VOL. 3 THIRD SESSION OF THF. THIRTY-NINTH GENEPAL ASSEMBLY OF NEWFOUNDLAND PRELIMINARY UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR THE PERIOD: NO. 22 3:00 P,M. - 6:00 P.M. 1f7EDNF.SDAY, AJ'RIL 11, 1984

April 11, 1984 The House met at 3:00 P.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER {Russell) : Tape No. 876 Order, please! STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS: MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. NM - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I just want to inform this hon.

House that about two months ago the government embarked upon a two-tiered initiative as it related to the question of the offshore,and over the last three or four weeks the negotiating team for the government has been briefing most of the editorial writers in the Province,and we had embarked in the Province upon, as everybody knows, a small ad campaign and I have as leader been speaking on the issue around the Province extensively over the last three weeks.

The second part of the programme began a few days ago, which is the national programme, and the negotiating team is presently meeting with all the editorial boards of major publications from here to Vancouver. Secondly, there will be,and has been worked on for several weeks now 1 a fairly extensive ad campaign on the 'Mainland and starting next Monday I shall be speaking to a group in Moncton,and then in May speaking in Ottawa, Montreal, Toronto, Calgary and Vancouver.

So we hope that by the end of May or ear!J..y June we will have covered most of the country in as many ways as we can to try to get across to Canadians the fairness and reasonableness of our position on the offshore~ and I thought I should inform this han. House. Later on this afternoon I shall be distributing more details to han. members. 2350

.. ~.pril 11, 1984 Tape No. 876 NN - 2 MR . SPEAKER (Rus se ll) : The hon . member for Mount Scio. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, the Opposition welcomes this long -awaited and overdue initiative on the part of the Premi er and government . We would express two concerns: Number one is the image which will be pr ojected by the Premier and government . The image that has been projected to date by the Premier will have to cha nge if he is to convince ci tizen s in othe r provinces of the fai rness and equity of our case. And the other thing we regret, Mr . Speaker, is that the Premier would not 2351

April 11,1984 Tape No. 877 ah-1 MR. BARRY: accept the recommendation that there be a nonpartisan, two-party representation on the Committee. Nor, Mr. Speaker, ha ve the Premier and goverrurent,apparently, accepted our reccmrendation. SOME HON .l1EMBERS: Oh, oh! MR.SPEAKER (Russell ): Order, please! MR.BARRY: - that there be representatives from the general business community( trade unions, the uni versity community and the general public of the Province which would make it a more credible campaign and there would be a more credible message transmitted in that case. MR.BARRY: Scio.

MR.BARRY: ORAL QUESTIONS The hon. member for Mount Mr.Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister responsible for Energy (Mr.Marshall). I would like to ask the minister whether in the offer recently conveyed by the province of Quebec did the government of Quebec offer to supply sufficient power to enable a recall of 800 megawatts from the Upper Churchill? MR.SPEAKER: · The hon. President of the Council. MR.MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, that is a detail of the negotiations and it is the hope of this government that negotiations can continue.

We are doing everything we can to see what possibly can be done to continue the negotiations. For that reason I do not care to answer that question at this particular time because it is a detail of the negotiations. MR.SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker. 2352

April 11,1984 Tape No. 877 ah-2 t-!R .BARRY: With respect to other details then , Mr . Speaker, I would like to ask the minister \.Jhether Quebec offered to make available to Churchill Falls{Labrador)Corporation additional revenue from the sale of power to Hydro-Quebec? I would like to ask the minister whether the province of Quebec offered to co -operate in the development of any of the rivers flowing from the Labrador portion of Newfoundland to the province of Quebec? And I would like to ask whether the offer contained an offer to help finance the Lower Churchill and agreement to permit the wheeling of powe .r across the province of Queb ec? 23 53

April 11, 1984 Tape 878 EC - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Hr. Speaker, once again that is a detail of the negotiation, to answer which would be to bring the negotiation into t~e rublic realm and to negotiate in public, and,whatever chances there may be, the chances would be very much diminished, so consequently, for that reason I will not respond to the question. MR. BARRY: MR.• SPEAKER: MR. BARRY: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. The hon. the member for Mount Scio.

I would like to ask the minister whether the Province has not put forth these elements as important elements of any settlement package and whether the Province of Newfoundland has considered making a counter­ offer to the Province of Quebec which would respond to each of these elements of what was probably contained in the Province of Quebec's offer? ~ffi. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I said nothing about any elements that were in any negotiations so I am not going to respond to that.

All I can tell the hon. gentleman is what this Province is doing in initiating the negotiations, seeking ~o continue them, and in pursuing them we will at all times act in the best interests of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. MR. NEARY: HR. SPEAKER: a supplementary. MR. NEARY: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Speaker, a couple of years ago, the hon. gentleman indicated to the House that the Churchill Falls Corporation might be headed for financial difficulties. Now, if the administration there opposite· 2354

~prli 11, 1984 Tape 878 EC - 2 ~lR. ND\RY : had not nationalized the Churchill Falls Corporation, they would have had a profit this year of $10 million as a result of the sale o= power to Quebec -Hydro. But because they nationalized the Churchill Falls and in vie\o~ of the esc .alation, the in ­ crease in the cost of operating Churchill Falls and so forth, could the hon . gentleman tell the House what the financial status of the Churchill Falls Corporation is in this current fiscal year? MR. SPEARER (Ru ssell): The hon . the President of the Council . MR .

MARSHALL: I find it rather difficult to follow the hon. gentleman's mental gyrations that he is presenting to the House with respect to the alleged aggravation of the condition of CFLCo as a result of the nationalization . As to the financial condition of Churchill Falls, the hon. gentleman, I think, is aware of it . It is a ma tter of public knowl edge that the agreeme ·nt that the hon . gentleman 's adnri.nistration permitted to be negotiated with the c~vernment of Quebec not only was deficient in rentals to the extent 2355

April 11, 1984 Tape No. 879 HJ - l MR. MARSHALL: that today,now,we only get between $6 million and $8 million a year while Quebec is netting about $780 million, not only does it mean that we have to fight to try to reclaim the power that was •given away without any reopeners,but also, Mr. Speaker, the han. gentleman and his colleagues there opposite,when they negotiated, negotiated an agreement in such a way that the financial position of Churchill Falls(Labrador)Corporation is deteriorating over a period of time and I think that is a matter of public knowledge. MR. NEARY: HR.

SPEAKER (Russell) : Leader of the Opposition. HlR. NEARY: A supplementary,Nr. Speaker. A supplementary, the han. the Mr. Speaker, is the hon. gentleman aware that the government's lawyer, Mr. Leonard Martin of Corner Brook, ~~o represents the Province at the Water Reversion Rights court hearing, that Mr. Martin, the solicitor for the administration there opposite,told the judges of the Supreme Court of Canada that the government did not negotiate any aqreement or any contract? Is the han. gentleman aware of that?

If he is aware of it 1 then how can he stand in this House and make such silly,nonsensical statements as the one he just made? MR. SPEAKER: The han. the President of the Council. MR. m:.:RSHALL: Hr. Speaker, I am not aware of any statements that Mr. Martin made. All I am aware of is what happened. I am aware of Mr.

Philip S~ith's book, BP~NCO,as well where he indicated that -you know, I think this is profitless in the present time when you are inquiring what is going to happen 1but since you asked the question - that the administration there opposite was very much involved in that Upper Churchill contract, that there were conversations 2356

April 11, 19 84 Tape No. 879 MJ - 2 MR. MARSHALL: between Premier Le~age and Premier Smalhmod at the time 1 and obviousl y so. I mean, the han. gentlemen there opposite have shown their consummate stupidity over the years in any event,but they are not so inordinately dense that they would have permitted a contract of that nature to be negotiated without being aware of its terms. ·The only problem, Mr.

Speaker, lies in their consurnrna te lack of any perception whatsoever and their lack of realization of where it plunged this Province financiall y in the years to come • We are feeling ·the results of it now and we see the results in the budget that the Hinister of Finance (Dr. Collins) had to bring before the House this year,which was an exercise,and continues to be an exercise in real management of our finances despite the inordinately bad position that we have been plunged into by actions of the han. gentlemen there opposite. SOME HON. MEMBERS : MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER (Russell) Opposition. MR.

NEARY: Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker. The han. the Leader of the The han. gentleman is really nasty today. I do not know where he was for the last couple of days but he must have taken his nasty pills before he got back into the House. Is the han. gentleman also aware that Mr. Crosbie,when he was Minister of Energy for this Province,also stated that the government did not negotiate the contract? And is he aware of a brochure put out by Newfoundland Hydro and a statement made by 2357

April 11, 1984 Tape 880 PK - 1 H.R .. NEARY: the present Premier in this House,that the government of the day did not negotiate the contract or the agreement. Is he aware of 'these facts? Now, Mr. Speaker, if he is let him s~y so. Let him not try to continue the big lie that they have been perpetrating on the people of_this Province for the last few years.

Now would the han. gentleman also tell the House if it is correct that over here at Holyrood at the thermo-generating plant chat because of a take or pay contract that Newfoundland Hydro have entered into with the oil company .that oil has to be burned off in order to make room to take delivery of oil that they have contracted for, that oil has to be burned off without generating a kilowatt of power, that several hundred thousand gallons of oil every year is used at the oil refinery, burned off, so that the tankers can come in and refill the tanks? COuld the hon. gentleman confirm or deny that? MR.

SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I cannot confirm or deny,you know 1what goes on in the hon. gentleman's mind. The hon. gentleman is obviously shellshocked over the years and the sooner the han. gentleman gets into the Senate of Canada the better it will be for the hon. gentleman, for the people of this Province and everybody concerned. He shows it by his type of question. That is the type of question, Mr.

Speaker, you .can float up in the Senate because the good old senators are so aged and infirm that they would not .realize the import of it, but do not try to put such silly questions before the people's House in this Province. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Torngat Mountains. 2358

April 11, 1984 Tape 880 PK - 2 MR . WARREN: Mr . Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Social Services (Mr. Rickey). I understand, according to the Planned Parenthood organization last year there were some 300 births to mothers und er th e age of fifteen; in fact,there were two births to chi ldren of eleven years of age. This information,! understand , Mr. Speaker, comes from the Planned Pa -renthood organization of Newfoundland and Labrador which is trying to deal with this problem and others.

I understand that this organization came to the minister's department asking for financial help to deal with this problem. . Could the minister advise whether his department has or has not given financial help to the Planned Parenthood organization? MR. HICKEY : What was the 300? MR. WARREN : There were some 300 births during the past year to teenagers under the age of fifteen. And I am just wonderin g why has not the minister given this Planned Parenthood organization some financial help to help them probably to educate teenagers. 2359

April 11, 1984, Tape 881, Page 1 -- apb MR. SPEAKE 'R(Russell): Social Services. MR. HICKEY: The han. the Mini_:s.ter Qf r-tr. Speaker, I arn not . aware that the Planned Parenthood Association has come to me in recent times for money to do something about 30 .0. births which have taken place to rrothers under the age of seventeen. MR. WARREN: Fifteen. MR. HICKEY: Fifteen. I can tell the han. gentleman that the process by which the issue of teenage pregnancies, which is what the han. gentleman is talking about, can be addressed and should be addressed. MR. WARREN: I cannot hear him, Mr. Speaker. MR.

TULK: Speak up. MR. HICKEY: It is not to be found in my providing money 0 Itis a very great ~rocess that has to be put in place 1 such as sex education, nQ~ber one, parental involvement, number two. The answer is not to be found necessarily in dollars to Planned Parenthood: That is one of the factors that have to be put in place. Now, if the han. gentleman is aoina to charqe me with responsibility for 300 births to ·rothers under the age of fifteen and expect me to solve the problem overni~ht, I am sorry, I cannot accept that responsibility. MR. W.~RREN : ~1R. SPEA...XER: Mountains. MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker.

The hon. the member for Torngat If the minister refuses, as he has just done, to help the Planned Parenthood organization to deal with this problem their way, is he willing to start a pr~gramme of public awareness aimed at out youth explaining basically the facts of life in a way that might encourage them to have second thoughts when making decisions about subjects like this, and when threatened with modern 2360

April 1~, 1984, Tape 881, Page 2 -- apb MR .. WARREN : day pressures to succumo to the hypnotic seduction of the mass med~a? I understand a lot of these cases result from a~tentton to tne mass media , sue~ as magazines, T.V ., radio and so on. I am asking the minister if he i:s · not pz.:epare.d to help th~ Planned Parenthood organ~zation 1 could ne tell us what his department is doing to solve the problem? MR ., SP~KER lRuss e l1.~ : The hon-. the Minister of Social Servi'c es. 23 61

April 11, 1984 Tape No. 882 NM - 1 MR. HICKEY: Mr. Speaker, I have great trouble keeping the hon. gentlemen on track as my shadow over there, you know. Surely he has been around the House long enough in the last number of years to know that in fact this controversial issue . -- -- -- ---- of Planned Parenthood, in dealing with the problem that he refers to, is not even within my mandate to deal with, but rather in the Department of Health. He surely should also be aware of the fact that the Department of Health, my colleague, the Minister of Health (Mr.

