two and a-half a case or twenty-four and a-half, not a tax - a commission, the government's cODD11ission. 2050

March 8, 1974 Tape 653 PK - 3 Eveey other breweey in the province had to pay it by the 15th. of the next month but not Atlantic Brewing. In May, 1969, they ceased operations. They owed durin,g that period,in commi11Siom. $412 .,000, l will forget the dollars and cent·s - 3130 - $412,000. During the whole period they paid $5,000, •o that the balance owing Yhen they ceased operations was $407 ,,0,00. That !s what they owed. 2051 ..

March 8, 1974, Tape 654, Pagel -- apb A writ was issued against them on October 24, 1969 - June, July, August, September, October - five months later, after they ceased operations. No action was taken in the previous thirteen months. Of course when the writ was issued they were bankrupt, they had no assets to pay the writ, to pay off the amount and therefore it could not be collected. The letter that the Premier had given them was ineffective and it was debated in this House in 1971. I have a copy of it here but it is not too relevant to the present situation. Bison Brewing Company Limited, Mr.

Speaker, connnenced operations in April of 1972 but on December S, 1970 it was announced that they were going to take over the Atlantic Brewing assets. The Atlantic Brewing assets had been taken over by people who had a trust deed on it, banks and so on who had financed it. They sold the assets to Bison Petroleum a subsidiary of Canadian Janelin which set up a company called Bison Brewing Company Limited to operate the brewery. The release was made - the Premier, the Ex-Premier, last Premier, Mr.

Small~~od,made a statement in November that this was going to happen and he said that Bison was going to take over the debt that Atlantic owed the government and would issbe ten year non-interest bearing revenue bonds so it would be paid off over ten years out of these bonds. 'When it was announced on December 8, 1970, Bison said in their statement that they were going to do this. The Ex-Premier, Mr. Smallwood,also said that all of the ordinary creditors of Atlantic were also going to be paid by Bison. That did not happen. That was not done.

It never did happen but the Ex-Premier was very concerned about this irregular and unusual situation with Atlantic Brewing and was wanting to quieten down the other creditors who had lost tens and tens of thousands of dollars. Bison Brewing commenced their operations in April 1972 and they closed down in August of 1973. Just for the record let me say they were watched like hawks and on the fifteenth of the month 2052

March 8, 1974, Tape 654, Page 2 -- apb they had their money in or they were immediately gotten on to to see they paid their commission. The total commission that they paid, Mr. Speaker, they had to pay from April 1972 to August 1973, was $284,664. Every dollar of it was paid. We saw to that but it shows you how low their sales were·. They did not have a chance, their beer was not accepted, the whole thing was an economic disaster, so in August 1973 they closed down. Now, Mr.

Speaker, during this whole period they had no revenue from which to pay anything on any bonds nor did we have any bonds, On December 8, 1970, Mr. Smallwood says they are going to issue non-interest bearing revenue bonds. When we came into office in January 1972, they still had not issued them and despite our best efforts from March of 1972 until December 1973 they still had not issued the non-interest bearing revenue bonds. In any event, if the brewery was operating so badly that it ~ad no revenue it had no obligation to pay anything. It had no revenue from which to pay.

When they shut down their operation in August 1973, there was no hope of getting anything. They are now shut down, had he~vy losses, no revenue and the Newfoundland Government is never going to get a bean from them. That is the situation and Bison, roughly. Now, there is correspondence tabled here and 1 will just run through it briefly. Some of it was tabled by the honourable Gentleman from Bell Island who got it from the Doyle organization presumably. There is nowhere else he could have gotten it. He had to get it from Mr. John C.Doyle or his lawyer. MR. NEARY : No • MR. CROSBIE: Or one of their agents. AN.HON.

MEMBER: Incorrect. MR. CROSBIE: That is the only place he could have gotten it. AN HON. MEMBER: No. MR. CROSBIE: In good faith, ¥.r. Speaker, a copy of an Oroer-in­ Council was given to the solicitor for Canadian Javelin Limited and the honourable Gentleman from Bell Island ended up with a copy of 2053

March 7, 1974, Tape 654, Page 3 - apb it. Now that either bad to come from the solicitor for Canadian Javelin Limited or hi• client. 2054 -i'.·

March 8, 1974 Tape No. 655 NM - 1 MR. NEARY: Wrong • Wrong again. MR. CROSBIE: I am not wrong again. Now, Mr. Speaker, the first letter is March 8, 1972 when I wrote Bison Petroleum and Minerals Limited and I should refer perhaps first to the Order-in-Council that was passed by the Smallwood Administration, a copy of it is already tabled by the member for Bell Island. It is dated "December 14, 1970.

"Ordered that consequent upon the sale of Atlantic Brewery Limited, Stephenville to Bison Petroleum and Minerals Limited and with respect to the amount of $407,000 owed by the former company to the Government of Newfoundland, the undertaking of Bison Petrolum to repay the said amount for the issue to the government of interest free revenue bonds redeemable in eight annual payments over a period of ten years be and it is hereby approved, the undertaking." Now there is no cabinet paper went up with that, Mr. Speaker. It was brought up verbally .and this Order-in-council was passed.

On file the only documents that were in the goverranent's possession on that whole transaction that is these documents I have here. But there is said to be an undertaking by Bison Petroleum and Minerals Limited• to pay this. Now Bison Petroleum and Minerals Limited, Mr. Speaker, did not own_ the brewery at Stephenville, that was owned and operated by a subsidiary called Bison Brewing Limited, so this has to do with Bison Petroleum. It is supposed to be an undertaking and it was a verbal undertaking. There was no correspondence.

There was no Agreement, capital "A" • There was no Agreement, no exchange of correspondence between the Government of Newfoundland and Bison Petroleum or Canadian Javelin or whoever. There was apparently only a verbal undertaking and that was not enforceable because they were - agreeing to give a gift. There was no consideration. So there is no agreement as I said in this House February 8. None. So on March 8, 1972 I wrote Bison Petroleum and Minerals iimited and I refer to this Minute of Council and their undertaking and that 2055 ...

March 8, 1974 Tape No. 655 NM - 2 no revenue bonds had ever been received. I asked what their intentions were and when would this be finalized. I refer to the House of Assembly debate of May 28, 1971 when Mr. Smallwood , said that all the creditors were going to be paid by Bison, all the creditors of Atlantic Brewing and asked thein about that, said that we would be pleased to be informed of any arrangements which Bison had to pay those creditors. Now March 12, 1972, Mr. L •. B. Martin, 111, aid to be a Vice-President of Bison. MR. NEARY: March 13 that is. MR. CROSBIE: March 13, 1972. MR. NEARY: That is right.

HR. CROSBIE: Bison Brewing Company Limited, a letter from L.B. Martin, III, Vice-President, I believe he is a son-in-law of the great Mr. Doyle, whom the memb.er for Bell Island is such a great admirer of, he • replied. March 13, 1972 he replied.

Be said, ''We hereby confirm that Bison Brewing Company bu undertaken to pay the Newfoundland Liquor C0111111ission the amount of $407,000 by the issue to government of interest free revenue bond redeemable in equal annual installments over a period of ten years." He then goes on to talk about the premises and he says, "The premises have been passed over to Bison Brewing, the ale of the premises lla,s not been completed and the issue price and securities involved have to be approved by the appropriate regulatory bodies. Some of these approvals have to be obtained from the Interior Security Commis~ion.

Row this is all popycock. ''Upon completion of the transaction it is the intention of the company to issue the rev~ue bonds to the goveTment. No agTeement has been made by the company with any of the creditors of Atlantic Brewing nor any agreement entered into providing for any such payments. This is a utter of discretion with the company, any payments would be purely a public relations gestun." So they were not going to pay the ordinary creditor. Well. 2056

March 8, 1974 Tape No. 655 NM - 3 you could not blame them. They had no obligation to do it. So L.B. Martin, III, sent back that letter confirming there was an undertaking. Ihat is March 13, 1972. June 19, 1972 I received a letter from the great man himself, John C. Doyle,on the stationary of Canadian Javelin Limited. MR. NEARY: What date? MR. CROSBIE: Will the honourable gentleman listen and atop interrupting me. I have enough to go through without listening to his interruptions. "June 19, 1972, ~ear Mr. Crosbie, we have instructed our local counsel in St. John's, Newfoundland, Mr.

