Volume XL Thursday PROPERTY OF NI:\Vi;-C~_!:·.:D! ,1'0..ND L.f~Gl:~L/\Tl\).E U T".'./\1-;.:Y P'LE<\~~F.. FI~'Ttn::.-i Province of Newfoundland FORTIETH GENERAL ASSEMBLY -OF NEWFOUNDLAND Third Session VERBATIM REPORT {Hansard) Speaker: Honourable Patrick McNicholas Number 42 14 May 1987

"" The House met at 3:00p.m. MR . SPEAKER (McNicholas): Order, please! 0 0 0 MR. SIMMONS : Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition . MR . SIMMONS : Could I just indicate to the Minister of Career Development and Advanced Studies (Mr. Power) that it was my error yesterday? His office had delivered a statement to my office. I was not aware of that when I spoke. MR. LUSH : A point of order, Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER: A point of order the hon. the member for Bonavista North. MR. LUSH : Mr.

Speaker, members will recall th~t yesterday I adjourned the debate on my own resolution at two minutes before six to call for a voice vote. As I took my place, I heard that there was going to be a standing vote. As is my duty as party whip on this side, I scurried to the Opposition Common Room to see if any of my colleagues were there. As I returned to the House, the bar of the House was down and the Sergeant-at-Arms - MR. PATTERSON: You are a poor whip. got a whip over there. MR. SPEAKER: L2217 May 14, 1987 You have not Vol XL Order, please! MR.

LUSH: I went to the Common Room for about thirty seconds to see if any of my colleagues were there to come in for the standing vote and when I came back to the House members opposite were screaming that I was not allowed in and thE! Sergeant-at-Arms, as he is supposed to do, of course, motioned that I should leave the House. Now, Mr. Speaker, my point of ordE!r is this: When there is a standing vote called there is a procedure, and all hon. gentlemen know that this procedure is to give party whips time to round up members. In most other jurisdictions therE! is provision for this.

Hon. members saw me leave, and if they k now t: he r u 1 e s of the H o u s e the y knew why I was leaving. Mr. Speaker, the prt::!s s reported, as well, that I was not in thE! House. I was in the House. I had just adjourned the debate .and I came back for the vote. I want to make that clear. But much more important, Mr. Speaker, I believe that when a vote is taken in the future we must observe the rules to give the party whips, or somE! other designated persons , the opportunity to go and round up their colleagues.

I was denied that right yesterday and denied the right to vote on my own resolution, though I was here. MR. SIMMS: Mr . Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands. MR. SIMMS : Mr. Speaker, order, clearly No. 42 to the it is point of not a point R2217

of order, the hon. member has taken the opportunity to explain a circumstance in which he found himself inadvertently absent from a properly conducted vote. Because what happened, and what happens on many occasions, is that both sides agree to lay the bar across the House rather than wait the entire ten minutes that is re~uired by the Standing Orders. That certainly was the situation yesterday. In fact, the Leader of the Opposition, himself, agreed to call for the bar. He may deny it now, but he certainly did. There is no question about it.

In fact,· if he had not, I am sure Your Honour would not have permitted the bar to go across. That is the circumstance. That is what happened. It is not a big deal. The hon. member has now taken the opportunity to explain the situation. But that is what occurred. Mr. Speaker, on another point I might just point out that whether the hon. member was in the House or not, it is not even certain that he would have been recorded properly as voting, because one of the other of his colleagues, the member for Windsor -Buchans (Mr. Flight), sat in the hon. the member for Mount Scio -Bell Island's (Mr.

Barry) place and stood in the recorded vote and was not counted, obviously because he was not in his own place. So the same thing might· have occurred. But in any event, Mr. Speaker, it is not a point of order, the member has taken the opportunity to explain the situation and that is fair ball. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I have heard enough on this point and I arn prepared to rule at this L2218 May 14, 1987 Vol XL stage. MR. SIMMONS: Surprise! Surprise! MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

I would like to point out to the han. member that it liJas asked if we· would take the ~1ote at the particular time and it was agreed to by that side. MR. SIMMONS: It was not. No, Sir! AN HON. MEMBER: It was. It was. MR. SIMMONS: No, Sir. MR. TOBIN: Yes. You agreed, boy. MR. SIMMONS: No, Sir. No, Sir! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: No, Sir! Now, tell the truth. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: The han. member will withdraw that now. MR. SIMMONS: Yes, Sir! On a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker.

I have just bE!en very badly misrepresented in this House by the Speaker of this Chamber. I have witnesses. I have the gentleman from Bellevue (Mr. No. 42 R2218

Callan) who will affirm that I gave no such agreement. I have the gentleman from Bellevue who will affirm that you would not let me make a point of order because a vote was proceeding, a vote that you rushed into without observing Standing Order 82 of this particular Chamber. Mr . Speaker, my friend from Bonavista North (Mr. Lush) will have no protection unless you give it to him - unless you give it to him. MR . SPEAKER : Order, please! Order, please! SOME HON. MEMBERS: Name him! Name him! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I have already made a ruling on this matter.

If the han. member keeps on in this vein, I am afraid I will have to ask that he be expelled from the Chamber. MR. SIMMONS: A point of privilege, Mr . Speaker . MR. SPEAKER: A point of privilege, the han. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, yesterday in this Chamber, I submit, a vote was improperly taken. I tried, during the course of that vote to say that, and I was not permitted to make the point because Mr. Speaker said that we could not have a point of order dur :ing the course of a vote. I rose immediately after, and Mr.

Speaker adjourned the House forthwith, without hearing my point of order . Mr. Speaker, the vote was L2219 May 14, 1987 Vol XL improperly taken. Be that as it may, the gentleman from Bonavista North (Mr. Lush) did vote in the Chamber, and then, because of a game that was played at least by people on that side, and I suspect some other people - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SIMMONS: - he was not allowed to have his vote recorded as provided for in Standing Order 82 (

b) which says: 'A division bell shall ring for a period of not more than ten minutes. ' There was no agreement to suspend that rule, Mr . Speaker. No agreement to suspend that rule. The vote was improperly taken. My friend, in the process, has been maligned and I think that is most unfair. The vote was improperly taken. Now you decide wnether it is· a point of privilege or l'lot, but it is an awful comment on the way this Chamber is being run. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, privilege. MR. SPEAKER : to the point of To that point of privilege , the hon . Minister of Finance. DR.

COLLINS : We will only be able to conduct business in this House if we all accept the authority and the ruling and the integrity of the Chair. Now, Mr. Speaker, unfortunately the comments by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Simmons) has called that whole Institution into question and it just cannot stand. Because the House cannot operate if that sort of thing is not withdrawn totally and completely. I would suggest, No. 42 R2219

also, that a sincere should be offered to Your because of the way those were expressed. apology Honour remarks Mr.

Speaker, in addition to that - this is a lesser point, nevertheless an important point ·­ if the Leader of the Opposition felt that he had a point of privilege because a vote was improperly taken in this House, it was his duty to bring it to the notice of the House at the earliest pass ible moment, which clearly did not happen, Mr. ·Speaker, because a point of order,· a much lesser event, a lesser breach of procedure in this House was allowed to be brought on the floor before the Leader of the Opposition rose to his feet on his alleged point of privilege.

It is quite out of order on that smaller point, but in addition to that and of greater importance, the integrity and the respect for the Chair has been called into question and it must not be allowed to stand, it must be withdrawn. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of privilege, there is no prima facie case. Statements by Ministers MR. BRETT: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Services. MR. BRETT: ' Minister of Social Mr. Speaker, I have two statements that I would like to read.

Both of these statements were ready for yesterday and, as a matter of fact, I gave copies of both 1..2220 May 14-, 1987 Vol XL statements to both parties opposite. They are a little bit out of date, nevertheless I would like to read them. The first one, Mr. SpE~al<er, is to advise the han. House of Assembly that yesterday I made an announcement of major importance concerning a beautification and community enhancement programme for the Eastern region, administered by the D'?.partment of Social Services in Harbour Grace. The programme will cover eleven district offices of the department in the Eastern region.

The offices are located in Harbour Grace, Heart1s Content, Bay Roberts, St. Mary1s, Whitbourne, Placentia, Arnold1s Cove, Marys town, Grand Bank, ClarenvillE! and Bonavista. Mr. Speaker, this beautification project in th'e Eastern region wiJ.J. see the department spending over $1 million during the fiscal year 1987/88, creating a total of 338 jobs.· The beautification and community enhancement programme tuill providE! the opportunity of improving various communities physically as well as upgrading the work skills of those hired for the various projects.

The benefits of the programme should be to bring about a change of attitude towards out~selves, the land we live in, our communi ties, and our Province. More importantly, Mr. Speaker, the benefits of the programme are three-fold. Firstly, it will reduce the social assistance caseload through self-satisfying, socially and No. 4-2 R2220

J.' ..... economically acceptable work; secondly, the beautification programme would preserve · and enhance our Province for our children's natural heritage; and thirdly, the enhancement of the infrastructure for a future tourism industry, by providing clean, beautiful towns and a he~lthy 'living environment . Some of the projects undertaken this year in t~e Eastern Region will focus special attention on road junctions, approaches to communities, attractive community welcome signs, mini parks or · lay-by s, and removal of unsightly objects such as car wrecks and other discarded debris. Mr .

Speaker, the beautification and community enhancement programme will expand public funds on public property, to create employment for those in need of work through the depart-ment, to accomplish visible projects along the roads and through communities as a means of thanking citizens and communities who have maintained their properties well, and to remind all citizens that it is never too late to start doing so! In addition, Mr.

Speaker, a team of eleven enforcement agents, outside the Social Services case load, will be employed to work with councils, development associations and the Department of Environment, to enforce the Municipalities Act and the Salvage Dealers Act. Mr . Speaker, the Beautification and Enhancement Programme will start next week, May 20, in nine fo the eleven district offices while the remaining offices will start their projects as the labour force indicates. L2221 May 14, 1987 Vol XL Attached to the statement, Mr.

Speaker, are the amounts that will be spent through each of the district offices and the number of jobs created. I will not read that, hon. members will be able to see it themselves. The second statement, Mr. Speaker, is to inform the House of the J>rovince • s participation in thE! national long term strategy on impaired driving · which was announced yesterday by the Federal Minister of Health and Welfare, the han. Jake Epp .

Representatives of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. th e nine other provinces, the territories and the Federal Department of Health and Welfarehave been working to develop programmes aimed at changing the public's attitude tow _ards impaired driving. We want to make it socially unacceptable for any · perso ·n to drive any vehicle - whether it be a car. truck. boat, snowmobile or all-terrain vehicle - after they have been drinking alcohol or using other drugs.

We have tried to take a positive approach to the problem by encouraging people to take responsibility for their own actions and for the actions of others. The national strategy announced yesterday will attempt to change attitudes and behaviour over the next twenty years. It consists of a number of initiatives . The first. which started yesterday, is a national media campaign aimed at our young people. Other parts ·of the strategy will stimulate community initiatives and provide training and resources to local groups to develop their own No. 42 R2221

impaired Additional committees develop programmes. driving programmes. federal/provincial will be working to driver education The consultation which is occurring between the Provinces and the Federal Department of Health and Welfare also provides a un{que forum in which ideas and resources are shared. The commitment of time and resources by this Province, the other provinces and territories and the federal government, will help to ensure that this national strategy will be effective in making impaired driving socially unacceptable throughout Canada. Mr.

Speaker, I am also very pleased and proud to share with hon. members the significant initiatives which we have developed in this Province during the past six months. We are well on the way to developing an effective provincial approach to the problem of impaired driving. Impaired driving not only has a tragic impact on those who are killed and injured, but it is a senseless crime which can have a devastating impact on the lives of people convicted and their families. We must stop this waste and we are developing programmes which will ensure that it will be stopped.

