April 9,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLI No. 23

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Lush): Order, please!

Before moving on to our routine business, on behalf of hon.

members I would like to bring to their attention the presence in the Speaker's

Gallery today of the hon. Rod Laporte, MP for Moose Jaw -Lake Centre.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Also, we would like to extend a warm welcome

to eighteen students from the Central Newfoundland Community College in

Lewisporte. They are accompanied by their instructors Linda Day and Linda

Fiander.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Speaker, I do not have a written

statement but I did get a briefing on the electricity situation a few minutes

before I came over. I thought I would give at least a couple of minutes on that

so we can all be as up-to-date as I am.

For your information, there are five transmission lines that

supply electricity to the St. John's area, and we have had some serious problems

with them because of the sleet storm two days ago. The problem seems to be

isolated now to ice loading and salt contamination around insulators on some of

these lines. It has caused intermittent problems on all the lines. As of now, a

line from the western Avalon, with Bay d'Espoir power, to Hardwoods outside of

St. John's is operating; a line from the western Avalon to Holyrood, with Bay

d'Espoir power, is operating; and a line from the Hardwood sub-station to the

Oxen Pond sub-station here at St. John's is operating.

However, we have two lines that are not. The line from

Holyrood station to Hardwoods is not operating, and the line from the Holyrood

station to Oxen Pond is not operating. That is what has caused our problems this

morning. With good luck the lines that are operating will keep us going this

afternoon. But if there are continued problems in the higher areas that still

have this ice problem this afternoon we could lose power any time, we could

continue all afternoon with no problem. So we can just wish everybody good luck

and hope the power stays on.

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

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, we are used to hearing good news

from this minister and we thank him once again for this monumental announcement

here this afternoon. I have to say to him, without being too sarcastic, that I

heard it myself today between 1:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. at least four times, on

CBC and VOCM and everybody else who has had it. So I thank him for bringing it

to the attention of the House. I wish that he had been standing to tell us that

something new had been accomplished in Hibernia, St. Lawrence, Hope Brook, or

something like that, but perhaps that announcement will come tomorrow, with any

luck.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I have a couple of questions for

the Minister of Health this afternoon. As the Minister of Finance announced in

the Budget, and I think the minister has said publicly outside, it is the

government's intention to reduce the number of hospital boards down from

twenty-five to five. I think that is what we have been hearing. Can the minister

confirm that he has already made the decision to locate those new boards in St.

Anthony, Corner Brook, Gander, Clarenville and St. John's? And will he confirm,

therefore, that all other boards in this area will be disbanded? And can he tell

us when these changes will occur?... because as he knows this came totally out

of the blue. Hospital boards around the Province are very confused and concerned

about what is going on. So we need some information.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. the

Leader of the Opposition for giving me the opportunity to respond to this

question, because it is a very timely question.

The Budget referred to this - made the statement that over

this year government will be looking at ways to reduce the number of hospital

boards from twenty-five to five. Now I want to say to the hon. Leader of the

Opposition: do not get hung up over the figure 'five'. Five is not in any means

cast in stone, but it is an accepted fact in this Province by people in the

system that there are too many hospital boards. Whether the ideal figure is

five, or three, or ten, has not been determined.

Mr. Speaker, over this coming year the Department of Health

will be taking on a facilitator, and that person will go throughout the Province

and meet with every single hospital board, and with as many interest groups as

are interested, with everyone who is concerned about it. In addition to that, I

will be having a resource committee advise me, as minister of the department,

which direction we should take. That resource committee will have a subcommittee

which will be working with the facilitator, and we will have a year of input -

the like of which has never been known in the history of the Department of

Health in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DECKER: At the end of this year, if it makes sense to

go from twenty-five to fifty, or twenty-five to one, or twenty-five to six, or

twenty-five to eight, that will be done.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. DECKER: I thank the hon. member for giving me the

opportunity to say it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

supplementary.

MR. SIMMS: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a

supplementary for the minister.

I am glad I asked the question too, because he has now

confirmed that what everybody out there thought, is not going to happen. In

fact, what he has announced here today is that the Department of Health and the

government are only going to study - only going to look at it, with all these

subcommittees and facilitators coming out of your ears, but that is not the

perception that hospital boards have, I can tell him this; they understood from

the announcement in the Budget, that, in fact, the decision had been made, it

was going to be reduced, and the numbers out there were twenty-five to five. So,

I thank the minister for explaining that and clarifying it and I hope he

chastises his colleague, the Minister of Finance, for leaving that perception

when he read his Budget Speech.

