April 26, 2004 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY

PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 22

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: We have one statement today by the hon. Member for Humber

Valley.

The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

MS GOUDIE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to once again pay tribute to four residents of Corner Brook who

have accomplished a major feat. On Friday, April 23, the Corner Brook Curling

Club team of: Skip Bas Buckle, Third Bob Freeman, Second Gerry Young and Lead

Harvey Holloway won the 2004 Senior Men's World Curling Championships in

Sweden. The team won the right to represent our country at this event after

becoming Canadian Champions this past February.

Mr. Speaker, on Friday, the Buckle Rink beat team U.S.A. eight to three to go

undefeated in the tournament and claim the gold medal for Canada.

On Saturday they received a hero's welcome upon their return home at Deer

Lake Airport and received a motorcade escort. As well, tonight the Corner Brook

Curling Club is holding a celebration in their honour.

I would also like to extend congratulations to the Corner Brook Curling Club

and residents of the West Coast of the Province. Throughout the last number of

months they have given considerable moral and financial support to the Buckle

Rink that I am sure was greatly appreciated.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of the House of Assembly and all residents of

Newfoundland and Labrador to offer congratulations to our world champions: Bas,

Bob, Gerry and Harvey.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Is the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of

Treasury Board asking leave to make a Member's Statement?

MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, just very briefly, if I could, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The member has leave.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to pass on congratulations to the Southern Shore Shawmut

Fisheries Breakers on winning the Herder Memorial Trophy. I would like to extend

congratulations to the Corner Brook Royals for their valiant effort. My

condolences to the Premier, the Member for Humber East, and also the Member for

Bay of Islands. It was the Southern Shore's fifth time in ten years that they

won it. They have only participated eight years and they won it five. It is a

remarkable record there. My congratulations to each member of the team and to

all members of the other team who put up a very strong effort. It was very

competitive hockey with a full turnout and sellout, which speaks well for hockey

here in our Province.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It saddens me to have to ask questions today, a dark day, as I see it in

Newfoundland and Labrador and a black mark, not only on the government, but on

the whole Province as a result of their actions.

Mr. Speaker, on September 20, 2001, the current Premier addressed the NAPE

convention and said - this is his quote: There is a legacy of neglect and

under-investment in education, health care and social services but my

determination to improve and strengthen the quality of public services is

absolute.

Mr. Speaker, in light of that statement: Does the Premier understand - and

will he now acknowledge - that his recent actions, including today with this

draconian legislation, are, in fact, ruining the quality of public services and

demonstrate that his only determination seems to be to punish anyone who would

insist upon their right to negotiate and to intimidate anyone who does not agree

with his government's right-wing agenda to slash and burn?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, back in September of 2001 I had no way of knowing what kind of a

fiscal mess we were going to be left in in this Province. There was no possible

way of seeing that that government could do the eternal, perpetual damage that

they have done to the people of our Province. What we were left with was a total

fiscal and financial mess. That has been repeated time and time again by the

Royal Commission, by banks throughout the Province, by the federal Minister for

Natural Resources, Mr. John Efford, who said we have been left with a financial

nightmare and was honourable enough to even accept some of the blame for that.

Unfortunately, the hon. members opposite just washed their hands like Pontius

Pilate and say they had absolutely nothing to do with it -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: - nothing to do with it whatsoever.

Mr. Speaker, I had no way of knowing when I talked to NAPE, but what I did

indicate to them was that I was going to do my best to make this a better place

to live. I will continue to live up to that commitment because this is all about

making it a better place, from a health care perspective, from an educational

perspective and from a social perspective. We cannot do that without any money.

You have left us with debt that we are simply drowning in. We have to take

strong measures that -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the Premier now to complete his answer.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We do not like having to do it but we have no choice because we have no

money.

[Disturbance in the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Speaker wants to make it quite clear that people who are visitors in the

gallery are welcome to this Legislature. This Speaker, and other speakers before

me, firmly want to communicate that visitors are always welcome in this House;

however, visitors are reminded that they are not in any way to show approval or

disapproval for anything that takes place on the floor of the House. I ask you

sincerely for your co-operation in that regard.

Thank you very much.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It seems clear that the government's approach is to continue to repeat

false statements in the hope that by some fluke they might become true

statements, just by repetition, because the circumstance he described is just

not true in Newfoundland and Labrador.

The Premier, Mr. Speaker, did talk about making a commitment and keeping

commitments, and I am glad he did. In the same speech, Mr. Speaker, the Premier,

the then Opposition Leader, said, and this is the quote: I make this commitment

to you - this is to the NAPE convention - we will not use the extraordinary

powers of the Legislature, which no other employer has, to undo collective

agreements that public servants have negotiated in good faith - and he said he

would keep the commitments that he made.

I do not think that has anything to do with what he is trying to describe as

the financial circumstance. How does that fit? How does that commitment and that

statement, in his own words, that he was so proud to make then, fit with Bill 18

today, with contract stripping right in the legislation, Mr. Speaker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, when the hon. Leader of the Opposition read out that particular

paragraph, he left out a sentence. I said: I make this commitment to you... -

and the sentence that he left out was - ...my government will respect the

collective bargaining process. We will negotiate fair collective agreements that

the Province can afford, and we will stand by those agreements.

The point that I have made time and time again here in this Legislature, Mr.

Speaker, is that we cannot afford the requests that were being made by the

union. On March 31, in the meeting that myself and the minister had, the

position of the union was: zero, zero, six and six, on a four-year agreement.

Six per cent is $132 million in year three, $132 million in year four, and a new

$132 million, as well, in year four; $396 million. If we were successful in

concluding an agreement with the federal government, whereby the federal

government gave us 100 per cent of all of our offshore oil revenues, I would

then take those revenues, when they hit a peak of $385 million -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the Premier now to finish his answer quickly.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker

- we would take another $11 million from the public Treasury, and we would

hand each and every cent of that over to our public servants.

There are 500,000 people in this Province besides the public sector workers.

We have to look out for them as well, and we have to look out for our children

and grandchildren in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is great to see the Premier restate his real appreciation for the public

employees - not servants - the public employees, who he is now trying to pit

against every other Newfoundlander and Labradorian.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier also said this, and maybe he will find a way around

these words as well, which were his own, same speech, same group: Governments of

the early 1990s - these are the Premier's words - did not try first to exhaust

avenues of co-operation in a joint effort to resolve the financial problems the

government faced. They bulldozed their way through the process and sacrificed

co-operation and trust in the process.

His words, Mr. Speaker, to the NAPE convention. Is the Premier now concerned

that his bulldozing through the process that is going to begin really in earnest

here today and tomorrow, as he uses the power of the Legislature to get what he

could never get by co-operation and negotiation, is he concerned about the

impact that is going to have -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the member now to complete his question.

MR. GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

- and the sacrifice of the co-operation and trust with the public employees

he values so much in the process?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I need to remind the hon. Leader of the Opposition that one of

the drivers of that bulldozer was he, himself, who was in that government at

that particular point in time and rolled back wages and had wage freezes. I

think he forgets that, Mr. Speaker. He has a very, very short memory when it

comes to that, and is very hypocritical when he can stand there and say that.

As well, what we are trying to get through, get the legislation through this

Legislature, is to try and do something about the 7,325 missed appointments in

the hospitals, the 2,835 missed child clinic appointment, the cardiac screening,

the mammograms. That is what we are trying to straighten out.

You have a very short memory, Sir. In April, 2001-

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

This is the House of Assembly. Members have a right to ask questions, to hold

the government accountable. The essence of Parliament is accountability. The

essence of Question Period is that government be held accountable. We must have

co-operation. When members ask questions, they should be relatively silent while

the people in the Administration are attempting to give the answer.

The Premier has about twenty seconds to complete his answer.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. Leader of the Opposition, in April of 2001, Premier Roger Grimes

said he would consider using legislation to get some striking workers back to

their jobs if the health care system shows signs it cannot cope.

If you want to accuse me of bulldozing life safety, then I will accept that

responsibility as Premier of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask members on both sides for their co-operation.

A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I understand the Premier is under considerable stress, and I recognize that.

Mr. Speaker, last year the Premier supported and committed to binding

arbitration for the doctors as an end to a dispute. In a month or so, there is

binding arbitration slated for the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. Is binding

arbitration okay for some people and not okay for other? Is it safe for anybody

or does Bill 18, which is tabled here today, show the new approach from this new

government and indicate that there is going to be binding arbitration for

nobody, under any circumstances, because they cannot turn over control of the

purse to a third party? Which is it, I ask the Premier?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to show the hypocrisy of what is asked here in the question.

Back in March, the former Premier of this Province signed a Memorandum of

Understanding on the Warren report. That was dated, actually, October 29, 2001,

and he said: The study should be completed by March 31, 2002, and the findings

of the study group will be implemented.

He had no time frame. In January, 2003, the Warren report put forth a report,

and in the following budget that Premier of the Province put forth a budget for

$2.5 -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, if they want me to answer -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

It is the right of the Opposition to ask questions. It is the right of the

government to either not answer at all or to decide their answer. They have

every right. What the minister is doing is well within the rules. It is for him

to determine, the government to determine, who answers and what the answer

contains.

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the opportunity to answer, because to implement 1 to 8 of the

Warren Report takes $5.1 million. Two months after that report, that Premier put

in a budget $2.5 million for the Warren Report. This year in the Budget that I

presented in this House, we put in $3.6 million -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister now to complete his answer.

MR. SULLIVAN: - $1.1 million more than he put in that report. Now he is

telling us he put in the report, an acceptable report, that he gave 50 per cent

funding, and we have increased that by 40 per cent. Where is the hypocrisy

there, I ask the Leader of the Opposition?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: I am sure, Mr. Speaker, that the people of the Province

appreciate the clear and concise answer about whether or not binding arbitration

is available to anybody. I am sure they understood the answer perfectly, from

what was just said.

Mr. Speaker, let me give one more quote from the Premier to the NAPE

convention. The quote is this: I believe it is important to respect the rights

of unionized employees - he has his head down now, Mr. Speaker, ducking behind a

piece of paper - while at the same time using the avenues available to us, under

existing laws and collective agreements. The current avenue, Mr. Speaker, under

existing law is binding arbitration.

Let me ask one last time: Why would the Premier not use the existing law,

which he told these people, at their annual meeting, he would do if they voted

for him and he became the Premier, why would he not use the existing law and go

to binding arbitration and leave the existing collective agreement alone, or did

we get the answer from the President of Treasury Board -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member now to complete his question.