I am pleased to inform you that this is an area in which representatives from the provincial Departments of Social Service, Health, Transportation, Education, Justice, the Alcohol and Drug Dependency Commission, the two police forces, and the Newfoundland Teachers Association have been working productively to L2222 May 14, 1987 Vol XL develop programmes. The Newfoundland and Labrador Challenge Committee, composed of representatives of the RoyaJ.

Newfoundland Constabulary, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the ADDC and the Departments of Transportation and Justice haVE! developed a number of initiatives which will challenge Newfoundlanders to stop driving while impaired. The ADDC and the Challenge Committee are currently sponsoring a contest in the schools to develop a provincial logo and slogan for use by all impaired driving programmes in the Province. They produced a Student Activity Manual to encourage students to develop impaired driving awareness programmes in their schools and communities. Furthermore, Mr.

Speaker, they recently submitted two proposals to the federal Departments of Justice and Health and Welfare respectively. They propose to develop a provincial media campaign and resource material which will help community groups to develop local programmes. Moreover, they are requesting funds for a provincial co-ordinator who will be responsible for fostering and assisting those community groups. I would like. to take this opportunity to commend the staff of the ADDC, the Crim1?.

Prevention and School Safety Offi.cers of t:he RNC and the RCMP who have been working actively in our schools and communities promoting the Newfoundland challenge. In a related area, the the Newfoundland No. 42 ADDC and Teachers 1~2222

Association developed a SAFEGRAD programme which they are actively promoting in our high schools. This programme is supported by school boards, principals, and the Department of Education. This programme was stimulated by our concerns over the risk associated with high school graduation festivities when alcohol and other drugs are used. The promotion includes an instructional manual, poster and radio advertisements. We hope that the concept of alcohol and drug free graduation parties will be embraced by communi ties around the Province­ and become commonplace.

Our young people are our future and we must make it socially acceptable for them not to drive while impaired . We must encourage them to take responsibility for their actions and for the actions of their friends and parents. Our young people are 'already setting an example for their pa~ents. I was very proud to learn that students of Stephenville Integrated High School and the Grand Falls Academy Regional High School had won prizei in a national contest on impaired driving sponsored by the Reader • s Digest. Their initiative is a challenge to us all. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. BRETT: Mr.

Speaker, impaired driving is a crime. It is also a social, health and cultural problem. As you can see, we are working actively to prevent it occurring. Thank you, Mr. Speaker . MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker. L2223 May 14, 1987 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER : The hon . the member for Port de Grave. MR. EFFORD : Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to thank the minister for giving me copies of both his Ministerial Statements yesterday and giving me some time to read them over. I will deal with the second statement first, Mr. Speaker, in responding to what the minister just said.

There are a couple of points I want to make but, first, we on this side of the House, like all people in the Province, agree with what the minister is doing in his promotion and his advertising campaign against drinking and driving and educating our young people on thE! social impact alcohol could have on their lives. A person driving a car _, or any vehicle, while under the influence of alcohol is just as dangerous as and just as deadly as a person pointing a shotgun at someone and killing them. I do not think that is a lesser crime than driving while under the influence of alcohol.

But I find it very strange, Mr. Speaker, that a government which takes in mul timillions of dollars from the sale of beer and alcohol the same thing applies to cigarette smoking - puts such a small amount of money into a campaign against these social hazards. This is one area, Mr. Speaker, where I think the ministers of all departments involved - the Minister of Justice (Ms. Verge), the Minister of Health (Dr. Twomey), and the Minister of Social Services (Mr. Brett) - are going to have to take a hard look at putting more money in a No. 42 R2223

campaign, because drugs and alcohol are having a very serious effect on our social life . We have to educate our students, our young people in our high schools as to what is facing them, and the devastating effect drugs and alcohol can have on their lives and on the lives of families who are affected by alcohol and drug problems, and about the loss of life in accidents caused by drivers who are under the inlfuence of drugs or alcohol. One area I have not heard addressed by the Department of . Justice, and it should be looked into, is the sale of alcohol in the clubs.

It is supposed to be against the law for a bartender or a club owner to sell beer or alcohol to a person who is drunk, yet it is not hard, when you walk into a club, to see somebody stagger to the bar and be sold liquor by the bartender· ·or club owner, and then ·being allowed to walk out of the club to drive their vehicle home. I think the Department of Justice and the campaign has to lean more toward prevention. I know there is a law against club owners selling alcohol to people who are obviously under the influence. but it is never enforced by any department or by any law enforcement officer.

I ·think the minister and all other departments involved in this particular campaign should take under careful consideration not only preventing people from drinking and driving, but actually preventing them from getting drunk. Mr. Speaker, in first statement, find most amusing. that came down minister announced reference to the this is what I In the budget recently, the $29 million for L2224 May 14, 1987 Vol XL community development programmes. He stands up in the House of Assembly today and reads a press release given yesterday out in Harbour Grace.

And this is another example of where they show no respect for the House, they go to Harbour Grace and in a press conference make this announcement before they announce it in the people 1 s House. They then, Mr. Speaker, announce the programme as if it were something totally separate from the monies that were already announced in the community development programme. But it is not, it is a part of that money. The minister said in the announcement yesterday that he is ashamed to be recognized as a Newfoundlander because of the mess on the sides of the roads.

Every year this is an ongoing thing with the various departments concerned. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The han. member 1 s time has elapsed . MR. EFFORD: I had two statements, Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member 1 s time has elapsed . MR. LONG: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for St. John 1 s East. MR. LONG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would thank the minister for copies of both his statements yesterday, and I, also, will respond to them in the reverse order of which they were presented. We welcome the No. 42 R2224

statement on the long-term strategy to deal with impaired driving, although we would have some problems with it inasmuch as the statement did not put any dollar value on the activities and the progra~nes that the minister says they will be bringing in. It sounds like they are encouraging the Alcohol and Drug Dependency Co~mission, the Newfoundland Teachers Association and other agencies to do their own work, but it would be a sign of the minister 1 s, and his department 1 s, commitment if there was some money being put in to give these · agencies a~tual financial support to extend these programmes.

We would also have a concern that it is necessary to address this problem at the source. The emphasis on reaching young people is very important, but we would have a concern that there is nothing in the stateme-nt about alcohol advertising. Right now, this season, with the NH L playoffs on, incredible numbers of young people and people of all ages, are being bombarded by lifestyle advertising, where you are not able to enjoy anything in this life unless you are drinking beer. There is a concern over whether or not the national programme might include an advertising programme to confront this.

But more than that, we would make a suggestion that the minister look into dealing with private establishments, private clubs, and - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. LONG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. - making L2225 May 14-, 1987 Vol XL it mandatory for club owners, in order to have their licences renewed, install breathalyzers in every private establishment, every club in the Province.

And, further, that the minister consider, in making contact with the club owners, which is the source of the problem, the bars themselves, that there be a programme introduced in which drivers who are not drinking be allowed to be given free soft drinks. In other jurisdictions in the country this programme h~s been introduced with great success. It is an affirmative action programme to encourage people, when they go out in groups, to make sure that one person in the group is not drinking.

A way to do that is to encourage private owners of clubs to allow people to drink soft drinks for free so that that will guarantee that any number of people in the establishment throughout the evening will be able to drive home without having had a drink. And there is more the ministe~ could do to deal directly with the clubs. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The han. member 1 s time has elapsed. MR. LONG: Could I have leave to respond to ~he second .statement, Mr. Speaker? SOME HON. MEMBERS: No, no leave. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! MR. SIMMS: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

No. 42 R2225

MR. SPEAKER: A point of Minister of Lands. MR. SIMMS: order, Forest the hon. Resources the and Mr. Speaker, as I understand it, the member has half the time of the official Opposition who have half the time - MR. SIMMONS: That is not true. MR.· SIMMS: The hon. Leader of the Opposition, I do not know what is wrong with· him today. He is a little foisty or something. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMS: Does he not have enough manners to let other people speak? Mr. ·Speaker, the practice is the minister prepares a statement, and presents it.

The Opposition gets half the time ~hat the minister took, and the member of the NDP Party gets half - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMS: -the time the official Opposition took. It is clear the member•a time is up, because he has used half as much time as the member of the Opposition used. Now, whether he thinks he got half the time, is another question. We are dealing with a point of order related to his request for leave and there is no leave granted on this side, Mr. Speaker. L2226 May 14-, 1987 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. TOBIN: And you get twice as much. MR.

SPEAKER: Order, please! At this stage I would like to welcome to the galleries eighte!en Grade XI students from Stella Maris Central High in Trepassey with their teacher. Mr. T1':!d Winsor, from the district of St. Mary•s-The Capes. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, Hear! Oral Q~estio,ns MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leadc':!r of the Opposition. MR. FUREY: Where is the Premier? MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, I had a question for· the Premier. The Premier is coming back into the Chamber. and I have a question for him. His Minister of Health (Dr. Twomey) has fumbled the ball for two and half years on ambulance service improvements.

Now, judging by his statements in the press of the 1 as t few day s • he in s i s t s on taking the ball and going. home altogether. · Mr. Speaker, why in the name of ordinary, common decency does the Premier stand idly by and let that minister, the Minister of Health, jeopardize the safety. the health and the lives of so many people? Why? No. 4-2 R2226

MR. SPEAKER : The hon. the Premier . PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr . Speaker, I do not know if that question really should be dignified with an answer. The Minister of Health is discharging his responsibilities as the Minister of Health. It is wrong for the Leader of the Opposition or anybody else to say that we are somehow ignoring the health concerns of the Province when in 1979, $275 million was allocated to Health and this year $624 million, over a 100 per cent, increase. And in road ambulance services it is gone from $1 million to $2.9 million, just about a 200 per cent increase.

So what the road ambulance service has .gotten is a higher percentage than did the whole Health budget. MR. FLIGHT : In eight years. PREMIER PECKFORD : In eight years that is a big increase. And it is wrong to say that the Minister of Health is not trying to fight for what is justifiably due that department. This year there is a $39 million increase in one year in the Department of Health - $39 million in one year - and it went from $275 million to $624 million in eight years, with a 200 per cent increase in road ambulances services. Now, Mr. Speaker, we would like to do more.

We would like to spend more money, but we have, of course, a responsibility to provide more money not only to road ambulance but to other forms of ambulance services, which gets the budget up to $4 mi 11 ion j us t for ambulance services in total, L2227 May 14-, 19 8 7 Vol XL when you look at air ambulance.

We have a responsibility to the hospitals, to the senior citizens, to the disabled, for abused children, for day care centres and the like, and we are trying to spread our resources as evenly as possible so that everybody is benefitting from some of the increase that has been going on every year in the Department of Health. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the -Leader of the Opposition . MR. SIMMONS: Mr . Speaker, this is, unfortunately, not the time to rebut some of the incorrect statements the Premier has made.

The business about the 200 per cent increase of course includes two or three components, including patient fees, and he knows who ·pays these, it is not the government, so he is misleading. Now, Mr. Speaker, since 2:4-5 p.m. today we have had an incident at the Health Sciences Center where a driver arrived with a patient who happened to be a paraplegic and, because of orders to the staff of that institution and their wanting to protect themselves in terms of liability, they could not handle the patient, and the driver goes scurrying around the parking lot trying to find someone to help him unload that patient.