Let me ask him, Mr. Speaker, if I may, specifically about the

St. John's hospitals in this area. Last year, the St. John's Hospital Council, I

think it is called, the boards, gave the minister nine options for consideration

to re-organize the hospital services in the area and I believe the minister,

himself, added one additional option -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I just have to ask the Leader of the Opposition to take his

place for a moment.

The Chair is noticing several conversations going on that it

finds rather annoying, particularly when the Chair is trying to listen to the

question so it can determine what the answer ought to be or a reasonable

facsimile of an answer.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: I thank Your Honour for that protection. I

will have to start again, now, because Your Honour got me right in mid-sentence

and I appreciate being given that chance once more.

With respect to the hospital services in the St. John's

region, I say to the minister again, last year, the St. John's Hospital Council

gave him nine options and I believe he added one which was actually, I believe,

one hospital board for the entire St. John's region. I believe that was his

option that he added.

I would like to ask him now, has he made a decision with

respect to that option? Has he now decided, in fact, to go with that option, one

hospital board? And may I ask him, as well, when will the hospital boards at the

Grace, St. Clare's and Janeway be disbanded? What is the time frame and what are

the dates?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, there is perception and then

there is the reality. Here is the reality, and I will quote the hon. the

Minister of Finance. I will read it:

"I am pleased, Mr. Speaker, to announce that during the

coming year Government will be exploring ways to reduce substantially the number

of hospital boards, from 25 to five".

Now, Mr. Speaker, the perception might be caused, because

there are people who have political motives in this Province and who want to

give the perception that we are going to go in like a bunch of storm troopers

with big hard leather boots, but we are not going to do that, Mr. Speaker.

Now, Options 1 to 9 plus Option 10: Just after we became the

government, we were presented with nine options by the St. John's Hospital

Council, recommending ways to deal with the hospital situation in this city. The

hospital council recommended option seven, which would have had a new Grace

Hospital built on the north side of LeMarchant Road, with buildings in-between,

where rooms, such as operating rooms and delivery rooms, could be made

available.

The cost of that, Mr. Speaker, was $250 million. That is in

the last quarter, 1988 dollars. Government immediately said, to go this route,

even while we were talking about it, it had probably gone to $400 million. We

thought this was totally unrealistic. So we went back to the Hospital Council

and asked: 'Would you look at another option?' - namely, dubbed 'Option 10' by

the media, and, of course, Option 10 is right. Option 10 would see an additional

100 beds attached to the General Hospital on Prince Philip Parkway and an

additional eighty-five or ninety beds attached to St. Clare's Hospital. Option

10 also asked the Council not to look at one board for St. John's, but to look

at two boards for St. John's.

Now, when we asked the Council to do that, we were quite

aware that the Grace Hospital and St. Clare's Hospital are privately-owned

institutions. So, in addition to its being a public issue there is also an

ownership issue, which is being dealt with over the course of time. When is it

going to be done, Mr. Speaker? From the latest information I have, I will be

receiving the report of the St. John's Hospital Council in September. Depending

on what that report says then we will move on along. But this whole St. John's

situation now has become part of the provincial situation and we will be looking

at it in that context.

Will we have two boards in St. John's, one board, neither

board, or twenty-five boards? Only after we have a lot of consultation, Mr.

Speaker, in the true Liberal way, consultation with the people in this Province,

will we make that decision.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I have to say to the minister - I

won't say it, I'll ask him, since it is supplementary. Isn't he aware that the

concerns I have raised here today are not politically motivated concerns, but

they are concerns that have been passed on to many of us from members of

hospital boards around the Province whom he himself has appointed? It is not

politically motivated. We have not asked any questions on it in fact, until

today. So that is a bit of a slur, and a bit of an unacceptable slur at that.

I want to ask the minister, as well, Is this government's

move to reduce the number of hospital boards - or at least to explore looking at

reducing the number of hospital boards from twenty-five down to five, and to get

rid of twenty boards - is that not also consistent, perhaps, with the intention

of this government to eventually reduce the number of hospitals, perhaps down to

five or whatever the number might be? Is that also part of the thing that the

government is examining and exploring?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I don't know where the hon. the

Leader of the Opposition got the impression that I was throwing slurs at the

Opposition for casting this political (inaudible). I would not dare think of the

like that they would try to make politics out of a health issue, Mr. Speaker.

Far be it from my mind.

I should tell the hon. member, though, that shortly after the

announcement was made, I met with the Newfoundland Hospital and Nursing Home

Association and they subsequently issued a release within hours to all the

hospital boards explaining exactly what we are doing, and they are totally

behind what we are doing, Mr. Speaker. They are totally behind what we are

doing.