House),with the blessing of this administration have taken a number of initiatives in this particular area and has addressed this issue to whatever extent we can. The han. gentleman is surely aware of that. MR. ROBERTS: MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : of Belle Isle. MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker. The han. member for the Strait Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to ask a question or two of the Minister of Public Works (Mr.

Young) about some space at Atlantic Place, I wonder if we could begin by asking him whether he would confirm that all or a part, and if it is only a part,which part, of the Petroleum Directorate of the Energy Department is moving into Atlantic Place? Are the provincial government opening offices in Atlantic Place for the Petroleum Directorate? I know they have been there~ Are they expanding them2 MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Public Works and Services. 23 6.2

April 11, 1984 Tape No. 882 MR. YOUNG: Mr. Speaker, the Petroleum Directorate has obtained 6,000 square feet in Atlantic Place. NM - 2 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) of Belle Isle. The hon. member for the Strait MR. ROBERTS: Could the member - the minister 1 I am sorry, who is also a member of course- tell us when this will be ready and could he tell us whether it has been booked or bought or rented, whatever the correct verb is, as a result of the public tender process? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Public Works and Services. MR. YOUNG: Mr. Speaker, I could not give the exact date when it will be ready.

The space is rented and renovations are being done by the tenant. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for the Strait of Belle Isle. MR. ROBERTS: Thank you, Sir. I asked the minister, he may not have heard me- or one of his more ignorant colleagues may have interrupted in an effort to be funny 1 but without any success- but I know the minister takes his departmental duties seriously and I respect and accept that, Couldhe tell us whether the rentals were done as a matter of public tender or not? MR. SPEAKER: works and Services. MR. YOUNG: The hon. Minister of Public I could check into that. · I do not think so, Mr.

Speaker. I think it was negotiated. But probably the hon. member is getting confused with the space that has been rented by the federal department, which we saw in the paper quite recently, and has nothing to do with the Department of Public Works and Services or this government. 2363

April 11, 1984 MR. SPEAKER (R ussell) : of Belle Isle. MR . ROBERTS: Tape No . 882 NM - 3 The hon . member for the Strait I am not asking about space the federal government may or may not have rented, that is their probl em . But the minister has told us his department bas taken an extra 6,000 square feet , I think he just said , Perhaps he could check it and let us know 1then 1 the results of negotiations, He confirms that it was not by tender,and he could check that too , This is not an exam, we are interested in information . Would he also either tell us,or ,if he does not recall 2364

April 11,1984 Tape No. 883 ah-1 MR. ROBERTS: the detail,would he undertake to get for us how much we are spending ,for rent ,obviousl y, but also how much in renovations? MR .SPEAKER (Russell): Public Works and Services. MR. YOUNG: The hon. Minister of I understand, Mr.Speaker, that the space is being rented at $18.00 a square foot, space already accomodated, you know, will be done by the tenant as compared to what we are renting there now at $11.75 per square foot where we have to do our own renovations. MR.ROBERTS: MR. SPEAKER: Strait of Belle Isle. MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker.

The han. member for the So we are paying $18.00 a foot and the landlord is doing the renovations. Could the minister tell us how much is being allowed by the landlord as a renovations allowance?And more to the point, will that cover the renovations which are to be carried out? MR.SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Public Works and Services. MR.YOUNG: Mr. Speaker, I can get these details. But I know that it is fixed up space for $18.00 a square foot. MR. SPEAKER: Strait of Belle Isle. MR.ROBERTS: The han. member for the Thank you again, Mr. Speaker.

Then the minister will get the detail,and as part of that, I understand, he will find out whether we have to spend anything over and above the $18.00. Well,he says, no, and 2365

April 11,1984 Tape No. 883 ah-2 MR.ROBERTS: if that is the answer, fine, but he can check that. And would he tell us how long the Petroleum Directorate are going to be at Atlantic Place? And perhaps,as part and parcel to that, what is the term of the lease? MR.SPEAKER (Russell ): Public Works and Services. MR. YOUNG: The hon. Minister of Mr. Speaker, I could not tell you the right term but I believe it is on a year to year base or for a three year period. I could not say for sure. I will get the details for the hon.member. MR.SPEAKER: Strait of Belle Isle. MR.

ROBERTS: The hon. member for the I appreciate the hon. gentleman's undertaking and , of course, will await the results. The final question, at least for the moment, is are the Petroleum Directorate-or is the Petroleum Directorate if it is a corporate entity­ to move into the extension,or whatever we are going to call it 1 here at Confederation Building? Does the minister know whether that is envis~oned or not? MR. SPEAKER: Public Works and Services. MR. YOUNG: The hon. Minister of The Petroleum Directorate will not be moving, I do not think, into Confederation Building extension. MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. member for Bellevue. MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker , I have a question for the Minister of Public Works (Mr.Young) 2366

April 11,1984 TApe No. 883 ah-3 MR.CALLAN: as well. It concerns the renovations and so on to the Whitbourne Boys' Home. Could the Minister of Public Works (Mr.Young) inform the House when public tenders will be called for the renovations and whatever is going to be done to the Boys' Home? -2367

April 11, 1984 Tape 884 EC - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The han. the Minister of Public Works and Services. MR. YOUNG: Mr. Speaker, I ~~ sorry I cannot, because it is only recently we appointed consultants and when this is worked out with the Department of Social Services and the necessary consultants bring in their report, tenders ' will be called. MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the member for Bellevue. MR. CALLAN: Mr.

Speaker, let me ask the minister, Is it possible that a lot of the work will not be going to public tender at all but will be done through the Department of Social Services and other qovernment departments as far as actual e!!!!'lOyr!lent is concerned? I l~noF that electrical anc all of that has to go to public tender, but is it the intention of the Department of Public Works to hire people who are on social assistance to do a lot of this work? M..~. SPEAKER: Works and Services. ~1R. YOUNG: The han. the Minister of Public My understanding is, Mr. Speaker, that it will go to public tender. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Municipal Affairs. I 'l·:one.er i£ the !"'inister could tell the House hm·.r many requests there ~ave heen 1 and fror. . where these requests have come, for assistance to munici­ palities who are finding themselves,as a result of the government restraint programme, having to increase taxes and are showing deficits in their budgets? Could the minister tell the House how many complaints have been recorded about 2368

April 11, 1984 Tape 884 EC - 2 MR. NEARY: t~e government's restraint pro- gramme, the decreasing of assistance to municipalities and how many requests have bee n received for assistance from the minister's department to cover deficits in municipalities throughout the Province? MR . SPEAKER (Russell): The hon . the Hinister o:f Municipal Affairs . ~.RS • NE\VHOOK: Mr. Speaker, there have been no requests to cover deficits in municipal budgets for this present year. I have received one concern from the Humber Joint Councils .

That was not a request, it \•!as not a complaint, it was just a concern and they were bringing their concern to my attention. We do get requests from municipalities once in a '"bile for 2369

April p, 1984 Tape 885 PK - 1 MRS. NEWHOOK: emergency assistance and these are for maybe some kind of repairs or something that has happened and they do not have the money or they have not budgeted for it. But these are regula~ ongoing 1small amounts where we assist municipalities and we have been doing that for years, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, could the hon. minister inform the House if there has been any dialogue, any correspondence or communications or any meetings between the minister and the Newfoundland Federation of Mayors and Municipalities concerning the announced policy that was included in the Budget Speech when it was read by the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins); ~ has there been any outcries, any protests, any meetings about the retrogressive policy concerning municipalities that was announced by the Minister of Finance? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs. MRS. NEWHOOK: Mr.

Speaker, no, I have not heard from the executive of the Federation of Municipalities except what the president has said over the air and I have read q his comments in the newspaper. But I do meet with the executive of the Federation on a quarterly basis and I would think perhaps when we have our next meeting that matter may be brought up. MR. SPEAKER : The hon. member for the Strait of Belle Isle. MR. ROBERTS: Thank you, Sir. As my colleague the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) says,I have no doubt that that matter will come up when the minister next meets with the liaison committee.

I would like to ask a question ,if I could 1to the Minister of Justice (Mr. Ottenheimer) 1who has been having a quiet afternoon over there so far. We are all distressed, of course, to learn of the illness of Chief Roche of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary and I know the minister 2370

April 11,1984 Tape 885 PK - 2 MR. ROBERTS : was asked some que$tions and made some responses here in the House a •11eek or so past . Ke may have heard the Chief on the radio the other morning , it was on .cac, The Morning Show ,being interviewed by a reporter and the Chief said that he was seeing his doctor and that :really until he saw his doctor he,of course, did not know how long he would be off on sick leave . And that is a pretty good answer to a pretty good question. I wonder if the minister could tell us has he heard anything more from the Chief?

In other words, can he bri .ng us up to da ·te on this situation? Can the minister tell us , t·or example, how long the Chief expects to be on sick leave and when we might expect to have him back on the job? MR. SPEAKER (Russell} : MR. OTTENREIMER: we ·have was conveyed by a letter The hon. Minister of Justice . Mr. Speaker, the latest information from the gentleman's physician to the effect that sick leave was still required . We expect another report with respect to his health, the medical situation around the middle of May . 2371

April 11, 1984 Tape No. 886 MJ - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the member for the Strait of Belle Isle. MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, neither I nor the minister is trying to become involved in the Chief's private, medical affairs, that is not the point, But the minister,to build on his answer 1 I know will concur that there is a state of some uncertainty about a very senior public service position, the Chief of the RNC. I · I wonder if the minister could tell us whether there is any indication how long the Chief will be away from work?

I gather from the minister he has had one medical report and he is expecting a second in roughly a month. Isthere any indication as to long the Chief will be away from his duties? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the ~~nister of Justice. MR. OTTENHEIMER: I would certainly expect, Mr. Speak'er, that I would be in position to give a definitive reply after we receive the report "'le are expecting around the middle of Nay. MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for the Strait of Belle Isle. MR. ROBERTS: I thank the minister and obviously we will have to await the event.

Could 1 ask of him an assurance that he will, obviously within the knowledge he has at that point, give us a definitive reply as to ,.,hatever the situation is? If the House is not meeting, and I gather that the government's lack of a programme may mean that the House will not be meeting in mid-Hay, as astonishing as that may seen, could the minister assure us that he ~.,ill make a public statement? He is not normally reticent 1 so I am sure he is willing to give the information. MR. SPE.li..KER: The han. the Minister of Justice. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, certainly as soon as 2372

April 11, 19 84 Tape :No. 886 MJ - 2 MR. OTTENHEIMER: I have definitive information myself I will communicate it publicly in the House or however appropriate if that is not possible. MR. ROBERTS: Thank you. MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Minister of Labour and Manpower (Mr. Dinn) is yet in a position to tell us what the deficit is going to be at the Workers' Compensation Board this year?

In 1981 the hon. gentleman is aware there was a surplus of $4 million, in 1982 a deficit $9 million and we heard during the Co~~ittee meetings on the Estimates that the deficit would be approximately $l0 million. Could the hon. gentleman inform the Ho .use, Mr. Speaker, if indeed the deficit this year will be around $10 million? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Labour and Manpower. MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, I am sure the hon. member is not deaf. He was down at -the Estimates Committee meeting, he asked the same question down there and I answered the question down there.

The answer to .· the question is -the same answer to that same question. that I gave in t_~e Estilrates Ccmnittee, which was in the paper, it was widely publicized, covered by the press very well, full coverage by the Dail v News 1 who attended the committee meetings. But basically the hon. the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) would also know that Workers' Compensation Boards throughout Canada have had grave difficulty over the past few years 2373

April 11, 1984, Tape 887, Page 1 -- apn MR. DINN: with w·orkers' c:Jmpensation. The one out in B.C., as an example, is subsidized substantially by the provincial government to keep it afloat. Our Workers' Compensation Board is :9robably the best run Norkers' Compens-ation Board of any province in Canada. SUME' RON. MEMBERS: Hear, hea.r !. MR. DINN: Th.e Workers~.

Compensation Board has had some de£icits in th.e past and some surpluses in the Elast,. nut these things have to ne taken into context: By surplus or deficit does it mean that there is not enough-money in the reserve fund to take care of the ins·urance needs· of the B.oard for future requirements'? We·ll,. Mr •. Speaker, we know that in 1982 there was an actuarial study done on the reserve fund of the Board and that report indicated that the Board was in exce].].ent financial condition. ' MR . S'IMMS .! That is· only 1982. MR. DINN: That ~s in 1982.