Mr. Speaker, my question is while the innocent pawns of the government 1 s monumental neglect on this issue are literally dying in the backs of ambulances - literally dying in the backs of ambulances - because of the lack of trained attendants, will the Premier, Mr. Speaker, now agree to what the minister now has stubbornly refused to, and will he agree to meet this afternoon or No. 4-2 R?227

tomorrow with the ambulance operators? They are here in the city, some of them have come all the way from Port aux Basques . Is he determined to precipitate a confrontation on this matter or will he become the conciliator that he likes sometimes to be? Mr. Speaker, if he could avoid that planned withdrawal of services tomorrow, Mr. Speaker, I ask him would that alone, even though he feels he has done a great job in terms of funding, but just to avoid that withdrawal tomorrow would he not agree that that is sufficient reason to agree ­ to a meeting between himself and the Ambulance Operators Association? MR.

SPEAKER: The han. the Premier . PREMIER PECKFORD: . Mr . Speaker, we cannot run a government when we are being threatened. We cannot go running health services or Social Services or Education or anything else when we are under threat. There was another threat this morning from another group somewhere in the Province, which called into my office and would not meet with a particular minister and made another threat.

Almost every day we are getting somebody who is going to threaten me or threaten the government if we do not do A, B and C, and you cannot run a civilized democratic society that way and I do not intend to run one that way, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. SIMMONS: A supplementary, Mr . Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. L2228 May 14, 1987 Vol XL the Leader of the Opposition . MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, that is an insult to those men and women who drive those ambulances, since it characterized what the1y are doing as a threat. Mr.

Spe1aker, I ask the Premier does he want to rephrase that insulting characterization of people who have been brought to the brink of desperation by a mini ster who -for two years has sat on a report? Mr. Speaker, . I tell him that what he has heard is not a threat, I give him no threat. ~'lli11 he, Mr. Speaker, if I give him the unqualified assurance that - MR. TOBIN: Your word is worth a lot . MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: It was sufficient, and the Premie1r took it in a letter of contract when I hired him, and he stayed for six years, very happy years. He should have had eighteen like it. MR.

WARREN : Yes, like Trudeau. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SIMMONS : Mr. Speaker, I know the guys over there do not care about health services, but will they shut up so . I can get my qu estion off to their leader? MR. FUREY: A bit of protection, Mr. Speaker . MR. SIMMONS: Yes, Mr. Speaker, how about a bit of protection . No. 42 R2228

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, if I gave the Premier the assurance that there would be no withdrawal of service tomorrow if he would agree to a meeting today or tomorrow, or if his

schedule is that busy in the next three or four days. with the Ambulance Opera tors As so cia tion? Would he agree if he had that assurance? PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I do not intend to negotiate with the Leader of the Opposition over health services in this Province. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the member for Port de Grave. MR. SIMMONS: You are off the hook temporarily, Brian. MR. EFFORD: Mr.

Speaker, it is very clear that the Premier would not get as many threats, and he possibly would not need his bodyguard if he was running his government right, and people were not driven into decisions that they were driven into . But I wo u 1 d 1 ike to as k the Premier to explain to the people of this Province, to the Ambulance Association ·and to the general L2229 May 14, 1987 Vol XL public, how it is, as the Minister of Health said in his statement, that he can only give the Ambulance Association a 4 per cent increase.

But at the same time can spend $300,000 in propaganda ads against the civil servant; $15 million in renovations on the building; over $800,000 in the last two years to his friend out in Alberta, Mr. Peter Lougheed, and now $13.5 million for the Sprung Group? MR. SPEAKER : Order, please! MR. EFFORD: My question to the Premier started with, Mr. Speaker, would he explain how he can justify that to the Ambulance Association? MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! The han. member should please keep quiet when I am up and speaking. The han. member asked a question and then he proceeded to make a speech.

This is question time, so the han. member should just confine himself to questions. The hon. the member for Port de Grave. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. MR. SPEAKER: A point of orderr the han. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, is well accepted in this House that when Your Honour rises to his feet that all members are silent and listen Your Honour's statement. Now, Mr. Speaker, when you rose to your feet a little while ago to inform No. 42 R2229

the House on a matter that you considered important, at least to members over there kept interrupting you, pointing fingers at you. I think that that is totally out of order. I would encourage members to give the Chair the respect that is required for us to conduct public busin~ss. MR: SPEAKER: To that point of order, the point is well taken. MR. SIMMONS: I could not agree more, Mr. Speaker. The point is well taken. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Port de Graue. MR. EFFORD: Mr.

Speaker, I will put the question very simply: Will the Premier explain how it is that he cannot give any more ·than 4 per cent to the Ambulance Association when at the same time ~e spent $300,000 in propaganda ads last year, $15 million in renovations to the Confederation Building, and over $800,000 went to his friend in Alberta, Mr. Peter Lougheed? PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. . Speaker, we increased. the Health budget from last year to this year by $39 million. MR. EFFORD: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. member for Port de Graue. the L2230 May 14, 198"7 Vol ·XL MR. EFFORD: What we need to know about, Mr. Speaker, is this: The people of this Province need a better ambulance service. The Premier has told them very clearly that government does not have the money. Will the Premier explain to those people, in his own words, why it is they have money to put $2 million worth of computers into the Department of Social Services in the last two years and they cannot provide a decent ambulancE! service for this Province? MR. SIMMS: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. l:he Minister of Forest Resources and Lands. MR. FLIGHT: This is another trick. MR. SIMMS: This is not a trick, this is trying to practice and rules of l"'r. Speaker, follow thE! the House. Mr. Speaker, may I quote for your edification from Beauchesne. Page 129, paragraph 357, says, 11In putting a question ... thE! question ... must not multiply, even with slight variations, a s irnilar question on the same point. 11 That is

section (c).

Section (

d) says it 11must not repeat in substance a question already answered, or to which an answer has been refused. 11 There are a1ll kinds of other sections, Mr. Speaker, that I could refer you to. Mr. Speaker, clearly thE! members opposite cannot have else to go on, because they ·asking the very same question and over, multiplying it variations. hon. much are! over with No. 42 R2230

MR. FLIGHT: The question is hurting the Premier and they will not answer it. MR . SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMS: Well, Mr. Speaker, if they are not getting answers, there is another method. If they are not satisified with - the answers, they can put it on the Late Show on Thursdays. There · are all kinds of avenues, Mr. Speaker. But I suggest that the questions are­ totally out of order because they are just the same questions over and over, and they are certainly contrary to direct references in Beauchesne. MR.

SPEAKER: To that point of order, it is very difficult at times just _t.o see the dividing line between on« question and another. I would ask the hon. member to pose his question. MR. EFFORD : I asked my question. for the Premier to question, Mr. Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier . PREMIER PECKFORD: I arn waiting answer the Mr . Speaker, over the last eight years we have increased the budget in the Department of Health by $349 million. That is a lot more than all the figures that the hon. member added up. In one year, this past year, we have increased it by $39 million. That is the answer. MR. FUREY: Mr.

Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: L2231 May 14, 1987 Vol XL The han. the member for St. Barbe . MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the Premier a question. His own government commissioned a report two and a half years ago, -and t:he recommendations are ve -ry cle!ar, Mr. Speaker. They recommended more financing for ambulance services, a long-term plan, a drafting of legislation ensuring minimum standards are set and maintained, and a provision calling for a second trained attendant on all ambulances. Now, those recommendations, Min.

Speaker, came from a commi ti:ee commissioned by his government which made recommendations that they have had them for two and a half years. When will the Premier do what is morally right and act on these independent recommendations for the sake of all people's ~ealth in this Province? MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Premier . PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I think there are two parts to the han. member's question. One has to do with the! whole question of legislation .

The Minister of Health has indicated that, in consultation with not only the privatE! ambulance drivers but the community based ambulances, and the people from "l:h.e hospitals, t-hey will be moving ahead on that legislation as soon as possible. As it relates to funding, the road ambulance service has _had its budget increased by over 200 per cent in the last eight years. MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker. No. 4-2 R2231

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for. St. Barbe. MR. FUREY: The Premier has talked about putting a contingency plan in place, which we assume will cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. I wonder if the Premier would tell us why he could not put that allocated money, as discussed by the Minister of Health, and apply that particular contingency money against and apply it to the recommendations from his own committee, from his own department and from his own government? MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Premier. MR.

PECKFORD: I do not know how much the contingency plan is going to cost and therefore the whole premise of the han. member•s_ ~uestion could be false. The conclusi·on-comes from a premise which could be quite false. MR. FUREY: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary. MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, I will ask the Premier if he would do what is right and convene a meeting as soon as possible with these ambulance operators while they are in the city and forget the nonsense about negotiating in­ public or negotiating with the Opposition.

Just do what is fundamentally and morally right and convene a me!eting as soon as possible to try to put this thing to rest. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! L2232 May 14, 1987 Vol.XL MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: We do not govern under threats and we do not intend to. MR. FLIGHT: You do not govern, period. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the member for Mount Scio -Bell Island. MR. BARRY: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier would he confirm that part of 1 this problem arises because of lack of funding directed to Health, and indeed the same problem applies in Education, that there are transfers from the Government of Canada for both Health ahd Education but a portion of those funds are allocated to other areas? They are not tied. The minister-and the Premier have never agreed to tie them. Maybe the Premier can answer this question: Does the Premier accept that he sho~ld tie funding that is received from the Government of Canada to the purposes for which it is giuen? MR.

SPEAKER: The han. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: The point is, theoretically the hon. member might have a point, but in practical terms he does not because we spend more on Health and Education than we get in EPF payments on Health and Education. Equalization is where we gE!t our biggest amount of money. We get $300 million or $460 million in EPF and we spent on Health alone $624 million this year. So therefore it is just a theoretical consideration and not a practical one, because the EPF payments are No. 42 R2232

not as much as the Health budget itself let alone Career Development and Advanced Studies and the Department of Education, which together would come to about $1 billion. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member For Mount Scio.

MR: BARI~Y: Just to follow up on that, as I say it applies both to the problem of ambulance drivers, who are receiving the answer from government that there is not enough money to go around and meet · their problems, and it applies to the students, who are meeting with I think most ministers, and I do not know if with all government MHAs but with all Opposition MHAs to express their concerns about lack of funding for Education.

I ask the Premier if in fact even if there is more money spent on Education or on Health · than is received from the Government of Canada, is there not in fact as much money spent for the programmes under which the funding is applied by the Government of Canada? MR. SPEAKER : The hon . the Premier . PREMIER PECKFORD: Now the hon. member is getting, I think, to the point.

One of the problems nationwide, and what some of the students are saying in their representations to the provincial governments and to the federal government, is that over the last number of years both the former Liberal administration in Ottawa and the present Progressive Conservative administration in Ottawa have been reducing the amount of funds under the EPF programmes, and that has L2233 May 14-, 1987 Vol XL put the burden on the provinces and made it more difficult.

But even under that reduction that is coming in the rate of increase that we thought we could anticipate from the federal government, even with that reduction we are still increasing the budgets of the Department of Education, the Department of Career Development and Advanced Studies, and the Department of Health. This year we are increasing the Department of Health 1 s budget by $39 million, even though we are getting less from the federal government than we did years ago, but it does put an added burden on us.

We perhaps could still find that $39 million, but if we did not have t:he reduction from the federal government then we would have perhaps a $45 million or $50 million increase rather than a $39 million increase this year. So the inherent information contained in the hon. member 1 s question is valid. I have argued this point, and I know the hon . member for Mount Scio-Bell Island agrees ·with me, not only as it relates to Education and Health per se, and I have been saying this in the Hous e for the last week or so, but in the whole area of research and development Canada is falling behind.

And that is all tied up with education and training and so on and it is a very serious national issue and has a big impact for us. MR. BARRY: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary . MR. BARRY : One of the ideas put forward by students, which was in fac ·t a recommendation from the Provincial No. 42 R2233

Liberal Party accepted by the Federal Liberal Convention, is that there be some better national co-ordination of programmes in education. Ambulance drivers are pointing out that i1. other provinces we see a second person in the ambulance, I believe I am told in· every other province, except Newfoundland. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! This is a final supplementary. MR. BARRY: I will cut it brief.