Donald Dawe, to prepare the necessary documents for the issuance to the goveI'tllllent of the $470,000 in principle amount of non-interest bearing revenue bonds to be issued by Bison Brewing Limited to the province." Then he talks about the land out in Stephenville. So in June of 1972, Mr. Doyle saya Mr. Dawe has been instructed to prepare the dacumenta. 2057

March 8,1974, Tape 656, Pase 1 - apb Then there is another letter of June - a couple of days later - saying that the $470,000 should have been $407,000. On October 10 ( nothing more was heard) October 10, 1972, I wrote Mr. John C.Doyle again telling him that I had not heard from him since June and asking for the issuance of the non-interest bearing revenue bonds. We understood that counsel was supposed to prepared the documents and had heard nothing from him. October 18, 1972, I wrote Mr.

Channing, Clerk of the Executive Council~asking him to search all Minutes-of 6ouncil and so on and so forth to see what could be found on Atlantic Brewing and Bison Brewing and the matter of these bonds and so on. Mr.

Channing replied with a note later on in October, it looks like the 31st. of October, attaching all the records they had on Bison Brewing. 'the only record they had was an Order-in-Council of December 14, 1970, an Order-in-Council amending some wording in that, the copy of a press release from Bison Petroleum and Minerals LiJlited dated December 7, 1970 and some documentation from the Mini.ater of Economic Development about whether Bison Brewing should be exempted from S.S.A. Tax on the equipment they were getting from Atlantic Brewing in Stephenville. The rest of that is about the sales tax matter.

There was an Order-in-Council passed December 1, 1971, after the election of October 1971, December 1, 1971, ordering that under section (12) and so on of the S.S.A.Tax Act, the regulations be ma.ended to grant exemption_ to Bison Brewing with effect from January 1, 1971, in respect of plant machinery and ~quipment ~ acquired by the company and previously owned by Atlantic Brewing. Mr. Speaker, these are all the documents the government bad,up to October 1972, about Bison Brewing and its obligations to pay this $407,000. That is all.

No agreement, no exchange of correspondence between the parties, nothing but an undertaking confirmed in writing by L.B.Hartin the III that they were going to 2058

March 8, 1974, Tape 656, Page 2 -- apb issue these bonds. The undertaking, Mr. Speaker, was not of any teal assistance because,what were the terms and conditions of the bpnds? All the undertaking was that they had issued ten year interest free revenue bonds. Nothing else agreed on the bonds at all. What conditions were the bonds to contain? None of that was settled. On June 4, 1973, I do not know how I let that slip so long, but in any event on June 4, 1973, Mr. Peper wrote my instructions to Mr. Doyle reminding him about :tll this again, saying that his lawyer was supposed to have sent us these docUQJents.

We heard nothing further. Mr. Doyle's office had advised us that the documents were sent for his approva1 months ago and we would like to have some progress. As a result of the lack of progress the paper went to the cabinet, the Department of Finance, and on July 4, 1973, and Order-in-Council was issued that we notified Bison that unless they took satisfactory action immediately to issue to the government these bonds the necessary steps will be taken to suspend its brewer's license, this matter to be reviewed one month from the date hereof. We had no weapon over the Bison Brewery, Mr.

Speaker, to get them to issue these bonds at all except a threat that we would have to suspend their brewer's license if they did not carry out their undertaking. Of course that threat was no good whatsoever when the brewery closed down in August and was not going to operate again anyway. However, that had a good effect. On July _5, ~973, I wrote Mr. Doyle (the letter is here) about the collDllitment and the honourable gentleman the Member for Bell Island tabled this the other day and thought he had struck a great, you know, he had come upon a Sold mine. Crosbie was a liar.

He had struck the load, he thought, to show I He thought he really had him,and this is what he has based his whole case on. My letter says; "Dear Mr. Doyle: We have now had a long 2053

March s. 1974, Tape 656. Page 3 - apb correspondence originating in March 1972 1 with respect to the commitment of Bison Brewing Company Limited 2060 •

March 8, 1974 Tape 657 IB-1 to issue to the r.overnment of Newfoundland free of charge noninterest bearing revenue bonds in the amount of $407,000 to be redeemed in equal annual installments over a period of ten years. The agreement, small (a\ the agreement - tPat is the agreement, their commitment to issue these bonds. Not an agreement, capital (A), a binding agreement between the government and this company, the agreement betweP.Tt Bison .Brewing and the government was ratified by the Executive Council by a minute passed on December 14, 1970.

That is the colllDlitment, the undertaking repeated in the Order-in-Council. I went on to say, "There has been extensive correspondence and no reply. The situation is being reviewed by the cabinet. I am directed to inform you that unless Bison meets its commitment and issues these bonds action will be taken to enforce the agreement. It is difficult to see how we can continue the brewery to continue operating if they will not meet their c0111111itments to government. I am giving them a month." That is the letter, Mr. Speaker. That is the letter - AN HONOURABLE MF.MBER: Inaudible. MR.

CROSBIE: Oh, will be come to the lawyers' advice. Do not the honourable gentleman worry. He is getting quite familiar with lawyers, involved in so many suits and actions and he would be involved in more if he clarifies his position outside this Bouse. MR. NEARY: I have already done it. MR. CROSBIE: You have not, you weasel, you have not done it. Go out•ide here this afternoon and honestly make those statements outside in the presence of witnesses later on and we will see. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I do not want to pay any attention to the member for Bell Island. _MR~--S~P_EA;._XE----'P._. :_(~!-'R----'.;._S~T~A~GG_,~)_: __ If honourable members are to persist in carrying on a banter across the floor, the whole debate will degenerate and I ask, if the honourable member for Bell Island interjects~ I ask the honourable Minister of Finance to ignore him or otherwise 2061 , .

March 8, 1974 Tape 657 the Chair will have to be continually ruling. I ask the honourable member for Bell Island to refrain fr011t gratu~tous c0111111ents of any kind. MR. CROSBIE: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I am not in the mood for banter. IB-2 The next letter is August 3, 1973. We received a letter from Curtis Dave Fagan and so on, Mr. Don Dave acting for Bison Brewing. It says, "Your Letter addressed to Mr. Doyle•(handed' to them for action) - "In your letter you referred to a minute of the execu~ive council passed on December 14, 1970." Now, get this, Mr. Speaker.

"But our clients advise us that they have not a copy of that minute which we would like to see. We would appreciate it if you would arrange to have a copy thereof forwarded to us as eoon as convenient so that we can proceed with the matters referred to in your letter." Now; here is a statement that vas made on December, 1970 that they were going to take over this obligation and issue bonds, nothing done for the last two years of the Neary- Smallwood Administration to enforce it and back comes their solicitor on August 3, 1973 to say that they have not even got a copy of the minute passed by the executive council.

All right, they did not have a copy~ So, on August 20, 1973 Mr. Peper, at my instructions, wrote back to Mr. ~awe sending him a copy of the Order-in-Council and asking him to reply by August 27. Then on August 22, Mr. Dawe replied again and thanked us for forwarding the Order-in-Council. ''You will note that this Order-in­ Council refers to an undertaking to issue interest-free revenue bonds.

We have asked our clients for a copy of this undertaking but they do not appear to have and I am wondering if you will be good enough to let me have a copy thereof so that I could proceed with tha preparation of the bond and settle the terms thereof with you." Now, that is good. The honourable gentleman says that I am a liar because I said there vas not agreement between the partiee because hi• great friend and companion, Mr. Doyle, had not given hi all the correspondence or his a~ent or agents or sub-agents thereof 2062

?if.arch 8, 1974 Tape 657 or his co-conspirators. "Augus .t. 22, 1973 refers to an undertaking. 11 We have asked our clients for a copy but they do not appear to have it." Would we be good enough to let them have a copy of it so they could at least start the pre.paration of the bonds .• IB-3 August 30, 197l, a letter back from myself to Mr. Dawe. "In rep1y to your letter of the twenty-second, I enclose herewith copies of letteTS dated J·une 19 and 27 from Canadian Javelin signed by John c. Doyle in which he confirmed that the do.cuments shquld be prepared.•• So, I sent him that lette .r or those copies of those letters. ----- 2063

March 8, 1974. Tape 658 Rli - 1 We are concerned about the fact that you are requesting documentation which should be in the hands of the company, cannot tolerate any further delays. For this reason, I am not prepared to extend the dead­ line beyond September 7, 1973. I had a letter September 4, 1973 from Mr. Dawe. P.e had received my letter. I was disturbed by the contents of the last paragraph because the records of Bison Brewing Company LiJllited, which had been forwarded to me, did not contain any documentation to the government relating to the proposed bonds. I was informed that no such records existed.

Now Bison has informed their lawyer that no such records, no documentation and I am called a liar and deceiving the House and deceitful by the honourable gentleman opposite who did not inquire what evidence there was or what all the correspondence was. Be•~•· "I felt that it was not proper for me to draft the bonds until I had all the information. You will note that the letters copies of_which you forwarded to me were sent by Canadian Javelin • Limited and no copies were ever in the files of Bison.