Now, we are doing this for several reasons, and let's never

underestimate that cost - we are looking for dollar savings and I am not going

to apologize for that. We are spending $880 million, almost $1 billion a year in

delivering health care, Mr. Speaker. We would be remiss if we did not look at

ways to make sure that these dollars are spent properly and that we get the best

return on every dollar we spend.

We are also looking, Mr. Speaker, at the quality of care that

we deliver. Is there some way we can deliver a better quality of care by

reducing the number of boards? We are looking at the problem that rural

Newfoundland boards are having with recruitment, Mr. Speaker. Some of our

smaller boards are having difficulty recruiting physicians from other parts of

the world. This is an issue which we hope to deal with as we look at this, and

there are a whole lot of other reasons which would make it reasonable to have

fewer boards than we have in the Province, Mr. Speaker. These are just some of

the reasons, but there are many others, and they all have good motives, good

intentions to improve the hospital system in the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, a question to the Minister of

Health.

The Budget announced that services programs of the Alcohol

and Drug Dependency Commission would be transferred to the soon-to-be-formed

regional community health boards. When will this transfer occur and how will the

functions of the Alcohol and Drug Dependency Commission be administered and

delivered by the community health boards?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, by coincidence, I just happen to

have with me the chart of a community health care board. This community health

care board includes health promotion, mental health, health protection,

continuing care and alcohol and drug dependency problems. Now, Mr. Speaker, that

is a board which I would be quite willing to table in this House so that members

could see it.

You see, Mr. Speaker, if you go to a hospital - there was a

time when broken legs were treated, broken fingers were treated, but that day is

gone. You now treat the whole person. The whole person. It is the holistic

approach, Mr. Speaker. It is quite conceivable - but not always - that a person

with alcohol and drug dependency problems might also have mental health

problems. Might also want the services of continuing care.

In the past these things were sort of put in pigeonholes and

had no inter-relation with each other. But now, as a result of those community

health care boards, those experts - the counsellors in the Alcohol and Drug

Dependency Commission - they will be able to share their knowledge with the

Mental Health people, and the Mental Health people with them - and health

promotion.

This is a major step forward. It surprised me when people

started to talk negatively about it. It is one of the major steps that we have

taken in health care. We are hoping to have all the services in place before the

end of this fiscal year. If there is an interim period when the boards are not

yet in place, we would have the services directly taken over by the Department

of Health and administered through our community health care nurses, Mr.

Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary, the hon. the Member for Port

au Port.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: You're a big bluff, that's what you are!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

AN HON. MEMBER: How do you ask a question like this?

AN HON. MEMBER: Pardon?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, the only improvement is in the

minister's mind. Is the minister aware that professionals and users who are

familiar with the services provided by the Alcohol and Drug Dependency

Commission have been unanimous in their criticism of the approach taken by

government? Is he aware that Ontario has tried a similar experiment that has

resulted in reduced services and increased cost? Can the minister assure us that

we will receive the same level of services in view of those budgetary

restraints?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.

MR. DECKER: No, no, yes, Mr. Speaker. Now. The first

question is no. Yes, some experts - and I put (experts) in parentheses - are

saying that this is not the right approach. But there are more experts who are

saying: this is late, this should have been here five years ago. This is the

kind of stuff my good friend Dr. Twomey and I used to talk about. But Dr. Twomey

and I used to talk about this when he was surrounded by a bunch of dinosaurs who

would not let him push forward with the health care system, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DECKER: Am I aware that Ontario tried this similar

experiment? Ontario did not try this similar experiment. Ontario, Mr. Speaker,

is phoning us almost on a daily basis asking for information. Ontario sent ten

cancer patients down here a little over a year ago to be treated. Ontario is

asking us on a daily basis for information on how to run a health care system,

as is the rest of the country.

Now the last question was: will this improve? The answer is

absolutely yes. This will improve the delivery of this particular program. That

is why I stand here today and so proudly proclaim this model, which I know will

be adopted by every single province in this nation, and the territories, within

eighteen months, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, this change will result in one

administrative unit being taken over by five administrative units; this means

these five boards will repeat or duplicate the services offered by a single

board.

Now, Mr. Speaker, what I want to ask the minister is: how can

the services be improved under this system especially when the Budget estimates

indicate a reduction in fiscal support?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, the mistake the hon. gentleman

is making is, he is falling into the same trap that he did when they were in

government. They think that the only way to deliver health care is to add more

money to it, but the problem we found with the health care system was not a lack

of money, it was a lack of organization. It was allowed to fall into the ground,

that is what we found. We are organizing the system and if the hon. member wants

to put a name on this, this is decentralization. This is decentralization, this

is what they have been preaching almost every day when they question us. They

have been accusing us of centralization . This is taking five units and putting

the experts right out there in the trenches where the problems are. I forgot the

other part of his question, what was it?