But briefly I would like to ask the Premier does he believe in the need for getting more consistency in national standards, both in education and in health as in ambulance services, and does he accept the concept of a national council of post~secondary education, and pas sibly a national council on health care measures? MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: I think I could agree with the basic thrust of what the han. member is putting forward. There is .no question there has to be some better standards.

And as it relates to health care and the road ambulance service, there is nothing we would like better to do than to provide more money than we are providing this year in road ambulance. But when you have demands coming from the Department of Social Services, or Career Development, where we have launched a new programme for reorganizing post-secondary education in the Province, and demands for roads and all the other things, you have to try to L2234 May 14, 1987 Uol XL be fair to everybody.

The big thing here to remember is that if you take all the sectors in the government that we haVE! to fund, the road ambulance service over the last eight years has perhaps done better than anybody else, and got a 200 per cent increase. I do not know of anywhere else in governmEmt where that kind of increase has been given over the last eight years. So we have recognized it as a high priority and will as soon as possible move to even improve it more along the lines that the private ambulance operators want, Mr. Speaker. The policy is not in question.

We agree the issue is a good issue, but where do you get the money when you ha1Je just gone from a $42 million current account deficit to a $172 mill:ion currt::~nt account deficit? Before I sit down, on EPF this year we got $224.5 million, and Health and Career Dev1elopmE!nt and Advanced Studies is $B60 million. So we are getting from the federal government $229 million and we are spending $860 million. MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the member for Stephenville. MR. K. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would 1 ike to come back to the Premier on the ambulance drivers again.

They have been attempting for a number of weeks to meet with the minister and your administration to discuss the problems. They have come to thE! point where they are very frustrated and would like to see No. 42 R2234

the situation add res sed. I would like to ask you again if you would try to defuse the situation by meeting the representatives of the ambulance drivers of the Province to see 'if a compromise can be worked out. These people · do not want to take any action such as they have discussed. They do not re~lly want to, they are trying their best not to, they haue been making attempts not to. Will you undertake to try to meet with them and try to work out a compromise? MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Premier . PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I have already answered that question about three times. MR . K. AYLWARD : Mr.

Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Stephenville. MR . K. AYLWARD : Mr. Speaker, I will keep asking the question because we are not getting an answer. As far as I know, under the rules of order - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The han . member will be out order if he keeps repeating question. MR . K. AYLWARD : of that The report has been in the hands of government for eighteen months. Why · has the gcuernment not acted upon the recommendations?

Why does the Premier have to wait until another group in this Province has to come in and demonstrate at the building here to get his attentiot~ so that L2235 May 14-, 1987 Vol . XL he will respond to their concerns? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, in Newfoundland society today there are many, many groups which legitimately are requesting additional funds. We have brought down our budget and we must keep within the budgetary limits that we are now debating in the House.

We have gone from a $42 million deficit to $172 million deficit in one year, and a lot of that was because we had to, because we felt that Health and Education were so important, and that Health needed $39 million more this year, that we could not pare it down and reduce it from where it was last year. There are a lot of groups out there who have legitimate health and safety concerns, one of them are the private road ambulance operators, no question. But there are many others and we must deal with them all fairly and squarely.

We have budgeted a certain amount this year and we intend to keep to that budgetary amount . MR. K. AYLWARD: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the han . the member for Stephenville. MR. K. AYLWARD : I would like for the Premier to explain why his government has ignored the report and its recommendations, because there was no action taken on the recommendations. First off, why has his government ignored the recommendations? Why have he and his officials refused to at least see and discuss with No. 4-2 R2235

these people their problems, since they have tried to be very reasonable with the government? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, we intend to move on it. As ·the Minister of Health has said on several occasions this week, we intend to move on it and bring in the new legislation. But we have to consult not only the· private ambulance operators, but also the community based ambulance operators and the people on the hospital boards which have ambulances at their hospi taJ.s.

We have to do all of that so that when we bring in a piece of legislation it will reflect the concerns of all those people who are working in this field: MR. LONG: Mr: Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the member for St. John•s East. MR. LONG: My question is for the Minister of Health. It concerns the same issue, and has to do with the statement that the minister read in the House yesterday, in which he suggests that statements made that deaths have occurred in ambulances as a result of no attendants being there are not supported by fact. MR. DINN: That is not what he said. MR.

LONG: I am reading from the minister • s statement. L2236 May 14, 1987 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. LONG: I ask the minister would he withdraw that statement and confirm that there have been proven incidents in which people have died because of a lack of attendants in ambulances? Would the minister explain where he gets his figure that 75 per cent of ambulances in the Province have attendants. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Minister of Health. DR .. TWOMEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I do not have facts, nei the!r dOE!S the Department of Health have facts, that people have died in the back of ambulances because there was not some first aid or some medical support present at that time. Where did I get my figures as regard to 75 per cent? MR. LONG: Yes. DR. TWOMEY: I have asked the people in the Department of Health to examine the records and they have done so. I have checked it not onCE!, but twice. These are the figures they have given me. I have given them already twice in the House. I reaffirm it here this evening. MR. LONG: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: A supplementary, the han. member for St. John•s East. MR. LONG: No. 42 the R223.6

I would submit, Mr. Speaker, to the minister that several statements in the minister•s statement yesterday are absolutely false and that it should be withdrawn. I would leave it to the media to check on that. My question, Mr. Speaker, for the minister is: At the close of his statement yesterday he made referenCE! to the contingency plan in the event of a withdrawal of services. There is an estimate that at least $500,000 will be spent on this contingency plan this weekend.

Would the minister­ consider taking the money that is being allocated for this contingency plan, and offering it to the private ambulance operators as a gesture of good faith, as the first stage of an implementation programme for the operators? MR. SIMMS: A point of order, Mr . Speaker. MR. SPEAKER:· Order, please! A point of Minister of Lands. MR. SIMMS : order, the hon. Forest Resources the and Mr. Speaker, I was trying to recollect what the hon. member just said in the pre!face to his question.

I think, if I am correct, that he clearly said, and perhaps he can nod and indicate whether he did say that the statements the hon. minister made to this House yesterday in his Ministerial Statement were false statements? Because if the hon. member said that, Mr. Speaker, then he must withdraw those remarks immediately. He cannot say things indirectly which obviously impugn the motives of the Minister of Health or make L2237 May 14, 1987 Uol XL comments of that nature. I do not have a reference right at my hand, ·but I am sure Your Hdnour is well aware of it.

And if he did say that, then he should be instrucl:ed to withdraw before he does anything else. That is totally unparliamentary. MR. SPEAKER : Order, please! The hon . member said that statements were false, and I would ask him to withdraw that. MR. LONG : Mr. Speaker, I was saying thE! minister was misleading the House. I will withdraw th e unparliamentary language. But it stays that the statement the minister made yesterday was slanderous, disrespectful and presenting misinformation. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,· oh! MR. SIMMS: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: A point of Minister of Lands. MR.

SIMMS: order, Forest the ho.n. Resources the and The hon. member can slither all he wants to try to get away From what he said, which was clearly unparliamentary. I subrni t to you, Your Honour, that what · he has nov.J said is even more unparliamentary, and even members opposite, I think, would agree with me. That kind of language cannot be tolerated in the parliament of Newfoundland or in any other parliament in this country. The hon. member should be forced, Your Honour, to withdraw those statements. If he is not prepared No. 42 R2237

to be a man and stand withdraw unparliamentary then he should be named. MR. LONG: up and remarks, To that Speaker. point of order, Mr. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! order. To that point of MR. LONG: Mr. Speaker, I do not intend to use unparliamentary language and if I have I would unequivocally withdraw it. The minister has- been maligning, and that is the point I have been making in my statement. And in the meantime, Mr. Speaker, there is a question that I have put to the minister. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The han. member is now stating that hon. minister is maligning, and that again is unparliamentary.

I ask him to withdraw it without comment. MR. LONG: I would not apologize minister do that he was MR. SPEAKER: only withdraw, I would and ask that the the same to the people speaking of yesterday. Order, please! Order, please! I am going to call member to withdraw qualification. MR. LONG: on the han. that without I withdraw, Mr. Speaker. DR. TWOMEY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health. L2238 May 14, 1987 Vol XL DR. TWOMEY: Mr. Speaker, the stab:!rnent I made yesterday was not consciously and I hope not unconsciously misleading this House. I did it. with sincerity and honesty.

As a member of the department I have to be factual, honest and truthful. I have done that to the very bE!St of my ability. I have not trir:!d in any way to mislead or to confuse any of the hon. members in this House. That is rny stateme!nt and I stand by it. Someone can vilify my character, vilify my motives, misconstrue them, that is the privilege of this House, but I stand herE! and affirm to all my colleagues, on both sides, that to my knowledgE!

I did not mislead; I was conscientious and I wanted to give information to all sides of this House. · As regards to the ·ather statement made by the han. member, money, money, money. I can assure this House I have checked on this too, Sir, and we do not expect anything to cost as much as has bee!n published in the press. Nothing, Sir. You must remember that we have helicopters stationed in DE!er Lake, we have helicopters stationed in Gander, we have helicopters stationed in Torbay, we have helicopters stationed in Bay d'Espoir, and these have been there all the time to provide emergency services.

They are under contract to the department and to other departments and can be used. There is one helicopter we have as ked to stand by and WE! have put that in Clarenville. We pay the usual rates for that and there might be a standby fee. In transferring there will be a do not think it No. 42 the ambulances, slight cost. We is •going to be R2238

high. Otherwise the running of the ambulances will be the same as it has been previously . Thank you, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The time for Oral Questions has elapsed. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, on a matter privilege. It relates to ambulance issue. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! of · the The tims for Oral Questions has elapsed. MR. PEACH: Time is up. MR . FUREY: Privilege, he said. MR. SIMMONS: I know that. As I said a minute ago, I rise on a matter of privilege. MR. SPEAKER : That is fine . MR. SIMMONS: Thank you, Sir . MR. SPEAKER : That is the first time I heard it.

The han. the Opposition, on privilege. MR. SIMMONS : Leader of a point the of Mr. Speaker, the reason, I submit, Sir, that you cannot hear what is L2239 May 14, 1987 Vol XL going on is because your clowns - and I am glad they are yours, not mine - will not give you a chanCE! to hear what is going on. I very distinctly said, I rise on a point of privilege. MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. privilege, state it. member has a point of I would ask him to MR. SIMMONS: I was stating it, but how would you know that? Now, Mr. Speaker, privilege. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR . SIMMONS: on a point of Mr.

Speaker, I need some order, if you can achieve it. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! If the hon. member has a point of privilege, please state it now. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. · Speaker I I want to state thE! point of privilege, but I want t:he protection of the Chair in having some order while I state the point of privilege because it is a very serious matter~ It arises out of statements by the Minister of Health. I hear the minister and I arn duJ.y impressed by his sincerity. I ha~e never question(~d his sincerity. But, I say to him, you can be sincerely wrong. Mr.

Speaker, yesterday in this Chamber he toJ.d this HOUSE! - hE! told the press as well, but the point of privilege relates to the House - that he had not had a No. 42 R2239

request to meet with the Ambulance Operators Association. I say to him and to this House. that is incorrect information. He misled the House. I tell him. to verify what I am saying all he needs to do is talk to his Director of Emergency Services. Mr. Dick Conrad. and he will affirm that there was a request from the Aml:iulance Operators Association. from Mr. Steve McKenzie. the President, who tal ked with Mr. Conrad. Mr. Conrad reported to the minister, the minister tried to dictate the terms of the agenda and, having failed to do that, · refused to have the meeting.