We are still without a copy of the proposal made by Bison to the Government which was accepted by the Order-in-Council which you forwarded earlier on this matter and if you have it,would you be good enough to let me have a copy." Well, we could not let him have a copy, Mr. Speaker, because there was no proposal made by Bison to the Government, accepted by the Order-in-Council. There vaa not one. Now, there must have been a verbal one. Presumably, Mr. Smallwood must have spoken to Mr. Doyle in December or November, 1972 and said, "'Will you takl! over this •$407,000.00. It is politically embarasaing to me.

I have allowed Atlantic Brewing to go for thirteen months without paying these beer commissions. I am in a hard, political spot, John. You know, you have to assist me. We have to get ove~ this matter and if you will take over the $407,000.00, it will help me out of a tight apot" ...... '. or some conversation like that, But there vas no proposal. We are still without a copy of the proposal made by Bison to the Government, accepted 2064

March 8, 1974. Tape 658 RH- - 2·, by the Order-in-Council because there was no proposal and we had no copy of it because there was no proposal. So much for the agreement. September 6, 1973, a letter back to Mr • . Dawe from me: "Thank you for your letter dated September 4 which deals with your further request to provide you wi'th an agreement which is supposedly in existance between Bison and the Government.

Review, search of our files has not been successful in locating an agreement between Bison aud the Government and I therefore suggest that if such an agreement is in existance, it should be in the Bison Brewing Company file. However, we believe a letter is in our possession from the parent company or sufficient to indicate the intention of Bison and Canadian Javelin Limited and I extended the deadline to September 14, 1973. So, on September 19, 1973, Mr. Dawe came back and says he has prepared a debenture.

He sent if off to Bison and he wants to get their approval of it but he sent a copy to us for our examination and comment. AB you are aware, I was at a disadvantage in drafting this debenture, as neither my client nor the Government bas been able to supply me with a copy of the proposal which was accepted by the Govern­ ment as appears by the Order-in-Council and I have had to fall back on statements, on correspondence subsequent to that day. So, that is the position, Mr. Speaker, on this Bison situation. There was no agreement, none whatsoever, an undertaking, apparently verbally given, I presume, by Mr.

Doyle to Mr. Smallwood in December of 1972, which they confirmed in correspondence after we took over but still nc agreement. They did confirm that they had underta~en the issue of ten year revenue bonds. October 2, 1973: The next docmnent is a letter from Mr. Peper to Mr. Vincent McCarthy, Deputy Minister of Justice, on my instructions forwarding the debenture. asking for their opinion, asking what legal steps we could take, saying it looked like we had little chance of recovering any of the monies, and we wanted to be advised; so ve did not have receivables that were worthless.

A letter of October 9, 1973, to Mr. McCarthy from Mr. Peper again 2065

March 8, 1974. Tape 658 RH - 3 sending them our whole file on the matter and all the correspondence, asking the same question, asking to make a search on chattel mortgages and writs. October 15, 1973: A letter to Mr. Peper from Kr. Nesbitt of the Department of .Justice, he has been assigned to look after the matter. He says about a mort~age that is registered and that he is ROinp; to look into the matter. October 30, 1973: A letter from Mr. Peper to Mr. Nesbitt, asking for progress. A letter then, November 2, 1973, from Mr. Nesbitt to Mr.

Peper, bringing him up to date: The debentures and the important paragraph~ "The debentures that Bison Brewing have agreed to give you are revenue debentures, even though the title of the debenture is Unsecured Interest Free Debenture," consequently it would not make much difference if the debentures were dated September 15, 1972 or 1974. If the company produced no revenue then there i  no requirement for them. tq make a payment. By this time, of course, Mr. Speaker, you realize the brewery wa closed; there was definitely no revenue.

There is nothin~ in the draft debenture to uggest that if they failed to continue busine • or to produce revenue that all the debentures would fall due. Reither is there a clause stating under what circumstances the company would be deemed to have revenue sufficient to pay off the debentures. All these things are not •~reed because there was nothing agreed, just interest-free ten year revenue debentures. How could you sue them or take action on that? Then on November 5, 1973, a letter from Mr. Peper- to me, enclosing a memo from Mr. Nesbitt who had met with Mr.

Dawe, and we decided that dispite the fact that the br~ery seemed not to be going to operate ap;ain we hould still try to get the debentures. Then a letter from Mr. Dawe again, on November 5, 1973, he requests instructions but has not heard from his client yet and it is a waste of time to meet with us until he does. 2066

March 8, 1974. Tape 658 ~ - 4 November 8. 1973, a letter from Peper to Nesbitt, he has discussed with me two questions that were not settled. One was advising him that .. he shoul~ still try to get the debentures even thou1h they would not be of much benefit. So that is the letter of November 8. November 15, a letter from Mr. Nesbitt to Mr. Peper saying that Bison wants the maturity dates updated at a current date. In other words, we said these interest free revenue bonds· should be d~ted September, 1972.

The promise was given in 1970 put it should be dated in 1972 when the brewery started up but they were insisting that they be dated the end of 1973 or 1974 when they were signed, so we would be two years longer getting our money. That was not agreed. I said no, they should be dated in 1971 or 1972. Then the next big question was: It also appears that revenue will be defined as being net income from beer sold in Newfoundland but this would have obvious connotations since there is little or no beer sold in Newfoundland. They will never have to pay off the debenture. So, 1 aaid no, the revenue should be revenue.

They should pay it from the revenue of Bison Brewin~ Company Limited whether the revenue was from beer sold in Newfoundland or beer sold in the United States or beer sold in Swaziland or beer sold in Nova Scotia or beer aold anywhere on the globe or any revenue that Bison Brewing bu. There are two matters not resolved, no agreement and we could not force them, Mr. Speaker, to agree to any of these points because they should all have been agreed to in December, 1970 or shortly thereafter.

Honourable gentlemen opposite and three of them were in the government, the member for Bell Island, i'hite Bay South, White Bay North, they were in the government, they never saw that anything was done about this. Rc'Y'1!111ber 20, 1973, another letter from Peper to McCarthy telling him about the maturity date on the revenue, my position on that. Then November 27, 1973, Mr. Neabitt report• that he met with Mr. Dawe and they are still in conflict about these two matters and 2067

March 8, 1974. Tape 658 RH 5 they have discussed the definition of net revenue and the redemption date. He is going back to his clients; will attempt to redraft the debenture 2068

March 8, 1974 Tape 659 Pk - 1 That is November of last year. On December 17, 1973 we wrote Mr. _McCarthy asking for progress again on the matter. So, Mr. Speaker, this brings ua up to where Labatts entered the picture. This is the situation. Labatts come along in December 1973. Bison has not given us the ten year revenue bonds, if they do give them to us, they are not worth a darn to us because they have no revenue and they have shut down their operations. We have no security on their operation. We have nothing. 'Ibere is nothing. Nothing. It is a wisp, it is a figment of the imagination.

We got nothing from them. No agreement. No security. Zero. This is just a political dodge in any event adopted in 1970 to get over a very difficult position that the government were in,in connection with Atlantic Brewing. Late in December of 1973, Labatt& contacted the government and said that they were interested in buying the assets of the brewery at Stephenville . and th~t there were some questions raised that they • needed our position on. We had to agree . to, for example, for a transfer of the lease at Harmon. There was · a question of the $407,000. What was the position of that $407,000?

Would they have to pay it or just what was the status? Would Bison have to pay it? There are one or two other matters that I will mention when 1 come to the Orders-in­ Co1m.cil. Now that went to the cabinet, Mr. Speaker, to be discussed and the cabinet was anxious for the assets of Stephenville to be put into good use. The cabinet knew that Labatts if they take them over will operate that brewery, not only will they operate that brewery but it will not be closed down in thirteen months or two years or at aJJ.Y cime ' nor will we have to worry about whether they pay the commission on beer or the rest of it.

They will also employ I think it is some thirty people out in Stephenville. The cabinet meeting was December 28, the Order-in-Council which 1 have tabled today 1• 1602 of 1973 and it ia dated J&nuary 9, 1974. That is the date Mr. Channing prepared it. The cabinet meeting wa• 2069

March 8, 1974 Tape 659 PIC - 2 December 28. It was decided at that meeting that I consult with the Department of Jutice to determine the liability of Bion and/or Bison Petroleum to the governllient under that Order-in-Council of 1970, that I be authorized to inform Labatts that provided that the sale of assets from Bison to Labatts was effective by March 31, 1974; first, the government would consent to the lease being assigned, it would have the Harmon Corporation aesent to that.