AN HON. MEMBER: It is not important.

MR. DECKER: Not important? I thought it was; I just

forgot what it was, but anyway -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair feels that the minister has addressed the question.

The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, the minister is singing a fine

song if he thinks that less money is going to mean better health care in this

Province. Mr. Speaker, dedicated funding has been provided for education and

health through the education and health tax, why is it that the minister will

not do the same for the Alcohol and Drug Dependency? For instance, by taking

revenues from the Newfoundland Liquor Control Commission, so that it can

adequately address the needs for education and service of those people who need

it.

Mr. Speaker, this Province is making some $80 million from

alcohol in this Province and yet it puts very, very little - peanuts, back to

the people who are afflicted by disease from alcohol.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, unlike the previous

administration, we are not taking $24 million out of the $80 million and putting

it into cucumbers; we are taking that $80 million and putting it into the health

care system. We are putting $880 million into the health system. Where does that

come from?... some of it comes from the Liquor Commission, some of it comes from

retail sales tax.

Now, Mr. Speaker, if we had to take one dollar every time

someone buys a bottle of Old Sam and write on it 'health', then make sure this

goes to the hon. Minister of Finance, that would be a little bit cumbersome to

operate, but who can say where a dollar comes from? If $80 million and other

funds are going into the pot, $880 million of that is going into health, Mr.

Speaker. I can see why they have this Province in such a mess.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.

MR. WINDSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Finance in his Budget, told us that the

economy is expected to decline by a half a per cent this year, unemployment is

going to increase by 2 per cent and he responded by increasing personal income

tax and payroll tax. Would the minister like to tell us what programs he is

proposing to help improve the economy and create some jobs this year?

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

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker. we have in place the Economic

Recovery Commission, which is doing a fine job; we have Enterprise Newfoundland

and Labrador, which has been creating jobs. I notice in the papers today, there

are 1,100 or 1,400 jobs that they have created recently and also -

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear, that many!

DR. KITCHEN: - that many yes, and also we have in place

now, or virtually to be launched, the Strategic Economic Plan and with all these

initiatives, and with the help of the low interest rates that the federal

government has been able to bring forward and hopefully, the lowering Canadian

dollar, things should become a little bit better in this Province than they have

been.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl, on a

supplementary.

MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, clearly, the minister has no

plans to deal with the situation today. We are still waiting for more than three

years now for an economic recovery plan from this government.

Could the minister tell me and is he aware, that in 1988

there was an 18.1 per cent growth in the number of new homes under construction

in this Province and that the growth rate has declined steadily so that last

year we in fact declined by 12.6 per cent in the number of new homes started?

That is a major industry in this Province. Since the minister has frozen wages

in the public service would the minister consider freezing the price of

Government developed building lots in this Province at the 1990 level? Would he

also consider putting in place some sort of subsidy to persons buying privately

developed building lots so that they would have the same benefit? Would he put

that program in place as a means to stimulate the economy and create some jobs?

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

DR. KITCHEN: The hon. member speaks out off both sides of

his mouth at the same time. On the one hand he keeps saying that we have raised

taxes too high and at the very same time he is saying why do you not spend more

on something else? I cannot quite understand his rationale. Perhaps he would

clarify it a little bit.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.

MR. WINDSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would be

delighted. The Homebuilders Association projects that the homebuilding industry

is worth $300 million in this Province. If we could stimulate that by 25 per

cent and bring it back to the level it was in 1988 when this Government came

into power we would generate some 3300 additional jobs in this Province. Now,

would the minister consider another proposal? Would he do what we did a number

of years ago? Would he lower the retail sales tax on building materials to 8 per

cent thereby stimulating the economy by increasing new home starts by 25 per

cent and by improving renovations by 25 per cent creating some 2500 jobs in this

Province?

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

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, recently the federal government

at the insistence of our Premier, I think, and a few other Premiers, have

brought in a proposal by which RRSP funds could be used to help in the

construction industry, but we cannot lower our taxes. Our deficit position in

this Province is as much as we can tolerate. Our taxes are in place for the

forthcoming year and that is it.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl on a

supplementary.

MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, we are aware of what the

that Registered Retirement Savings Plans can now be used, and that the down

payment has been reduced to 5 per cent, and that has had an impact in

stimulating home purchases at the lower end of the scale. My question to the

minister is: is he is aware that of the $300 million of new home construction

one third of that cost or $100 million is building materials and that in

renovations, which is valued at $300 million, 50 per cent is for materials for a

total of $300 million and that 8 per cent of $300 million is better than 12 per

cent of nothing if that home is not being built?

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

DR. KITCHEN: The hon. member forgets when he boasts about

the past that their credit rating was lowered in their regime to the point where

we are now at Bs for three of the credit rating agencies and we are A- in the

other ones. I suppose what they would do if they were here was make them all Bs

then we would be in the junk bond market which is where these people were headed

when we, thank God, took over and ran this Province in a sensible way.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, the people of the Province are

tired listening to the hon. member as his reception on Open Line showed this

morning.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, very much, Mr. Speaker.

I have a question for the Minister of Fisheries. I understand

there is a proposal from the Canadian Sealers Association before the provincial

and federal governments looking for some funding to help with their sealing

activities. I am wondering if the Minister of Fisheries could inform the House

what the status of that particular request is now and can we expect some action

soon?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries.

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, I met with the Minister of

Fisheries and Oceans in Ottawa yesterday and we discussed this very matter and

it appears that they are now in the process of putting together a package. I

understand it has not been finalized yet and as soon as their package is

finalized then we will take a look at it and hopefully put it together with one

that we are coming up with. Hopefully, within a few days we will know exactly

where we stand in that matter.

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the

minister.

The minister must be aware that time is passing us by very

quickly and if we do not get something done soon, if there is not some funding

arrangement put in place, then it is going to be too late and consequently there

will not be any seals harvested and the potential markets that have been lined

up - and there are some very substantial markets that have been arranged - are

going to be lost.

So I ask the minister: is the Province giving consideration

to funding the Sealers Association themselves, because it does not have to be a

federal-provincial arrangement. The Province can come up with adequate funding

to enable the Canadian Sealers Association to get on with the proposed

activities. Is the minister giving consideration to going this alone to help the

Sealing Association out?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries.

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, the record will show that over

the last few years the Government of Newfoundland has been very generous in

terms of trying to promote the landsman seal hunt, very generous. We have been

informed now that the federal government is willing and almost quite prepared to

join the Province in putting together some kind of a more comprehensive package.

Now it will only take a few more days to get the thing together so I do not

think it would make sense for the Province to assume full responsibility, even

if we could, for this year's harvest by way of paying subsidies and research and

development and all that sort of thing, if there is an opportunity there where

we can plug into the federal program, and that is what we are endeavouring to

do. The fact that it has not been announced, I guess, can be attributed by and

large to the fact that it has taken the federal authorities - and I can

understand they are all quite busy - quite some time to put it together. In

fact, yesterday in Ottawa the Deputy Minister of Fisheries, Mr. Bruce Rawson,

was not too well clued in on it as a matter of fact and he needed another day or

two to sort of get briefed on what it was all about. I guess, Mr. Speaker, to

make a long story short certainly some time next week we should be able to make

some kind of an announcement.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister

of Forestry and Agriculture. The minister will know that an ongoing problem in

the forest industry of this Province is the use of sawlogs for other than the

cutting into lumber, providing an excellent value-added, Mr. Speaker. Sawlogs

used for pulpwood, for chips to generate electricity or for firewood or fuel. I

want to ask the minister whether his department has done any studies on the

extent of the use of sawlogs for other than the production of lumber and what

are the results of these studies? What is the extent of the amount of

underutilized timber in this Province that is being cut down and not being used

for the production of lumber but for other less useful purposes?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Forestry and

Agriculture.

MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member

for his question, and I recognize obviously that he is speaking for the

sawmilling and sawlogging industry in St. John's East. But in any event, Mr.

Speaker, the sawmilling industry is very important to the economy of

Newfoundland. It is particularly important to the economy of rural Newfoundland.

Indeed in some communities the sawlogging industry is the greatest contributor

to the economy. Mr. Speaker, I want to tell the member that yes, the Province is

aware, I am aware and the department is aware, that sawlogs are more valuable to

the economy of this Province when they are turned into lumber than for making

pulp.

AN HON. MEMBER: What are you going to do about it?

MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker, we are doing a lot more about it

than the hon. member when he was Minister of Forestry.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: Let me tell the hon. House what the hon.

member did when he was the Minister of Forestry.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask hon. members please to extend to every member a

courtesy when answering a question, and ask hon. ministers when they are

answering to keep their minds on the question and not on any extraneous comments

that might be made.

The hon. the Minister of Forestry.

MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker, to answer the hon. member's

question, which I might say is an excellent question, and the question and the

answer is very important to a lot of people in Newfoundland. As a department we

are instructing, or it is our wish and we intend to enforce, that sawlogs

harvested off Crown lands will be turned into lumber. Obviously the by-product,

the pulp, will go to chips and to pulp; but we are going to insist, and find

ways to enforce, that sawlogs produced off Crown lands will be turned into

lumber. We are even prepared to look at the possibility of sawlogs produced out

of company limits being turned into lumber.

MR. SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has elapsed.

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Special Committees

MR. SPEAKER: Oh, sorry. It is such a rare occasion for

the Speaker to get a chance to present one.

The hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations.

MR. GRIMES: I would certainly defer to Mr. Speaker, if

you would like to proceed first.

MR. SPEAKER: That's okay.

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, in compliance with the

requirement in the Act, I would like to table, today, the Fifth Annual Report of

the Workers' Compensation Appeal Tribunal, commend it to the attention of the

members of the House, and just point out that in the past year, 1991, there were

some thirty-one decisions rendered by the Appeals Tribunal from people who were

not content with decisions rendered on their behalf in the Workers' Compensation

system. Of those thirty-one, in ten of them, the appeals themselves were

allowed, and the decisions of the Commission were overturned. There were four

others where they were partially overturned, or referred back to the Commission.

In seventeen cases, the appeal was denied and the original decision of the

Workers' Compensation Commission relative to the claim was upheld.

I table the report and commend it to the attention of the

members of the House.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask hon. members, particularly during this period, if they

would please stay in their seats as much as possible. When the Chair is calling

on somebody, when somebody stands, obviously the Chair thinks the person might

be up to do something and some time we are going to run into problems on that.

So, if hon. members would remember that, please.

In accordance with the Internal Economy Commission Act, I am

pleased to table the 1991 Report of the Commission of Internal Economy, which

sets out the decisions of the Commission and members' expenses for 1991.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Notices of Motion

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Eagle River.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will, on tomorrow, ask

leave to introduce the following motion:

WHEREAS the Rails for Roads deal was signed in 1988 for

fifteen years; and

WHEREAS Labrador only received 3 per cent of the $800 million

for their transportation needs; and

WHEREAS 90 per cent of Labrador communities are isolated from

the rest of the Province for up to six months each year because of a lack of

roads; and

WHEREAS economic development in forestry, tourism and the

fishery is being stymied and hundreds of jobs are being lost;

BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly call upon the

federal government to re-open the deal; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that unless new money is added to the

agreement, that existing funds be re-allocated to complete the Trans-Labrador

Highway.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.

MR. BAKER: Order 2.

MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, Petitions.

Shall we go back to Petitions? Do I have the consent of the

House to go back to Petitions?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bellevue.

MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to our Standing Order

90, I have, today, three petitions from constituents in my district that fulfil

all of the requirements of our Standing Order 90 except that they are not on the

proper forms. These petitions were circulated by the communities. I have checked

with the Clerk of the House, and other than that everything else seems to be in

order, so I ask leave of the House to present those petitions.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member has leave.

MR. BARRETT: I have leave?

MR. SPEAKER: Yes.

MR. BARRETT: The first petition is signed by 783

residents of the communities of Gooseberry Cove, Butter Cove, Little Heart's

Ease, Caplin Cove, Hodge's Cove and Long Beach. It refers to a

section of the

highway on Highway 204. On that particular highway there is one particularly

dangerous curve where, over the last two or three weeks that we have had two or

three practically serious accidents in that -

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

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

West, on a point of order.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I don't want to take up too much

of the hon. gentleman's time, but I wonder if he could give me the date on which

the petition was circulated, please - the date on the petition?

MR. BARRETT: There is no date.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bellevue says there

is no date.

AN HON. MEMBER: Two years old (Inaudible)?

MR. BARRETT: No. The hon. member did some clinics in his

district, finding out issues in the district, and this was presented by a group

of people to me and -

MR. TOBIN: When?

MR. BARRETT: - they requested me to present them in the

House.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BARRETT: The point that the (inaudible) -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to take - in the interest of expediting

matters, I understand that the House has given the member consent to present his

petition. Now if that is withdrawn, that is fine. But if it is not withdrawn, I

ask the hon. member to continue with his petition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Continue with the petition please.

The hon. the Member for Bellevue.

MR. BARRETT: The point is that on this particular highway

there is a dangerous curve right now that needs to be widened. We have school

buses travelling this particular road and recently a couple of cars went out

over the guard rail. Except that there were a few trees that held them up, they

would have been down over a 400-foot embankment. It is a very dangerous

situation. I would like to see this work done as soon as possible.