- that there is no binding arbitration for anybody ever again?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We are concerned about the health care in our Province and we want immediate

action. I would like to make it clear to him, there is no reference, nothing in

the collective agreement, right now -

MR. BARRETT: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: I mean, the Member for Bellevue - they want an answer and

they are not prepared to accept an answer.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: I will sit down if they don't want an answer.

MR. BARRETT: You are not giving an answer. If you gave the answer, I

would let you stand up.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair again asks all hon. members for their co-operation.

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There were three issues that were outstanding. We spent four days on the

previous weekend dealing with them. One was salary and the second was the Warren

Report. There is no Warren Report in the current collective agreement. In spite

of that, Mr. Speaker, we put 40 per cent more money to deal with janitorial,

secretarial and cleaning in schools than that government put last year in the

Budget; 40 per cent more in spite of not having anything in the agreement.

On sick leave, Mr. Speaker, I will make it clear, there is no concession for

anybody working in the workplace today by this government to take anything away.

In fact, we have added things at different stages of that process that were not

there before, including making temporary employees permanent and -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister now to complete his answer.

MR. SULLIVAN: - numerous other areas that we agreed to give employees an

opportunity to deduct money for car allowances, basically, so it was not a

taxable item. We made numerous changes and we have not asked for one thing that

current employees do not have today.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am sure again the people of the Province respect and appreciate the clarity

of the answer, that there will be no binding arbitration for anybody ever with

this government. I take it that is the answer. That was the question that was

asked.

Mr. Speaker, let me switch to another question. Could the Premier tell us

which precedence he used to draft the unbelievable piece of legislation that is

here before us today as Bill 18? Did he find examples of contract stripping,

which are in this legislation, grossly exaggerated fines, which are in this

legislation, and the firing of supposedly valued public employees, which is in

this legislation, did he find those features in other jurisdictions across

Canada? Where, exactly, were the precedence, or does he have a made-in-person

solution from the one-man show himself, Mr. Speaker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Number one, there is no contract stripping. You know the person who signed

the MOU said the Warren Report will be implemented with no time frame. It could

be fifty years. We put 40 per cent more than you put in your Budget. We have

enhanced the aspects and the principles of the Warren Report over what that

former Premier did when he was in that chair that this Premier is in.

Secondly, on sick leave we have made no changes whatsoever for current

employees. It is false to give the impression that we are contract stripping. We

have looked - there are numerous in jurisdictions if you look at it.

Mr. Speaker, traditionally the -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SULLIVAN: Give me an opportunity.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: Currently, Mr. Speaker, and traditionally in a lot of areas

we have seen an escalation in the amount of fines. Environmental have gone to $1

million. We have seen DFO violations, $1 million. They are examples of today.

There is less tolerance for those things, and there is a movement to higher

levels out in society today. Besides -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister now to complete his answer, quickly.

MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, I will complete.

The Leader of the Opposition has said clearly, something that is absolutely

false, that contract stripping - he is doing something. In fact, he did

something, signed an MOU and funded it less than 50 per cent of what he signed.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: Where is his real thought behind this Warrant Report, I

would like to know?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would gladly, and I am sure all the members would gladly have the President

of Treasury Board, because the Premier obviously does not want to answer any

more of these questions. He does not like the line of questioning anymore. He

has given up on it again today. Maybe he would like to table those other

jurisdictions that he scanned before they put together this draconian piece of

legislation.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier, this Premier, has been given the privilege to

govern Newfoundland and Labrador, not to rule or to control or to run a small

island off the Coast of Florida that Americans are not allowed to go to anymore.

Is the Premier really willing to fire up to 20,000 public sector workers as the

legislation suggests, the valued public employees that he talks about? I ask the

Premier, does he really think that the government, and he personally, could fire

the skilled workers that help government function on a daily basis, or does he

already have, in fact, a hit list compiled of people who dare to speak out

against him?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the member now to complete his question, quickly.

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The legislation sets down certain terms and requirements and the worker

decides if they will comply with returning to work. I will use an example -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SULLIVAN: Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, under essential service agreement -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, I am asking members for their co-operation. The question has been

asked. It is a very serious question, and the minister is attempting to give a

very serious answer. I ask the minister to continue his answer.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will use an example. Yesterday, under an essential service agreement, if

someone does not report under an essential service agreement their job is gone.

They are dismissed. That is there and it is accepted by both sides. Yesterday,

after three hours of asking people to come, they still were not in on the job.

We waited for over three hours and then we went back again because they

indicated they were told not to come in and fulfill the requirements of the

essential services agreement. That choice is theirs when they are asked to make

it. If they do not report to a job that is there, an essential service - the law

says that if you do not come to work you are dismissed in the job. That is a

fair and reasonable legislation there -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister now to complete his answer.

MR. SULLIVAN: - and putting it in legislation. It is a serious piece of

legislation, Mr. Speaker, it is no joke. Legislation is brought in for a

purpose: to protect people, to ensure that the Province gets run, and the proper

work is done. That is what laws are all about in this Province.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, on a supplementary.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The answer, again, demonstrated better than I ever could, that the penalties

in this legislation are both vindictive and punitive. It is clear that the

Premier's one-man show approach to this whole process is killing morale in our

public sector and will destroy it for years to come.

Mr. Speaker, the question is this: How does the Premier feel that fines of up

to $250,000 a day and the firing of our so-called valued public sector employees

will help improve his already severely damaged relationship with the unions?

Does the Premier really personally feel that these levels of punishment and

penalty are just?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we were elected to govern this Province. We were given a mandate

from the people to run this Province on their behalf. That is exactly what we

are trying to do. We cannot have a situation, as we have had over here the last

couple of weeks, where we have had our managers out there on a parking lot,

refused admission to come to work. This is not about 20,000 people. This is

about 520,000 people and future generations. We cannot allow anarchy to prevail

in our Province. This is a Legislature, this is where the laws are made. If

people choose to break the law than they get fined. Foreign overfishing fines

are as much as $1 million. Environmental fines are as much as $1 million. This

fine would be against a union for advising its people not to come to work and

that is $250,000.

What the members of this Legislature need to know, Mr. Speaker, is that part

of the reason why the clause is in this legislation, for people to choose to

terminate their own jobs, is because those very people have phoned us, as a

government, and said: Please put that in the legislation so that we can go back

to work because we want to go back to work.

There are requests that came to us from union members, asking to have that in

the legislation. They actually phoned our office. That is why we are doing it.

We are doing it to support them and we are doing it to keep this Province as a

good place to live, for people who live here right now and for future

generations. That is why we are doing it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable. I am glad that the Premier does speak from

time to time and answer a few questions so that we can get to have a real look

at the real leadership and the new approach. They needed the managers so badly

last week, they had to cross picket lines so they could sit in the galleries so

others could not get in.

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that the Premier has not thought this legislation

through to any degree at all. The penalties are draconian, heavy-handed,

punitive and vindictive, and you will find no such penalties anywhere in any

similar legislation in the free world. The Premier has ensured that the

penalties, once assessed, cannot even be appealed.

I ask, again, of the Premier: If an employee happens to be sick on the day

the legislation is passed, and are supposed to go back to work, are they going

to be dismissed or can they get a chance to speak to somebody and explain why

they did not show up? It is not in the bill.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and the President of

Treasury Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to add that the bill was given notice. It has not been

introduced even in this House at the moment and there is an opportunity, I can

tell him, in dealing with that bill to answer questions. We did not have an

opportunity to introduce that bill in this House, other than to give notice. We

did give the courtesy to the Leader of the Opposition for him to have a copy of

this in advance. I only have a draft. I have not seen the final bill. I do not

have it, I might add.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time assigned for Question Period is slipping by.

A few seconds to the minister to complete his answer.

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, I have a copy of the bill that went to print.

The bill is tabled and circulated by the House of Assembly here, and it does not

help matters much when the Opposition are trying to inflame - the Leader of the

Opposition, and some of his people, spent a good part of Thursday, I think, with

the NAPE council, in their offices. That does not help matters, and coming back

here inflaming the situation. We want a co-operative environment here. We want

people to come back to work, and we are going to be, as any government would be,

reasonable -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister now to complete his answer.

MR. SULLIVAN: - in wanting its employees back to work.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Under the rotation we have, with time assigned to the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi and his colleague, I now have to move to that member.

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Premier.

This afternoon, the Minister of Finance has acknowledged that they are

concerned about health care and they want immediate action. The Premier himself

has listed a number of issues and health care needs that are unmet. I want to

ask the Premier to acknowledge that he has made a choice, that he has made a

decision, not to use the existing legislation, the provisions of

Section 30 of

the Public Service Collective Bargaining Act, which could be passed this

afternoon by a simple resolution of the House, and instead has chosen to impose

dismissal, and to take benefits that have been negotiated, fought for and struck

for, in the past instead.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. member knows that no benefits have been taken for current employees

in this agreement. That is absolutely incorrect. What I will acknowledge is,

over the last month we have done absolutely everything that we can to negotiate

a fair and reasonable and affordable agreement with our public sector employees.

Myself and the minister have met together on two separate occasions. The

minister has spent four days, himself, in intense negotiations to try and reach

an agreement. We have exchanged proposals, where there have been moving targets.

They are up, they are down, they are sideways, they are all over the place. It

is hard to try and track where they were in the negotiation, but we stayed the

course and we kept presenting our offers. We did everything we can. As recently

as last Wednesday, we went down and we showed flexibility. We presented three

variations on the three outstanding issues. We did everything we could to

achieve a fair and reasonable and affordable collective agreement.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, the Premier talks about money and the financial

issues this time. The Minister of Finance talked about health care. I want to

ask the Premier, why, if he is so concerned about money, he did not do what the

Nova Scotia Conservative government did the other day: Increase the corporate

tax rate in their province, and took back tax increases - tax breaks - two

things that we suggested they should have done, which would have given $130

million a year for this Budget, instead of doing what he is doing now, which is

taking it out on the backs of public sector workers?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We are one of the heaviest taxed jurisdictions in this country, and we want

to have fair and reasonable taxation for our individuals on an individual basis.

The former government went through two decreases in personal income tax so we

can be competitive with other parts of this country. On Corporate Income Tax,

over four years ago we were collecting $50 million. Look at today's Budget. We

are budgeted for $183 million, over a 400 per cent increase in just a four-to

five-year period.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, time for one

short supplementary.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question, again to the Premier, is: Why is he choosing now to impose terms

and conditions of employment on public sector employers? Is it because he has

failed to reach a collective agreement? Is it that he cannot negotiate a deal,

or is it because the public services of this Province cannot be met? Can you

tell us the answer to that? Are you imposing it because you want your deal to be

implemented, or are you imposing it because we have problems in delivering

public sector services?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: There is a very, very straightforward answer to that.