Now, I put it to him and I put it to this House, that the minister yesterday, Mr. Speaker, did mi .slead this House by telling the Chamber that he and his department had not had a request from the Association to meet with that Association. In parliamentary terms, Mr. Speaker, that is unconscionable. It might be sincere, but sincerely wrong, I say to the minister, and sincerely wrong is· not good enough when you are dealing with the lives and the health and the safety of people. This was an incorrect statement. I submit that the easy way is to say, as has been said before, I do not have a prima facie case.

The courageous thing is to investigate this. If I am wrong on that, I will sincerely apologize to the minister. My information is that there were repeated requests about three weeks ago for the meeting, contrary to the minister's statement to this House that there was no such request. I submit, Mr. Speaker, the minister has misled the House. And if you find L2240 May 14, 1987 Vol XL that I have established a facie case, I am prepared down the appropriate motion . DR. COLLINS: prima to put To that point ·of privilege, Mr . Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of FinancE! to that point of privilege. DR.

COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, we cherish the right to bring up points of privilege in this House, be c·au s e points of privilege take precedence over everything else; all other activity in the House of the people comes to a dead halt and you have to consider only the point of privilege. Now, that is a very great privilege for every member and it has to be treated and regarded as something very precious. The hon. the Leader of the Opposition has gotten up - and I am quite sure he is aiAJare of this and he has a difference of opinion as . to facts with thE! hon. the Minister of Health.

That is clearly not· a pol.nt of privilegE!. It is an abuse of the House to get up on something which is clearly not a point of privilege and hold up all other activities in this House. Beauchesne states quite clearly that a difference of opinion as to facts does not constitute privilege. The whgle case is facetious and it is really an insult to the rest of us. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of privilege, there is no prima facie case. No. 42 R2240

Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: The hon . the member for Port au Por:t. MR. HODDER : Mr. Speaker, as Chairman of the Government Services Committee I would like to report that the Committee has considered the matters to it referred and has · passed without amendment items of expenditure under the following headings: Public Works and Services; Transportation; Municipal Affairs; Consumer Affairs and Communications; Finance; and Labour. MR. SIMMS : Mr .• Speaker: MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Resources and Lands. MR.

SIMMS: Forest I believe my colleague, the member St. John • s North (Mr. J. Carter), also has a report he wishes to table. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for St. John 1 s North. MR. J. CARTER : Mr. Speaker, in spite of the negative comments about the Estimates Committee system by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Simmons), and I might add carried on critically in today•s Evening Telegram, the Social Services Committee have considered the matters to them referred and have passed the spending estimates of L2241 May 14, 1987 Vol XL the following departments: Social Services; Justice; Health; Education; Environment; Culture, Recreation and Youth; and Career Development and Advanced Studies. Notices of Motion MS VERGE: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice. MS VERGE: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will· on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a btll entitled, 11

An Act To Amend The Corporations Act . 11 (Bill No. 38). MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Agricultural Development. MR. R. AYLWARD : Minister and Thank you, Mr. Speaker. of Rural, Northern I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, 11

An Act To Amend The Department Of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development Act. 11 (Bill No. 37). DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I give notice I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, 11

An Act To Amend The Public Service (Pensions) Act And The Uniformed Services No. 42 R2241

Pensions Act. 11 (Bill No. 40) . Orders of the Day DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, a few first reading, , Motion 9. Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance to introduce a bill, 11

An Act To Amend The Financial Administration Act, 1973, 11 carried . (Bill No. 27). On motion, Bill No . 27 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. DR. COLLINS : Motion 11. Motion, the the hon. the Minister of Career Development and Advanced Studies to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Memorial University (Pensions) Act, 11 carried. (Bill No. 39). On motion, Bill No. 39 first time, ordered read ~ime on tomorrow. DR. COLLINS : read a a second Order 3, Concurrence debate, Mr . Speaker . MR.

SPEAKER : Debate was adjourned by the hon. member for Twillingate who has just about a minute or so left to finish . MR. W. CARTER : Mr. Speaker, I realize that the fifteen minutes - AN HON. MEMBER : By leave ! MR. W. CARTER: L2242 May 14, 1987 Vol XL -allocated in this debate has been pretty well used up, but I did indicate during my few remarks - MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave to continue? MR. GILBERT : Yes, he has got ten mi nutes now . MR. SPEAKER: Leave is granted . MR. W.

CARTER: that I wanted to words to say resource-short plant our Province. have a about problem few the in I have a fish plant in my district, in fact I have three fish plants in my district whE!re there is a shortage of resource. I can refer the ho n. gentlemen opposite to the plant in Twillingate, ·which is a very substantial plant now operating at probably less than 40 per CE!nt of its actual operating capability. I can talk about plants in other parts of Newfoundland where similar situations exist. The point I wanted to make, I would like to address to i:he Minister of Fisheries (Mr . Rideout) .

We cannot afford the luxury, Mr. Speaker, of giving quotas to foreign countries, whether that quota is in the areas commonly known as 2J+3KL or in the Northern area known as 2G and 2GH. I have said this before in the House and I am going to kE!E!p repeating it until we get some assurance from the minister that never again will there be a quota of ground fish given to a foreign power within our 200 mile limit as long as we have fish plants that are operating far below their actual operating capability . No. 42 R2242

It just does not make sense that we should be trading off ground fish from within our 200 mile limit to other countries, for whatever reason, while we have people in this Province underemployed and unemployed, fish plants that are underutilized, operating at considerable expense at .only a fraction of their actual operating capabilities. We all remember last December when the minister and the government opposite, in collusion with the national governments, gave the Government of France a quota of · 2000 metric tons that subsequently increased to 3000 metric tons of ground fish in the area known as 2GH.

I said the other day, there is only an imaginary pencil line, a pencil mark. separating those two areas. It is alarming when you think. Mr. Speaker, that these foreign countries, given the right to fish ·in that area, tan quite easily slip over that imaginary boundary Sou .th into the area that is traditionally fished by our vessels, take their load of fish, sneak back over the, again, imaginary boundary, into the 2GH area and not be caught. The fact, I suppose, that it is such a wide area makes it almost impossible to properly police. In the Estimates Committee, Mr.

Speaker, these matters were brought to the minister 1 s attention, as were a number of other matters pertaining to the fishery and to the resourc:?-e sector of our economy. I think yesterday we had an example and I think I stated in this House, where there appears to be a lack of competence, maybe that is not the right word, but certainly there is a lot to be desired, for example, in the operations of the Fishing Industry Advisory Board. L2243 May 14, 1987 Vol XL I realize it is a difficult task that has been assigned to thE! Chairman and the members of that board.

I believe it is a very useful board and I believe that they should be given the necessary wearwi thal in order to be able to fill their role as they are supposed to. We heard the minis .ter talk yesterday about thE! price of lobster. I think it is no secret that there has been a slipping up there somewhere and, because of that, our lobster fishermen did not get the price that they were suppose to get, the Boston blue sheet price.

Because the Industry Advisory Board maybE! lacked the confide~ce to provide the proper kind of intelligence. the information required to the minister. or did not have the proper mechanism in place where that kind of intelligence would be forthcoming, the fishermen of our Province have been short-changed on the price of lobsters. It is all very well ·for the minister to say that he hopes that maybe the buyers will compensate the fishermen for monies forfeited by virtue of that fact, but I am afraid he has probably more faith in a lot of our fish merchants than I have becauSE!

I suspect ' :i.t will take almost a direct order from this House or from some other supreme being before the fish merchants who purchase those lobsters will voluntarily compensate the fishermen for monies lost because of .that price·. I think certainly OnE! of the problems. I would suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, stems back to the Industry Advisory Board. Their job is to keep on top of things and have the proper intelligence in place and agents to be able to advise the minister, the No. 42 R2243

department and the union, and through the union, the fishermen, of what is going on in the marketplace. Obviously, in the case of lobsters, that was not so. So, Mr. Speaker, these are the few comments that I have to make. As I said when I adjourned the debate, I indicated to the House I wanted to have these few word·s on the resource-short plant problems. I think we have to address that problem.

I would strongly suggest to the minister that he maybe go back over his files and dig out some of the. reports that were submitted or prepared ·ten, fifteen, eight:, ten years ago, wherein that problem was addressed and very well addressed. We all know that there is a problem in Newfoundland with respect to the seasonality of fish plants. For example, we ·know that on the Northeast Coast the inshore fishery, the source from which most of these so-called resource-short plants draw their source of. supply, there is a problem with the continuity of supplies certainly after a certain period in the year.

That is why we have to find ways and means of providing the raw material, hold it in storage until the time comes in the .Fall of the year for the plants to draw upon that source. At one point in time there was a plan ready to go into effect, and it has bee!n allud~?;.~ to in the budget this year, where holding facilities would be built around the Province in designated areas. I believe there was one planned for the Northwest Coast and one for the Northeast Coast.

Several of these cold storage holding facilities were being planned whereby fish could be taken there, L2244 May 14, 1987 Vol XL gutted head on fish, ready for processing during the glut period, or during other periods when surplus material was available, or maybe fish would be procured by draggers that would fish in the Northern areas, including 2GH, trucked to these holding areas for use by these resource-short plants at a time of the year· when other sources of raw material were not available.

I would strongly suggest, and it is in the budget, I give the government credit for at least putting it in the budget, for what good that is going to do, I would strongly sugge·st that they take a hard look at that pol :i. cy and that plan and give some thought to implementing it as soon as possible. MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER:. The hon. the Minister of Fisheries. MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to respond again to the concerns raised by the hon. g1entleman For Twillingate (Mr. W. Carter) on the! matters he referred to today.

As he correctly indicated in his remarks, I have responded to th~:1m before and I will re!spond to them again. Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt about it, none of us --I mean, it is not a rnatte!r of politicaJ. philosophy or political differences between us in this House. There are none of us as Newfoundlanders impressed when any amount of fish resource off our Province, whether it is in 2GH or whether it is a certain species or a species in 2J+3KL or in any other NAFO division around our No. 42 R2244

Province, none of us are impressed as leaders of the community, as politicians, when we are told that we are not harvesting all of that resource that is available to us. All of us would accept as motherhood the statement that there should be nothing out there th~t is surplus to the needs of Newfoundland and Labrador or that is surplus to the needs, secondly, after having said that, to · Atlantic Canada. But the fact that we cannot dispute, Mr.

Speaker, not that r· like it that way, I know the member does not like it that way, none of us like it that way, the fact that we cannot dispute is that there are certain species in certain NAFO divisions adjacent to our shores that have, since there is a 200 mile limit, for one reason or another, it can be argued maybe not ·a good reason, but for one reason or another that have been surplus to our needs or surplus to our capacity to catch or surplus to our desire to catch or surplus to our economic ability to catch or surplus to something that makes it possible for us to harvest that particular species or that particular resource.

The fact of the matter, Mr. Speaker, is that in 2GH there is a Canadian allocation that the Government of Canada allocates for Canadian harvesting that has never been harvested. It has not been harvested by Canadians in Atlantic Canada. It has not been harvested by Canadians in Newfoundland and Labrador. And, in fact, there has been a special allocation as part of the overall quota of 1,000 tons that has been allocated to the resource-short plant programme that have never been harvested in 2GH. L2245 May 14, 1987 Vol XL - Now, you can argue that that is wrong.

You can argue that there should be financial incentives to allow our companies to participate in that harvest. These are being looked at and they have · been looked at in the past. You can argue that they should be forced to go up there. But all of the arguments are on the other side . too, Mr. Speaker. Because of economic reasons; because of climatic conditions; b~cause of bottom difficulties; because of harvesting difficulties; it is not economic, whatever that means, to harvest that particular resource. Mr.