That the governmen,t reserve. the right to uke apt1ropriate action against Bison and Bison Petroleum for the pa,-ent of t~e amount of $407,000. Then it went OD to talk about the intereat free boada,that we are going to reaerve the right to take action against them. Third, that there will be no exemption from retail aales t&JC granted to Labatt  in connection with the purchase of the aasets of Bison. 1 lll!l&t have slipped up there, Mr. Speaker. I muet have slipped up. I did not give Labatta a sales tax exemption.

That would have been $30:ooo or $40,000 bucks in their pocket and a:lne I suppose, if I persuaded the cabinet to giye • them a sale tu: exemption~ Anyway we atated that there would be no exemption from retail sales tu and that no claim will be made againat Bison for retail sales tu OD thair purchase of aHets from Atlantic Brewing because there was an Order-in-Council esaipting them,of 1971. Now that was on the asauaption that we might have a legal claim for the $407,000. So that was the position OD December 28, u Labatt  were informed, on thoae four iHues. After that· cabinet meeting I wrote Mr.

Peper on December 31, ( I waa going away; to tell hiJI what the situation was and asked him to get in touch with the Department of Juatice and get their legal opinion. That letter is in the file here. On .Janaary 2, he wrote Mr. McCarthy and Mr. Nesbitt, 11ending my letter and aaking · for the o~inion - did we have any suit against Bison? Then 011 January 8, Mr. Nesbitt replied. Bi• letter is here. January 8, 1974. I have your memo and so on. made s0111e inquiries of Executive Council to aee if there were any,_ taackground material  to support the Minute-of-Council. Re could find nothing. 2070

March 8, 1974 Tape 659 PK - 3 In order to enforcer I will not read the whole letter - but win order to enforce an undertaking it is preaumed that there must be legal consideration flow in the opposite direction. Prima-facie I can find no legal reasoning for one company to assume the debt of another when it does not have to merely because it has pµrchase.d the assets under a power of sale from a mortgagee.

It appears then the undertaking of Bison is an undertaking of a gift and a gift is unenforceable unless the donor sets a condition precedent or aubaequent which if acted upon forms a consideration auffic~t for the. gift and so on. I have not been able to find any •upport for this proposition. Therefore, it is my opinion, that if you attempted to force a claim for a debt owing of $407,000 in a court of law you would be unsuccessful. ., Ria opinion on that.

That 18 clear enough. ,tT00 0 on the otker hand if you attempted legal action for specific performance baaed on the assumption of agreement by virtue of the letters of L.B. Martin III of 1972 and John C. Doyle you would first ha~ to overcome the task of convincing a judge of the exiatence of an agreement to support your claim. Then you would have to establish the form of that for which you are asking. spe~ific performance. -- Then is no.thing to ask the court to specifically perform. the conditions r• •-• ., ..._. are not agreed except that there is to be ten year revenue bonds.

There 1a no evidence of what wa intended to be a final fora 6f the revenue debentures and as can be-seen by other corre911ondence between Dawe Q,C and your any my offices, it has not even been determined what the definition of revenue was to be. The affect of all of this is that it could be argued that since there was no consensea ad idem. a meeting of minds on the alleged agreement, .then specific perfoniances and possible and the agreement frustrated.

A~ng that we could successfully argue before the court and could convince the court that specific perfonance ia warranted for the iauance of the debenture , the court will be reluctant to et • date for th• iaauance. Conaequently •~en if the debentures were 2071·

March 8, 1974 Tape 659 PK - 4 issued, if there is no revenue being produced in Newfoundland, which 1 under•tand they would insist would be the farthe t extent of it intention in issuing the debentures then government would be gaining nothing. On the whole I would say that our chances of obtaining the decree for specific performance by the court would be extremely remote." That is his opinion. If you got a decree of specific performance for ten year revenue bonds with no other conditions, · it would have been no good to us because there vas no revenue, because Bison Brewing is not· functioning any longer.

That is the legal position. So on January 18, there was another cabinet meeting, the meeting was actually January 16 - this ia all gone over again. The cabinet decided that since ve had no legal claim aga1Mt Biaon it wu just •• well to recognize we had no legal cla~m against Bion ~nd to tell Labatt• that we had no legal claim again t Billon. But since we nov had no legal claim against Bion for thi co11111i ion on beer and ince they were not going to honour their obligation -, they were uot offering to c0111e acros with $407,000. In fact they were doing 2072

March 8, 1974 Tape no. 660 Page 1 - MW all they could to prevent us from getting the boncla,that we would not give them the ales tax exemption. They had no right to it. That Order-in-Council,which was paHed 1n 1971, had never been implemented and it would not be. At least we would get $40,000 in sales tax that they had been exempted from by the previous administration. The Order-in-Council of January 18, 1974,sets that out in view of advice received by me from the Department of Justice I aa authorized to do such and such and the previous Order-in-Council was issued. There 1s a docmientation, Mr. Speaker.

Everything that is relevant I have. I have the originals here and a whole lot of other stuff from the £ilea, enquiries of the llaraon Corporation, enquiries of Public Works and ao on for information on the situation. The rest of it 1a not really geraane to thi motion nor to the iaue that is being .dicuased here. There 1• the complete correspondence, Mr. Speaker, and the complete situation. • Mr. Speaker, what I aid,vbat I aid on February 8, 1974,in this Boue, every word wa• trua a,:,,d correct, abolutely true and correct, abolutely~ Row, MT.

Speaker, would Labatt  pay the $407,000'l Ro, they would not pay the $407,000. Why ahould lhey pay $407,000 for a debt owed by ou Atlantic Brewing to the GoftrDMDt of llevfounclland four yur earlier with which they had had no coanec:tion? Why should they? Why would any one'l_ Mr. Doyle and MT. Smallwoo~ concocted their pact again . to get him out of a tough aituation he was into becaue he had not collected the ales tax nor the ~•ion  on beer. I aakad 1'., Labatt  would they pay the $407,000 and they said: ''Ko, they would not pay the $407,000.

They were prepared to pay Javalin for their usets, vhat the usets were worth but they were not going to pay $407,000 ~ They uked for a salea tax exemption and they were told, no. Nov that 1 the aituation. rhere 1s the correspondence, Mr. Speaker~ 2073

March 8, 1974 Tape no. 660 Page ! - MW The honourable gentleman opposite,without asking for the whole picture, not caring about the whole picture, has charged me with lying and deceiving this House. Now there is no fair-minded reasonable person in this House today that should make any other conclusion than that this House has not been deceived nor lied to by yours truly. Now that is one charge of the honourable gentle111&n which is one hundred per cent incorrect. Now what was the second charge. The second charge - he bas a lot of charges that fellow.

The second charge: "A very grave conflict of interest and that I acted as the chief officer of the govermient in negotiating a cancellation of debt; that I was associated in two ways with the purchasing corporation which had most to gain by such cancellation of the debt." Mr. Speaker, there is no conflict of interest whatsoever. How the honourable gentlemen opposite talk about conflict of interest now; they never heard or thought about it until the last couple of years. When they were in office they never worried or heard or thought about it.

They were not concerned about it then but now it is all conflict of interest with them. The legislation that is being passed is not tough enough, not strong enough and what not. They would not even hear it talked about in the House. I was attacked like a savage when I proposed it in 1969, accused of slandering every member of the House and every civil servant and the rest of it.

Now the "dought,''members opposite are talking about conflict of interest and every time an action is taken by the government we are being accused, innuendo and snide whisperings around that there is conflict of interest, patronage, graft and corruption, which is all we have heard.for the last two years lead by the Member for Bell Island who is a spigot and a fountain of viciousness and slander; aided and abetted by two more educated gentlemen.

Oh, yea one point was that I was a member of the firm of Aylward, Crosbie and Collins and therefore, I was getting the gravy fro them and they were acting for Labatts in the purchase. Now let me 2074

March 8, 1974 Tape no~ 660 Page 3- MW say this that I have acted for Labatt  in the put when I was in practice and if I am in practice again, I would not doubt I would be acting for them again, If the government falls in eight or ten years time, if I am not all worn out and jaded by that time. I would act for them. ---~Y should I not? I have every right to act for them or any one else. I am not acting for them now. I have not acted for tbea since January. 1972. My nae is with the firm of Aylward. Crosbie and Collins because Mr. Aylward van.ta my name to stay there.

We have been in pract:ice together since 1958; we two "little fellows started out on Duckworth Street. We rented from Dr. Harry Roberts. had a bathtub between the two offices and I used to look out on a concrete wall, a beautiful v:iew, two fut out there was a big concrete wall. That is where we started and Brother Aylward wants my name to stay there. I do not care if it stays there or not. It is not a cent in my pocket. I have not had a cent from Aylward, Crosbie and Collins since January, i972. In fact I do not know if I had a cent from them before January, 1972, becauaa it used to be.