The other petition that I have, and it regards road work, is

from the Town of Chance Cove. The road in Chance Cove was opened in 1948 and in

1974 it was paved from the Trans-Canada at Gull Pond to the end of the

settlement, approximately nine kilometres. Since that time, very little

maintenance has been performed on this portion of the road and it is a very

deplorable situation. At the end of the road we have a major fish plant. There

are hundreds of people who go to work, and also there is a lot of traffic in

terms of transporting of fish. Recently a lot of the wholesalers will not go

over the road from the Trans-Canada to the community of Chance Cove because they

do a lot of damage to their cargo. I petition the House that there be something

done about this particular issue.

I am proud to present another petition from the 352 residents

of Dildo in Trinity Bay. The same sort of condition exists. The roads are in

deplorable condition in the community and recently the Trinity South bus service

was unable to travel over this particular road. We all know that most of these

roads were paved many years ago, they are in deplorable condition and they need

to be resurfaced.

Mr. Speaker, I request that this hon. House refer these

petitions to the department to which they relate. Thank you.

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

West.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to stand and,

obviously, support the petitions presented by the Member for Bellevue. I can

certainly see the frustration that the people of his district must be

experiencing, as well as most other constituents throughout the Province. If

this government, of which he is a member, had not reduced the provincial roads

budget from some forty-odd million dollars to $25 million over the past few

years there would be money there for the people of Bellevue, and this petition

might not need to be presented in the House today.

Mr. Speaker, this administration has reduced the budget by

between $15 million and $20 million over the past number of years since they

came to power. The last year we were in government the budget was something to

the tune of $48 million. Today it is $25 million. That's what has happened to

the roads budget in this Province, the government has kept the cash for some

reason other than doing what needed to be done in capital expenditures.

I know what the people are going through. In my own

constituency, people living in the communities of Monkstown, Beau Bois and Rock

Harbour have exactly the same problems. The trucks can't get in with fuel, with

oil, they can't get in with groceries, the school buses are having difficulties

operating, and it is all because this government have not placed priority on the

need for road improvements in this Province as the previous administration had

done.

I will say one thing, that the Member for Bellevue at least

represented his constituents, even though the petition has been presented long

after the Budget came in, rather than before the Budget, and I would suspect he

had the petition prior to the Budget but refused to present it in the House. But

he did do it. He didn't do what the Member for Eagle River did - who, because

this Province has put no money worth talking about into road improvements in

Labrador, is now up on a Private Member's bill, calling on the federal

government to put more money in.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is aware of the rules with respect to

presenting petitions. He has now gone into an extraneous matter. I ask the hon.

member to keep his remarks to the prayer and the material allegations of this

petition.

The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the roads in Labrador and on the

Island part of this Province have to be treated equally and fairly by the

provincial government. The Member for Bellevue had the courage to come and

represent his constituents and present the petition, unlike another member, Mr.

Speaker, who got no money for his area. He is ashamed of his life, and he is

trying to blame it on the federal government. Mr. Speaker, it is time that this

Minister of Transportation did more than get up in this House, flex his muscles

and shout and scream, fold his arms and jump up and down. It is time this

minister did something for the people of the Bellevue district as well as the

other districts in this Province. It is time the Department of Transportation

took some responsibility and put back - I call upon the minister to put back,

Mr. Speaker, into the Budget the monies that were not spent last year. There

were millions and millions of dollars not spent last year in transportation, yet

the people of Bellevue and Chance Cove and other communities in the Bellevue

district, the same as in my own district, were without road improvements, while

this government refuses to spend the money that the Budget allocated.

I ask the minister if he would give consideration to putting

the Budget back to where it used to be, under the Conservative Government, if he

would put $40-plus million into the road works this year rather than the measly

$25 million they are putting into it, because the people of Chance Cove and the

other communities referred to by the Member for Bellevue deserve to have decent

roads to drive over. Why should the people in rural Newfoundland not have decent

roads to drive over, Mr. Speaker?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Yes, there is a road to Petit Forte and there

should be a road to Petit Forte. It may upset the Member for St. John's South to

know that rural Newfoundland deserve their fair share, but I would say that is

too bad. It is time this government realized that there a place outside the

overpass, and that the roads in Bellevue and Burin - Placentia West, and Grand

Bank and Bay of Islands and every place else, Mr. Speaker -

AN HON. MEMBER: And Eagle River.

MR. TOBIN: - have the right to receive the types of road

improvements the member just called for. Mr. Speaker, it is time that members

stop hiding behind their responsibilities.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. TOBIN: By leave, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation.