Now,l983 just passed,. so in 1984 we are due to have another actuarial study on the Workers• Compensation Board and at that point in time I will be in a position to give the hon. member more detailed information as to the capability and the viability of the Workers •· Compensation Board. What happens if, for example, the actuarial indicates that we are $1 million shy wi·th respect to the reserve fund? What happens then is the assessment - MR. HODDER.:_ "'Jhy do you not. (inaudible) MR. DINN: The hon. the member for Port au Port C.Mr ..

Hodder) is interrupting when I am trying to give the hon. the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary)_ a fairly detailed answer to a very good question. The fact of the matter is, if the actuarial study indicates that there is a shortage i'n the reserve fund, then what happens is the assessments 2374

Apri~ ~1, 1~84 1 Tape 887~ Page 2 -- apb MR. DINN: are increased, If ±t indicates that it is rn a surplus position, the assessments can be decreased. And tfiat is now tfie operation of the Workers' · Compensatron Board is operated. rt is operated on the basis of very good frnancial information .

Now 1 i:t is true,as the non, member indicated, there was a surplus rn 1981 of $4 milli-on. ~'lell ,you !\ave to also look at in tnat year now­ mucn money was transferred from the assessments collected that year i·nto the reserve fund r and that year titere was a substantial amount of money, s·o along with the $4 milli:on surp~us: . the:r:e was a s.unstant.±al amount of money transferred i·nte the disaster z:eserve, etc, , and tne other three funding si:tua tions , and that i:s. qur ·te available to the non, member in last yearts repo~t that I gave to the Bouse of As.sa~ly , Now 1 last year 2375

April 11, 1984 Tape No. 888 NM - 1 MR. DINN: there was a substantial amount of money also transferred into the disaster reserve and the other two funding categories of the board. There was a $9 million deficit. So you take the $4 million surplus that you had the year before, the $9 million deficit, if one cannot subtract 4 from 9, it means that over the two year period then it was $5 million deficit. MR. NEARY: $13 million. MR. DINN: It was a $5 million deficit. The hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) adds when he should subtract.

You see,when you have a surplus, and then you have a deficit, you subtract the surplus of one year from the deficit of the next and you find out that indeed there is a $5 million deficit - MR. SIMMS: Clear as a bell. MR. DINN: -over the two years. Now if we continue that on into the next year, which is not reported ye~but in trying to supply the hon.

Leader of the Opposition with all the information that is available to me- and,of course,being a responsible minister we have to, I mean,we have to check and make sure that these boards are operating very well in the Province;and I go down occasionally to the Worker's Compensation Board and meet with the board and get the information from the board, and in my quest to make sure that all the information is provided to these members of the committee, especially those members who show up at the committee meetings - then I indic~ted to him that 1 based on the information that I had at that point in time,it appeared as though there may be a deficit this year of $10 million.

But does that mean that no money will be transferred into the reserved funding or no money will be transferred into - 2376

April 11, 1984 Tape No. 888 NM - 2 MR. NEARY: Do you know what is going on? MR. DINN: Well, if the hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) does not want the answer, Mr. Speaker, you know I cannot help that. But the han. Leader of the Opposition asked the question so I am endeavouring to give him the answer. If he does not want the answer,well, Mr. Speaker, I will sit down and wait for another important question. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please! The time for the Question Period has expired.

Before we proceed,I would like to welcome to the galleries a delegation from the Twillingate, New World Islands, Change Islands Development Association, with their president,Mr. Albert Canning, Mr. John Noel, Mr. Wayne Anstey, and Mr. Malcolm Anstey. SOME HON. MEMERS: Hear, hear! REPORTS OF STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES: MR. SPEAKER: Hermitage. MR. STEWART: The hon. member for Fortune- Mr.

Speaker, the Resource Committee on Estimates have met and considered the following heads: Development, Head VI; Mines and Energy, Head VII; Fisheries, Head VIII; Forest Resources and Lands, Head IX; Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development, Head X; all passed without amendment. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN: MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I have the answer to question number 27 appearing in the name of the hon. the Leader of the Opposition. 2377

"' April 11, 1984 Tape No . 888 NM - 3 ORDERS OF THE DAY : MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : It being Private Member's Day , we shall proceed with Motion number 5 on the Order Paper to be moved by the hon. member for Mount Scio. The hon . member for Mount Scio. MR . BARRY: Mr . Speaker, I expect that we w~ll see unanimous support of the House for this mot ion.

It is a ve ry straightf orward motion and the substance of · the motion is that ~t be resolved that this House condemn the Provincial Government for weakening our bargaining position th·rough its approach to the offshore is·sue: AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this House demand that the Provincial Government return with the Federal Government to the bargaining table immediately.' Now I do not think members will have any difficulty in supporting that . It is the 2378

April 11, 1984 Tape 889 EC - 1 HR. BARRY: only way, ~x. Speaker, that we are going to see this great resource developed for the benefit of Newfoundland and for the benefit of the country as a whole. Now, Mr. Speaker, I would like to start at the beginning. The first 'Whereas' is: 'WHEREAS the Supreme Court of Canada has recently decided in favour of the Federal Government concerning ownership and jurisdiction of offshore resources.' Now, I am sure that hon. members would have no difficulty in accepting that that is the position as laid down by the Supreme Court.

I think it should be pointed out that this was first raised - and the Minister of Justice (Mr. Ottenheimer) should listen to this - this was first raised in a legal forum by the Newfoundland Workers' Compensation Board. The statement has been made by members opposite that it was the federal government that first brought this issue into play. Well, Mr. Speaker, it was the Workers' Compensation Board of Newfoundland which brought this issue first into a legal forum. I was happy to hear the member for Stephenville (Mr. Stagg) 1 in his comments on this 1 acknowledge, Mr.

Speaker, acknowledge and confirm that this was a matter which I had raised as a matter of concern. It was a matter that,I had pointed out to government, need not have been put to the Newfoundland Court of Appeal at the time it was; this has been confirmed by the member for Stephenville, that government was aware of the possi­ bility of the federal Court of Appeal deciding on purely labour law issues, as they in fact ended up doing, and not on the offshore issue. But, of course, by the time the federal court decision came down, the Province had 2379

April 11, 1984 Tape 889 EC - 2 MR. BARRY: already put it before the Newfoundland Court of Appeal, so the legal process was underway which led to a decision adverse to this Province's interests. Now, Mr. Speaker, that has had the result of weakening this Province's bargaining position. The only thing that we can conclude from the position of the Minister responsible for Energy (Mr.

Marshall) and the Premier,that they will not return to the bargaining table, seems to be a lack of confidence in their ability to negotiate a deal that would be acceptable to the people of this Province, and they are taking the safe way out. Rather than be accused of making a mistake, they are taking the safe way out by doing nothing. Well, Mr. Speaker, the people of this Province will condemn members opposite for putting all unemployed in the position of despair, no hope, no promise for the future, o£ putting, in fact, probably an entire generation through unnecessary economic hardship and uncertainty. ~x.

Speaker, this is something that the people of this Province will keep in mind. Members opposite will not get away by doing nothing for fear that they may make a mistake. The people of this Province are aware of the unnecessary hardship to which they are putting our people by their refusal, their stubborn refusal, des~ite many invitations from the federal govern­ ment, to sit down and deal like reasonable individuals with this issue. ~X.

Speaker, that deals with the second recital that: 'WHEREAS this followed a decision of the Newfoundland Court of Appeal which was brought prematurely to the Court and was not properly prepared;' 2380

April 11, 1984 Tape 889 EC - 3 MR . BARRY : The next recital is: 'AND

WHEREAS t.he Premier of this Province has indicated that he intends to keep on fighting until there is a change of government in Otta~1a rather than nm.,r returning with the Federal Government to the bargaining table; 'AND

WHEREAS the present Leader of the Federal Progressive Conservative Party has refused to commit himself to pro­ vincial ownership and jurisdiction of offshore resources and our Province 's two Progressive Conservative Members of Parliament have made conflicting statements on this im_!?ortant issue; SOME HON . ME~1BERS : 'I'he !JOll s! The !JOlls ! 'AND

WHEREAS' - this is what the members were waiting for . The polls change, Mr. Speaker, and they \-lill change again . There has been a neH poll out since this went on the Order Paper . 'AND

WHEREAS recent polls create doubt \·lhether the ' 2381

April 11,1984 Tape No. 890 ah-1 MR. BARRY: 'Progressive Conservative Party will form the Government of Canada after the next election.' And we saw, Mr. Speaker, the polls narrowed to where the Conservative Part~ in a time of no leadership, from the Liberal Party had fallen down nationally to a twelve point spread. Now, Mr. Speaker, I take a position of neutrality in this federal politics. I am a provincial member of the House of Assembly. I take a position of neutrality. I will be looking with great interest, Mr. Speaker, as to what ha~pens.

But I would suggest to member opposite that if the polls have narrowed to twelve points at a time when one of the parties was leaderless,let us watch and see what happens after there has been a leadership convention and a new leader elected. Let us wait and see what the polls are at that point in time. And, Mr. Speaker, my point purely and simply is that it is a very risky proposition for members opposite to put all the ir eggs in the basket of seeing a Progressive Conservative government returned in Ottawa, particularly, Mr.Speaker, when one considers the position recently taken by Mr.

Mulroney following last weekend's policy conference when he comes out and sits down and tells the press -- AN HON . MEMBER: MR.BARRY: He is coming here. Okay, he is coming down here later this month or in a couple of weeks. It was supposed to be the middle of April but it is now several weeks time. So maybe it will be the end of April that he will be down,or maybe it will be May. Maybe he will not be down at all. Butwhat is he going to say when he comes down, Mr. Speaker? I hope members opposite 2362

April 11,1984 Tape No. 890 ah-2 MR.BARRY: were watching his casual statement to the press where he spoke about a couple of new wrinkles, a couple of new wrinkles developing since ~x. Clark was prepared to sign on the dotted line, Despite being undermined by the Premier in the election, Joe Clark was prepared to sign on the dotted line. Mr.

Mulrone~ however 1 is now saying,' Oh, there are two new wrinkles, There is the Supreme Court of Canada decision and there is the new amending formula under the constitution,' and:,' he said,'we might be waiting quite a long time if we had to wait for a constitutional amendment.' To that I say, rubbish, rubbish , Mr. Mulroney. If the Premier has not yet, the Premier should very quickly , this afternoon or tomorrow,send off to Mr. Mulroney the concurrence which the Premier tells us he had obtained from the other Premiers of Canada. Now if we have, Mr.

Speaker, the concurrence of all of the provincial governments of Canada ,as the Premier indicates we have,this should be pointed out to Mr. Mulroney,so that if he does become Prime Minister,in that eventuality,an~ he has the concurrence of all ten premiers for a constitutional amendrnent,then it will be only in Mr. Mulroney's hands as to whether or not the constitution is amended. So, Mr. Mulroney should not be let off the hook by pretending that this amending formula is now going to create great difficulty in his doing what the Conservative Party had earlier committed itself to do. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I would like to get back to the telex of the Minister responsible for Energy (Mr.Marshalll, sent to Mr. Chretien January 24,1983. I have two or three points, Mr. Speaker, 2383

April 11, 1984 Tape 891 PK - 1 MR. BARRY: to indicate, Mr •. Speaker, that this side of the House stands foursquare for Newfoundland beyond any shadow of a doubt on matters of principle relating to the control and management of the resource and on seeing this Province get a fair share of revenue. But what we are against, and this, Mr. Speaker, will come out despite these misleading propaganda ads that are being circulated, I hope not at government's expense, I hope at private expense -not that last one, surely not that last one, at government expense!

I think there is an ad that comes out that shows last week's resolution, Mr. Speaker, but fails to point out the amendment. It does not mention, I do not believe, the amendment; does not mention the amendment proposed by this side of the House that says that these matters should not be set forth as preconditions. MR. SIMMS: The House defeated it. MR. BARRY: Yes, it was defeated. The amendment was defeated by members opposite. In other words, Mr. Speaker, members opposite are in favour of setting these preconditions.

They are in favour of not sitting down unless you have the other side agree to a list of I think it is seventeen preconditions we have here. And imagine, Mr. Speaker, what is being set forth as matters of principle. MR. SIMMS: Eighteen you said yesterday. MR. BARRY: counting them? Is it eighteen? Who is Mr. Speaker, I went through the first four or five. We are in favour of true joint management which would see some form of dispute resolution so that the final say is not necessarily with one side or the other. MR. PATTERSON: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. 2384

April 11, 1984 Tape 891 PK- 2 MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I wou~d like to have a little silence.- · I know it is a hot issue, a red hot issue - MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) : Order, please ~ A point of order by the hon. member for Placentia. MR. PATTERSON: If the hon. member is so much in favour of the position taken by our Premier,why is he sitting opposite? MR. YOUNG: MR. BARRY: order. MR. SPEAKER: Right on! Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker, to the point of Order, please! To that point of order, the hon. member for Mount Scio. MR. BARRY: Mr.