Lewis, Aylward• Crosbie and whatnots and that firm bad diseolved itself and I do not believe I ever got a chance to get down practicing with Aylward, Crosbie ancl Collin • ls that not right? Be ia ao darn mean, I hardly got a cent out of him when. I waa back there in between times. It was a job to make a n:ickel out of hi.a. I have uot had a cent, Mr.

Speaker, from Aylward, Crosbie and Collin  and I am promised nothing and I received nothing from tha and if I leave the gove-rnmant or get defeated or go back to practice, I will receive what I bring in myself and he ld.ght help me along for the first fw months when I am down doing the collection  again. there ia no conflict of interest - Aylward, Crosbie and Collins. Every lawyer in this Bouse, except the Leader of the Oppoation who ; has never practiced, has hill name down v:ith his firm, the member for White Bay South and the re11t of them. There is nothing wrong v:ith it.

None of the slander and atrocious innuendo that ve v:111 get in this House will make me change Chat unless Brother Aylward van.ts to take it down,for a tempo-rary rest. so he will not be abused and attacked slyly and viciously and v:ith complete disregard for honesty and decent conduct in this Rouse. 20-,5

March 8, 1974 Tape no. 660 Page 4 Now what about Labatts? I am a director, Mr. Speaker, of Gaden'II Limited or I was when this was ·going on. Gaden'II Limited is in the soft drink business. It has nothing to do with beer. The only thing it has to do with is Labatt& - it is OWl\ed by Labatts. Labatt  own it. It has hundreds of subsidiaries across Canada, two hundred, I do not know how many they have.

I was a director of it before Labatts bought out Bavarian Brewery and Caden'& and the rest of th• and I have been a director of it since and I am still • director of a soft drink company but not of Bavarian Brewing or the co.panies that have anything to do with the beer busineH. MR. NEilY : Vbo distributes and sells the beer? MR.. CIOSBIE: It is distributed and sold by 'Beverage Sales Limited. HR. Rr.AllY: (Inaudible). MR.. CIOSBIE: Hr. Speaker, I do not care who diatributea the beer. I a uplaining - MR.. R!'AI.Y: I care. MR.

QlOSBIE: I do not care about the honourable gentleaan ezcept that be is a squalid nuisance in this House and in the whole province. Bow, Mr. Speaker, I will continue on. I am· a director of that company a is Mt down there in m.y conflict of interest statement and tliare is no conflict of interest, none whatsoever. I do not intend to resign from it and I see no reason why I should and I• not going to. Thera is no conflict of interest. If Gaden'a ever have to appa>ach the government on anything,then I will not.participate in that matter. Labatte, Mr.

Speaker, to top it all of, Labatt  has nothing, the cancellation of the debt had nothing to do with Labatts. There was ' no debt owing to the government by Labatt• or Gaden's or any one else. The debt was owed by Bison Brewing C0111pany Limited. I can assure you that I have no connection with Bison Brewing Company Limited, none whatsoever. My only connection with the owner of it baa been a very distasteful one but we are busy now wrestling this province back from tbe grip of that type of person and we are going to do it deapite 2076

March 81 1974 Tape no. 660 Page S the campaigns of in•inuation and slander and the viciousne•• and the rest of it, we are going to wrestle this province back from the clutches of people like John C. Doyle. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear! Bear! HR. NEARY: You better tall Brother Andrew that. HR. CIOSBIE; Andrew can do what be darn well likes. lie ca look after - he is the 201-,

March 8, 1974, Tape 661, Page 1 - apb Liberal and he can associate with the honourable gentlemen oppoaite. MR. WARY: How naive! How naive! MR. CROSBIE: But not me. Now, Mr. Speaker, to get back to this point here. Just to repeat that: Who was benefited by the cancellation of the debt? It was not cancelled, we just coDCluded that we had no way of taking action, no way of recovery. The only one who could benefit from.that is Bison Brewing Company Limited whatever benefit it is to them, because they are bankrupt anyway. They have no assets,it matters not to them.

They had certain mortgages and so on on their assets which I asaume got paid off vben Labatt• paid them whatever they paid them.

So I have nothing to gain by the cancellation of the debt, Labatt& bad nothing to pay, I was not aasociated in at least two ways with the purchasing corporation.; I get nothing from Lewis, Aylward and Crosbie and the conflict· of intereat _is simJ>lY. _ . _ .. _ _ trumped up because it sounds to the ordinary peraon who knOW11 nothing about these subtle matters that there is a conflict of interest, you know, and the ordinary person does not even lmow_-~oclay_ really what that is except that it does not sound too good. so· honourable gentlemen opposite ·go around saying;· "Conflict of interHt" and try to make us look bad.

Thia 1a their campaign, deliberate, premeditated. This is how they hope to get back into powr. Not by diacussing the iaauea, not by what ahould happen to Javeline or happen to thia, that or the other, not by dealing openly and hone9tly in this House but by a campaign of calumny and inault and inliuendo and slander and viciousness unparalleled in th18 l!~nce. In the iaya when Mr. Smallwood WU here we never had the likes of this. We used to have a battle but we never had - and he would not even have stooped to the degree that the Member for Bell Island baa stooped. He would not do it.

He used to put his tongue on me every day in this House and outside and I would put my tongue on 2078

March 8, 1974, Tape 661, Page 2 -- apb him, I matched him tongue for tongue but he never stooped to this kind of thing, never! HR. NEARY: What about Saunders? MR. CROSBIE: Never had to. Never stooped to it. Now, Mr. Speaker, what happened to - Oh! that was number two, yes. That is the conflict of interest and number three,which is really minor compared to the other two in my opinion, but number three was that I abused the privilege of my office for my own personal interest. My own personal interest is not involved here, Mr. Speaker, as I have just explained.

It mattered not a darn to me whether Labatts bought the assets of Bison or whether this or that or the other thing happened with the exception that we were delighted to see Labatts take over those assets out in Stephenville. They will create a viable industry there that will give employment to thirty or forty people in Stephenville. We know they can do it. They are experienced in the brewing business and the rest of it. That is the three charges made,not legitimately, not because the member was really concerned. No.

I have explained tO' . you how he did not ask for any information, .he did not ask for all the correspondence, he did not ask to see the file, no, he just I wanted to use this as an excuse to follow up the same kind of thing that he use·d - went out and accused the Premier and members of his cabinet of flogging around shares of Javelin when the government sold its shares and so on. I will say no more because it is going to come up in court. The same kind of thing we see him do in the House. Insinuations against the member for Trinity North and this one and that one, anyone.

The man seems to be filled with a vicious hatred of everything on the other side of the House. He will stoop to any level and this is evidence of it. Now, Mr. Speaker, I do not want to speak too long - MR. NEARY: (Inaudible) 2079 ...

March 7, 1974, Tape 661, Page 3 - apb MR. SPEAKER: Order please! MR. CROSBIE: But, Mr. Speaker, - MR. SPEAKER: Order please! MR. NEARY: What about th~ donations for the minister's campaign from Labatts? MR. SPEAKER: Order please! Order please! MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, I will just have to repudiate that before I go on. There were no donations from Labatts to the minister's campaign, none whatsoever. The minister's campaign in St. John's West cost him $2,500 last time. I only had to walk around the district once and stop into some stores.

I was in thl.s building working my guts out when the last election campa,ign was on in ~.arch of 1972. I needed donations from no one. $2,500 ii what it cost me in the last election, and in the one of 1971 about $4,500, in St. John's West. MR. NEARY: How about 1966? MR. CROSBIE: And if the honourable gentleman wants to run against me in St. John's West or anywhere else,becauae I will bµry him. They will not see him again. It will not be eighteen feet deep it will be one thousand feet in the molten insides of the earth. MR~ NEARY: How about the leadership? MR. SPEAKER: Order please! MR. CROSBIE: facts - Now, Mr.

Speaker, to come back to this issue. The AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR. CROSBIE: To come back to the facts, Mr. Speaker, just 'to summarize: Bison and the government never had any agreement. No agreement certainly with a capital "A" and no proper agreement with a small "a" of any binding effect whatsoever. Absolutely, beyond doubt, it is all here in .the file. Secondly; there are no terms or conditions of these interest free revenue bonds. There are all kinds of major principles not agreed right up to December 1973. No revenue to pay the bonds, The company had ceased operations. We had no legal 2080 ...

~larch 8, 1974, Tape 661, Page 4 -- apb claim for the $407,000 and no legal action for the bonds. I am just summarizing now what I have explained here this afternoon. Even if we could take legal action to force them to give us bonds,we have gotten not a cent because the company had no r.evenue. Thirdly, Mr. Speaker, every possible step was taken to collect, to get those bonds from Atlantic, from Bison,to get the money. Nothing was done from September 1970 to January 1972 except give them a sales tax exemption when they had taken no action on those bonds at all.