We are now, today, proceeding with legislation because we have to. We have been

informed by our health care sectors that we have a very serious situation on our

hands. Myself and the two ministers met last Thursday with the physicians and

also with the health boards. We were convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that

we had a very serious situation. We had a balloon that was prepared to burst.

The other thing which is different between myself and this government and the

past government, is that we are not prepared to give away in order to achieve

deals. We are just not prepared to do it. That is the problem.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time assigned for Question Period has expired.

MR. GRIMES: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to raise a point of order with

respect to two comments made by the President of Treasury Board during Question

Period. I believe this is the appropriate time to raise them, at the end of

Question Period.

The first one is, he made a reference - again, a false reference, as he did

before - about meetings I attend, suggesting I was in the premises, the NAPE

building, I think he said, on Thursday. If he will check, he will find I was

nowhere near the NAPE building. We were here on Thursday, trying to get the

Legislature open, trying to get to....

Check Hansard. Loyola, you always forget - excuse me, Mr. Speaker, I am

sorry. The Member for Ferryland always forgets very quickly what he just said.

He got it wrong again, Mr. Speaker. It took him a full day to apologize the last

time. I hope it will not take him a full day to apologize this time.

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, maybe he might like to check with the Government House

Leader about the status of his own piece of legislation, Bill 18, which was

provided to us. The information I have is that it was provided to us so that we

could review it, now that it was finalized by the Cabinet late yesterday.

Finalized, not a draft that the President of Treasury Board just talked about,

trying to make it look - this is not final, this is only a draft; I have not

even seen the final copy of it.

Which is it? We are sitting here with the House Leader for the government

suggesting to us, we would like to give you the bill so you can get prepared for

the debate - which we plan to do, we are planning to do. We are getting legal

advice, we are getting other advice, and we will participate in the debate. The

President of Treasury Board stands up, in answer to a question, and says: It is

only a draft. I do not even have the final copy myself.

Mr. Speaker, for purposes of clarity in this House, I rise on the point of

order to ask that the President of Treasury Board apologize for misinformation

in the first instance and give us the right answer. Someone for the government

tell us, the bill that we were presented with this morning, is that the bill we

are going to be asked to debate or not?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, I will clarify both. On the second point, I have indicated since it went

to the printer it comes to the House of Assembly to be distributed and therefore

is not distributed there. That was the intent. It went through Cabinet's

approval. There is no change in the wording of the bill. It is just that I do

not have the bill since it came back from the printer because the House

distributes the bill to everybody. I hope that point is clear.

The first point he indicated - the first point I made, Mr. Speaker, and

Hansard will show, I do not recall saying: he met at NAPE headquarters. I said

with NAPE council. Regardless, I withdraw the remark, and you can look in

Hansard. I do not think I said it but I will withdraw the remark regardless.

That will settle it, I hope, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Thank you very much.

To the point of order. There is obviously a disagreement between the members,

and the remedy having been offered by the minister. Therefore, there isn't any

further work to be done relative to the point of order.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Motion 6, Bill 18, first reading.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of the Treasury Board have leave to introduce a bill

entitled,

An Act To Provide For The Resumption and the Continuation of Public

Services. (Bill 18)

Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. Minister of Finance and

President of Treasury Board. shall have leave to introduce said bill?

All those in favour, `aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: Carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to

introduce a bill, "An Act To Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of

Public Services," carried. (Bill18)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a

first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a first time?

All those in favour, `aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: Carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of

Public Services. (Bill 18)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the

said bill be read a second time? Now? Tomorrow?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 18 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Motion 1, we move back to the Budget Debate for the remainder of the

afternoon.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion 1, the Budget Debate.

The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'anse au Clair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today, in the House, to speak to the Budget and to the motion of

non-confidence that has been put forward.

Mr. Speaker, I will say, right from the offset, that this is not a Budget I

will be supporting in this Legislature. I will go into some details as to the

reasons for that.

I want to start off today by talking, first of all, about how the numbers in

the Budget have been presented, and how they have been presented by the

government and by the members opposite. Mr. Speaker, first of all this year,

what we have seen is the government going out and looking for an independent

auditor, because they said this would be an independent, non-biased,

non-partisan look at the entire fiscal position of the Province of Newfoundland

and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, the government did not trust their own numbers within the

department, within the civil service and the public service of the Province. I

guess we see the evidence of some of that today when you look at what is

happening. They hired an independent auditor by the name of Michael Gourley. Mr.

Speaker, it is only in the aftermath of this particular audit being conducted

that we, in Newfoundland and Labrador, actually see who Mr. Gourley really is, a

former deputy minister of the Mike Harris government in Ontario, an individual,

Mr. Speaker, who is being challenged through the courts right now for the

misinterpretation of numbers and budgets and fraud within the Province of

Ontario. This is the independent PC associated former deputy minister before the

courts in the Province of Ontario who has been brought in to do an independent

assessment of the budget and the numbers in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, I have heard other people in the media, the public - this has

not been lost on the public, the fact that there are numbers presented in terms

of where the deficit is in this Province that are inaccurate. It is debatable

and we will debate it. There are people out there who are saying that this

government trumped up the numbers in the Budget, Mr. Speaker, so they wouldn't

have to honour agreements with their public servants, so they wouldn't have to

spend money in needed health care and other services out there in the Province,

and that by doing so they were going to the negotiating table without all the

proper, all the factual, information being distributed to the public.

Mr. Speaker, I am one of those who feel that they have trumped up the figures

in the Budget and that the numbers are not nearly what they are making them out

to be. Mr. Speaker, this is unfortunate because it is this play of numbers and

this image that the Premier and his government is portraying of Newfoundlanders

and Labradorians, all across the country, that is affecting everything we do

here at home. Mr. Speaker, we have spent our whole lives trying to convince the

people of Canada that we are a have-Province, that we are Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians who are educated, who have the ability to run our own affairs and

to stand on our own two feet when the time permits it.

Do you know what this government had done, Mr. Speaker? They have created an

image across this country that we are in a bankrupt position, that the people in

Newfoundland and Labrador do not know how to run their own affairs, that we ran

the entire Province right into the ground. That is the message they are sending

across the country. That is the image they are creating in the minds of the

people of Canada when they look at Newfoundland and Labrador. Do you know what

it is doing to us here at home? It is demoralizing our people. That is what it

is doing, because if you were told often enough that you are no good and that

you cannot do it right, you will start believing that you cannot do it right. I

learned that lesson at a very early age, Mr. Speaker. Most of us who went

through the school system learned that: if you are told something often enough,

you will believe it. Well, this government is telling the people of this

Province that you do not deserve to have wage increases, you do not deserve to

have proper public services, you are no good at running the affairs of this

Province and contributing to the affairs of this Province. That is the message,

Mr. Speaker. That is the message they are getting to the people of this Province

and the message that they are getting to the people of Canada, is that we do not

know what we are doing in Newfoundland and Labrador and we run everything into

the ground. These are the messages that this government is putting out there.

Mr. Speaker, today we have, out in this Province, over 40,000 people in

Newfoundland and Labrador today who do not have a paycheque. There is a problem

with that. These are people who want to work. These are people who have trained

in occupational fields and have committed their whole lives to serving the

people of the Province. Right now, today, we have almost 20,000 people out there

in the fishing industry alone who are not employed. We have people who have not

been on the water this year; plant workers who do not know when they are going

to work; fishermen who do not have a price for crab, do not have a price for

shrimp, whose unemployment insurance benefits are all running out. These are

almost 20,000 people today, in this Province, who do not have an industry to

participate in because it has been mocked so much in Newfoundland and Labrador,

because there is no effort being put into trying to straighten it out and get

these people back on the water and get the workers back in the plant. That is

the problem.

Then we have 20,000 public servants, some of the lowest paid public servants

in this Province today and their families, who are out on the streets, who have

been almost a month without a paycheque. Do you think they can defy legislation?

They cannot defy legislation. Some of them are only making $14,000 or $16,000 a

year. They have children in schools. They have kids in university, and most of

them have a spouse who is probably on the picket line next to them. They have

car payments. They have mortgages. They are trying to live as regular, ordinary

citizens of this Province. How can they defy legislation that tells them: If you

do not go back to work you will lose your job? It is not like they can walk down

the street and pick up another job, Mr. Speaker. They are lucky to have the one

they have. That is the kind of hard-nosed tactics that this government is

putting forward to the people of the Province today. Saying to some of the

poorest civil servants and public servants in this Province who are trying to

just do a good job for their employer and do a good job for the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador, and now they will pay the price. They will pay the

ultimate price, of not only losing the freedom to speak and the freedom to act

on their own behalf if they do not agree to something, but they will be

legislated back. They will have legislated concessions. They will have

legislated wages. That is what is happening, Mr. Speaker. It is absolutely

shameful, is what it is. It is shameful when you know there is a government that

has other options available to it.

Now, I will tell you something, the public servants in this Province and the

people, the public at large, are not stupid. We might owe a few dollars in this

Province. We may have somewhat of a deficit but we are not stupid. We can see

through the mist and the clouds that are being created by the members opposite.

Do you know what we see, Mr. Speaker? We do not see the best interest of people

being looked after here. What we see is a long ways from it, an awful long ways

from it.

Mr. Speaker, we have a government that had options available to it. I will

start back with the Budget piece again, because they are hiding behind the

numbers. They are trying to convince the public and the public servants of this

Province that we cannot afford to have you on our payroll, so 4,000 of you must

go. They are telling them that we cannot afford to give them wage increases

because we are running the massive deficits.

The Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi has just asked the Minister of Finance

again today: Why didn't you use the option of raising corporate income tax? I

never heard such lame answers in all my life; never in all my life. The Premier

did not stand to answer. The Minister of Finance stood to answer.

We are paying 5 per cent in corporate income taxes in this Province. Our

neighbours in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick are paying 15 per cent to 16 per

cent in corporate income taxes.

Last week the Nova Scotia government brought down a budget. Do you know what

they did to get new revenue? They increased corporate taxes again. We have lots

of room to manoeuver on corporate taxes that could have brought in probably $65

million to $70 million to that government, but no, Mr. Speaker, because the

right-wing agenda does not look at taxing corporations and increasing tax to big

business. No, Mr. Speaker, the right-wing agenda is to plug the public service,

put them out on strike, let them wait in the streets, cut 4,000 jobs, and close

down school boards. That is the agenda of the members opposite. Those are the

principles upon which their party is founded and upon which their government

will govern.

Mr. Speaker, they do not believe in taxing the big business. They do not

believe in bringing our corporate tax on parity with Nova Scotia and New

Brunswick. No, Mr. Speaker, because that would have given us probably $60

million or $70 million right off the bat. Why do that? Why not? The Minister of

Finance gets up and says: We cannot do that because we may drive corporations

out.