Speaker, I think that becomes quite obvious from the vote on the amendment last week,when the member for Placentia (Mr. Patterson),together with other members,got up and shot down an amendment which would say we should not set forth _preconditions to negotiation. Members know that they will never get a negotiated settlement if they are going to set preconditions. MR. SPEAKER: Order, piease! To that point of order, I rule there is no point of order, merely a question to the han. member. The hon. member for Mount Scio. MR. BARRY: So, Mr.

Speaker, what we have again is an example of a total lack of awareness of what is involved in negotiating. Member,s opposite do not know how to negotiate. They have never had to negotiate. They do not know how. Now, if I can go through these points, the first point is we agree with true joint --------- 23B5 ==-

April 11, 1984 Tape 891 PK - 3 MR . BARRY: management, with a dispute resolving mechanism. \ole do not understand ~hat all this emphasis is on who employs the sta£f, as long as there is a proper secondment. As long as there is proper direction given to the staff of the Board, who cares ~~~ho is the ultimate employer? ~ ::-~ --.-;---- - """":' ... rom . PATTERSON: Who hires and fires? You do not think it is important who hires and fires? SOME HON . MEMBERS : Oh, oh! 2386

April 11, 1984 Tape No. 892 MJ - 1 MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, do I have to shout the member down? ~~R. SPEAKER (Aylward) : Order, please! Order, please! MR. Bl\.RRY: Hr. Speaker, on the second point, ~.,rith respect to 'th.e Federal righb to determine the pace of development up to the point of national energv self-sufficiency and security nf supply,' - fine ! 'There will be rreaningful protection afforded the Province against the unreasonable or capricious use of that power,•--what:Ooes that mean? T.\lhat does that mean, ~~r. Speaker? We want clarification from the ~~inister responsible for Energy (Mr.

Marshall) . \17e are not trained seals, Mr. Speaker, that will vote for anything. We want clarification of what is meant by this. MR. RIDEOUT: Do you not know? MR. BARRY: No, ~1r. Speaker. No. It has never been explained. The Premier got up there, stood up in this House and said, 'Oh 1 the Opposition is using terms like 'reasonable'.

They say that they want a'reasonable' settlement.' And he said, 'That is nonsense using words like that.' So the Premier and the Hinister of Energy sent up a Telex to ~~- Chretien saying that they were against, 'unreasonable exercise of federal power.' Well 1we put the Premier's words back to him, '1\fhat does this general language mean?' Mr.

Speaker, 'In the development plan approval process, if there is disagreement at the BoRrd and Ministerial levels, the provincial plan will have paramountcy unless through an objective process it can be proven that the plan unreasonably delays or interferes with the achievement of national self-sufficientcy and security of supply.' No problem! Again, it is a question of what type of objective process. It is general language since we do not know t.,rhat form of objective process they are talking about 2387

April 11, 1984 Tape No. 891 MJ - 2 MR. BARRY: here. Mr. Speaker, the next point is they are talking about the objective process being through 'a mutually agreeable independent body'. ~~at type of body? They have not said, we do not know. Item (d), Mr. Speaker, 'That there will be an objective means of determination of national energy self-sufficiency and security: again, 'by a mutually agreeable independent body.' ~O:e do not know what that independent body is. Get up and tell us. Get up and have the aovernrnent tell us, Mr. Speaker. MR. RIDEOUT: You know. You know. Ypu were in caucus with all of us. MR.

BARRY: The member opposite willl·have his chance to enter into this debate and he can tell us · all the things he has learned since he joined the other party . I .. ffi. RIDEOUT: MR. SPEAKER (Ayhlard) MR. BARRY: . , You knOll the a.ns>o.er, who ;.1as suggested. Order, please! Order, please! Mr. Speaker, Item (e), 'That the ?rovince's contribution to national energy self-sufficiency and security of supply will be commensurate toli th other ··oil producing provinces or areas~ 'That Mr. Speaker, seems to be all right.

Item (_f), 'That the fiscal regime setting the basic and sliding scale royalties and crown share applicable in respect of resource revenue will be set out in the mirror legislation.' Well we mav not have ( -· any need for mirror legislation now, it will not be possible without a Constitutional amendment. Why would we need mirror legislation if we have a proper Constitutional amendment? 'Provincial Retail Sales Tax and Corporate Income Tax will apply offshore.' Mr. Speaker, that is only another way of getting the revenue. Nhether that is done or whether the revenue comes to the Province in another I 23BB

,. April 11, 1984 Tape 'lo . 89 2 MJ - 3 MR. BARRY: 'Yiay is not a matter of nrinciple, it is a matter of getting the proper share of government take. Item {h) 'A revenue floor when we reach a certain level of wealth which ,.,ill never be less that the initial share of the 'Total G·overnment '~'ake accruing to the Federal Government . ' .a.gain, no problem, Mr . Speaker. 'Per capita earned income will be significantly reflected in the revenue trigger point in addition to the fis cal capacity of the Province . ' ttr .

Speaker, now this is where we get into the nitty -gritty of negotiation and this is an example of where the Province is trying to set a precondition. . Before they sit down t~ the bargaining table,they are trying to have the federa l government agree to all matters by Telex. I mean,they actually think that they can get an agreement bv an exchange of Telexes, Mr. Speaker . It shows you why we have not had 2389

April 11, 1984, Tape 893, Page 1 ..-- apb MR. BARRY: progress rn this Pl'ovince over the last five years ·,which shows : you why we h.ave the level of unemployment, the acknowledged level at 23 per cent~ God knows what the real level of unemployment is .. Mr.

Speaker, Item (j l_: ''That the Provincial Government would receive 75 per cent of the Total Government take at the start rnc],udi .ng, if necessary, . the PGRT .' The Petroleum Gas !<.evenue -tax, Mr, Speaker, this i:s the point that was bei'ng made ny Mr, Chretr .en rn his statement la .st week, that as long as we look. at total government take the province w·rll end up i'n a better posrti ·on as ],ong as we a~e gettrng,i:nstead of the federal government,the benefrts of thi: ·s PGRT.

Now,. i·t rs · still j us.t a rna tter of looking a.t the total government take and how i:·t wi-ll be divided between th .e province and the federal governme~t. And wh.ether you take it through provincial tax, o:r: provincial corporate income tax, or through the federal government passing over the PGRT, does it matter? Wha .t matters is th.e amount of money that will be available to this Province to use for the benefit of our people. Mr, Speaker, again the next ite~.

That there will be no artifici31 reduction by reducting P.I.P. grants and so torth 1 again we can accept that. ''That there be fair and equitable shari·ng of Crown rights,.' we accept that. •An orderly phase out of ~quali:zation not less favourable than the provisions contained in the the present Fi:scal Arrangements Act•, whi'ch says that it can only reduce By 15 per cent in any one year, and Mr, Chretien, in the s·tatement he read last week 1went further than that and sai~ he would enter into the type of agreement on equalization 1 which members opposite apparently know nothing about, that he has with th .e Province of Nova sc:otia where there is less than a dollar for dollar 2390

April 11,, 1984, Tape 893, Page 2 -- apb MR, BARRY: reduction as part of a special deal on t!i: .e offs·hore, Now-r the government and members oppos ·:i'te s·hould find what the detai'ls of that Nova Scotian ag~eement a~e. MR. NEARY: Have they a copy of that statement over there? MR. BAR.RY: I do not know if th.ey haye a copy of Mr. Chretien's statell)ent, Now, there are th:j.ngs in Mr. Chretien •·s· statement~ Ke s·lides too easily oyer thi·s ' joint management,. !i.e wants the final say. ThA .t is a matter for negotiati·on. . That is a matter on which we would not tell the provincial government to accept Mr.

Ch11et:i:en "s · statement, There are matters there where we can negoti ·ate a bett_er deal than he has offered, Simi.'larly 1 when he talks about . '·We will ne almos·t as· ri'ch as Alberta. r and ~icl'ler than Ontario~, it depends on what he means by · the de:fi .nition of '·ri·ch.' · .. And we do not think that he is taking into cons·ideration per capita earned income,and, again, , that is a matter where we think a better deal can be negotiated from Mr .. Chretien than h.e has · offered so far. . But the . only way of getting that better deal, Mr.

Speaker, will be if the provincial government sits down at . the bargaining table and negotiates i~. MR. SPEAKER (Ayl>vard) . : elaps ·e.d. MR. BARRY: Order, please !• The. han .. member 1 s tl:me has · There. are just four more points, M~ . speaker, :r a.m sure we can have our posi:ti ·on by leave on those to sli..ow -that there i·s no real opposition in principle, Mr .. Speaker~ jus:t on ll)atters of detail, just on the process of negoti:ation. MR. SPEAKER: SOME HON •. ME l-iBERS : Order, please!' Oh ~ oh~ 2391

April 11! 19~4, Tape 893! Page 3 -- apb MR ... BARRY; Tney do not want tne people to know ·. Mr, Speaker : 'rhey- do not want tlte people to know- , MR , SPEAKER (Aylward) .: MR . BARRY: cloud of pvopaganda , SOME HON . MEMBERS : MR. SPEAKER: leaye to continue~ \• ... SOME: RON', ME.MBERS'; SOME HON', MEMBERS '; 'MR. SPEAKER: MR. ROBERTS; '-MR, SPEAKER: s.pe.aker, Order 1 please! ' The ~ want to ~de be~nd a ~:i:t down, !Joy, Order , J? lease~ Does tbe non, memeer nave By' leave, No, no leave. I;e.aye has not been granted, No leave? Re.fore I in troduce th.e next 239 2

April 11, 1984 Tape No. 894 NM - 1 MR. SPEAKER (AYLWARD) : I am sure you wish to join me in welcoming to our galleries the Mayor, three Councillors, and Clerk from the Town of Spaniard's Bay. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for St. John's North. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. CARTER: Perhaps members should not applaud me because I was thinking of moving a motion of no confidence, a motion of no confidence in the Opposition.

There is a procedural problem there, because if there is a motion of no confidence moved in the gov~rnment and the motion is lost 1 then the government loses and becomes the Opposition, so if a motion of no confidence is voted on in the Opposition and is sustained,then presumably the Opposition becomes the government. It gets awfully tangled so I thought I would stay away from that. Mr.

Speaker, when the hon. member for Mount Scio (Mr : Barry) first crossed the floor 1 I was looking forward to an increase in the general level of intellegence of the Opposition and I think we were all looking forward quite genuinely to very hard,trenchant debate; the debate from now on would be largely a matter of ideas and not just of words. But I think we have all been sadly disappointed.

The member for Mount Scio, especially in regard to~this particular resolution, has been involved in the negotiations for a number of years, he is very knowledgeable, he is I think very well versed in all these matters both from ~ legal point of view and from a political point of view because of his experience . ~~d I was hoping that we would get a very good, if somewhat biased, analysis of the present offshore position. And I for one would have 2393

·. April 11, 1984 Tape No. 894 NM - 2 MR. CARTER: been more than happy to have granted him leave to carry on for most of the. afternoon, I think other members he.re would have agreed tvith me, had he been interesting and analytical, and serious . I really think I speak for every person on this side when I say that it would have been l'lO trouble, he might have had to ask a couple o£ times, but it would have been no trouble for him to have gotten unanimous consent to carry on for the to~hole afternoon.

Because I think the hon. member did start off by being sincere,and I would like to make this point, sincerity is the important thing in political life; once you can fake that you have it made. On the matter of the motion as it is made, now this is the one that deals with the six remaining Supremes, the ones that I inadvertently referred to as Liberal hacks 1 Mr. Speal~er, the last time I \'Ia'S speaking 1 and for which I have apologized and cannot apologize too often. It was wrong to call them Liberal hacks . They are not Liberal hacks. They may be Liberals but they are not necessarily hacks . 2394

. April 11, 1984 Tape 895 EC - 1 MR. CARTER: So the point is that the Supreme Court of Canada has made, unfortunately, a decision that certainly prejudices any negotiations with Newfoundland. And, you know, there is really something very unfair about this House of Assembly and I think it is a good time for me to bring it up. The Opposition can ask questions of the ministers of the government - they can ask all kinds of questions; a half an hour a day is devoted to it. Sometimes they are given leave to ask even more questions - but we are not allowed to ask questions of the Opposition.

Now, I agree that individual members should not be allowed to ask questions of individual members of the Opposition but, surely, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) has, he h2s told us nanytL~s, , Cabinet rank, and if he has Cabinet rank, he should therefore to some extent have Cabinet responsibilities. After all, if the government changes he 1-rould hecone nreT'l.ier; although the phrase 'Premier Neary' sort of sticks on rny tonc:;ue. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

CARTER: Several times I have attempted to phrase a question for the Leader of the Opposition and each time it has been disallowed by the Speaker, in spite of the fact that I have quoted citations which I think would support my attempt to ask the Leader of the Opposition some questions. But now that I am speaking and he is in the House, I do have two questions for the Leader of the Opposition, two very important questions. They are the following: Has John Doyle read the Mifflin report or has he not? them now. SOME HON. MEMBERS: T\ ·!o questions : He can anS\V'er Hear, hear! 2395

April 11, 1984 Tape 895 EC - 2 HR. CARTER: To get down to the matter at hand, I am convinced, and I think most of us here are convinced, that a deal is possible and that philosophically, perhaps, the federal government and the provincial govern­ ment are not all that far apart. I think the day will come when a deal will be made. I think it will be long and hard and I do not think it will be easily come by. The negotiations will not be simple and the technological developments that have to be perfected are certainly going to hold things up.