After the government was defeated and when they were hanging on here in defiance of the will of the Newfoundland people, they gave them a sa.les tax exemption. Nothing was done by the honourable gentlemen opposite to correct that situation. The record shows what I did and what the government did from then on to try to collect. Every possible step was taken. There was no possibility of collecting from Labatts who were never involved, who would not have taken over the brewery if we had insisted that they assume a debt they had no obligation for.

The sales tax exemption we did collect and said they had to pay although the previous administration had exempted them. There was no conflict of interest. There was no deceit or lying. There was no private interest, _ personal interest of mine achieved in the whole matter . There was nothing achieved except the public interest.

The public interest in an honest attempt to get these people to do what they undertook to do and would not do and have not done, to act in the public interest,to reactivate that brewery at Stephenville, that is what was done and an honest effort;nade to overcome the positive neglect if not worse of the Smallwood Administration with Atlantic Brewing that was there from 1968 to 1970. Finally, Mr. Speaker, this attack was launched when I was away. I mean, words fail you to describe, to describe. If the 2081

March 8, 1974, Tape 661, Page 5 _..., apb people of Newfoundland cannot understand how low and contemptible this action is,then I despair for it h~t t think they do. It has never,in my knowledge never has there been a parliament or a House of Assembly where a charge of this nature was made against a 2082 ..

March 8, 1974 Tape No. 662 NM - l member when he was not in the House. You know you can bring up the matter,even if you are going to use that story about it, you have to bring up a breach of · privilege at the first opportunity. It was eighteen days after February 8. You can rise on your feet and say, "Mr. Speaker, I give notice I have a claim of privilege that involves the Minister of Finance and I would like the House to - I give you notice of it now and we will deal with it when he returns to the province.• You can do that. But no, the honourable gentleman did not want to do that.

He-wanted to launch it while I was away and get his libel and his slander slithering and linking throughout the province so my reputation would be most blackened and then have three or four days of talk and agitating about it before I could get back and reply. Never in the history of parliament has any - thewords fai~ you. My God,if people cannot understand this,and how low and dis~usting this is, then I for one hope they will defeat me in the next election and put me out if I do not put myself out first!

I would sooner be abolished if people do not understand how nefarious this is, how disgusting and disgraceful. Now if you have no character and reputation and if you do not care, then it makes no difference. You can squabble down in the mud and splash and spray it everywhere and you do not• care because you do not care about your own reputation. But I care about mine! I am asking the members of this House to show they care too. While I was away,my wife here happened to listen to this while I was away - it is a wonder I can contain myself but I will. MR. NEARY: Come on over. MR.

CROSBIE: If I came over, Sir, you would be finished. I would flatten you so fast. But I will not. I will just ignore him, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAlCER: Order please! 2083

March 8, 1974 Tape No. 662 NM - 2 MR. CROSBIE: No, I am not going to get up on a manslaughter charge. Mr. Speaker, I want the protection of this House. If this House means anything in this province, I want the protection of this House. That is what I want. AN HON. MEMBER: Do no break up the microphone. MR. CROSBIE: I want the protection, Mr. Speaker, of this House and I think that every member of this House deserves the same protection from these kinds of breaches of privilege, slander, libel, character assassination and the rest of it.

If this House will not protect- its members from this it means nothing and from now on it is a free for all. there are no holes barred and the next two or three years or until the next election it will be pigsty in this House. It is either that or this House has to show both the government and the opposition and the opposition will not and if the opposition will not participate and do not want to protect any of the members of this House on either side, then the government members will have to do it.

Something has to be done to protect members from this kind of conduct because it is not tolerated in any other parliament in the whole of the Dominion or the Commonwealth. The other day in British Columbia the Liberal Leader was put out by the Speaker because he said Mr. Barrett was a liar,and would not withdraw it. In thie House I am blackened, slandered, libelled, called a liar, deceitful, a crook, a corupt for his own personal interest,and not a word said or done to protect me,and I 4,500 miles away. What a wretched state of affairs is thatf I have to wait until I get back myself.

I do not think that is good enough. I hope ~ that does not happen again. Now this House can either decide we are going to act as other Houses do and enforce some rules or it is going to be a beer garden. Mr. Speaker, I am quite prepared to consider withdrawing this motion if the member for Bell Island stands when I sit down 2084

March 8, 1974 Tape No. 662 NM - 3 and says he withdraws completely and irrevocably these charges he made against me on February 8. He withdraws them completely and irrevocably and without equivocation because I have no desire to have him put out of the House or put in the House. MR. NEARY: Oh no. MR. CROSBIE: I have no desire, Mr. Speaker, other than this,that if this House is going to tolerate this kind of conduct in the future and no disciplinary action'~ is taken by the House at all, then t it is no holes barred. Then it is everybody jump in.

Then it will be a level of behaviour and decorum that has never been observed in any parliament of the British Commonwealth. So if the member opposite wants to withdraw completely and retract those statements completely and unequivocably with no equivocation, with no qualification, with no distinctions, then I would be prepared to withdraw the motion. The honourable gentleman • does not? The member does not? Then I have no other choice, Mr. Speaker, but to carry on with this motion. Mr.

Speaker, do not let the opposition pretend as they have done outside since yesterday that this is anything different than it. is. Hear the Leader of the Opposition with his crocodile tear  on the air, "Oh they are going to stop us from speaking in the House. There is the tyranny of the majority. "The majority are tyrannizing us. They are bullying us They are stopping us from doing our duty, criticizing the government. They are going to use the House Leader on the other side, Mr. Marshall, in the conspiracy with the member for St.

John's West is going t~ ·eject us from the House and stop us from speaking.'' Freedom of speech is gone. Democracy is gone in Newfoundland because Hr. Neary might be expelled for fourteen days." Now, Mr. Speaker, there is not a word or an iota of truth in that. The opposition has never had as much freedom in this House since 1949, with a question period, say what they like, ask what they like, speak around the country, people have never felt so free before. 208!:i

March 4, 1974 Tape No. 662 NM "- 4 The dead hand of tyranny went, the end of 1971.and everyone feels free now to say what they think or feel, not like it used to be, not when they cowered and almost collapsed if you went into their tavern or their brewers retail store or their brewers agents place when you were going around and Mr. Smallwood opposed you. Then I saw it myself in 1969 and 1970 , people blanch, turn white, ask you to leave because they are afraid they would lose their licence.

That is gone forever;and the Leader of the Opposition has the gall to try to pretend in the last few hours you know that this motion -· 1s passed, the opposition are being stopped from doing their duty. They are not being stopped from anything. One member from the opposition would be stopped, nOt from doing his duty but from libelling and slandering another member of the House and abusing the privilege of the House. That is what would happen and that is all that would happen. There is no one stopping the opposition criticizing or probing or speaking in this House. We have been here for over a ·month now.

They have been speaking for a month but they have to observe the laws, Mr. Speaker, and the rules the same as we are supposed to do. You do not have complete freedom because you are in oppositiol\ You cannot just slander or libel anyone or do what you like because you are in opposition and if the majority of the House should take no action, . that would be your beer garden for surel Now, Mr.

Speaker, I am asking this House for justice and I am asking this House for protection and I am asking this Bouse for affirmation that there is absolutely no substance to these cfiarges, if you can call them that, these base, cowardly, false 2086

March 8, 1974 Tape 663 malicious, unparliamentary, McCarthyite, spurious, vicious charges made here last Monday. That is what I am asking this House for. I IB-1 am asking members opposite, Mr. Speaker, I am asking the members opposite to make their position clear on what they speak. Do they believe these charges are true or false? Are they satisfied or not? I am asking members opposite to vote for this resolution if the member for Bell Island does not withdraw completely and irrevocably what he said. I am asking, Mr.

Speaker, for justice here, for decency and for a way in which this House can continue on as it should in discussing the affairs of this province. MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. ROBERTS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let me begin, Sir, by saying that if ever I opposed a motion, I oppose this one. Let me begin, Sir, by saying also that if ever I should, as a member of this House, oppose a motion, I should oppose this one. Let me say, Sir, that if ever a motion should be defeated, turnrd down, rejected, if ever that should happen to a motion, Sir, it is this motion.

The motion moved just now, Sir, by the Minister of Finance,is a vindictive and vengeful motion. It is part of a plot, a deliberate ii,~ plot, concocted weeks and months ago in the confines of a Tory caucus, , one which has become widely apparent to all of us in the last few weeks in this House, a deliberate plot. Sir, to do whatl A plot to try to stifle this group in this House, to silence us, to keep us quite, to prevent us from doing our duty as we see it. Well, let me say, Sir, they will not succeed. They shall not succeed. They do not deserve to succeed.