What a joke, Mr. Speaker. Do you think that IOC is going to pull up and move

out of Labrador West because we jack up the corporate income tax by a couple of

percentage points? Do you think they are going to close down Hibernia and Terra

Nova, and pack it all in and go home because we are going to raise the corporate

taxes? These companies are making billions of dollars in profit on an annual

basis. They are not going to close her up, pack her in and take off because the

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador tries to achieve parity on corporate

taxes with other provinces in Atlantic Canada.

Actually, Mr. Speaker, I would not doubt but they are sitting back and

laughing at us right now, absolutely laughing at us, when they can go up in Nova

Scotia, develop the oil and gas industry, come down here and end up paying 10

per cent less in corporate taxes for doing the same thing. You cannot hide

behind the numbers when there are other options that are available to you, Mr.

Speaker.

Just look at what is happening, the other option that government had. Putting

aside the numbers, putting aside the fact that there were other ways to generate

revenue for the Province and for the government, they also had the option, Mr.

Speaker, to go to arbitration. That option was available to them. Did they take

it? No, they did not, Mr. Speaker. They did not take it. Do you know why they

did not take it? Because they said that this government will not turn over the

cheque books of the Province to an arbitrator.

Mr. Speaker, let me tell the members opposite something. There are collective

agreements in this Province. There is a Collective Bargaining Act that is

negotiated between governments and unions. It is

an act that is developed and

signed in good faith, and one that is expected to be followed. Do you know what

we have in this Province, Mr. Speaker? Just let me summarize for you what has

taken place.

First of all, we had a government who walked into a negotiation, who said,

basically, this is what we are prepared to offer. They put their offer on the

table and the unions counteracted; but, Mr. Speaker, there was no give in this

negotiation. First of all, the government put an offer on the table that not

only asked for a wage freeze for two years, which I understand the unions were

quite supportive of, in agreement of, in the beginning, but they tried to roll

back concessions that these unionized workers spent the last twenty years trying

to build up in this Province. You do not walk into a negotiation and say: This

is what I am prepared to offer you - less than you had last year, less than you

had two years ago, less than you had three years ago. No, Mr. Speaker, that is

not the way you conduct negotiations. That is the way this government conducts

negotiations.

As soon as the unions, on behalf of their members, could not accept the

concessions that the government laid before them, what happened, Mr. Speaker?

The government walked away. No arbitration, no communication, slapped the

legislation into the House: You defy it and you lose your job.

MR. REID: Never even spoke to his caucus about it.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I do not even know if he spoke to his caucus. I do

not even know, because on the day that he walked out of the hotel and went to

the media and said - he and the Minister of Finance - that we are going to

legislate them, the Government House Leader did not know, and actually said that

it was not true. Five minutes later, the announcement was in the media.

Does that sound like a group of caucus members who are informed, Mr. Speaker?

I do not think they are informed. I do not think they are informed. They are

just dragging along on the coattails over there. They are not speaking up for

the people who elected them. They are not speaking out. I do not hear one of

them in this Legislature stand up and say that we should not be legislating them

back to work, but they have had the calls. I know they have had the calls, and I

know they have had the e-mails, but they are not responding to them.

I am going to tell you, Mr. Speaker, that what that government is doing is

not right, and it is shameful that every single last thirty-three of them there

could sit back and tap their desks during the Budget and applaud what was about

to happen in this Province. It is absolutely unbelievable, Mr. Speaker.

I know a lot of the members over there, and I knew what they stood for before

they sat on that side of the House. I knew what they stood for. They were

standing up for people in their former lives, yes they were, but where are they

now? They are not standing up for people now. No, instead, they have laid lame

and quiet since January 5, since the day the Premier went before the public on

the cameras in this Province, making his address to the people of Newfoundland

and Labrador, from the first evening when he announced there would be a wage

freeze, the first thing to incite the public service in this Province to do

exactly what had happened in the days that followed. Where were all the members

over there? Not one of them saying a word.

Then, the Budget comes down and what is the first thing that is announced in

the Budget? The fact that 4,000 jobs will go in the public service in

Newfoundland and Labrador. Do you know something? We have not heard one of them

speak out against it. Not one of them over there have I heard stand up for the

people they represent, and speak out against it. No, but I heard them the day

the Budget came down tapping their desks on the other side every few minutes for

every single announcement. They were tapping their desks that day, Mr. Speaker.

If that did not incite the strike and incite the unions to take the positions

that they have taken in this Province, I do not know what would.

Mr. Speaker, it is so evident that the reason that we are here today, about

to bring legislation into this House to legislate public workers back to work,

is simply because that government and their leader's attempt at public

bargaining is the most shameful, deplorable attempt at public bargaining I have

ever seen in this Province to date. Not only did they go out and try to divide

and conquer the union, but the leader, the Premier, went out to the picket lines

with his name signed on a deal, trying to convince public servants in this

Province to defy their unions, to break the union movement. That is what he did.

That was his first attempt. I bet he would not go out there today, though, with

a signed piece of paper trying to offer them an agreement. I did not see him out

in the parking lot today when all of this lobbying was going on.

Then, Mr. Speaker, not only did they bungle the negotiations, not only did

they fail at the attempts to negotiate, not only did they incite the workers of

this Province by portraying false numbers on budgets by announcing wage freezes,

by laying off public servants, but then, when they tried to exercise their

rights, their right to be able to protest, their right to be able to speak

freely in this Province, they were forbidden from sitting in the galleries. I

walked into this House of Assembly last week, Mr. Speaker - and I have been here

almost nine years - and for the first time I saw managers, the heads of

departments within the public service, filling the seats of the gallery. Never

before in the nine years I have been here have I seen it. Never before. Do you

know what it was? It was an attempt to keep the public out, to keep the strikers

out, an attempt to stifle them and not allow them to express their views.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave to clue up.

Leave has been granted.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you for the opportunity to clue up. I am going to clue up by saying

this, that it is absolutely ridiculous, it is absolutely shameful that the

members opposite could legislate some of the poorest and lowest paid public

servants in this Province back to work, and to say to them: You will lose your

job if you defy this act.

Mr. Speaker, these are honest, hard-working, descent people whose only

objective is to earn a living for them and their families and to serve the

public of this Province, and to do it with respect and with dignity, something

that this government is prepared to strip clean from these workers. It is

absolutely ridiculous! They are hiding behind the numbers that are false,

absolutely false, and they are letting their corporate friends walk away

scot-free without paying a dime while they balance their books on the backs of

honest, hard-working people in this Province, and for those reasons I will not

support this Budget, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin-Placentia West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This is my first opportunity to speak at length in this House and it gives me

great pleasure to do so today. In doing so I would like to speak to some issues

as they relate to my district, and then I would like to connect them to what I

see are some of the positives in this Budget.

As I stand here today I do so with mixed emotions. First, I feel quite

humbled knowing that this great House has been inhabited by so many influential

people in this Province. I reflect on the number of decisions that have been

made in this House that have impacted on this Province, and as I do so, I

realize that the fate of this Province has been placed on the shoulders of the

people who sit in this House.

On the other hand, I am certainly somewhat troubled today when I realize that

I have family, friends, and other fellow Newfoundlanders who are placed in the

situation that they have been placed in over the past number of weeks. So, as I

make this speech today I find that I am forced to reflect on my role as an

individual in this House, but, as well, I reflect on my role as part of a ruling

government. It is then that I realize a couple of things. First, that we do live

in a democracy, for as unfortunate as it has been that we have people who are

out on the streets, it is equally a fortunate situation that people have been

able to express themselves. Now it comes to a time when issues related to health

care and education, and other general matters related to the public, it is time

now that this government has to take a stand in the best interest of public

safety. Having said these things, I recognize that this government has many

tough decisions to make. I believe, in the end, the majority of people will

realize and will fully endorse the government's stance in regards to this

Budget.

So, Mr. Speaker, from the farthest reaching point in my district, South East

Bight on through to communities referred to in our area as down over the road,

and through Marystown and into Burin and their surrounding communities, I

recognize the expectations, the hopes and the aspirations for the future that

have been placed upon our shoulders. Indeed, it is hope and enthusiasm that was

eagerly bestowed upon us on October 21, 2003. It is a government that I am

pleased to be a part of and I want to ensure the residents of Burin-Placentia

West that I am here to represent them.

I wish to sincerely thank the residents of Burin-Placentia West for giving me

the mandate for the next four years. At this time I would also like to thank my

family, my wife and my five children, because they were very supportive of me

moving into this journey in my life and again, I would sincerely like to thank

them.

Mr. Speaker, I am a product of resettlement. The program of the late 1960s -

in October of 1968 my family moved to the Town of Marystown. My mother, carting

our few belongings and nine children - the youngest being one month of age and

I, being the oldest, at fourteen - left our community in Grole, Hermitage Bay.

The member across the way from Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune would certainly

recognize where that community is. It is about three miles away from his home

community.

We began our journey via coastal boat from Terrenceville to Marystown. We

then - all ten of us - piled into a taxi owned by Mr. Ambrose Stacey and we were

delivered to apartment sixty-two in Marystown; in the housing area

section of

the town. My father had found employment at the fish plant, and coming from a

smaller remote community, this community certainly presented us with many new

challenges and many new sights and sounds. However, despite all the transitions,

we did survive and despite all the adjustments and the manner in which the

original resettled people and their offspring have distributed themselves across

the district, we are now an integral, productive part of the communities in the

district. This district has been our home for thirty-eight years.

Personally, I left the Peninsula for a number of years to attend school and I

spent two years in Cartwright, Labrador. In 1978 I returned and for the

remainder, up until October, I pursued my teaching career and my educational

career in the district.

Mr. Speaker, during the early days of the 1970s and 1980s work was at a

premium. The local fish plant in Marystown was operating at capacity, as was the

fish plant in Burin. The inshore fishery was lucrative with several communities

having small fish plants. The Marystown shipyard was underway, and with the

production and repair of deep sea trawlers work was aplenty and the economy

strong. Unfortunately, as it relates to the fishery, insight at the time was

only immediate, and the long-term sustainability of the resource that was

thought to be unlimited was limited. With the downturn in the fishery in the

1990s, devastation struck the South Coast of Newfoundland and the District of

Burin-Placentia West, as it did the entire Province.

However, Mr. Speaker, I think it is important that we acknowledge that the

people of this district and of the Burin Peninsula, not to be snowed under, so

to speak, once again came forward to attest to the character of Newfoundlanders

and Labradorians. The residents of Burin-Placentia West began to take ownership

of their own destiny. The larger centres began to diversify. Burin, with the

fish plant, continuing to play an integral role in the life of the community and

moving into secondary processing, also began to build a future that involved the

rich history of the town.