Speaker, whether you like it or not, whether you are in favour of it or not, and most of us are not, but when that happens and there is an amount of resource that. ·is surplus to the needs and to the harvesting capability at the time of the coastal state then, Mr. Speaker, under international law the coastal state has no recourse but to divide and allocate that surplus to foreign countries at the request of foreign countries. That is the law of the sea. That is the international constitutional basis for our 200 mile limit.

We might not like it, we might lump it, we might screech and complain and everything else about it, but the fact of the matter is we have the right to harvest the 20,000 tons allocation in 2GH and we are not harvesting it. Therefore, other countries have a right to expect access to that. Once you accept that or do not accept it, just put yourself forward for a few moments and you are in an international negotiation trying to settle No. 42 R22LI.5

another very serious fisheries problem for Newfoundland and Labrador. That problem, of course. I am referring to is the French overfishing in a disputed area. There is no doubt about that. That is not a case of mistaken fact or mistaken identity. There is a vast disputed area between the sovereign state of Canada and the sovereign state of France in the area known as 3Ps.

You are trying to negotiate a settlement to that disputed zone so that you can get the boundary to arbitration, so that you can get some compromise· on an acceptable quota in that area. and in other to achieve that, you obviously, in any set of negotat:ions. have to give something. Now if you have to give something, Mr. Speaker. and this is the question that we are getting thrown back at us. If you have to give something, and that has been the position of this Province. you can argue that you do not have to give nothing, that might be defensible. it might not.

But in negotiations it is usual that both sides have to give something. So if you accept the principle that you have to give something, do you give what is surplus to your ability to catch and that you are not catching. or do you give what is non-surplus? Mr. Speaker, it is as simple as that.

If there is a surplus allocation of -whether there should be or not is another thing -but if there is a surplus allocation a species in 2GH, or if there is a surplus allocation of another species. and it is certainly not cod, in some other zone, do you work with that surplus to try to achieve your needs and your ambitions and your desires to L2246 May 14, 1987 Vol XL control the stock, get a boundary set in another zone, or do you not? Do you say. 1 Stuff it 1 • and walk away from the table? Now, Mr. Speaker, it is a simple as that. We choose. not with any great degree of enthusiasm. I might add. Mr.

Speaker, on the basis of a quid pro quo in 3 Ps to agree to 1.000 ton allocation in 2GH. When the secret. deal was clone. it tJJas up to 3,000 or 3,500. But we did agree on the principle of offering some surplus stock in 2GH to get arbitration on the boundary. and a compromise on overfishing in 3Ps.

Of course. the federal negotiators in their stupidity - I have sa:id this before and I will say it again without any need to apologize -in their stupidity they gave away, they acceded to .the principle of giving something that was surplus to your needs. at the present time -it might be argued that we can use it, but at the present time we ar·e not -but they ·acceded to the principle.. of letting access into that surplus stock without getting the guarantee of the quid pro quo on the other side. on 3 Ps, and the overfishing and the boundary.

Of course that was the essence of stupidity, and the essenCE! of stupid negotiations. I do not care how that is interpreted by the people who made that colossal blunder. So that is where we have been and where we are, Mr. Speaker, on that particular issue' of access to 2GH cod. Let me make this point as· well. The hon. gentleman says -and up until this year he was quite right. By the way. the foreigners have been fishing that fish, whether it is the West Germans or whatever, since 1977 on quotas No. tp R2246

given to them by Canada. But, the hon. gentleman makes the point that it is very easy to just slip over the line. You know you are fishing and then suddenly South in the Northern regions of 2J. That is true. That was true up until this government - whatever we can say about the present government in Ottawa, good, bad, or indifferent, it is a fact, Mr.

Speaker, that the government of today in Ottawa and this government were able to bring in a new policy of surveil1ance on foreign vessels so that today every foreign-registered vessel ­ that fishes inside the 200 mile limit of Canada has 100 per cent observer coverage, as does every domestic vessel. Now, under the Liberal pol icy, when the previous government was in power in Ottawa, there was · an average of 40 per cent coverage. Under those conditions, ·the hon. gentleman 1 S o~servation was correct. There was no -way you would know whether they slipped down South of 2J or whatever they did.

There was no way to have control over their fishing. There was no way to know whether they stuck to their quotas or not. But under the present policy, 100 ·per cent enforceable and paid for by the owners of the foreign vessels, the foreign governments and the foreign companies, there is now 100 per cent coverage on every foreign vessel and 100 per cent coverage on every domestic vessel that· fishes inside the 200 mile limit, so that they cannot slip over a border. If they do , i t i s done with the collaboration and the concurrence of Canadian nationals. Obviously, we are not expecting that to happen.

So there is 100 per cent coverage . L2247 May 14, 1987 Vol XL This dippsy-doodle, rob me, rape me another bit kind of approach that the hon. gentleman referred to cannot happen under this new progressive, innovative policy that was brought in by the Government of Canada. So where thE!Y are right, I give them full marks, and where they are wrong, I condemn them. Mr. Speaker, on the Industry Advisory Board - AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh. MR. RIDEOUT: Fishing No, no! I am saying good things about him. Mr.

Speaker, on the Fishing Indus try Advisory Board, I have to take exception to the remarks made by the han. gentleman about the incompetence of the Fishing Industry Advisory Board. It is not a function of the incompetence of the Fishing Industry Advisory Board that it is difficult to have a handle o_n what hap ·pe ns · to lobster prices in the Boston market. The Fishing Industry Advisory Board is on top of that on a daily basis. What is difficult, and it seems that it is almost impossible to get people to understand this because it is not a I1E!W phenomenon, Mr.

Speaker, it is not something that just happened this year, the fact of the matter is that the lobster bought · in Twillingate today, May 14, 1987, will not b.e in the Boston market unti 1 about seven days from now. That is the difficulty. It is a week time lag. They are a week behind before the date that the lobster is purchased in Newfoundland. It could be sent to Nova Scotia and held in pounds. It No. 42 R2247

might be held down in Lou Everly's outfit down in Comfort Cove. It could be held somewhere else, and then be a longer time getting in. But the average time, from the time the lobster is purchased in Ming' s Bight in Newfoundland until it gets to Boston, and the price is reflected in the Boston Blue Sheet, is seven days. Now, how you compute the 70 per cent of that price this day, 9:15 this morning, at 70 per cent and tell the fishermen that that is what he is entitled to, is a difficult situation. We do not- know what 70 per cent of that will be unti 1 a wee·k down the road.

So that is not a function of the incompetence of the Fishing Industry Advisory Board. I think it is a credit that they are able to advise fishermen and advise the union and advise the minister and advise buyers on a daily basis what · those prices are fe-tching in the market place. So I have to take exception to that, and say this as well, Mr. Speaker, in terms of a defence of the Fishing Industry Advisory Board, which in many respects, does not need a lot of defence. The hon. gentleman for Twillingate last year - MR. BARRY: Would the hon. minister permit a question? MR. RIDEOUT: ·Sure . MR.

SPEAKER: The han. the member for Mount Scio - Bell Island. MR. BARRY: It says that 70 per cent of the Boston price will be paid. The lobster bought on a particular day L2248 May 14, 1987 Vol XL are seasoned then for three or four days. Then they are trucked off. By the time they get to Boston, the price may have gone up or may have gone down. Now, what is meant by that condition in thE! license? What price is supposed to be paid? Is it 70 per cent of the price on the day the lobs 'l:er are bought or on the day the lobster are sold? MR. RIDEOUT : That is what I just referring to. I am member did not hear me. MR.

BARRY: finished surE! thE! I picked up part of it, but I did not get it all. MR. RIDEOUT: The question is a good one. The way the regulation is structured is that - understand now that there is a week delay on the average before the lobsters get from Newfoundland to Boston. So the lobsters bought this weE!k may get down there next WE!ek, and you are riqht, it could be up, it could be down. The way we are enforcing and interpreting the regulation is 70 per cent of t:he weekly average price. So that we monitor every day in B o s ton this week, from Monday to Friday.

At the end of the week, we will have a 70 per cent average of the weekly price . As of last Friday, for example, that weekly averagE!, 70 per cent, was $3.28 a pound Canadian. So that lobster buyE!rs in Newfoundland should have been paying a minimum of $3.28. So that is how it is done. MR. BARRY: (Inaudible). MR. RIDEOUT: Yes. It is done ev1H'Y day and then it is averaged at the end of No. 42 R2248

the week and you take 70 per cent of it. This week, it so ·happens, that practically every buyer in the Province is paying significantly in excess of 70 per c e n t of the B o s ton p r i c e . B·e c au s e normally the market takes a big dig following the Mother's Day weekend, and it took that dip this week. So, while they were two or three weeks paying significantly less, they are . now into a period where they are paying signific~ntly higher. That has to average itself out too. I made the point in the statemen -t· yesterday, Mr. Speaker, and I believe it.

I think it is an anomaly really and I am not sure how it developed that the Department of Fisheries in the Government of Newfoundland is into this exercise. Lobster is the only species of any commercial sign~ficance that I am aware of for which the price is not collectively bargained by the representatives of the fishermen, by the Fishermen's Union. I think there is a lot to be said for that to happen because 'I think there is protection in it for the fishermen. I mean, all fish prices are bargained as minimum prices and that is the minimum that the buyer, who is a member or a signatory to the agreement can pay.

I do not think you would have those wild fluctuations then at the beginning of the season or two or three or four weeks in the season, you would have a stable price situation.

So I think there are advantages in that for the fishermen and, like ~ said, in my opinion, I think it is an anomaly that we are in this position and I intend, through the process of consultation and discussion, to try to see if we cannot reach an agreement with the L224-9 May 14-, 19 8 7 Vol XL Fishermen's Union where, come next year, they would bargain lobster prices as they bargained cod prices or as they bargained caplin prices, or as they bargained crab prices, or as they bargained a whole number of other things. The other thing I wanted to say before I sit down - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The han. member's time has elapsed, unless we have leave . SOME HON. MEMBERS: Leave . MR. RIDEOUT: Okay, thank you . MR. SPEAKER: You may continue. MR. RIDEOUT: Only just a point or two on the Fishing Industry Advisory Board before I was asked a question by the hon. gentleman for Mount Scio-Bell Island. The member for Twillingate (Mr. W .

Carter) last year in co~nittee, and I believe. if I am not mistaken, in Question Period, asked on a number of occasions whether maybe the time had come for us to rethink or even abandon the Fishing Industry Advisory Board, or change its mandate, or a whole bunch of things of that nature. I, in good faith, said to the han. gentleman that nothing is carved in stone and neither should it be, and I would undertake to give some thought to that, to consult on that and to see the mandate and the board was living up to its manda~e and whether the industry No. 4-2 R224-9

and the union for whom it was basically set up to advise, and to give independent advice to the minister, whether those roles are being fulfilled. And I did. The Fishermen's Union, Mr. Speaker, is adamant that the Fishing Industry Advisory Board is performing a vital, aggressive, inrtovative, up-to-date, spur of the moment, advice to them on practically any question that they want independent advice on.

The industry, as members will appreciate, use the Fishing- Industry Advisory Board to find out independent market advice and so on but there are some in the industry who would be just as happy if the board was not there.

But from the Fishermen's Union perspective the board plays, in . their opinion, and in the opinion of the leaders hip of that uni.on, plays a very, very vital role, and the consul tat ion around whether the mandate needs to be examined, whether it needs to be expanded, whether it needs to be tightened up, the unanimous solid advice from the Fishermen 1 s Union is that, 11If it is not broke, do not fix it. This board is working very, very well. We are very, . very supportive of it. We do not want you to tamper with it, just leave it alone.