But it is rather - perhaps I should argue by analogy it is rather like my saying that I am going to give a salesman a car to do his work with. Now, who could disagree with that? What salesman would say that it was wrong for me to give him a car to do his work with? - a perfectly reasonable position.

But now, when you get down.to the fine points ,and you look at the car and you find that it is a twenty year old car, you find that the tires are all flat and you find that the body is rusting away and there is no insurance on it; you have to look at the shape of the car, then you realize that it is not enough just to make general statements of good will, it is the fine details that are important. And later on in this debate, people who are far more knowledgeable than I am will get up and talk about the details that they could not agree with. MR. NEARY: The:' ~-rill be eT'l.barra::;sec~ over there then. ~8..

CARTER: ~·" oc ·.r, tl1e cry ]~eeps going up, 'Why can we not sit down and negotiate?' Well, I am sorry that the hon. member is not in his chair because, I would say, I will give him another example; I will offer him $1,000 for his house. Now, his house is worth far more than that, but this is a serious offer, I will offer him $1,000 for his house. 2396

1\~ril 11, 1984 Tape 895 EC - 3 t-IR. CARTER: And if he \•lill not sit down and negotiate, \vhat is the matter? If he does not like that offer why does he not sit dow~ and negotiate? I might give him $1 ,100 . That is the kind of deal we have with Ottawa . MR. STAGG: I would say they •.vill give you $1 ,000 today and if you do not negotia te they will give you $900 tomorrow. MR . CARTER: well taken.

Yes, the member 's point is Now, a little earlier ,when speaking in Interim Supply, I believe, I pointed ou t how something over $1 billion a year comes out of Newfoundland pockets and go es to the federal government and some~~ing like - and I am quoting figures from the budget - something like $750 million comes back in equalization and established program financinry payr!' .ents . So we pay out Sl billion - rather more than $1 billion, that is a conservative estimate. It is implicit in the budget figures, any member may check it, and we get back something like S750 million .

Now, if we get any oil revenues, those revenues - not all of them , apparently; I am willing to concede the point to the member for Mount Scio (Mr . Barry ) - not all of those, no matte r what deal is made they would not do it dollar for dollar . 239 7

April 11,1984 Tape No. 896 ah-1 MR. CARTER: Not all of the money we would get for oil would go against our payments,but most of it. We would be very little better off. So our equalization payments would go to zero, our oil payments might be a little better than that. We might end up with an net profit of $50 to $60 million, a few pipe yards and perhaps a head office or two. So it is not very much and I think we can hold out for much better, much, much better. Now, the member for Mount Scio (Mr.Barry) says that we are doing nothing. Well,is it not better to do nothing than to give it all away?

Is it not better to wait them out? I would like someone to respond to that. It is far better for us to be doing nothing at the present time. We are causing unemployment? Well,what would we do? Sign a deal that would ensure all kinds of employment for people other than Newfoundlanders. Why should we do that? We want to sign a deal that will ensure that Newfoundlanders get first crac~ at any employment in the offshore. And this unnecessary refusal to sit down, Mhy should be sit down with them when they continue to insult us by their offers? Now,the member for Mount Scio suggested that our federal leader, Mr.

Mulroney, is soft on ownership. But as far as we are concerned, management is the important thing.And in any case,as the Opposition know,opposition parties should not get too specific, they should always paint with a broad brush. And I am rather disappointed that our erstwhile member for Mount Scio is now sitting down with the likes of Mr. Trudeau. Would they have us try and make 2398

April 11,1984 Tape No. 896 ah-2 MR.CARTER: a deal with Mr. Trudeau? Would they have us try and make a deal with Mr. Chretien or Mr . MacEachen? Or how about 'Forger' Fox? I wonder what kind of a deal you could make with him? That is the kind of people you have to talk to up-along, so I think we will wait them out MR. NEARY: Frank Moores will straighten them all out. MR.CARTER: Now, to go over the actual resolution. It starts; . "

WHEREAS the Supreme Court of Canada has recently decided in favour of the Federal Government concerning ownership and jurisdiction of offshore resources." Well, that is not bad, but by the time you reach the next clause, it starts to get slimy." AND

WHEREAS this followed a decision of the Newfoundland Court of Appeal which was brought prematurely to the Court and was not properly prepared." Now that is just slimy. There is no question about that. MR. SIMM: The member for Mount Scio (Mr.Barry) said the opposite. MR.CARTER: Right. "MID li'?HERFAS the Premier of this Province has indicated that he intends to keep on fighting until there is a change of government in Ottawa rather than now returning with the Federal Government to the bargaining table." That is just dirty, ~d so on, and it gets from dirty to filthy.

And the last two resolutions are quite unacceptable. So, Mr. Speaker, I have composed an amendment. And in my amendment I suggest to delete all the words after the second"WHEREAS" and to substitute the following."THEREFOHE

BE IT RESOLVED that this House condemn the Federal Government for weakening our bargaining position through its approach 2399

April 11,1984 Tape No . 896 ah - 3 MR . CARTER: to the offshore issue; ~~ BE IT FURTHER RESOLVF.D that this House demand that the Federal Government reconsider its present position on the offshore question.' ' ~.nd I think that is a very sensible reformation of the resolution and I think that this is the way we should approach it rather than put up lvith the slime that the hon. gentleman has put in his resolution . MR .STAGG: Rxcellent. It does not negative it all. r.oes it? MR.CARTER: MR.SPEAKER (Aylward): is in order. MR.CARTER: MR. SPEAKER: minute.s left. MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER: No, it expands it.

I rule that ·this amendment Thank you . The hon. member has five A point of order . The hon. Leader of the 09positior on a point of order . MR . NEA.~Y: Mr. Speaker, I believe when you move an amendment on a Private Member's Resolution there has to be a seconder . 2400

April 11, 1984 Tape 897 PK - 1 MR. NEA RY : I did not hear the hon. gentleman name a seconder, Mr. Speaker. so I would submit that the amendment is completely out of order. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) : a mover and a seconder? MR. NEARY: MR. CARTER: MR. NEARY : HR.. 1'-.ND~WS : SOME HON. MEMBERS: M'R. NEARY: f.1R. WARREN: MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Is it correct that there is No , there has been no seconder. Mr. Speaker, It is too late now. Hr. Speaker, I second. Oh, oh! Your Honour has alread v ruled. That is right.

I ruled that it was in order because it was onderstood that there was a mover and a seconder, and the hon. Minister of Environment (Mr. Andrews) has said that he is the seconder. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. CARTER: this side. MR. NEARY: Oh, oh! There are plenty of seconders on Mr. Speaker, my point of order , I raised the point of order, Mr. Speaker, because Your Honour ruled on an amendment that had not been seconded. And I believe the whole procedure is completely out of order, Mr. Speaker.

You cannot say that something is in order if it is not in order, and then,after the fact,have somebody get up and second it, Mr. Speaker. I would submit that the whole procedure is completely out of order. MR. OTTENHEIMER: order. MR. SPEAKER: hon. Minister of Justice. Mr. Speaker, to the point of To that point of order, the 2401

April 11, 1984 Tape 897 PK - 2 MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, permit me to go back on what happened. The hon. member for St. John's North (Mr. Carter) moved an amendment which was then submitted to the Chair. And the Chair ruled that it was in order; in other words it was not a direct negation, it was · not irrelevant to the subject, it was not whatever other things would put it out of order. The Chair ruled that it was in order, ~hen agreed with the hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) that a seconder was necessary 1and then the House was informed who the seconder was.

So I think all of the criteria have been met. I would submit to the Chair that the criteria have been met. MR. l'7ARRE~l : No. MR. OTTENHEIMER: The first ruling was it being in order from the point of view if it was irrelevant 1 had nothing to do with the subject, if it was a direct negation, whatever, those things, that it met all of those criteria,And then the Chair quite properly said a seconder is necessary; and then the hon. member who seconded it informed the Chair that he did in fact second it. MR.

SPEAKER (Ay lward ) : To that point of order: When the Chair heard the resolution and viewed the substance of the proposal from the han. member for St. John's North, ,the substance of the proposal did not negate the main motion, so therefore it was ruled to be in order in substanc~ It was pointed out by the han. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) that a seconder is necessary, which is correctr-I have no doubt. And the Chair was informed that it was seconded by the hon. Minister of Environment (Mr. Andrews). So,therefore 1 I rule that the amendment is in order. MR. NEARY: A further point of order, M~.

Speaker. 2402

April 11, 1984 MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) : han. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Tape 897 PK - 3 A new point of order, the Under the rules of this han. House, Mr. Speaker, when somebody moves an amendment to a private member's resolution,he has to state 'It is being moved and seconded' Now up to that point the han. gentleman did not have a seconder, Mr. Speaker. HP-.. DINN: of order. MR. NEARY: That is exactly the same point You are questioning the Chair! No, it is not the same point of order.

I am stating what the precedents are in this House, 1•1hat the rules ot this .r-J:ouse sav: That 1.,rhen a me!'lber !'\aves an amendment to a ~rivate member's resolution he has to state "r~.oved and .seconded b~r". ~~m.,r the hon. gentlel"lan did not no that, !~r. Sneaker. And I -r,muld submit to your Honour that the \•Thole !Jrocedure Has com:?letely out of order. ~m.. HOUSE: MR. OTTENHEIMER: of order. MR. SPEAKER: han. Minister of Justice. MR. OTTENHEIMER: r,rhere q.re vour authori _ties? Mr. Speaker, to that point To that point of order, the I would submit, Mr.

Speaker, that in terms of the time sequence o~_the procedure for a seconder 1 there is no doubt that a seconder is necessary. There is no doubt about that. MR. NEARY: That is right. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Now very frequently when a person moves an amendrnen~they will aa~ 1 I move the following amendment, and I am seconded by the han. member from So-and-So.' The han. member from So-and-So does not say anything, just nods_his head, and by doing that the han. member perserves his right to speak on the amendment. Because even if you get up and say/I second the arnendmen~'you have spoken on the amendment. Now the hon. 2403

April 111 1984 Tape 897 PK - 4 ~1R . OTTENHEIMER : Minister of Environment (Mr . Andrews) seconded .. the amendment, and the procedure her e 1 or the process 1 the methodology wa s different . Instead of the hon. member fo r St . John Is (Mr . Carter) say ing I I '.t'he amendment is seconded by the hon. Minister of Environment;and he sitting in his Chair and nodding and thus perserving his right to speak 2404

April 11, 1984 Tape No. 898 NM - 1 MR. OTTENHEIMER: on the amendment, a different process was done and the hon . Minister of the Environment (Mr. Andrews) got up and said, "I second the amendment." He has obviously fulfilled the requirement of having a seconder MR. NEARY: No. MR. OTTENHEIMER: - but it means he cannot speak on the amendment. He can · speak on the original question but he cannot speak on the amendment. So I would suggest, Mr.

Speaker, that in a sense there are two - there may be other ways,I do not know - but two ways of the Chair being informed of the ~econder of a~ amendment; one by a proposer indicating that it is seconded by So-and-So, and if So-and-So has not already spoken, because if he has he cannot second it, if So-and-So has not already spoken and nods his head si qnifying yes, he is se~onding it, then that is the way the seconder is ·communicated.

If an hon. member does not wish to reserve his right to speak on the amendment, it has nothing to do with the original motion but on the amendment, then it may be signified to the Chair by the han. member . getting up and saying, "I second the amendment." So I would submit- and I do not know really if there is much difference between this point of order and the previous one that the requirement of having a seconder has been met. It has been met by the han. member · getting up and saying he seconds it, rather than having a proposer inform the House who in fact is seconding it . The han. member did it himself . MR.

NEARY: Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Further to that point of order, the han. Leader of the Opposition. 2405

April 11, 1984 Tape No. 898 MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I would submit that this is a very, very serious matter indeed. We cannot allow the House to function in this way. You cannot run the House like you were having a meeting downtown somewhere in a tavern. The rules are there. NM - 2 The rules are clear, Mr. Speaker, that the hon. gentleman moved an amendment and did not have a seconder. Now Your Honour cannot give the House time for the hon. gentleman to go around and say, "Will you "second this?" Obviously the hon. gentleman did not have a seconder when he moved his amendment, Mr. Speaker.