Tourism became an attraction that sees people visit the area from across the

Province, from across the Nation, and, indeed, from across the World. If you

want to see a sampling of this rich local talent, show up at around 7:00 p.m. on

a Wednesday at the Old Colony Trust and I can assure you that you will be

impressed with the surroundings as well as the talent.

Marystown, through such groups as the Chamber of Commerce, began to promote

the possibilities within the business sector. Mr. Speaker, through ventures

related to recreation, in particular sports recreation, the fisheries, ship

construction and offshore oil related industry, the Town of Marystown along with

its surrounding communities, despite the challenges, continued to survive, grow

and develop. The Marystown fish plant, through companies such as Fishery

Products International, are presently restructuring their production. I feel

confident that in the coming years there will be a stable, viable workforce

related to this facility.

At present, with the Cow Head fabrication centre operating to capacity with

preparatory work with the White Rose oil development and with over 1,000 people

working on site, the area is thriving like it has not seen for many years. The

future will hopefully see further work in this field, again providing an

environment that will see other investors in the oil industry have work

completed in this area.

The potential of Mortier Bay is tremendous. Whether it be in the oil related

sector, ship building or fish production, the potential benefits of Mortier Bay

and the possible spinoffs it could produce in terms of employment and business

to the entire Burin Peninsula is immense.

Mr. Speaker, the communities in the northern part of the district, one being

Baine Harbour, which I am pleased to have called my home for the past

twenty-five years, cling to their talents. Whether it be in fisheries, carpentry

or construction, those living in the communities continue to sustain themselves

quite well and will tell you that despite a declining population they intend to

be there for years to come.

We, with decision-making powers, need to understand that it was these

communities that made Newfoundland and Labrador. We must also realize that they

continue to shape this Province and will do so into the future. In fact, in a

recent interview, I heard the Mayor of St. John's stating that while St. John's

and the Avalon region are experiencing a growth, if there are concerns in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador, he stated, as a Province we should all be concerned.

I hope all the people of the Province see it in this same light.

Mr. Speaker, it is with this in mind that I make reference to the Budget

initiatives that will hopefully serve us extremely well. As I continue to speak

with family and friends across my district and across the Province, I sense a

bitterness. Far too many of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are bitter

with the lack of return we have received from our resources. They are bitter

about the manner in which our resources have been managed, and they are bitter

about the perceived giveaways that have happened time and time again. During our

election campaign we certainly heard this, and I feel it is a topic of

conversation in individual households.

Mr. Speaker, it is now with hope that the residents of this Province look to

this government who have campaigned on the slogan "the new approach"

to get back what is rightfully ours and, equally as important, that we not let

slip away any future developments. The residents of this Province look to a

positive, prosperous future with this government. The new approach will

hopefully result in fair and equitable treatment from the federal government.

So, Mr. Speaker, what better rationale can we want than to have these types

of activities that we see happening in Marystown, related to the offshore,

happening on a larger scale across this Province? What better rationale could we

have for lifting the abandonment that so many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians

have felt due to the loss of revenue? So it is with opportunity, I guess, that

we look to the Ottawa office, the Newfoundland and Labrador Office of

Federal-Provincial Relations, and hopefully a better return on our resources.

If I may, Mr. Speaker, let me relay a personal experience. What better

rationale could there be than to reap the benefits and rewards that would see

our people return to this Province? Just a couple of weeks ago, I am pleased to

say, one of my sons returned to this Province. In the next short while his wife

will return and, better still, so will my grandchild. Mr. Speaker, this is

reason enough for me, as I am sure it would be for so many parents and

grandparents of this Province, for the Ottawa office, one that will hopefully

see our people get their just return for the resources and see more of our

children and grandchildren return to this Province.

I am certain that the people will look to the Rural Secretariat, which will

report to Minister Dunderdale, as a renewed commitment to rural Newfoundland and

Labrador. This department, coupled with the business portfolio led by the

Premier, will support the small business sector that offers so much possibility

for the rural areas of this Province. Again, what better rationale for such a

position than sustaining and developing these smaller rural communities?

Mr. Speaker, as I say this, I think of a gentleman who has a cupboard door

business begun in our district. This gentleman now employs three people and is

looking at expanding his business so that he can employ more people and thus

keep more people in our smaller communities.

Mr. Speaker, as this government continues with an agenda of openness and

transparency, the people of this Province look to a fiscal and social

responsibility that will see the future of this Province on a sound footing with

a productive future. In line with this agenda, there are tough decisions to be

made. When we talk of restructuring in areas such as education, and in

particular school boards, I am looking at the impact that such a decision will

have on many of my friends and former colleagues.

While many realize that restructuring in this particular area was inevitable,

once the stark reality hits, it can be devastating. I would like to remind those

who criticized the government for restructuring of boards that over the past

five years, in our district alone - I am talking the school district of the

Burin Peninsula - four of the major schools were closed. This can be said the

same across the Province - devastating, in fact, but people have adjusted and

moved onward.

Mr. Speaker, education has been a lifelong career for me, and I assure the

people of Burin- Peninsula West that it will remain forefront in my actions. If

we look to the Budget, we will see the commitment of the government to

education. While we would like to maintain all the teachers that we presently

have, we realize that, with declining enrollments, there will be reductions.

With the Sparkes-Williams report suggesting that 365 teaching units be taken

from the system, I feel that a reduction of 256 units this year and the

remaining 109 being removed in the following year is being well received. Many

will also be pleased that these overhanging numbers will finally be dealt with.

Teacher cuts this year within the District of Burin-Placentia West have been

minimal, and I believe education will be delivered in an effective, efficient

manner.

Mr. Speaker, these initiatives, along with other initiatives, will impact

positively on the children of our Province. The Ministerial Council on Early

Childhood Education recognizes the importance of a good start. The foundation to

a sound education starts with the youngest of age. It is why I am pleased and

fully supportive of this initiative. Equally, there is the important recognition

of co-operation across different government departments. This is something that

I personally feel will improve fiscal responses within the Province.

Mr. Speaker, the investment in "Healthy Children - Healthy Schools"

will see the Department of Health and the Department of Education jointly

address issues related to schools. Again, this speaks to the desire of this

government to have departmental co-operation. Likewise, the $500,000 to maintain

the Kids Eat Smart Foundation speaks to the importance again of a healthy start

and, in this case, a good start to every day through support for the breakfast

program and continuing on throughout the day with support of lunch programs.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased with the White Paper on Post-Secondary

Education, issues which will address matters related to affordability and

accessability, along with enhancing employment prospects. The outcome of this

investigation will certainly result in measures that will hopefully please the

youth of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, there are many other initiatives that I feel will

benefit the people of this Province. I am particularly interested in matters

related to health care and seniors, and I look forward to speaking on these

matters in coming days.

Mr. Speaker, from the beautiful, remote community of South East Bight on

through to the oldest community of Burin, let me say it is an honour to serve in

this House and to represent the people of Burin-Placentia West. We are a people

who exemplify the tenacity and determination that so many people in communities

have displayed in this Province for so many years.

Under this government we have vowed and will dare to look differently at the

future. The people expect and deserve no less. With this challenge comes the

need for co-operation. I feel confident that the people of Burin-Placentia West

are accepting of this challenge and they will work with me and my government to

ensure a vibrant, viable future.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today I want to stand and say that I - in support of the non-confidence

motion, and to go into some of the highlights of why I am unable to support this

present Budget.

Mr. Speaker, to begin with, I want to say that this Budget was crafted by the

leader who is the Premier of this Province. I wonder, from day to day, can we

really believe and are we really debating the true and only Budget? Because one

day something is cancelled, and the next day it is placed on hold. Then the

items that were placed on hold, we learn that they have been deferred. When you

look at this Budget you have to really size up where all of this came from and

the individual who is behind it. When he decided to run for the leadership of

this party and to become Premier of this Province, he asked that, he would love

- the time had come for him to give back to this Province what he had received

from the Province. I have to say, Mr. Speaker, if what we are seeing over the

last couple of weeks is what he received from this Province, he is giving back

in return, it is a sad day for the people of this Province.

He also told us, Mr. Speaker, that he would build solid, fundamental policies

to govern this Province that he acquired over thirty years in the private

sector. He promised us of a new leadership -

MS FOOTE: A new approach.

MR. BUTLER: New, real leadership; a new approach. I doubt, Mr. Speaker,

what our people are facing today in this Province, when they voted him in and

his government, that is not the approach they thought they were voting for.

He also made sure that he would build a foundation of trust and co-operation.

He stated to the people of this Province that he was a man of his word. But, Mr.

Speaker, I want to use a quote from Will Rogers, and it was used last year by

the then Member for Ferryland, who is now the Minister of Finance and President

of Treasury Board, he said: "I don't make jokes. I just watch the

government and report the facts."

Mr. Speaker, the people of this Province were told the problems that we are

facing were inherited by the financial problems that were passed along to them.

A lot of those reports came from an individual who was working in Ontario - and

I am sure the people of this Province really know who he is. He was known as the

Pokaroo. He was on the Polka Dot Door program years ago, and I think that is

what he did when he came to this Province. He pokarooed' around to every

department, made out a financial statement, and the people of this Province are

asked to believe it.

When the Blue Book came out, and the blueprint, it was full of promises to

the people of this Province. Now they are known as broken commitments because of

the financial mess we find ourselves in. We were promised that they were going

to grow the economy, and I know they have only been there six months, Mr.

Speaker, but I say they should start to protect what we have and not destroy.

Mr. Speaker, as we look back over a period of time, and some of those issues

that I am going to reference, the 20,000 people who are on the streets today are

part of all that is happening. When we see from the mining industry, in 2003, an

estimate of $755 million, and it is forecast to increase again in 2004.

Aquaculture in this Province; we have 6,200 people directly employed in the

industry, for an approximate value of $500 million. Our fishing industry; four

out of the past five years have been in excess of a $500 million value to our

Province. Retail sales tax last year went to $5.4 billion. Tourism, in 2003, was

a strong year with 439,000 visitors to our Province with the funds coming in

from that of over $300 million. We also know that employment numbers have grown

since 2002 here in our Province. Supermarket sales increased by $48 million.

Gasoline sales were up by $31 million, Mr. Speaker, and the list goes on.

Mr. Speaker, in this Budget, one of the issues I want to touch on is the new

tax reduction for low income individuals and families. If you look at it, and

that was the end of the line, no doubt it is a good program. It states: with

this program a low income individual may save up to $416 in provincial income

tax and a family may save up to $464. Mr. Speaker, when you look at it, a lot of

the people who are in this wage range will never see the light of day to get

$464. It has been estimated that the majority of them will be between $250 and

$300. Even that is fine in the pockets of our Newfoundlanders, if that is where

it ended.