While they may succeed in this House on this -motion because they are a majority, Sir, and have made up their minds and they are going to force this through, 2087

March 3, 1974 Tape 663 while they may succeed in that, Sir, they will have won the battle but they will lose the war. IB-2 The people of Newfoundland, Sir, as is evidenced by the crowd that have come here today, the people in the galleries, are interested in this matter and so they should be.

Because never, Sir, in my eight years of membership in this House - I would remind Your Honour, Sir, that there are present in this Chamber today only three men who have been here longer than I have, the member for Bell Island himself, the member from Fogo who is the senior member of this House and the gentleman, the member from Fortune Bay. The ~inister of Social Services has bee:i a member since 1962 but he is not with us today. He is in hospital. Re had an operation I understand. I hope he is coming out of it well.

Sir, this motion is the most shameful and vindictive and vengeful type of motion that I can conceive. It is the mark, not of a man fighting for his character and honour which is what the Minister of Finance would have us believe, a man standing their claiming he wants justice. He does not want justice, Sir, he wants vengeance. Re wants to have a kangaroo court, a jury, Sir. That is the prosecutor, the judge, the jury and the executioner. That, Sir, is what we have today in this• House. That is why I say, if ever I should opp_ose a motion, it would be this one.

If I never opposed anything else in this House, Sir, I would oppose this. These men opposite, Sir - let there be no doubt what the issue is. I will deal at length with what the gentleman from St. John's West said. But, Sir, the issue is not anything said in this House or outside by my friend from Bell Island. The issue is not anything said in this House by ~he gentleman from White Bay South, my friend and colleague, inside or out. anything I have said inside this House or out.

The issue is not The sole issue before this House, Sir, is whether a member of the House, the gentleman from Bell Island, four times sent here by 2080

1'1arch 8, 1974 Tape 663 IB-3 the people of the district, whether that member has the right to raise statements in good faith and honourably and put them to the test. I say, Mr. Speaker, that the gentlemen opposite deliberately, intentionally, maliciously and malevolently intend to deny him that right and · to prosecute him and persecute him for trying to do it. Sir, I am going to oppose this motion and I can assure the ~entleman from St.

John's West that we on this side intend to divide this House and every member present, Sir, in this Chamber - there will be none of this shameful exhibition he put on yesterday of ducking out - every member present irt this Chamber, Sir, when the Sergeant-at-Arms puts the bar across,and were officially here will have to stand, Sir, and make his case known, "Aye" or "Nay". I do not expect that will change any vote, that fact. It should not. I want it recorded, Sir, so the people of Newfoundland for years to come can see who stood for and who stood a~ainst this motion, can see who took

part in a deliberate olot, a plot which was dreamed up weeks and months ago in the Tory Caucus. Oh, they will deny it. I can hear them leaping out now, Sir. But I say now that they made that plot. They sat back in the confines of their caucus and said, "We will get them I" They did not know what the precise issue would be. It did not matter but they said, "We will get them." Here today we have the first results. I predict it will not be the last.

I predict, Sir, that as long as there is an opposition in this House be it composed of the Liberal Party as it will be until the next election or be it composed of the Tory Party, Sir, or be it composed of any party, that if we have more of this, Sir, the opposition will fight it and should fight it. I would think the less of any group of men who did not. I am going to oppose it, Sir, by my voice and by my vote. I ask every member in this House, Sir, now when the time comes,to do the 2089

March 8, 1974 Tape 663 IB-4 same because if he does not, Sir, he will be doing the wrong thing , for Newfoundland and for this House. Now, ~r. Speaker, let me first of all, Sir, deal with a number of minor points that I have marked in my notes here as being undergrowth. Let me clear away the undergrowth, Sir, to get at the main issue, to get at the point which is being debated and which should be debated and a point which will be decided. First of all, Sir, let me dispose of a couple of base canards from the point of the Minister of Finance and some of his colleagues opposite. The rules of this House, Mr.

Speaker, are quite clear. We saw it earlier today when my friend from Hermitage who has had to leave the House to travel to Springdale where he is to be one of the major exhibits in the Winter Camival tonight- AN HONOURABLE ~ER: What happened to the member? MR. ROBERI'S: The member? He was not asked but the gentleman_ from Hermitage is 2090

, . ~ ... March 8 1 1974 Tape 664 PK - 1 to take

part in an important part of the Springdale Winter Carinval tonight and he has left to go on. But earlier this day he stood on orders and he raised a point of privilege. He said he was not sure if it was a point of privilege,or was it, Sir. It is a practice that is mentioned in Mr. Speaker Sparkes citation in our Standing Order& It is printed,a practice hallowed by this House. Your Honour has allowed it time and time again, and the Minister of Finance did it a few days ago when he launched a quite vile attack on the "Evening Telegram" and Mr. Wickford Collins one of the writers for that newspaper.

Your Honour in dealing with the point raised by the gentleman for Hermitage said, "Timeliness is of the essence." That is a position in which Your Honour is well fortified, Sir, by our rules, by Beauchesne and by our precedents. Timeliness is of the very essence, the very heart, the very pith and substance of any point of privilege. If one does not raise the point of privilege at the earliest possible moment, it cannot be dealt with. That is a rule hallowed in parliamentary practice, Sir, and it is a wise rule.

The gentleman for Bell Island, Sir, told this House that this information came into his po~session this past weekend. Nobody has. challenged that 0 Sir. I believe him. I believe he cama into possession of this information, the information which he tabled on Monday, this past weekend. I believe that, Sir. He has stated it and there has not been even a voice heard against him. Well, Sir. then 1f he came into that and if he were to deal with it, and I will come back to that whether he should deal with it or not, it stands that he must deal with it on Monday when Your Honour called order.

If he did not, Sir, the timeliness rule, that quite proper rule would put him out of court. AN HO:t. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, the gentleman for St. John's West made his speech uninterrupted by me. My friend for Bell Island was provoked on a number of occasions and resisted manfully but once or two rose to debate it. I do not prpose. Sir. to be interrupted by any honourable 2091

March 8, 1974 Tape 664 Pk - 2 gentlemen opposite unless any honourable gentlemen opposite wish to rise in the proper way on a point of order or something that 1• proper under our rules. I would ask that I be given the same courtesy, a courtesy that I am seldom afforded in this House, the same courtesy that I gave the Minister of Finance. I heard him out without interruption, question, ejaculation, remonstrance or interjection, any sort. I listened to him, Sir, carefully, carefully in the hope that he would do the right thing and he did not say it,but so be it.

There are days when I am in the mood for banter and I do not think that I am confessing anything very unsuspected when I say that at times I am not entirely surprised when gentlemen opposite rise to debate which I have prompted in the form of provocative statements. I am like the Minister of Finance, Sir, I am in no mood for banter, this day. I am in no mood for banter on this subject, Sir. This goes to the heart, the very heart of this Rouse of Assembly.

Now, Sir, I have just e_stablished before the, I am not sure which honourable gentleman it was, it may have been the gentleman for Trinity South but I do not know that, I just established, Sir, that the reason the matter was raised on Monday was timeliness. Timeliness! If it should have been raised at all, Sir, and in M'/ _submission it should have been,but I will deal with that at length, if it should have been raised at all, it must have been raised on Monday. There can be no question, no quarrel, no doubt of any sort with that.

Nov, Sir, let me deal with anot~e~ specious, spurious and really quite irrelevant issue. ~Whether there should have been notice given to the gentleman, the .Minister of !inance." He was not here on that day, Sir. My friend for Bell Island must have known he would not be here. We all knew he would not be here. In not being here, Sir, first of all it was not our fault. We did not send him away. He was off on a phantasm frolic, flitting hither and yon about the country, doing we know not what, he and the Premier and Mr. Korbai of the Premier's staff and who know who else off flitting about.

They ssy they were on public business, I accept their word. I accept their word, but they were not here. It was not our doing nor our fault. And I stress, Sir, 2092

March 8, 1974 Tape 664 PK - 3 that if we had not raised the matter on Monday, if we had not raised it, it could not have been raised at all. But, Sir, the gentleman for St. John's West in not being here, Sir, was in breach of Standing Orders of this House. Standing Order (80), Sir, says "Every member is bound to attend the service of the House, unless leave of absence has been given to him." Standing Order (80), Sir, is found on page 55. It is a rule, of course, Sir, that is more honoured in the breach than in the observance.

Indeed in my eight years in this House, Sir, I cannot remember any honourable member having asked for or been given leave to be absent. I am sorry does the gentleman for Labrador South want to do it? AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. ROBERTS: Continuously. Well I agree he is continuously absent but I amend my statement then to - I had not recalled the honourable gentleman asking leave - if he were to do so, he is,was quite proper. I would submit in course of our practice,quite eccentric because most of us are guilty of breaches of Standing Order (80), I am certainly not accusing the gentleman for St.