And I hasten also to point out,by the way, that the Minister of Justice· (Mr. Ottenheimer) is absolutely correct, the Minister of the Environment (Mr. Andrews), if Your Honour allows the amendment to stand, removes himself from being allowed to speak on this amendment because he stood in his place after. But, Mr. Speaker, this is all after the fact. The rules of the House clearly state that the member who moves an amendment must have a seconder, except in certain debates, certain amendments that are made. But in this particular instance,when you are moving an amendment to a private member's resolution, Mr.

Speaker, you cannot do it after the fact. When the amendment is sent to Your Honour in the Chair. the member who is moving the amendment says, "I have moved, seconded by So-and-So", Th~n Your Honour examines t~e content of it and decides whether or not it is in order or out of order. But do not then say, "Well, can we have a seconder?" Mr. Speaker. Then you are having a free for all. The Hou~e cannot operate that way. MR. OTTENHEIMER: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. 2406

April 11, 1984 Tape No. 898 NM - 3 MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): Order, please! To that point of order, the han. Minister of Justice. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, I think I have some actual authority now as well as people's various views. Standing Order 32 says, "All motions shall be in writing, and seconded, before being debated or put from the Chair." MR. NEARY: MR. OTTENHEIMER: MR. NEARY: Right on. Now the motion was in writing. Yes. MR. OTTENHEIMER: It was seconded"before being debated or put from the Chair." MR. NEARY: Before it was put by the Chair. MR. OTTENHEIMER: put by the Chair. MR. NEARY: MR.

OTTENHEIMER: No, it has not been debated or That is right. There is another one as well _which is probably clearer and that is Beauchesne, page 99, Paragraph 304, and it is right under the heading,"SECONDING OF MOTIONS", it could not be more germane. "The Member who makes a motion may," not_ must, shall, may, permissive, "The Member who makes a motion may give the name of his seconder who will, if necessary, indicate his consent, and the seconder will then be allowed to speak on the question.

But if the seconder should rise and say only a word or two, for instance, 'I second the motion'", if he should do that, "he is precluded from again addressing the House." MR. NEARY: MR. OTTENHEIMER: That is before, Mr. Speaker. So it is quite clear in

Section 304 of Beauchesne , that that is an option. It is quite clear. I will read it again without comment because it is so clear. My comments may make it less clear. "The 2407

llo.pril 11, 1984 Tape No. 898 NM - 4 MR. OTTENHEIMER: Member who makes a motion may give the name of his seconder who will, if necessary, indicate his consent, and the seconder will then be allm.,.ed to speak on the question. But if the seconder should rise and say only a word or two, for instance, 'I second the motion,' "-what is the result? - "he is precluded from again addressing the Erouse." The result is not that the motion is not properly seconded. So I think this is straight on and the authorities are quite clear . MR . NEARY : Mr . Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER (Aylward) : The hon. the Leader of the Opposition to that point of order. MR. NEARY : (32) of our Standing Rules, Mr. Speaker, is perfectly clear. It is clear . and I will quote it again, "All motions shall be in writing, and seconded, before being debated or put from the Chair." 2408

April 11, 1984, Tape 899 1 Page 1 -- apb. HR. NEARY: N:ow- 1 Yo~r Ronour h.ad put, the motion. ': MR. SIMMS: No, he had not, ,, MR. WARREN; ae di :d so~ MR. s:IMMS': You ca,nn_ot put the motion until you vote on it. _ MR. NEARY ': Mr.. Spea!c.er 1 Your H.on .our ha.d put the motion and t.he hon, gentleman was: ready 1;;o continue wi'th _ his: deabte wfien I interrupted witlt a point of order, Now, Mr, Speaker, that is contra;J;"y to the rules: of this: han. .

Hous"e f and unless we are goi:ng to make rules: here on the floor here t_oday, -whi'Ch_ we. cannot do 1 we cannot chancre the rules w± .thout a twa-thi:rds vote i·n th.e House ' --the_ whole procedure is completely out of order. And I am not chall,engin_g Your Honoui;~S: ruli ·ng at thi ·s point i:n time. I may have to do it 1 D'l,lt I would li'ke Your Ronour to ta .ke the matter under advisement and pro:Oab"l.y tak .e fi'Ve or ten minutes: to do a li'ttle re -search ..

Because 1 Mii, Speaker! r think Your Honour should look at H'ansard 1, see what happened r see what the procedure i's, Becaus :e we -do not want t,o create a very dangerous: precedent .in this- --House, And I would suggest to the Chair, and I a!!\ not telling the Chair what to do •. that I believe there should be a fe'" minutes taken on this because the whole thing was completely out of order. MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, to that point of order. MR. SPEAKER(.Aylward): To that point of order, the hon. the member for St. John's North, ~hP. final ar~uroent on this point of order. 2409

Ap:J;'.tl Ur 1,984( Tape 899 1 Page 2. apb . MR, CARTER: Mr, Speaker-r thi·s i.s. frivolous and vexatious·· and just designed to delay the time of the House. I th:i::nk. there .i,s a J,at.i,n legal maxi'm that covers this po .int quite nicely,' De minimis non curat lex 1' the law does not concern .ttself with . trifles·, MR. S'PEAKER (AylwardJ.: Order, please~ \>Ji th the initial rulincr on the text of tfl:i's amendrnent, I ruled that this wording would be in order ..

If the hon. member had to start his · debate on this amendment.,. had to continue to debate the amendment without a seconder( obviously then it was out of order ·and it Has brought to l"1V attention at that time. By the non. ·member not ·contim£ing t_o debate~ the. poi .:1t of order was raised that there was not a seconder, the seconder who ordinarily wou1d ha,ve. been mention.ed by the ~over of the motion stood and stated that be was seconding it, therefore. eLiminating any possibil:i:,ty that he may speak to this: motion, , and by hi"' seconding it before it was debated made the motion to be in order.

Therefore I rule that this amendment is in order. elapsed. MR •. NEARY: The han. member's time has now Mr. Speaker, I move that we appeal Your Honour's ruling. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Is it the pleasure of the House that the Speaker's ruling be sustained? All those in favour •·aye '' SOME HON, MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKE-R: SOME' H.ON. MEMBE'RS : MR. SPEAKER: it. Aye. All those. against •·nay •·. Nay. _ In my opinion the ''a.yes' have The time of the han. the member for s·t. John''s North(}lr, Cartert has elapsed .. 2410

Apri·l ll.: 19:84, Tape 8'19! Page 3 --apb MR~ CARTER: MR •. NEARY: · ~.R, SPE:lU{E:R(.Ayl\vardt: A final A point o£ order1 MI.', Speaker, The hon, the Leader of the Opposrtion on a point of order, MR, NEAR_'{: Your ffonour has ±nfot'IIled the. .non .. membe·r that l'r.i..s time l\as ela.pse.d r he i:s persisting in violating the rules-of t..l'te Hous:e, he •·rants to carry-on w:i:tl'l. deoate 1 and Your Honour should ask tl'le non, ge.nt1eman to take h±s seat or name him and have him removed from the House. 2 411 ..

April 11, 1984 MR. CARTER: order. Tape No. 900 MJ - l Mr. Speaker, to that point of MR. SPEAI<ER (Aylward) : T<;> that point of order 1 the hon. the member for St. John's North. MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, as a matter of fact I was rising to a point of order 1 but I did not have a chance to say it before the Leader of the Opposition (_Mr. Neary). got up on a point of order. But to that point of order, which is the same one, I did understand Your Honour to have said that the han. member's time was up and I was going to rise and ask you if in fact that was what you said, it is what you said and therefore I accept it.

The only point I \V'Ould like to make is that ! think that my t-ime has been used up in frivolous, mischievous and vexatious argument and ordinarily I would ask for leave to continue but I do not think I would get it. MR. SPEAI<ER: Order, pleasel To that point of order, I rule there is no point of order. The han. the member for Bellevue. MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker, I do not have a copy of the amendment, so I cannot very well debate it I suppose if I do not have a copy, ~hat is another mistake that the member for St. John's North (1~r. Carter) made. HR. SIMMS: What? MR.

CALLAN: He should have made some copies and at least distributed them . in antici ~ ation of his amendment being accepted. But anyway, Mr -.-. Speaker, as I remember from what he had to say when he introduced his amendment 1 2412

April 11, 1984 Tape No. 900 MJ - 2 MR. CALLAN: the whole thing is still in the same realm as far as debating points go. What we are talking about here, Mr. Speaker, is the reason why this Province and the offshore negotiations are in the stalemate that they are in today. And,of course 1inherent in all of that we are also talking about why the Premier - today at his press conference and earlier here the House - why the Premier has decided to spend the next couple of months travelling across Canada trying to win back what was lost in the courts. That is what it amounts to.

The Premier admits it in his statement here. He says in his statement, 'The bottom line, however,is that the legal case on the offshore,through no fault of ours,is lost.' That is on page 2 of the Premier's statement today. But of course there is something wrong with the statement. That part about the legal case on the offshore is lost, that

part is correct, there is no arguing that, it is lost. The other part,of course,where the Premier says, 'through no fault of ours' now that is not correct. If there is one person in this Province, ~x. Speaker, who must accept responsibility for the offshore being lost it is the Premier. So how that man can say 'through no fault of ours' is of course a good question. It is the Premier's fault because the case should never have gone to the courts in the first place. HR. CARTER: That is rubbish. MR. CALLAN: It is not rubbish. It is factual. It is true.

And as I said last week,when we were debating a similar resolution put by the member for St. Mary's - The Capes (Mr. Hearn) regarding the offshore and the legal 2413

April 11, 1984 Tape 901 EC - 1 HR. CALLA N: case that was lost and all the ramifications that are part of that 1.,rhole mess 7 as I said last week, nobody in this Province is more responsible for what happened than the Premier because he knew, as he went to the courts he knew, even though he fooled the people of this Province and called an election on it and used it for three weeks in an election, telling the people of this Province, 'We have all of the facts in our favour; we have an excellent court case. We are going to v;in it in Newfoundland, we are going to win it in the Supreme Court.

And, if I did not think we were going to win it,' he said, 'we would not be going to court today. But "'e have put it into the courts.' And then the Premier called a snap election on that very issue. And the fact that the case was lost in Newfoundland, and the fact that the case was lost in the federal courts, of course, Mr. Speaker, the proof is there for anybody to see that the Premier - I cannot say he lied to the people of this Province. MR. CARTER: Would you like to say it? MR. CALLAN: I would love to say it. But the fact of the matter is, Mr.

Speaker, that the Premier betrayed the people of this Province. ':'hat uord, I think, is in order, Mr. Speaker, and I think it is appropriate as we approach the Easter season and we think of another gentleman who 1.,ras betrayed. The Premier betrayed the people of this Province. The Premier says, 'The le~al case is gone, is lost through no fault of our own.' What nonsense! But in the next sentence, the Premier, on page two of his statement today, says, 'The moral case,on the other hand, has only just begun.' Now, what nonsense, Mr. Speaker! What nonsense! 2414

.. April 11, 1984 Tape 901 EC - 2 MR. CALLAN: As I stood here in the House yesterday, the lOth of April, I wore my rose marking the third anniversary of the winning of the Bellevue by­ election.

I remember the next morning , the 11th of April, three years to this very day - I remember the Premier on the airwaves the next morning admitting, as he admits here,'The district of Bellevue is lost to the Tory Party,' but in the next sentence he said, 'However, we had a moral victory in Bellevue.' 'Ne lost the election in Bellevue, but we had a moral victory.' The Premier is using the same kind of stupid logic here as he was using back on the 11th of April in 1981. What can be achieved, Mr. Speaker? If you lose something, what does it matter?

It does not matter a row of beans whether you were morally right or wrong. The fact that the Premier and the P.C. Party won a moral victory in the district of Bellevue in the by-election, did that give them a P.C. member in the House of Assembly? Did it? Of course it did not! Moral victories, Mr. Speaker, are not worth very much. The district was lost just as the legal case was lost. Let me point out to this House, Mr. Speaker, what the Premier is really doing. What is the Premier really doing with this two month speaking tour across Canada? I will tell you what he is doing, }~. Speaker.

What the Premier is really doing is he is going to be going across the country and he is going to be talking about, of course, our offshore case and so on and how Newfoundland brought it into Confederation · and if we had not joined Confederation in 1949, of course, it <t10uld not belong to Canada. But what is the Premier really doing? The Premier is really campaigning. rm. . PJI, T'I'P?. _;,f) ~!: ~·T ill the !1on. !:'lenJ-,er ~err':' .i t a question? MR. CALLAN: The member for Placentia, 2415

""""" April 11, 1984 Tape 901 EC - 3 MR . CALLAN : Mr. Speaker, will have his chance, he will have half - an - hour . Mr . Speake .r, what is the Premier really trying to do? w"hat is his real motive in this two-month speaking tour? ~lhat is it? He says it is to convince the rest of Canada that we have a good moral case . MR . PATTERSON: On a point of order , ~x . Speaker . 2416

April 11, 1984 MR. SPEAKER (Russell} : on a point of order. MR. PATTERSON: Tape 902 PK - 1 The hon. member for Placentia, I am delighted to hear that the member is so active her~ today speaking on this offshore question. I wonder~ if he were issued an invitation would he go along with tfie Premier, since his cohort on the other end there said ne would support that? MR. CALLAN: I am coming to it. MR. SPEAKER: That is not a point of order. The hon. member for Bellevue. MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker, as the member for LaPoile (Mr.