It is doing a fine job, thank you very much.11 That was the principle reason by the way, as I was not in the House at the time . but I know the background to the legislation, the principle reason that we have a Fishing Industry Advisory-Board today came out of the union/employee disputes of the early seventies when it was felt that there was a need for an independent, arms length professional organization to give L2250 May 14, 1987 Vol XL independent market advice and assessments to both sides, and t:he union is adamant that they still are playing a very vital role in that regard and that it should not be changed.

Now, that is not: to say the world is perfect, and if any member, or a member of society, for that matter, has somE! suggestion to make with regard to improving the functions of the Fishing Industry Advisory Board, then, as always, Mr. Speaker, this minister is open to those kinds of suggestions. MR. W. CARTER: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the ITIE!mber for Twillingate. MR. W. CARTER: I just want to set the record straight in a couple of instances.

I know it is difficult sometimes to go back over twe1VE! months and to be able· to quotE! a person verbatim as to what was said, but I can tell the minister now, and I can tell this House - I ·stand to be corrected if it ts on record, but I know it is not that I at no time su•::~gested that the Fishing Industry Advisory Board be abolished. I was Minister of Fisheries at thE! tirnE! that board was restructured and beefed up, and it was done for a very good reason. I still think the board has a very, very important role to play in the whole scheme ·of th:ings. Last year, Mr.

Speaker -and I do not think the minister is trying to create the wrong impressions -I expressed some concerns about the board because of a situation that developed in my riding and similar situations that were developing in other parts of Newfoundland, and it had to do with the mackerel No. 42 R2250

fishery. In my district last year some fishermen were dumping hundreds of thousands of pounds of mackerel because they could not get a market or an adequate price for that fish. I contacted the Advisory Board at that time and requested rthat there be some kind of an explanation as to why fishermen in Newfoundland had to dump huge quantities of mackerel.

At that time, I was not satisfied with the response I got from the Chairman of that Board and in Committee I expressed the concerns tha~ I had and I suggested that maybe in light of the importance · of the Board, in light of the need for such a Board, the necessity for it, that maybe the Board should be reviewed with a view to beefing it up, to improving the intelligence unit that the Board is supposed to have · whereby they can, in fact, reach out into the marketplace and provide the mechanism whereby prices can be ascertained and proper liaison be in place · between the primary producer and the merchant.

I realize, too, that the fishermen 1 s union is very big on the Advisory Board. I think any Minister of Fisheries or any government that would dare abolish that Board would do so at their own peril. I think the fishermen in our Province would take a very dim view of anybody who dared tamper with that Board because it can, Mr. Speaker, fill a very useful function. In fact, I have always said that if that Board was able to function the way it was intended to function there need not be any long-standing or costly disputes between the fishermen and the fish buyers.

That Board was established in order to have in place certain intelligence capability that would enable it to L2251 May 14, 1987 Vol XL advise the Fishermen 1 s Union, the processors, the fish buyers, exactly what the situation was or is with respect to the marketplace. Now, getting back to the statement I made earlier today about Newfoundlanders should never again witness . the giveaway of any fish stocks within our 200 mile limit, I am well aware of that

section of the Law of the Sea unified text which states that 1 in cases where there is a surplus, then we haVE! an obligation to make sure that that surplus is made available to other coastal states. 1 That is one of the fundamental principles of the 200 mile limit regime and it makes sense.

Canada could not possibly hope to win the goodwill of the other countries, the 130-odd countries that were part of that negotiating effort, if they adopted a dog-in-the-manager attitude, if they adopted the attitude we have at our disposal a certain quantity of fish that the scienti~ts say can be safely harvested but Whether We can takE! it or not, it will die of old age before we will allow other countries to harvest that resource. That would not stand up. Canada would be laughed at, it would be frowned upon and rightly so. The fact of the matter is, Mr.

Speaker, that only that which is surplus to the actual needs of the coastal State should be given or shall be given to other countries. The point I want to make - I made it earlier and I want to do so again - is that in light of what we are experiencing in this Province with 60,000 or 70,000 people unemployed, a large number of whom live in coastal communities where we have seasonal fish plants operating very much below their actual operating No. 42 R2251

capability, I see no reason why there should be any fish at all within our 200 mile limit declared as surplus. Now, I know the minister will say that is not economic maybe to harvest that resource. But I would suggest to him that if it is that difficult to harvest and that expensive, why, then, would the French want it? Why are the French people prepared to use that fish stock as a bargaining chip in trying to negotiate other agreements? The fact of the matter is, Mr.

Speaker, I suspect that one of the · reasons why that fish is not being harvested is because the harvesting companies find it cheaper, more expedient to fish on the Funk Island Banks, for example. on the Northern Grand Banks, and in the area of 2J+3KL. I know this year there has been agreement that the large companies will disperse their harvesting efforts three ways, one-third on the 2J· area, the Northern part of 2J+3KL, another one-third on the Funk Island Banks. ·and ·the final third on the Northern Grand Banks, and that is a move in the right direction.

Some of us at the time thought maybe there should been even less effort allowed on the Funk Island Banks and on the Northern Grand Banks in light of the impact it is having on the inshore fishery on the Northeast Coast. But be that as it may, it is an improvement over ·previous years. Because last year, for example, we all know tha ·t 99 per cent of the total harvest took plac& on the Funk Island Banks and the Northern Grand Banks; one per cent of the 'total offshore harvest for that year and the year before took place North of the Funk Island Banks, and that, of course, is an unacceptable situation.

We all know what happened last year L2252 May 14, 1987 Vol XL to the inshore fishery on the Northeast Coast. It was a dismal failure because the fish just did not turn up. I suppose there is probably no real hard scientific data that would prove beyond doubt that that is the reason why the fish did not turn up. The oJd Newfoundland fishermen who continue to say that you cannot catch a cod fish twice, I think their argument would stand up and the reason why the fish did not come ashore on the Northeast Coast was because it had already been caught on the Funk Island Banks and on the Northern Grand Banks.

So that is a moue in the right direction. Hopefully, next year they will further disperse the effort and, maybe, have less pressure on the stocks on the Funk Island Banks and on the Northern Grand Banks. Mr. Speaker, again I want to repeat that there is no need why there should be any fish within ou~ 200 mile regime declared as being surplus. If the big companies can prove beyond doubt that it is absolutely uneconomic to fish the stocks in 2GH, th1:!n maybe there should be some kind of incentive provided. I am referring now to. Fisheries Products International, which is the biggest, the largest in the world.

I suppose. Maybe there should be an incentive whereby for every thousand tons of cod they harvest in the 2GH area and makE! available to our plants, especially our resource-short plants, they should be given extra or special concessions in the more accessible areas. Maybe that is the way to do it. Maybe the large companies involved in the offshore sector should be given that kind of an incentive. If they are prepared to spend a IittlE! extra money and effort to prosecute the No. · 42. R2252

fishery in the Northern reaches of the 200 mile limit, then maybe they should be given preferential treatment when it comes to the allocation of quotas in the more accessible areas. But certainly there ·must be some way in which that fish can be harvested. It just does not make sense, when you realize that we have plants crying for additional raw material, to have fish literally dying of old age in the Northern reaches of the 200 mile limit. Getting back to the Advisory Board, Mr.

Speaker, I want to repeat, because as a politician and as a representative for Twillingate district, as one who has a lot of respect and admiration for the Fishermen•s Union and its leadership, ·I have never in my political career openly, publicly criticized the union. I have had some misgivings at times about, maybe,· some of their policies or · their philosophies, but I have never openly, willingly and knowingly said anything to j eoparadize that union. Because while it is not perfect, I have very vivid memories of life in this Province, Mr. Speaker, before the advent of the Fishermen•s Union.

I have ~ery, very vivid me~ories. MR. RIDEOUT : We have come a long way. MR. W. CARTER: We have come a long way, the minister says, and I agree with him.

I can recall very vividly, although I was not actively involved in it but my people were, they were very much involved in the fishery before we had a union, and I tell you now I would not want to see the primary producers in this Province subjected to the kind of treatment that was L2253 May 14, 1987 Vol XL accorded people in my father•s generation, for example, who were left to their own resources, left to the mercy, the benevolence and the fairness of the fish mere hants . I suggest to you that these were virtues, Mr. Speaker, that were not very prevalent.

Benevolence, charity and fairness were virtues that were not to prevalent in the fish merchants of yesterday. If I could take a half minute I want to emphasize again that I arn not against the Advisory Board. I think it should be beefed up, if necessary, and given the tools to do the job . And if that is so, then, I think they will play an even greater role in keeping peace in the fishing industry and ensuring that our fishermen are given a fair return for their labours. MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Minister of Fisheries . MR. 'RIDEOUT: Mr.

Chairman, I would just like to have another few comments on the items raised by my friend from Twillingate. Again, there is not much disagreement between us and between both sides of the House on the comments that my friend just made. I certainly, in questioning his questions on the Fishing Industry Advisory Board, did not mean to unduly indicate that the gentleman may have been against the Board. That was not my intention at all. All I wanted to say was that I knew there had been some questioning of the Board last year.

I believe - rny memory is a little bit better right now - it was actually the Canadian Saltfish Corporation, in the estimates No. 42 R2253

discussions, that the hon. gentleman might have suggested we get rid of, or certainly do dramatic surgery on it, but there were questions on the Advisory Board as well. I would like to rnak~ a comment or two, Mr. Speaker, on the Fishing Industry Advisory Board as related to · mackerel, in particular, last year. I know the han. gentleman was not satisfied, nor was I, nor, I suspect, were a lot of members and a lot of fishermen, in particular, with the situation regarding mackerel last year.

The · thing we have to remember, and I am going to say this perhaps at the risk of incurring some criticism or a smack in the gob from certain people in the industry, but the fact of the matter with mackerel last year , and it may have been the fact other years, I do not know, but it certainly was a pronounced factor last year, was that our own people, particularly a consortia or two of our own people, were our own worst enemies in mackerel last year.

They went and they did deals, particularly with the Soviet Union, and signed and agreed to prices and our producers, and I am sure the han. gentleman knows this, could not even afford to pay the fishermen last year - under those signed contracts - what they were paid the year before, which was crazy. Our processors could not afford to process mackerel last year under those contract prices and even get a very small, insignificant contribution to their overheads, which was crazy.

The best market we had, unfortunately, for mackerel last year was the bait market, which is a very, very sad commentary on what we are doing _with a species - any f is h species L2254 May 1.4, 1987 Vol XL - like mackerel which is of such good food value, and you have to put it into bait. That was a function of the negotiating process under which there were Newfoundlanders and non-Newfoundlanders in this consortia - two consortia actually - who did those deals principally with the Soviet Union and negotiated prices under which nobody, fishermen or plant owners, could produce that mackerel for that price .

Now Barrys did their own deal and were much better negotiators, were smarter negotiators and got a heck of a better price than the other two did, and they were able to buy significant amounts of macl<er ·el and make a dollar on it. But the others did not do that. We trted to assist the situatio n last year, as members will recall, by introducing a special $1 million mackerel assistance programme to help in food aid, -in buying mackerel to send to Third World Countries.

It was probably a b:L t late when we got into it and the industry did not have their homework done ·, nor did the un :ion and, consequently, there was not a lot of mackerel . purchased under that particular programme . But I hope that the small steps we made in that particular programme last year might bear larger fruits this year.