Mr. Speaker, to come along with that wonderful news item was the massive tax

grab. The people of the Province who will receive this tax rebate over a period

of time are being hit by the tax grab. Just on a few items, Mr. Speaker, to

ordinary individuals out in the communities of rural Newfoundland: the small

game licence has increased in one year by $5; big game licence increased by $12;

for a family to go camping in an unserviced camping site, $3 for one weekend;

driver's licence gone up $4 per year; vehicle registrations, $40 per year. God

forbid, but if one family had to use one ambulance trip, that is also gone up by

$40.

Mr. Speaker, the list goes on. If you took all of this into consideration and

you look at the rebate they are going to get back on that taxes, it would be a

wonderful help to help lift those families above the poverty line if they could

keep it, but what was given in one hand was taken away in the other.

The other thing, Mr. Speaker, in the Budget is education. We all know how

important education is to us in this Province. I have to go back to my hon.

colleague again from Harbour Main-Whitbourne, while in debate on April 8, 2003.

He stated, and I quote, "...the voice of the youth had been heard through

the 1990s, and Generation X that went through the 1990s..." - referring to

that government - "... turned into generation death." He said the

voices were loud and were ignored. Make sure they are heard and acted upon.

Mr. Speaker, when we look at this Budget, I say that Generation X has turned

into generation exterminator, because now we see 476 teachers being eliminated

and taken out of the system over the next two years. I doubt very much, Mr.

Speaker, if that is the call of our youth.

We see the teachers, we see the civil service, being stripped of their jobs,

4,000 of them, and the concessions that go along with it, Mr. Speaker. We see

the seniors being stripped, one time or another, stripped of the pride and

dignity that they have. The general population of our Province, once we see the

amalgamation of the health care boards and the education boards, we are going to

see massive changes to the service that our people are used to seeing.

Mr. Speaker, only this past week - and in our area of Conception Bay North we

have the Avalon Health Care Institutions Board, and over a number of years it

took quite some time to get all of the people in that area to see that there was

a service being provided at the hospital in Carbonear, because people had the

idea that the hospital should have been somewhere else back in the early days.

The people of that area now are very proud of the facility that they have, and

what has been offered them.

I just want to make a quote that was in their booklet this year. "Health

care is by its nature in a constant state of change. We are pleased to report

that in our Board, change isn't simply followed, it is sought and it is

valued. Our staff show considerable capacity to pursue and accept new ways of

doing things."

Mr. Speaker, they are referring to the people who are walking the picket

lines in that area today, who offer services to the people at the Harbour Lodge

Nursing Home; the Interfaith Home for Senior Citizens; the Lions Manor in

Placentia; the Carbonear General Hospital itself, Mr. Speaker; the Placentia

Health Care; the Dr. A. A. Wilkinson Memorial Health Centre in Old Perlican; and

the Dr. William H. Newhook Community Health Centre in Whitbourne. Mr. Speaker,

those people provide a wonderful service, but I fear what is going to happen

when the health care board are amalgamated together and what is going to happen

to the people in this area.

Only this past weekend, I had a call from a gentleman from Trinity-Bay de

Verde, who I knew a number of years ago. When he called, he said: Roland, I

would like for you to mention this some time. My wife is a patient at the

Harbour Lodge in Carbonear. She has been there for a few years now with

Alzheimer's. When the people went on strike, she thought that her family had

left her; but, Roland, as sad as that is, make sure that you and your people

stand firm and do not support legislating those workers back to work, because

without them our services are going to be totally taken away from us and we are

concerned what is going to happen in the future.

Mr. Speaker, the other thing that was mentioned in the Budget Speech was the

Rural Secretariat. I am wondering, is that going to turn into something similar

to the urban Cabinet that we have, a Cabinet that we were told by the Premier

was based upon qualifications?

Mr. Speaker, I heard the Premier on television one night talking about how he

selected his Cabinet by qualifications, and no doubt each and every person there

is qualified, but when he was questioned why rural Newfoundland was not in

place, like they should have been, he said: Well, there may be some minute areas

of this Province that are not covered in the Cabinet at this time.

Mr. Speaker, I guess we are playing games with words again, because it seems

like the word minute falls into the same category as massive. When you look at

the district, the wonderful District of Topsail, all the way out to the District

of Lewisporte, all of the Burin Peninsula and the Bonavista Peninsula being

classified as a minute area of this Province, I think there is something to be

desired.

When you look at that area, Mr. Speaker, we have ten individuals sitting on

that side of the House who were not considered to be in that Cabinet and

represent the people of rural Newfoundland. Don't tell me that the Member for

Conception Bay South is not a qualified individual to sit in the Cabinet. I go

to Placentia & St. Mary's, a member who has been here in this hon. House

for many years. Don't tell me that he is not qualified to be in the hon. House

of Assembly. The Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne, an educator all of his

life, being put in a category that he was not qualified to represent the people

in my immediate area. Trinity North, the member who has been critic for Health,

and has all the answer to the health care system, don't tell me that he is not

qualified to sit in the Cabinet. Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member for

Windsor-Springdale, an hon. gentleman who stood here time and time again

fighting for the people in his district, don't tell me he was not qualified to

be in the Cabinet. Then we go the Member for Bonavista South, an hon. gentleman

in this House for many years, who has been looked down on, that he was not

qualified according to the Premier to be placed in this Cabinet. Then we have

four newcomers from the wonderful Districts of Trinity-Bay de Verde, Bonavista

North, Terra Nova and Burin-Placentia West. All of those people represent the

little minute area of this Province that is not represented, and the people of

rural Newfoundland are not too happy about it. I think it is time for the

Premier to take a look at that.

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the Rural Secretariat, the Premier stated: My

Government is particularly concerned about the challenges confronting our rural

communities and the businesses that operate in them.

Well, I say - and we hear all too often about the mess that this government

took over - how about we look back to 1995. I hate going back because we are on

this journey forward, but we go back to 1995 when the Firewood Experts

International Limited was formed, in 1995, and they were to buy birch in Central

Newfoundland, in the area of Lewisporte, and to ship it to Norway. It was

supposed to create sixty seasonal jobs for the people of this Province. That was

in August of 1995. In December, 1995, there seemed to be a problem. It was not

working out. The quality was not up to par; but, up to that point in time,

Enterprise Newfoundland and Labrador had put into that business, the taxpayers'

money of this Province, $600,000, and the operation was run by our present

Premier. He was the head one in this particular company.

Anyway, when they fell into difficulty and could not sell the birch over in

Norway, they needed legal advice. They had to fight it in the courts to get some

of this money back. Lo and behold, Enterprise Newfoundland and Labrador put

another $150,000 into it. Seven hundred and fifty-thousand dollars to get a few

birch junks that the people of this Province put into that project. What

happened in November, 1996, a little over a year-and-a-half? We had to, in this

Province, write off $676,846 for the very simple reason that there were no

personal guarantees or other non-company related securities to collect that

money back.

Is that the thirty years' experience that we are referring to? Is that the

man who was going to hire lots of Newfoundlanders back on? Because if it is, Mr.

Speaker, I can start a business tomorrow and take them on.

The other thing, Mr. Speaker, is - talk about growing the economy. I remember

when the by-elections were on up on the Great Northern Peninsula and two hon.

members opposite were elected. I happened to be up there during that time. The

word was up there - and I agree with every word that was said at the time - that

make-work projects are not the only thing that is any good for those people.

They just don't work out and build the economy the way it should be. There are

times, Mr. Speaker, when we have to do that.

Having said that, while the words were coming out of one side of his mouth

there were twenty-five to thirty people hired on creating the wonderful golf

course up at Salmonier Line, The Wilds, cutting the brush, a make-work project.

It wasn't good for the people on the Northern Peninsula, Mr. Speaker, but it

was good for himself.

Here we are today, and I have been told that approximately 100,000 vehicles

crossed over the Straits of Bell Isle last year, from the Labrador side to this

side. Now, with the change in the routes of the ferries going from Lewisporte

down the coast - and I am not saying that is all bad either, Mr. Speaker,

because people were worried about their freight. What an opportunity that is,

and was, to help the businesses and the local economy in that area with all

those tourists traveling down the Northern Peninsula.

In the Throne Speech, Mr. Speaker, on page 21, I think it is - I hope I can

find it fairly quickly - they are talking about, "My Government will

establish a Newfoundland and Labrador Office of Federal-Provincial relations in

Ottawa..." to the wonderful tune of $350,000. Mr. Speaker, words are very

important. It says, "My Government will be right there, imaginatively and

aggressively focusing..." on all the issues of this Province.

Well, Mr. Speaker, when I look imaginative up in the dictionary, one of the

meanings that is listed there says, having a lively imagination. That is what

imaginative is. I say, Mr. Speaker, what a lively imagination it is to be able

to spend $350,000 to talk to the people in Ottawa, when they have been flying in

and out here, one of the biggest tourist industries we have had in the last few

years. They have been coming in here on jets leading up to the election. There

is not a minister in Ottawa who hasn't visited this Province.

Mr. Speaker, I have to go back to Hansard, because when this Premier went

around to the people of this Province seeking there support, he wrapped himself

in the flag, I guess probably like many others, and this is what he said, and I

quote. This was March 19, 2002, in Hansard, and I hope this is not a prop.

"I can tell you what needs to be done with the federal government. They

need to be hit over the head with a mallet. That is what the federal government

needs. That is exactly what they need, because they are stripping our people of

their dignity. They need to understand the difference between have not and

have."

MS JONES: Who said that?

MR. BUTLER: The Premier said that, leading up to the election, before he

was elected.

The other thing he said, Mr. Speaker, and it is in Hansard, was, What do

those people want up there? Do they want our clean water, do they want our fresh

air, do they want the very blood in our veins? Mr. Speaker, he wrapped himself

in the flag and the people believed him and they voted for him, and that was

their democratic right. Mr. Speaker, after the election I would say he has

become nothing only a purring pussycat with a cuddly relationship with his

friends in Ottawa.

Mr. Speaker, today we witness one of the toughest decisions, I guess, that

will be made in this House of Assembly, when people will have to stand and vote

one way or the other on this new legislation when it is introduced in the next

reading. I do not know about the hon. members opposite, but I can tell you one

thing, I know what I am hearing in my district and I hear it all too often, the

people are very upset. People who voted for this government cannot believe what

they are hearing and what is happening around them today.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of giving other people an opportunity to stand

and speak, I want to conclude with this one thing. It was written in Hansard and

I hope I can do it justice, Mr. Speaker, because it is the words of the great

poet E.J. Pratt. When he said, "Here the winds blow,/And here they die,/

Not with that wild, exotic rage/ That vainly sweeps untrodden shores,/ But with

familiar breath/ Holding a partnership with life,/ Resonant with the hopes of

spring,/Pungent with the airs of harvest."