Neary) the Leader of the Opposition has so often pointed out,'Oh,' he says,'we are in the House of Assembly, we are not down in a bear pit down on Water Street somewhere,' You cannot be getting up on spurious points of order, which, of course, are nothing, are not points of order. Mr. Speaker, what is the Premier's real purpose for this cross-country tour ? What is it? What is the real purpose? Mr.

Speaker, what he hopes to do is have what he thinks will be an influence as far as the Liberal leadership contenders are concerned,and he is hoping that he can per~uade them to change their views and perhaps to offer something better to this Province. MR. STAGG: it. The hon. gentleman cannot do MR. CALLAN: But, Mr. Speaker, he has another purpose as well. What the Premier is really trying to do, Mr. Speaker, is make some amends to Mr. Mulroney, Because the Premier went to Ottawa during the PC Leadership and made a fool of himself supporting John Crosbie with his shirt sleeves rolled up1 and insulted Mulroney.

But what he hopes to do now ~s make amends,and he is hoping that if Mulroney does win the next 2417

. -.·' April 11, 1984 Tape 902 PK - 2 MR. CALLAN: federal election that he will be able to say to him,'Well, Brian, you know,I did not support you in the leadership,but you notice all of the support I gave you during the recent federal election?'· That is what the Premier is really up to , hoping that he can take some credit for a victory that he hopes that the PC Party will have in the next federal election. That is what he is really trying to do, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, when the member for Mount Scio (Mr.

Barry) spoke earlier,he talked about what has happened in this Province for the past five years that the hon. gentleman has been Premier. What have we done? What has been accomplished in this Province, Mr. Speaker? r have said it before and I will say it again today,that anybody who really wants to look at what has been happening in this Province will realize that there has been no progress. The only bit of progress that we have seen in this Province, Mr. Speaker, was a deal renegotiated with ERCO Industries at Long Harbour, Who renegotiated that deal, Mr. Speaker?

It was the very man who now sits on this side of the Legislature, the member for Mount Scio. That is who renegotiated the ERCO deal. The Premier tries to claim credit. In his ·Tory Blue brochures that he sends out to the liquor store and to the schools and so on 1 he talks about people say we cannot negotiate, but look what we have negotiated. And he talks about the negotiations that have been finalized by the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands (Mr. Power) 1who , of course, admits that he is doing his part for the government.

And he talks about the ERCO deal, which was negotiated not by the Premier but by the member for Mount Scio when he was the Minister of Mines and Energy. But outside of these ~ouple of deals that have been made, Mr. Speaker, there has been no progress in this Province. 2418

April 11,1984 ... Tape No. 903 ah-1. MR. CALLAN: And is that what you would expect, Mr. Speaker? What political party is in power in this Province and has been for the last twelve years or so? It has been, Mr. Speaker, a Progressive Conservative Party. Is it not fair to expect progress from a Progressive? What has been progressive about this Province? Where have we progressed, Mr. Speaker? I said what the real PC stands for four or five years ago and , of course, Mr. Speaker, it is becoming more and more evident with each day that passes.

On the weekend The Evenin g Te legr am headlines,"The Premier says no more negotiations with Ottawa. We are going to wait until the next federal election." MR.TOBIN: If you are going to quote from the papers quote it accurately.And that did not say the Premier said anything as such. MR.CALLAN: It was said here in the legislature on Friday. I heard it in the legislature and I read it on the front page of the Evening Telegram. What exactly the wording was is totally immaterial, but the fact of the matter is - MR. DOYLE: So accuracy does _r10t_ mean __ anything. MR.CALLAN: I am saying it is accurate , the _ wording.

MR. NEARY: The people of Bell Island are looking for accuracy now. MR. DOYLE: If you had done as much for the people of Bell Island as I have, you would still be over there. MR. CALLAN: What we have had in this Province for the last twelve years, Mr. Speaker, is procrastinating .. ----- Conservatives, procrastinating, putting it off until tomorrow -- - - and the next day and the next week and the next month. And now ·-- - this --gover nment, this very government has said openly and -- -- publl.ci y~ in s ide -~f thi -s legisl~t ~-re -and o~t, ~~ s said we are 2419

"' April 11,1984 Tape No. 903 ah-2 MR.CALLAN: not going to try to do ·- anytiring within the next couple of years, we are going to wait until a new government is formed in Ottawa and then we will negotiate,hoping, of course, that the new government will be a Tory government. But what happend, Mr. Speaker? And this question is the question that every Newfoundlander must ask him or herself: Why was there not a deal struck when we had a Tory government there from May of 1979 until February 18,1980? Nine months Joe Clark was Prime Minister of this countr~ and who was in power in this Province?

The very same gentleman, Mr. Speaker. He got his mandate on June 18,1979. A month after Joe Cl.ark became Prime Minister this gentleman won his first election as Premier. He inherited Frank Moores' job for a couple of months but then he went to the people on his own merit and won. And did he get an offshore deal with the Tory government then? Of course he did not.

All he did was insult James McGrath, the Minister of Fisheries, 'Romeo Leblanc was a better Fisheries Minister~ All he did was insult Joe Clark, chasing him over the Confederation Building steps on television, trying to get a written commitment from him. AN HON MEMBER: He got it. MR. CALLAN: Did he get it from Mulroney? Has he got it from Mulroney? MR. DOYLE: Time will tell. MR.CALLAN: Nonsense, Mr. Speaker. The Premier did not want a deal anymore in 1979 when Joe Clark was Prime Minister than he wanted one . in 1980,1982,1983 or 1984.

The Premier is getting all- kinds of political mileage out of this and, of course, 2420

April 11 ,1984 Tape No . 903 ah -3 MR .CALLAN : he is going to stick with it . And , Mr . Speak er, hon. gentlemen opposite.and ladies,are quite ·nappy with that position because, you see, even though the Premier says to us that we are smarting , hon . ladie s and gentlemen opposite are not smarting . They have their cushy jobs . Practically every gentleman ovelT there is either a full Cabinet minister or a half Cabinet minister . They are getting their 2421

April ll, 1984 Tape No. 904 MJ - 1 MR. CALLAN: little cushy jobs on the · side, special committees set up on food prices and so on, so the people who are not in the Cabinet will get their extra $3,000 or $4,000 or $5,000 a year and,of course,the Premier himself, an extra $500 a month from the Tory Party, Frank Ryan delivers it to him every month on top of his other luxuries, a free apartment, two cars, dining room. These are facts. 'Let the Province smart, we are not smarting, we can afford to wait another year or two years,' that ·is what the Premier is sayincr to the people out there on ~relfare.

But the time is coming, Mr. Speaker, and it is fast coming when things are going to change in this Province,. The people who swallowed hook, line and sinker back on April 6, 1982, the Premier's betraying statement · 'That it is in the courts and 'it is ours because we are going to win the court case!; the people of this Provi:nce now realize, Hr. Speaker, how they were betrayed by the Premier and how they were duped by the Premier and the time for change is not that far away. ~~r.

Speaker, on the \'leekend I attended a function where I was asked to bring greetings and I was very happy as I stood to explain that the member for St. John's North (Mr. Carter) back in 1982,when we were reduced to eight on this side, the member for St. John's North nicknamed us Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. P..nd I brought greetings from Snow r,J1il.ite and the Seven Dwarfs on Saturday night past and I mentioned, Mr.

Speaker, that during the past year - because it was a year ago that I also attended a similar function and broughn greetings - I said, 'Since I brought you greetings last year we had a small accident in Terra Nova and we were reduced to Snow White and the Six Dwarfs but then', I explained, 'we had another accident in Mount Scio and again we were back to Snow White 2422

April 11, 1984 Tape No. 904 MJ - 2 MR. CALLAN: and the Seven Dwarfs . And' , I said, 'I even have to correct that statement because no longer are we SnO\-t White and the S~ven Dwarf s, because we have a couple of giants among these dwarfs.' And,of course,the other giants, Mr. Speaker, in the Liberal Party are out there waiting. They are \-tai ting for the next election, ~.r. Spea .ker, when they can turf out this Premier and when they can knock off of his coattails a lot of the members who came in on a free ride back on April 6, 1982. You see, Mr.

Speaker, all this Premier has ever done -:-and this is the whole issue here, this is what this resolution is all about, and this is what the amendment is all about, it stinks of politics, it is all political. The Premier has never played an active role ir: trying to administer this Province as the First Minister, all the Premier has ever done is play petty politics . Now, of course,he is going to the ultimate~ he is going across canada. If the Premier wanted to travel across Canada, Mr . Speaker, 2423

April 11, 1984 Tape No. 905 N1·1 - 1 MR.

CALLAN: he should have done it in March and April of 1982, Insteaoof calling that foolish election and putting our case into the court, the Premier if he were loyal and really cared about the people of this Province, instead of betraying them the Premier would have kept our case out of the courts, because he knew then that we did not have a strong case, he would have kept it out of the courts and then was the time for the Premier to announce to the people, not that he was calling an election two and a half years into his four or five year term, wasting the taxpayers' dollars MR. STAGG: Three years. MR.

CALLAN: It was less than three. MR. STAGG: "Thirty-two months. MR. CALLAN: It was less than three, June 18, 1979 to April 6, 1982 is not three years, and we had at least a month there of campaigning, so you might as well take off that month as well. MR. STAGG: Thirty~four months. MR.

CALLAN: If the Premier had then said to the people of this Province, instead of announcing an election, "I have decided to travel across Canada try to convince the rest of Canada_that we should be given a better deal by Ottawa," then the Premier would have been making a wise decision, and then,of course,the member who was the Minister of Mines at the time would have struck a deal, and he would have had the sympathies of all Canadians with us. And it would have been a lever that he could have used on the Liberal Government in Ottawa i~ April and May of 1982. 2424

April 11, 1984 Tape No. 905 NM - 2 MR. CALLAN: But no, no. The Premier did not want to do the sincere and the honest thing. The Premier decided, "I can win an election on this issue." Unfortunately he was delayed. He was going to call it in February and the Ocean Ranger sank, and then he waited. MR. ·NEARY: MR. CALLAN: he waited. He should call it now. And he did another poll and MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please! The time for the hon. member has expired. The hon. member for Stephenville. MR. STAGG: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I note the enthusiasm on our side of the House to get up and get on the record on this motion, and certainly on the amendment,and I have no doubt that the member for Burin­ Placentia West (Mr. Tobin), who now occupies the seat which was previously occupied by the mover of this motion, the former member for Placentia west, who is the present member for Mount Scio (Mr. Barry), he held that seat from 1972 until 1975, and was res~onsible for one of the greatest political resurrections in modern day politics, the resurrection of Paddy Canning, taking Mr. Canning from defeat in 1972 up to a 1500 majority in 1975.

So I expect that we will see a similar reincarnation of some old politico in the next election to come, and I expect that motions similar to the one that the han. member has moved here will in no small

part contribute to his second pol -itical decline. Now, Mr. Speaker, I commend my colleague from St. John's North (r-lr. Carter) on the amendment 2425

April ll 1 1984 Tape No . 905 NM - 3 MR. STAGG: that has been placed before Your Honour, and,I suppose,to some extent we must extend a certain amount of gratitude to the member for Mount Scio for at least being consistent . Since he has gone across the floor he has acted in the >-lay that we have become accustomed to noting Liberal politicians act, and that is to disregard the obvious, 2426

April 11/ 1984! Tape 90.6., Page 1 -- a,pb 11R. STAGG: disregard principle, and to take the path of what they consider to be least resistance. But it is obviously a short-sighted route and it is one that is destined to result in political failure for the ~arty and political failure for the members. So it is certainly something that we are grateful to see. The hon. the member for Mount Scio(Mr.

Barry) who, by the way, having moved the motion has · not been i:n the H:ous·e since, presumably he is in the precincts somewhere, but i:t would be appropriate for someone who would move a motion of considerable importance to the Province, to at leas ·t stay and listen to the debate so that ~11e could have some indication of where he stands, but instead, he has vacated the premises. Well, I have got him back in the H~use. Very good! Very good! Now·~ Mr. Speaker r I wo .ul.d like to say a few- words about the . Supreme Court of ca.nada decision and the referral of thi:s matter to the Supreme Court of Canada..