Because it is criminal, whether there is a good fishing season or not, that we are not, for whatever reason, harvesting mackerel, and this year, hopefully, there will be a lot of herring to harvest, and squid as we 11, but harvesting those species when they are available to us so that our fishermen and our pl 1:3.nt workers can get the economic gain from our so doing. It certainly hurts me and hurts every Newfoundlander that we are not in a position to do that as well as No. 42 R2254

we should. I want to say, too, to the hon. gentleman, Mr. Speaker, in terms of surplus species, particularly cod in 2GH, we embarked on a programme last year - it was begun the Summer before last, but we went mdre widely with it last year - to encourage the development of a cod fishery, once again, North of Nain. As the hon. gentleman knows, years ago there was, in many years, a very viable cod fishery well North of Nain, but over the last number of years that cod fishery has totally, for all ' practical purposes, disappeared; you have a char fishery and a salmon fishery and that is about it.

We have embarked on a financial incentive programme over the last year or so to try to encourage Northern Labrador fishermen and Island fishermen to go further North of Nain, up around Hebron and Okak, ·which we did las.t year, up in that region, and it appears as if it is working. So we o.Jill continue with that this year.

We also ne·ed to, I agree with the han. gentleman, get our own larger offshore fleets to do the same thing, but with our first priority as a Province being to try and help the · inshore fishermen, particularly the inshore fishermen in Northern Labrador, we are using the meager financial fiscal capacity available to us to encourage the development of that fishery by the inshore fishermen North of Nain. I am pleased to say that it appears to be working and we will continue t..ui th that this year with the support of my colleague from Torngat Mountains. One other thing I want to say.

The gentleman asked a rhetorical question, and it is good question, Why will foreigners fish in 2GH when our own offshore vessels will L2255 May 14, 1987 Vol XL not unless they are forced to? Well, The answer is very simple, Mr. Speaker. Foreigners, particularly the EEC countries like West Germany, France and the Soviet Union, do not have access to adequate stocks of fish to service their own fleets, to keep them fishing, so, therefore, they are forced to fish, whether it is in 2GH which is very expensive, or whether it is by allocation off the Falkland Islands. I mean, they are doing that as well .

They are forced to go further and further afield, to less e~onomic advantageous fishing regions because there is nothing else left for their fleets to do. Our fleet has some flexibility in that regard, but, yet, I agree with the principle espoused by the hon. gentleman, that we should be forcing them to go as far North as is practical, and financial in c en t.i v e s s h o u 1 d be a v a i 1 a b 1 e if we can do that . I am pleased, too, Mr.

Speaker, to be able to say that . while it may not have been enough, and while we will have a good look at it again when we implement the 19 8 8 management plan, the VE!ry fact that the companies howled and screamed and said that it will be economically disastrous and it cannot be done, the fact of the matter is that the mandatory sharing of the harvesting effort of one-third and one-third and one-third in 2J+3KL has worked.

FPI have caught their one-third quota a·vailable to them in 2J · already, and they were screaming like blue murder last year, 1 You are going to bankrupt us. 1 But we · stuck to our guns, and the Government of Canada stuck to its guns and said, You have to harvest one-third of your allocations in 2J and in 3K and in 3L. Whether or not, as my colleague said, we No . 4.2 R2255

can scientifically make the connection or not, it is fundamentally wrong that 99 per cent of the 256,000 tons that was allocated to the offshore effort be caught in one small geographic NAFO zone when 2J is not being haruested and some other area has been ouerharuested. It is not good management to allow· that to happen. And despite the screams and despite the reservations, we went with that mandatory distribution and it has worked, and I hope we will see the results of that this year and next year and following years in the inshore· fishery.

I think we will haue to continue to expand on that kind of management programme in the years to come. MR. W. CARTER: May I ask a question minister. MR. SPEAKER (Mitchell): Or_der, please! I haue to announce the for the Late Show. · member may pose his afterward. of the questions The hon. question We haue three questions for the Late Show today. One from the han. the member for Fogo to the Premier concerning the hydroponic complex. The second one from the han. the member for Port de Graue to the Premier concerning investment to the Sprung Group.

And the third question is from the hon. member for Belleuue, and it is to the han. the Minister of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development concerning rural Newfoundland investment by his department. MR. FUREY: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. L2256 May 14, 1987 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER: A point of order. MR. FUREY: With respect, the hon. the member for Fogo could not b~! here today and I was supposed to ask the Chair at the beginning of the House today if it would be okay if the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Simmons) replaced him in this particular question? MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, order. to that point of MR.

SPEAKER: The han. the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands. MR. SIMMS: The gouernrnent really does not care what happens, but that is a matter that the hon. member should qeal with the Speaker on and not the House. That is a matter that the Speaker deals with. Perhaps he can go in and see the Speaker. It would be the Speak1ar who wouJ.d make that decision. MR. FUREY: By leaue of the House? MR. SIMMS: Go in and haue a Speaker, that is the do. MR. SPEAKER: chat to the best thing to The Late Show will take place at 5:30, so I am sure there is time fo~ that to be resolued. MR. FUREY: Mr.

Speaker, with respect, I--think most members said they haue no problem with that, that the hon. the Leader of the Opposition would replace the House Le.ader. I am sure you can rule on that. That is no problem. No. 42 R2256

MR. SIMMS: You will still have to get the Speaker 1 s agreement. MR. FUREY: Not by leave! MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, the Chair will consult with the Speaker of the House and a ruling will be made shortly. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, that is the appropriate course and I commend you, because it is not for a· member to shuttle back and forth between people who happen to be in the Chair at a given time. The Speaker is an institution. Now, we have just put to the Speaker who happens to be in the Chair right now, the Speaker, a proposal. The Speaker has responded as he should have and we thank him. MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Twillingate. MR. ·w. CARTER : Mr. Speaker, I am not going to take the normal ten minute period, I know others want to have a few words . I think the minister made an interesting observation during his rebuttal to some of th9 comments I made concerning the management plan and how it was this year, divided three ways. I commend the government for doing that. He also alluded to the problems with respect to harvesting the quotas in the 2GH area.

Now, not wishing to give the impression that I have an obsession with respect to the 2GH, and I know there are problems up there in trying to harvest that resource. L2257 May 14, i987 Vol XL I do have an obsession, I suppose, in one way. I want to see our inshore plants operat:ing as close to full capacity as pas sible. Until we can do that, I do not think we will ever have a truly prosperous or successful inshore fishery or an inshore processing operation. But, would the minister give some thought to what I am going to suggest to him?

Maybe when he is consulted on this he should insis .t, if that is the right word to use, that the powers that be in Ottawa think about it to. · Why would this government not, in next year 1 s management plan, when they allocate quotas and when they start divvying up {:he quotas, dispersing it over, say, threE! years, include the 2GH area and maybe insist that 25 per cent of the total quota be harvested in 2GH, 25 per cent in the 2J area, 25 per cent in the FUnk Island Bank area, and, of ~ourse,- the remaining 25 per cent on the Northern Grand Banks?

I believe that if that were done that our fishing effort in the 2GH area would be vastly increased and maybe we would not have a surplus up there. MR . RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Minister of Fisheries . MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I certainly· will giVE! serious thought to that. serious, I am sure, and sincere recommendation from my friend from Twillingate. I think it has a lot of merit and we will give thought to it. I am sure the han. gentleman is aware that the stocks, even through they are probably distant cousins No. 42 R2257

biologically, are managed as two separate stocks, and 2J+3KL is set at 246,000 tons now, with the 10,000 ton redu~tion, and 2GH is set at 20,000 tons. Certainly that is a worthwhile recommendation and one that we will give serious consideration to. Just one other point before I finish responding to the hon . gentleman. We dispatched - I do not know if force is the right word - but we made it part oF our fishing plan last year for our middle distance vessels that they had to do some trips to 2GH. I· must say, Mr.

Speaker, even using gill nets, because we thought that i·t would not be very practical in terms of long lines, the effort was very, very discouraging from an economic perspective. MR. EFFORD: Mr . Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: The hon. the member for "Port de Grave. MR. EFFORD : Thank you, Mr. Speaker . I have a couple of things that I want to in the Resource Estimates concerning the fisheries. I am sure ·the minister will listen while he is out in the corridor. My particular area and my district concentrates mainly on the inshore fishery.

The inshore fishery has been greatly affected over the past number of years by what has been taking place offshore . It is a major problem, and I guess it is due to the overfishing and the quotas and the dragging 'and everything else, although some of the scientists seem to blame it on the temperature of waters and a number of scientific problems. But the fact still remains that L2258 May 14, 1987 Vol XL the inshore fishery is not what it used to be in the local areas around Newfoundland, especially out in my area. The trap fishery has been almost a complete failure.

So it has been really affected by what is taking place offshore by the foreign fishery and by our own Canadian draggers . We have problems with regulations and with licenses. The system has been changed back and forth a number of times and it is now being looked at in a different way because of the major problems in the inshore fishery and because of what is taking place. One of the most serious things that is taking place now, and probably the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Rideout) can answer me and enlighten me when he gets the opportunity, is in the caplin fishery .

The only way to survive for most of the inshore fishermen now is with caplin. If the caplin fails, of course, it is back to hunger strikes as we saw a couple of years ago when people were having to go on television and get down on their hands and knees and beg for food. It . is not necessarily the lack of caplin, but I think it is the market more than anything else.

What is taking place is because of the fishery in Denmark, the Winter fishery, or Norway, wherever it has been, I am not quite sure other than Denmark, the Japanese can get their quotas if the f-ishery is good in ·that particular area in the Wintertime ·which leaves the Newfoundland fishery short in the marketplace. What has has to be guarantee can be Japanese No. 42 to take place is there at least some sort of a from year to year, if it worked out with the through trade relations R2258

or whatever so that, yes, the quota last year was 30,000 metric tons and in order for the Newfoundland fishery to survive and the Newfoundland fishermen to make at least a decent income with the caplin fishery, knowing there is nothing else to fall back on, there has to be some way in which the government and the unions possibly together, can make a deal with the Japanese people to protect the quota from year to year. Already right now the talk is around about the pricing and about· the amount of caplin that is going to be purchased in 1987.

If it comes to a point where you are going to get a substantial drop of 25 per cent or 30 per cent in the markets from 1986 to 1987, that then follows right down through the line and you are going to get a 3 0 .per c en t or 4-0 per c en t drop in the amount of money · which a particular fisherman is going to make for that season. The problem then is the fact that your season is only three to four weeks long seining and trapping. This means it cuts back the amount of money that can be lengthened out over a period time in order for them to receive unemployment insurance.

So, not only do you get the fact that the~ are going to make a substantial amount of money less for the season, you are also going to eliminate a lot of people from obtaining unemployment insurance for the coming Winter. If other species of fish was available, hopefully this year and I heard the minister refer to it earlier that squid - and it looks good - squid will possibly be in in some quantity, according to the researchers from the Department of Fisheries in the Fall of 1987, but we cannot go on the guarantee or L2259. May 14-, 1987 Uol XL the expectations of what is going to happen in the Fall.

We have to try to make the most and the best of what is going to take place in the Spring when the caplin fishery comes in. Now everybody was encouraged last Fall, in the Fall of 1986 when it was reported that there was going to be a market for male caplin in 1987, but whether the fishermen were gain~ to get any advantage out of taking a good price for the male caplin is another question.

Because when the processors buy caplin, they buy a quantity of cap lin, as they have been doing in the past, and they pay for the male and female, whether it is seven or eight cents a pound or whatever the set price is, depending on the quantity and quality, ·the male caplin is taken and thrown away so there has been no cost or no loss to the fishermen.

What we are saying is possibly what is going to happen in - I would say not possibly I would say it is going to happen - if any purchase if done or any sale is done to the male caplin, the fishermen are not going to get any price because they have been bringing them in and the processors are going to say, 11 Well we ·bought them from you last year and we threw {:hem away. 11 So we cannot see that as any additive or supplement to their income For this year, unless it is negoti