Mr. Speaker, I have a little change made to it because I believe - I also

hope that the winds will continue to blow and die here. I hope all our shores

will be well-trodden and that a partnership with life will continue for the

spring and thanksgiving for the harvest. But, Mr. Speaker, I fear the plans of

this government is a threat to rural Newfoundland. The hope they gave the people

will wither on the vines and have not will continue to be. I believe there is

only one resolve to all of this, and I ask the hon. Premier to do the honourable

thing and head back to the people and get the message that they thought they

were going to get the first time he went to them.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is with a sense of humility caused by the heavy responsibility that was

entrusted upon me, on October 21, caused by the history that I feel by being in

this historic and famous Chamber and in recognition of the real contribution

that has been made by the people that preceded me, in this particular seat, that

I rise to make my first remarks on behalf of the great people and the great

District of Humber East.

Mr. Speaker, first of all I want to join with those who congratulated you on

your election as Speaker. I understand that this is an historic situation, that

you are the first Speaker who was independently elected by all Members of the

House of Assembly. The fact that your election here was unanimous is certainly

an indication of the respect that all members of the House, both on this side

and that side, and indeed, all parties here, have for you. I congratulate you on

that.

I have seen, in the short time that I have been here, the fair and impartial

way that you have carried out your duties, not only to those of us who have the

honour to sit here in this Chamber, but also those people who come and sit in

the public galleries. I think you are to be highly commended for the fairness

and impartiality that you have shown.

Mr. Speaker, this is the people's House. In order to sit in this House, and

in order to speak in this House, you have to place your name before the people

of this Province. You have to get elected. We are the true, concerned citizen's

committee. We are the true representatives of the people. From time to time, and

indeed, in many times, I hear people on the radio who claim to speak for the

people, who claim to speak for the citizens, but the only true citizen's

committee are the people who run in a general election, who put what they stand

for behind the people, who knock on doors, who hear what the people have to say

and then stand to be elected or defeated in a general election.

I want to congratulate all of those who had the guts to enter their names in

the election and stand for office, not only on this side of the House but that

side of the House as well. All members carry the hopes and dreams and

aspirations of all the people of Newfoundland. That is why we are here. It is an

honour to be elected. It is a noble calling to offer yourself for office and be

elected and have the responsibility from the people of your district to go and

represent them in this Assembly. It is a big responsibility and I can tell you,

Mr. Speaker, it is one I take very, very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, I think the people expect a high standard from us and they are

entitled to that high standard. I have to say that since I was elected on

October 21, and came in here, I found the job exhilarating. It is indeed an

honour to serve the people. I went into politics out of a desire to serve, out

of a desire to do my bit. Rather than sit at home and criticize, I decided that

I would take the plunge at this stage of my life. I congratulate all people who

have done it.

The disappointing thing that I found since I came in here in this House of

Assembly: I found the tone of the debate too nasty. There is a lot of yelling

and screaming. There is a lot of foolishness. I think one day in particular

there were a bunch of high school kids sitting in the gallery up there, and they

looked at the foolishness that was going on here, the yelling and the screaming.

We can do better than that, Mr. Speaker. I think all of us can do better than

that, and I think the people demand us to do better than that.

I have the feeling that, as a new MHA coming in here, there are a lot of old

scores that are being settled. Well, I do not care about old scores. I am

looking forward to the future. I am looking forward to new things. I am looking

forward to taking

part in the debates in this House of Assembly and I want to

see the advancement of my district and my Province. So, if there are people who

want to settle old scores, maybe it is time to move on.

I remember my father, who was elected to parliament for the District of

Humber-Port au Port-St Barbe on the West Coast, the night he was elected he

said: I don't understand why some politicians don't know when it is time to

go. He was referring at that time, I think, to two politicians who served their

Province and their country well. He was referring to John Diefenbaker, former

Prime Minister of the country. He felt that sometimes you have to know when to

fold them and move on. He said that he would serve for two terms and then he

would leave. I was not necessarily a believer in fixed terms, but maybe it is a

good thing, that after a while you move on; after a while we fold them and let

some new blood and some new people come in. I appeal to all members to remember

that we are here for all the people of this Province and lets debate the issues,

lets have a high tone, and lets get on with the work that the people of this

Province want us to do.

Mr. Speaker, I said I am honoured to be here and I am. The reason I am here,

I am influenced by a number of people. Since these are the first remarks that I

have made in this House of Assembly I want to pay tribute to my father, who, as

I said, represented Humber-Port au Port-St. Barbe in the House of Commons in

Ottawa. He was elected for the first time in 1968 with a majority of 283 votes.

He was the first Progressive Conservative member of parliament elected in that

district since 1949. I want to pay tribute to him today because he is quite ill

at the moment but I know how proud he would be if he could sit in this gallery

and watch me here today, because he is the reason that I did go into politics.

He was elected four years later with a majority of 6,000, and two years after

that he was re-elected again with a majority of 6,500. He is one of the few

politicians that I know was more popular when his career was ending than when he

started. When the ten years was up or the nine years was up, he said: That is

enough, it is time for me to move on. He told his family that he was leaving

politics, and he told a friend of his in Ottawa, by the name of Don Jamieson,

and the next thing that happened is the Prime Minister of the country appointed

him to the Senate, Prime Minister Trudeau. So, I think that is quite amazing

that a man who was the first Progressive Conservative elected in the great

District of Humber-Port au Port-St. Barbe in 1968 would be appointed to the

Senate of Canada by a Liberal Prime Minister.

My father was a person who, to put it mildly, did not like people who were

powerful in our society. He not did like large corporations. He did not like the

weight they had in the economic life of this country. I always used to be amazed

sometimes to see how angry he would get when we used to walk into the airport in

Stephenville or Deer Lake and he just was angry at Air Canada because they were

a monopoly. He did not like the fact that large corporations with their

lobbyists and their lawyers who seemed to get an undue advantage over the rest

of the population. Equally, he was concerned about the people who were poor. He

was concerned about the people who were not strong in society. He was concerned

about the poor. He was concerned about people on fixed incomes, people who were

retired. He was concerned about the sick and the elderly. He felt that the role

of politicians who are elected, whether in the House of Commons in Ottawa or in

the House of Assembly here in the Newfoundland, that our role is to protect

those people, and I am going to follow that tradition, Mr. Speaker. We are going

to protect the people who are poor. I am going to speak out for the people who

are old, who are widows and people who are disabled. That is my role.

Corporations can look after themselves. Unions are strong and can look after

themselves, but we have to look after the people who are not strong in society.

I call on every MHA in this House, on this side and that side, to join me in

that effort.

I want to pay tribute now to the man who was supposed to be here in this

seat, because it was not supposed to be me originally, and that is Joe Mullins.

I am sure that most people here probably knew Joe Mullins. Most people in

Newfoundland knew the man. I do not think there was ever a more popular person

in all of Newfoundland than Joe Mullins. He would have been a great

parliamentarian. He would have added such vigor and such life to the proceedings

of this House. He worked for CBC for many years. He was a wit and a humourist.

He did his impressions of Uncle Llewellyn. He could debate. He could tell a

story. He could joke and he would be a great debater; plus, he had one of the

biggest hearts that you could possibly imagine. He was nominated to represent

the PC Party in Humber East, and, unfortunately, we lost Joe before he had a

chance to be elected here. The numbers - I know all politicians are always

interested in polls. The numbers that were done on Joe Mullins were absolutely

phenomenal. He would have beaten anyone. He would have beaten any candidate for

any party in Humber East, in Humber West, or in the Bay of Islands. As I said,

Mr. Speaker, I want to pay tribute to him and to his wife Marie and to his son

Peter. If we had not lost Joe, I would have had the pleasure, Mr. Speaker, of

running against the hon. Member for Bay of Islands, and that would have been a

battle that I would have looked forward to.

Mr. Speaker, as the Member of the House of Assembly for Humber East, I want

to pay tribute to those who have preceded me in this position.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

MR. T. MARSHALL: First of all, I want to pay tribute to my immediate

predecessor, Mr. Bob Mercer. Bob Mercer was a good MHA for Humber East. He

worked hard for his district, but elections are not about winning and losing.

Elections are about choices. The people -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) tried his best.

MR. T. MARSHALL: He did try his best.

The people of Humber East, in assessing the situation, wanted a change. They

recognize that all MHAs - they expect all MHAs to be good MHAs, regardless of

what party you belong to. It is not enough to say that I am going to elect that

guy because he is a good MHA, or that woman because she is a good MHA. We expect

everybody to be a good MHA. The people decided they wanted to change the

government in this Province. They decided that after fifteen years of our hon.

friends opposite being the government of this Province, they wanted a change.

They wanted a new approach. They wanted an approach with Danny Williams, and

therefore they did me the honour of electing me.

Before Bob Mercer, Lynn Verge was the MHA. I do not think there is anyone who

could say that Lynn Verge was not an outstanding MHA, but Bob Mercer defeated

her in one election at the time when the people of this Province wanted a

Liberal government elected by Clyde Wells, but I do want to pay tribute to Bob

for the work he did as the MHA for Humber East, and pay tribute to his wife

Judy, and I hope that they enjoy their retirement.

Mr. Speaker, there have been a number of interesting people who have

represented Humber East, in this House. The first member was Mr. Charles Ballam,

who I had the honour of meeting in a professional capacity when I was a young

lawyer in Corner Brook many years ago, and he certainly regaled me with a number

of stories about the early days of this House and the national convention that

preceded it.

He was succeeded by Mr. Jack Forsey. Mr. Jack Forsey was a man I remember,

and I think he would make the hon. Member for Ferryland quiet in comparison, but

he served Humber East well. He did it to the best of his ability.

He was succeeded by Dr. Noel Murphy. Dr. Noel Murphy is the former Mayor of

Corner Brook, a very distinguished and prominent citizen of Corner Brook, a man

who I always felt should have been a Lieutenant-Governor. He was involved in

numerous organizations. He started so many organizations on the West Coast. He

was a doctor and he was very highly regarded. He became a leader of the

Progressive Conservative Party and was elected as a PC. I think he was the first

Progressive Conservative to be elected in Humber East. Indeed, he was. Later on

in his political life he decided to join our friends in the other party, which

was a loss to the Progressive Conservative Party, but even today he does a radio

show every morning for seniors. It is one that I certainly enjoy listening to,

and I want to pay tribute to him as well.