John's West of having done anything unusual or very wrong in being in breach of Standing Order(80). ,ut I point out, Sir, that it is there. The requirement is there. There is no requirement anywhere that any notice be given to anybody else. Nor, Sir, has it been the practice of this House that honourable gentlemen notify honourable gentlemen on the other side when they propose to call into question their character or their activities. The gentleman for St.

John's East once sent me a note, I was Minister of Health at the time, when he was over here as the health spokesman or critic,to say that he proposed that evening or that afternoon to raise a matter. He did raise it, a matter affecting me personally and in responding I thanked him for his courtesy and then proceeded to demolish his argument.

Sir, he did not do me that courtesy two years ago nor did the Minister of Transportation and Communications when he came in here one day in the spring of 1972, Sir, came in here with a prepared statement not written out word for word because that is improper under our rules but a statement prepared.carefully shaved,worded,and 2093

March a. 1974 Tape 664 PK - 4 lalJftched a vicious and a vile attack on the gentleman for 8ell Island, so vicious an~ so vile that the gentleman for Bell Ialani:l w•s forced to ask pub1icly to ask the government for a public enqui-ry,to call upon the ,:overnment to ai,point a judge or some auch person to tnake an enquiry. The government responded to my friend's appeal. Mr. Justice Mifflin of the Supr~e Cc:iurt has . sat, ··hti,s 'J;aeard evidence and I understand ,in due course will be submitting to His Honour the Governor or the Executive Council. MR. NEARY: lnaudible. MR. ROBER.TS: Mr. Spe.r, there was no notice fr011 the 2094

March 8, 1974. Tape 665 RH - 1 ~entlem.an from St. John's East Extern, a premeditated attack, none at all. How do you think the member for Bell Island's wife felt or children or brothers or your mother, your father was alive at that sta~e. I could talk just as meaningfully about that as couJd the Minister of Finance. His wife is a lady and I respect her, Sir, and I have respect for her feelings. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: So does my wife. MR. ROBERTS: That is just the point. So is the lady married to the gentleman from Bell Island. Sir, maybe in this House we should have a rule.

I think certainly it is a practice that should be encouraged. It is a practice that I would like to see encouraged and if possibly, possibly having our time back, possibly the gentleman from Bell Island should have sent a wire to the honourable the Minister of Finance, ~herever he may be at that time saying: "Proposed to raise following issue today in the House.• Maybe he should have but Sir, it is hardly a very grievious sin. The Minister of Finance has time and time again lashed out quite low and sordid, personal atta~ks on such gentlemen as the gentleman from White Bay South and myself.

All you have to do is look at the debates in the spring of 1972 on the Linerboard Mill when he deliberately and malevolently accused us of having knowledge and having taken certain acts when the facts available to him showed conclusively that we had done no such thing and had done the direct opposite. No notice came then and the Minister of Finance, Sir, could hardly be heard now to draw about himself the seamless garment. "Sir, let he among you who is without sin be the first to cast a stone." It is a good biblical injunction and it is good in _this House too.

His point is specious and spurious and I am surprised that the Minister of Finance would weaken his argument, maybe try to strengthen it but all he did was weaken it by resorting 2095

March a. 1974. Tape 665 RH - 2 to it. It was not a valid point, Sir, and is not. Neither on the question of timeliness nor on the question of notice is there any validity at all in what the Minister of Finance has said repeatedly. There just is not and his repetition of it, his saying so does not make it so. I can say, Your Honour, a thousand times that black is white but that does not make black white. The Minister of Finance saying something over and over again does not make it so.

The third point I wish to deal with, Sir, on this question or these questions of undergrowth is this magnificent red herring. wResign your seat.• They would like us to resign our seats, Sir. That is the only way they will ever get me out of this Rouse. It is the only way they will ever get me out. The people of the district I represent, Sir, will get me out whenever they wish at a general election but the only way that crowd will ever get me out, I am sorry, that honourable crowd will ever get me out, Sir, is that way.

Let me say here and now, I have said it outside the House and I will say it inside and I will say it outside, that I will put my seat to the test on this matter, My time the Premier, and he will not need Bill Saunders this time, he will not need the mysterious circumstances there, any time the Premier wishes to wait upon his Honour the Governor and advise his Honour to have a desolution, I have no doubt his Honour will accept the advice. He has no alter­ native, he will accept it.

My time the Premier wishes to do that, Sir, I will put my seat to the test and so will the gentleman from Twillingate who today is on his way to ~illingate for a function there tonight at which he is the chief speaker. So will the gentleman . . from _Labrador North. So will the gentleman from White Bay South, the gentle- man from Fogo. So will the gentleman from Bell Island, the gentleman from Bonavista North who is attendinz the funeral of a member of his family, the gentleman from St.

Barbe North, the gentleman from Hermitage, although he is not part of our group, I have no doubt the gentleman .from Labrador South, at any time, will happily put his political faith in 2096

March 8, 1974. Tape 665 RR - 3 the hands of his constituents. He nods agreement and being a man of integrity I have no doubt that is what he would say but I am glad to hear him say it. I have no intention of resigning my seat over the sordid charges of the Minister of Finance but if they wish to l'ave an election on this issue, Sir, let them issue the ·writs. We can have an election in March in this country, we have had it before. We will not need a Bill Saunders this time. We will not have that trail of shame and scandal and that will come out, that will come out.

We will not have men trying to cover it up as men are today in this Province. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: This House. MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, all this talk of resigning one's seat is a red herring. The Minister of Finance says, "I will resign my seat if I am found guilty." By whom? By himself? Mr. Speaker, it is nonsensical. It is not worthy of the Minister of Finance vho normally is an able opponent in debate. But every now and then, Sir, the Minister of Finance gets so carried away with his own moral righteous indignation that he uses arguments that really are not worthy of him,and that is such an argument.

I say, Sir, that if any honourable gentleman wants to put it to the test, I stand ready. I stand ready this night to seek a nomination and a constituency and to submit my faith to the hands of the electorate, now, tomorrow, next week, next month or next year and I will happily and gladly abide by the result. I will not abide happily by the result of this House, no, not in a kangaroo court, thirty men who have made up minds, who have made up their minds.

They have made up their mind now to vote for this motion, no matter what is said or what is done and I can sit down now, get into the debate now or we can debate it for a week or a month and the result will be the same. These thirty men have made up their minds; Sir. They made it up weeks ago and now they are just putting their plot into . action. · I will not resign my seat. They can take it from me. They can 2097

March 8, 1974. Tape 665 RH - 4 persu2de the people. If the people decide to take it away from me then that I accept happily. So do all the nine men on this side, for this purpose the ten men on this side, any of us. I do·not hold this seat by right. I certainly do not hold it fiat of any gentle­ man opposite. I hold this seat, Sir, by virtue of the fact that the people of one constituency, White Bay North in my case, have in a majority ballot, a secret ballot, chosen me to be their member and that is that.

The honourable gentlemen opposite can stand up and prate all they want about timeliness, about notice, about resignation and I say now that we reject all of these because none of them are relevant, none of them have anything to do with the issue under debate, none of them have anything to do with the issue before this House now, none of them have anything to do with the issue we will be deciding with our votes, our voice vote or our standing vote when the question is called. ... 2098

March 8, 1974 Tape no. 666 · Page 1 - MW Then the Minister of Finance, Sir, talked about the opportunity to reply as if somehow this was something new, the Minister of Finance, tha great character assassin of this House. I sat there. I sat just behind the desk he now occupies where the gentleman from Grand Falls sits and I listened for two or three years as the present Finance Minister set out and tried to destroy the character of a man, Mr. Smallwood.

I sat there and so did the gentleman from White Bay South, so did the gentleman from Fogo and so did the gentleman from Bell Island and so did a number of other members opposite, many of whom are in the House, six or seven character assassination. "Let he among you who is without sin be the first to cast the stone." Let that stand, Sir. He says he has no opportunity to reply. Your Honour ruled the other day - the gentleman from Placentia East raised on a point of privilege a reply to statements - there was no objection from this side, Sir, once Your Honour made the ruling. The gentleman made his statement.

It wu heard out in respectful silence, as he would agree. Whether we agree with his statements or not is another story but we heard him out. I say that the gentleman from St. John's West made no such. effort. If the gentleman from Bell Island is at fault for not having sent a wire ·saying: "Dear John, I am going to produce some facts", the gentleman from St. John's Weat, Sir, is equally guilty for not having stood in the House and said, "Mr. Speaker, may I make a statement by leave or may I make a statement according to ... the p