This matte.!? came before the Supreme Court of Canada by a ra .ther ci:rcui·tous route. It was brought upon us · by the attempted expansi:on of the sr:u case by the federal government in February 1982, The member for Mount Scio knows t.hat f he was part of our caucus · at the time and participated in the ca .ucus· deci:s·i:.on~. the unanimous deci·sion to refer the question to our own Supreme Court of Newfoundland, Now~ Mr. Speaker I thi·s whole matter , to a certain extent, has to be cons -idered in the realm of the politics of the day.

I: do not think it is any secret that we consider that the government in _Ottawa, the Li:oeral Gcvernment in Ottawa i:s no friend of Newfoundland on this matter, They have been given every 2427

Apri -l, ll 1 1,9 .84 1 Tape 90.6 1 ?age 2-- -apb MR. STAGG: opportunity to con firm the pos -ition so valiantly and courageously taken by .Joe Clark and John Crosbie and Jim McGrath in September 19 .79 1 when in the exchange of letters between the Premier, P.r"ime Minister Clark and all of th e other Premiers of Canada it was graphically and concisely, precisely set out what our position was and what our position would ne and what the position of the government of Canada was. It is one of the great items of consistency that has ever come before the political process in Canada, when Mr.

Clark's position before the election and his position after the election were absolutely the same. And how was that thwarted? Well, it was thwarted by hon. members opposite to some extent, but it was mainly thwarted as a result of the election of February 1980 when through happenstance and one of those accidents of history, where unfortunately Canada instead of taking one step forward took a couple of steps backward, there was a five year backward step that we took in February 1980.

And one of the great backward steps for Newfoundland was the repudiation by the Trudeau government and th .e subsequent energy ministers, Mr. Chretien and Mr. Lalonde, or Mr. Lalonde and Mr. Chretien, in that order, of this most Canadian proposal and s-cheme which . was in effect between Mr. Clark and Premier Peckford. They repudiated it 1. Mr. Speaker, and continued with their own reference of the Hibernia matter to the Supreme Court of Canada in May 1980. It was a direct reference to the Supreme Court of Canada, they were not going to wait for the Supreme Court of Newfoundland's decision to be given.

And, as you r~call, we had a day of mourning in 1980 and, Mr. Speaker, that day of mourning was scorned by han. members opposite, it was not popular in certain quarters. I maintain that it 2428

Apri ·l llr 19.84 r Tape 906 .~ Page. 3 -- apb MR, STAGG: was an historic day and it was an appropriate reaction to a despicable act on the part of the federal government. 2429

April 11, 1984 Tape 907 EC - 1 MR. STAGG: They were attempting to accel- erate the process of getting a legal decision because they knew that once the electorate of Canada had another crack at them that there was a very good chance that they were going to be turfed out of office, and they hoped that by getting a quick decision from the Supreme Court of Canada in their favour - and they had a sneaking suspicion that the Supreme Court of Canada would come down in their favour; we all had a sneaking suspicion that the Supreme Court of Canada would come down in their favour. We hoped otherwise, ~x.

Speaker, because, as has been put forward by our legal advisors, we have a very good case, and it is more than a moral case that we have on the offshore. But it was rejected in total by the Supreme Court of Canada. Our position was rejected by the Supreme Court of Newfoundland as well, but at least the Supreme Court of Newfoundland indicated that Newfoundland did have some integrity as a political entity in 1949 and that we were in fact more than a colony. But the Supreme Court of Canada decision will rank with the worst decisions ever made by a Canadian court.

It is not a decision that is going to be considere~ to bind this country together. It is a decision that comes down foursquare on the part of the Centralist theme that unfortunately has pervaded the Supreme Court on matters of this type. we are distressed. MR .. NEARY: to ;·1ind there nov1. MR. STAGG: So we are indeed disappointed, You are sailing pretty close Sailing pretty close. The hon. member is talking about contempt. I would love for the Supreme Court of Canada to take me before the Bar and say that I was contemptuous of them, because I am 2430

April 11, 1984 Tape 907 EC - 2 MR. STAGG: contemptuous of this decision, Mr. Speaker. I am contemptuous of it. Any group of individuals who would indicate that Newfoundland did not have any political integrity before 1949, I think one can only have contempt for it, and I do have contempt for it. I would love to be called before the Bar of the Supreme Court of Canada to elucidate further on it. The Supreme Court of Canada says that if there were Continental Shelf rights in 1949 then no claim would be necessary to obtain them.

Our Court of Appeal, on the other hand, said the only reason we lost was because we did not make a formal public claim prior to 1949. The Supreme Court of Canada says that Newfoundland did not have any rights to transfer to Canada, that they were transferred-from Britain to Canada, if indeed they were transferred. That is a neocol.onialist attitude, Mr. Speaker, that really decries the issues that were before the Canadian public and from 1946 to 1948 at the national referendum. It was a national referendum, a national convention. ~~r.

Speaker, it was not a provincial or a colonial referendum or colonial convention that we were having, it was a national referendum and a national convention. And there was no doubt about it that the Fathers of Confederation, the gentlemen \vho signed the Terms of Union, did not go there feeling in the least subservient, that Canada and Newfoundland were on anything but an equal footing, and we joined as equals.

But the Supra~e Court of Canada in this decision has, in effect, denigrated the framers of the Terms of Union and have put us in the position of being a mere colony having no political or territorial integrity, and I have contempt for that 2431

April 11, 1984 Tape 907 EC - 3 MR. STAGG: position, Mr. Speaker. The only Hay nm~' that can be turned around is in the court of public opinion, the great court of public opinion. The Supreme Court of Canada, supposedly the bastion of all that is good and right, has failed us in this matter. We look for justice in the big 1 J 1 or t.l-J.e si!lall 1 j 1 or whatever. We looked for justice before the Supreme Court of Canada and we got contempt for Newfoundland as a political and economic entity. That is all we got. That is all that decision is. It really sloughs off Newfoundland.

There is no possibility of Newfoundland seeing anything in that decision ather than contempt ~or it as it sto.od in 1949. Now, Mr. Speaker, ! have contempt for that decision and I would love to have the opportunity to 2432

.ll.pril ll, 1984 Tape- 908 EC - l MR. STAGG: be "called to account for that,because I am sure that I would have quite a legion of people who would be cheering me on in that regard, but I doubt whether that opportunity will ever present itself. HR. TOBIN: I would say you c.ould be the Leader of the ~regressive Conservative Party in Canada. MR. STAGG: Yes, indeed. What the Premier is doing now is he is going across this country of Canada, which is comprised of ten provinces and two territories, and he is going to the great court of public opinion. And the member for Bellevue, (Mr.

Callan) with all his political warts, does occasionally come across with a few gems of truth. Yes, the Premier is going to assist the federal Leader of the O~position, Mr. Mulroney, in winning the next federal election, let there be no mistake about that. The campaign is on. \'le are determined to put seven Tories up in Ottawa: we are determined to put 284 Tories in the House of Commons in Ottawa if we can possibly do it. Because we believe that that is where justice - MR. CALLAN: Praise the Lord! We believe! MR.

STAGG: The han. gentleman was formerly almost a man of the cloth and he displays contempt for that kind of belief. 11.11 I expect froi!'_ Liberals, anY" ·T<lY, is contempt, and I guess to a certain extent that reflects my attitude towards Liberals. I do have a lot of contempt for Liberals in this Province, ~x. Speaker. The Premier is going across this country and he is going to tell the people of Canada as many times as it is necessary, that Newfoundland has been 2433

c •• - ~ • ... April 11, 1984 Tape 908 EC - 2 MR. STAGG: shafted, Newfoundland has been betrayed by the Liberal Party both federally and pro­ vincially, and we are looking for justice. MR. CALLAN: Who is paying for it? MR. STAGG: I do not care \'lho is paying for it. I hope the people of Newfoundland are ~aying for it, because the people of Newfoundland are to be the great beneficiaries of this mission. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. STAGG: This is a divine mission that the Premier is on at the present time. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. STAGG: What else is there for us?

They have precipitated this matter into the Supreme Court of Canada, into a friendly court. It was obviously a friendly court. There could be no more contemptuous look at Newfoundland than that Supreme Court of Canada decision, absolute contempt for Newfoundland as a political and economic entity. MR. HISCOCK: MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : River on a point of order. On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Order, please! The hon. the nernber for Eagle !~. STAGG; There is no point of order, Mr. Speaker, absolutely no point of order! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! MR. HISCOCK: Mr.

Speaker, here you have a member of the House of Assembly who belongs to the law profession stating that the Supreme Court of Canada was stacked and unfriendly. Is he saying t:1e sa.,..,_e thing about the Newfoundland court? I think the member for St~phenville should withdraw that statement. MR. STAGG: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. 2434 .·.

April ll, 1984 Tape 908 EC - 3 ~~. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the member for Stephenville to that point of order. MR. STAGG: I have been going to great pains here, Mr. Speaker, to outline my contempt for the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada and I have no intention of withdrawing it. As far as the Newfoundland Court of Appeal is concerned, they made a decision with which I disagree; they indicated that Newfoundland had to make a formal claim for the offshore prior to 1949 and did not make it, but they came down on all the other points.

They agreed that Newfoundland had territorial integrity, they agreed that Newfoundland was in fact a country,and all of the other things about it they agreed with. Certainly, I disagree with them on their ultimate decision but I certainly applaud them on the other findings that they made. They fell one step short. So maybe the hon. member's point of order is -well, I will let the. Speaker rule on it anyw·ay. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order. Certainly the Chair is not of the opinion that the hon. the member for Stephenville was casting aspersions on the judges of the Supreme Court.

Certainly, I feel it is the prerogative of any hon. member to maybe disagree with a decision made by any court and that, in essence, is what the hon. the member for Stephenville was doing. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. STAGG: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Anyway, I want to get back to my original train of thought, my original argument, Mr. Speaker,, because I do not expect I have much time ' left. 2435

April 11, 1984 Tape 908 MR . STAGG: I am talking about the Premier 's mission, the divine mission as far as Newfoundlanders are concerned, o£ going across Canada and educating Canadians . EC - 4 canadians are good people . ~ve have an innate faith in the good nature and the sense of justice that Canadians have. Unfortunately, by certain elements of the national press , they have opted for a position of con sideri ng Newfoundland to be uppity or uncaring or greedy, all of these 2436

April 11, 1984 Tape 909 PK - 1 MR. STAGG: adjectiv~s,which are completely untrue. And there is a curious blindness, Mr. Speaker, that is exhibited by people in power when they are confronted with a person who may be weak, politically weak or physically weak, who has the right point of view. And when that point of view is to upset the status quo,_theyquite often they look for other ways of discrediting that person's point of view. And they never deal with the ----- - - - - issue, they deal with form rather than substance. Well,the Premier is going across this country.

He is going to deal with substance and he will deal with it in his own inimitable style. And I will maintain that it will be of considerable benefit as a corollary, it will be ofconsiderable benefit to the overall national movement we have towards the Progressive Conservative Party in Canada. The Premier of Newfoundland~ not yet started to campaign in this federal election. And we have a great lead in the polls, and this, curiously, forms part of the han. member's motion where he says, 'And

WHEREAS recent polls create great doubt whether the Progressive Conservative Party will form the Government of Canada over the next election'. Well,the hon. member, I believe, studied mathematics in university. He had a certain reputation in that regard. But obviously his ability in mathematics deser:t -ed him quite sometime ago,because the latest polls indicate that even with Mr. Turner, the messianic, Mr. Turner - MR. CALLAN: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): A point of order, the "hon. member for Bellevue. MR.

STAGG: - leading the way. that the Tories are going to sweep this country and it is going to be similar to John Diefenbaker in 1958, SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! 2437

April 11, 1984 Tape 909 PK - 2 MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) : Order, please! A point of order , the hon. member for Bellevue. MR. CALLAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. The hon. gentleman is not intentionally trying to mislead the House I am sure, but the hon. member knows that this resolution was put on the Order Paper at least a month or more ago and refers to polls in existence at that time. And for the hen. member to talk about polls of yesterday or the day before,it is totally immaterial and he is misleading the House. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! To that point of order.

There is no point of order. It is merely a difference of opinion. The hen. member for Stephenville. MR. STAGG: Mr. Speaker, again when you start getting close to the quick, or hitting close to where you want to hit these individuals they squirm. MR. STAGG: And the member for Bellevue (Mr. Callan) is a well-known squirmer. 'Poles are for dogs 1, said Mr. Diefenbaker, and certainly the latest poll will dog Mr. Turner and Mr. Chretien and it will certainly dog the member for Mount Scio (Mr. Barry) who, I am sure,must have had quite a problem coming in here today to read a motion saying, "And

WHEREAS recent polls create great doubt whether the Progressive Conservative Party will form the Government of Canada after the next election". MR. CALLAN: Do you with Mr. Diefenbaker, there w.asno need to have taken the recent poll? MR. STAGG: This is before the case for Newfoundland, the case for the