Dr. Murphy was succeeded by Clyde Wells. Clyde Wells at the time was a young

lawyer in the City of Corner Brook when he first got elected by defeating Dr.

Murphy. He was a man whom I had the privilege of being a law partner with, and a

business partner with, for about ten years. I know that some of my colleagues on

this side may not understand what I am about to say, but I can tell you that I

was proud of my association with Clyde Wells. I consider him to be an honourable

and principled man. While we may have differed in politics, I never doubted his

sincerity and belief in the principles that he espoused. I disagreed with him

fervently with respect to Meech Lake, but I never doubted his honest belief in

the principles and the fact that he did make us proud of the way he conducted

himself, with his persuasiveness and his eloquence when he represented this

Province in the Meech Lake negotiations, whether you agreed with the principle

or not. He now is the distinguished Chief Justice of the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

After Clyde Wells, Dr. Tom Farrell became the MHA for Humber East and Dr.

Farrell, as Minister of Health, established the new Western Memorial Hospital

Corporation in Corner Brook and created the Sir Wilfred Grenfell College in

Corner Brook. He will be long remembered for that.

He was succeeded by Lynn Verge, probably the greatest MHA of them all for

Humber East. Many people may not know it, but Lynn Verge has done more to

advance the cause of women's rights than any other person in this Province. I

remember when she brought in legislation entitled the Family Law Act. I am

sorry, at the time it was called the Matrimonial Property Act; it has since been

renamed. I said to her: Look, it is great progressive legislation but you are

going too fast. You have to slow down. She said no, and she was right. She

brought the legislation in. She said: We will bring that legislation in and we

can always amend it later. That is what she did. Do you know what? It does not

seem that progressive now. She did more to advance women's rights in this

Province than anybody else.

I am delighted when I look around and see all the women MHAs on both sides of

the House. I think that is a credit to her and the fights that she and people

like Anne Bell fought many years ago. As a result of her efforts, I think all of

us are conscious to make sure that women's rights are advanced in this

Province, and I am pleased to say that in a new program we have announced for

new RNC officers, in conjunction with Memorial University, we have asked the

deputy chief to take steps to ensure, to the greatest extent possible, that 50

per cent of the recruits are women.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to announce that I support the budgetary policy of this

government and will vote against the non-confidence motion.

In the Budget, we attempted to accomplish three things, three things in very

difficult circumstances. First of all, we are trying to get our fiscal house in

order. We have no choice but to do that. That is because of the horrible mess we

find ourselves in with a debt that I understand will be $11.6 million at the end

of this year for only 520,000 people. I mean, that is just a phenomenal debt,

520,000 people with a debt load of $11.6 million. It is terrible to even think

of.

Secondly, I congratulate the Minister of Finance for what he attempted to do

to help people who are disadvantaged because, as I said earlier, that is a role

we have to play. We have to make sure that we look after the disadvantaged

because they cannot do it themselves.

Thirdly, we took steps to grow the economy, because if we can grow that

economy, more people will be employed, more businesses will make money, and

therefore the government can then tax those people and get more revenue, and

that revenue we can then redistribute to the people who need it, for health,

education, and social services.

Mr. Speaker, figures that I saw from the Department of Finance indicate that,

of every dollar we have to spend, twenty-five cents is going to pay interest on

the debt. Government say they are servicing the debt, but all we are doing is

paying interest. We are not paying the debt down. That is twenty-five cents. I

am told that we spend fifty-two cents on wages and benefits. That leaves only

twenty-three cents for everything else. That is twenty-three cents for all other

programs that this government has to operate.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the member that his time has lapsed.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General, by

leave.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank hon. members.

I am only halfway through these remarks. I did not realize the time has

passed so quickly, but there will be other times, I am sure.

Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, just let me say that I will be speaking on other

issues that are important to the people of Humber East. I will be speaking about

the MRI machine that has just been announced, or the funding has just been

completed, for Western Memorial Regional Hospital. I will be speaking about the

issue that is my main priority, which is the long-term care facility in Corner

Brook. I will be speaking about the good things in the Budget that this

government did for seniors and those people on low incomes, especially the

additional $8.6 million that we put into drugs; especially the elimination of

provincial income tax for people on low incomes; especially the indexing of the

seniors' benefit and the child's benefit. A woman said to me during the

election campaign: You got to help me pay my bills. That is what we tried to do

in this Budget, and I congratulate the Minister of Finance for that.

I will speak, also, for Grenville College which is going to be a catalyst for

economic development and growth in Western Newfoundland. So, I look forward to

taking

part in debates with other members. I intend to do it on a positive

basis, regardless of what is said in this House, and I intend to work with all

Members of the House of Assembly for the advancement of the people here. During

the campaign when I knocked on doors and I talked to people about what they

wanted me to do, I told them that I would go forward and try to advance their

hopes and dreams and aspirations here. I want to assure everyone watching and

everyone in this House, that while I am here the work will go on. While I am

here a cause will endure, that our hopes will still live and that the dream we

all share, on both sides of the House, of a proud and prosperous Newfoundland

and Labrador within a strong and united Canada, that dream will never die.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bellevue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand today and proudly say

that I will not be supporting this Budget. As a matter of fact, I am very, very

happy to say that I will be standing and voting as a no confidence in this

particular government.

I spoke a couple of weeks ago in terms of a Private Member's Resolution in

this House. I am a great predictor of what is going to happen, I guess, because

I indicated at that particular time and laid out, that most people looked at -

this Premier did not know what he was doing. He did not know how he was going to

get anywhere or how he was going to get there - but I indicated, at the time,

and the resolution at that particular time: I call on the government to get back

to meaningful negotiations. The resolution was to get back to meaningful

negotiations.

The negotiations that took place in this Province with our public service

unions, this time around, were nothing but a farce. An absolute farce! The

Premier talked about the hard work and all the negotiations. Now, I was not in

the room so I do not really know, but we listened to the reports on the media -

the Premier spent about two-and-a-half or three hours. The Minister of Finance

probably spent three or four hours in the total negotiations. I mean, the

Department of Labour, which does not exist, was involved only in the latter

stages. The whole negotiation process did not take place. There were no

negotiations at all, it was the Premier had an agenda. I indicated back, when I

spoke at that particular time - I guess we saw the writing on the wall when he

put his Cabinet together. At the time I indicated that the Cabinet was a St.

John's Cabinet. We know that the majority of people in the Cabinet are from

the St. John's greater region and Corner Brook. Very few representation from

rural Newfoundland, even though he had very capable individuals who represented

rural districts that he could have put in the Cabinet, but for some reason he

put all the people who represented the urban part of Newfoundland and Labrador

in the Cabinet.

I think the most telling thing of all was when we saw the priorities of this

Premier and where he was headed. He did not put a Department of Labour in his

government. There is no Department of Labour in this government. For a while he

put it along with the Department of Environment. As a matter of fact, I was

listening to an Open Line program the other night and the moderator did not

really know who the Minister of Labour was. As a matter of fact, she was

indicating that the Minister of Labour was the Member for St. John's South. I

sat there for a while and I said: Well, I cannot have her on the provincial

radio network not knowing who the Minister of Labour was. So, I called into the

station and left a message for her to indicate that the Member for Stephenville

East was the Minister of Labour. That gives you an indication, when the public

do not know who the Minister of Labour is in this Province. What they did was

split up the Department of Labour. They sent it out to an agency, a labour

relations agency. There is no department. There is an agency of the Department

of Labour. Occupational Health and Safety was put out to Government Services.

We seen what happened with these present negotiations, even around the

Province, where we had - and I get reports all the time. Some of the private

business negotiations that are going on, we do not have enough people from the

Department of Labour to participate in the conciliation and mediation process.

This Premier has no empathy, no reason to have a Department of Labour. Lo and

behold, in the Budget we found out that there are going to be two Departments of

Business; two Departments of Business in this government.

We talk about the corporate agenda, people say: Why didn't they not

increase the taxes for the corporations? Some chance! Some chance that this

Premier is going to reduce the taxes for business when he is going to set up two

Departments of Business. One, Innovation, Trade and Rural Development. As a

matter of fact, rural renewal is not even going to be in that department. They

are setting up another agency called the rural resettlement agency. That is what

it is going to be. At the rate we are going in rural Newfoundland - we hear that

the minister who is also responsible for the Department of Labour, responsible

for H.R.E. offices in rural Newfoundland, he is going to close all of them up.

So, the only offices that will exist of government in this Province will be in

the major centres. We do have opportunity to have two Departments of Business.

We do not have any money, we are bankrupt.

I have been here for fifteen years and I will tell you, I feel really guilty.

I spoke at a firemen's ball in my district this weekend and I said: I really

feel bad. I apologize tonight because I have been in politics, I represented you

for fifteen years and I have bankrupt the government. I have bankrupt the

government. I indicated to them, I said: I really feel sorry. When I got elected

in 1989, the fire departments in my district, the best they had was buckets.

They used to be called the bucket brigade. That is the fire departments in my

district. That is what they had. We equipped the fire departments - since I got

elected there were nine pumper trucks allocated to the District of Bellevue, to

the fire departments. So, I said to them: I apologize, because the money that I

got for my district I bankrupt the government. They do not have a cent in there.

The present Premier is whining and crying and bawling that the place is

bankrupt.

Honourable members, we are elected to serve people. I have been elected five

times in this House of Assembly and there have been issues where I have

disagreed with former premiers. I disagreed with Clyde Wells, very adamantly.

Clyde Wells at one time came to us and said that he was going to wipe out

severance for public servants. But, do you know what? People in our caucus stood

up and said: there is no way that severance pay will ever be eliminated while we

stand in this caucus. No way that severance pay would ever be eliminated for

public servants, teachers, nurses, and the people who work for the government.

As a matter of fact, we indicated to him: there is a door and if you want to go

through it you can go through it but there will be nobody else going with you.

You, in the caucus, have to stand up. You have to stand up against this piece

of legislation that was introduced today which takes away the rights of workers

in this Province. One of the members on the other side, the other day - I think

it was the Premier who said: What are we really worried about? They are holding

up the whole negotiations for the Warren Report. We are only talking about 3 per

cent of the workers out there. Besides, they are only janitors and secretaries

in our schools.

I thought it was the most disgusting thing I heard in my life. He said, they

are holding up the negotiations for 3 per cent of the people in the schools. I

was very proud in my career to serve as a principal in our school system; very,

very happy to be involved in the educating of our children. The teachers in my

school were very, very important. The public health nurse was very important,

but I will tell you one thing. I did not have a school secretary back in those

days, but I had a janitor who worked in the school. I can tell you one thing,

that school would not function without the janitor.

You are saying, on that side over there, that they are not worth it? S