MR. GOVER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GOVER: Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that there are

great needs for road construction -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair has called for order. That is what the Chair means,

and that is what the Chair expects.

The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

MR. GOVER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt there is an immense need for

road construction and road improvement in all of rural Newfoundland, and there

is no doubt that in the district of Bellevue, needs are great, perhaps greater

than many other districts around the Province. Why is that, Mr. Speaker? If you

looked at what was spent in Bellevue district for the last seventeen years while

the members opposite were in power -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GOVER: - it is not surprising that the needs in

Bellevue district are great. Since this administration has come into power, Mr.

Speaker, it has adopted a policy of fairness and balance so that the needs, not

only of Bellevue district, but the needs of the district of Burin - Placentia

West and districts of members on the opposite side of the House are met, as well

as the districts represented on this side of the House.

The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West, in the great

spirit of fairness and balance, in an objective assessment of needs, I believe

received three projects under the provincial roads program in a great spirit of

fairness and balance and an objective assessments of needs, I believe received

three projects under the Provincial Roads Program. I wonder if the situation was

reversed, would that have occurred in Bellevue district?... if it was still on

that side of the House, based upon the past seventeen years when the other

members were in power, Mr. Speaker, I sincerely doubt it. Given the fact that

there is a great backlog of need built up in Bellevue district, in the Strait of

Belle Isle district, obviously all these needs, if we are to be fair to all the

residents of the Province, cannot all be addressed at one time, although we are

making the best efforts that we can to address the needs in Bellevue district. I

believe significant amounts of money have gone into Bellevue district in the

last few years to correct the injustice which occurred for seventeen years.

Also, in the Strait of Belle Isle, significant amounts of money have gone in

there to address the imbalances which have occurred over the last seventeen

years and we will continue to do that.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) pork barrelling.

MR. GOVER: It is not pork barrelling, Mr. Speaker. I

understand why hon. members opposite shout across the House 'pork barrelling',

because the record for the last seventeen years would bear out that is the way

the previous Conservative administrations operated. Districts like mine,

Bonavista South, were well looked after, were well looked after, perhaps to the

detriment of districts of Bellevue and the Strait of Belle Isle.

AN HON. MEMBER: Mount Scio - Bell Island .

MR. GOVER: Well, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member opposite

says, their government was doing a great job with the roads program, that in

1988 they announced $40 million worth of work. I do not think it was ever

announced.

AN HON. MEMBER: No.

MR. GOVER: No, I do not think it was ever announced but

they were the roads government. If that was the case, Mr. Speaker, why did the

people reject them on April 20, 1989? If they were doing such a good job, why

did the people reject them? I think the people of this Province, on April 20,

1989, said: no more pork barrelling, Mr. Speaker, no more patronage; we want the

roads money to be assessed on the basis of need; we want hospitals to be built

on the basis of need; we want nursing homes to be disbursed around the Province

on the basis of need. We want water and sewer money to be disbursed around the

Province on the basis of need rather than pork barrelling and that was the

reason, one of the most important reasons why that administration fell and was

replaced by this administration, and we intend to live up to our commitment in

that election, that hard fought election, to deliver the services to the people

of this Province on the basis of need.

Now, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member opposite says that they

were doing a better job in expending money than we are and that there was $40.8

million devoted to road construction in 1988. Mr. Speaker, it is easy to make

that allegation and in fact I will go back and get all the records for the last

seventeen years and see who is doing what, but we must remember, Mr. Speaker,

that the people gave this government a mandate and in 1988 they did not have an

opportunity to bring in a Budget, so we do not know what they would have put

into it if they had come back in power, but I think one conclusion can be drawn-

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GOVER: - if they had come back in power and they did

spend $40 million, 98 per cent would have gone into Tory districts.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. minister's time is up.

Orders of the Day

MR. BAKER: Order 2, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order 2, Bill No. 18.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into Committee of

the Whole on said bill, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

A Bill, "An Act To Amend The Public Utilities Act, 1989."

(Bill No. 18.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

DR. GIBBONS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I move that this minor amendment be approved. It is an

addition of Clause 3.1 to the Public Utilities Act, to allow the change from 1

megawatt to 15 megawatts per site for small hydro. I really have nothing extra

to add to what I said in debate on second reading.

Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

MR. WOODFORD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have just a few short comments. I made most of my comments

the other day on second reading of the bill. I just want to make a couple of

further comments on something that has happened since then. I mentioned it to

the minister earlier today. It has been most evident in the last couple of days

how nice it would be if we had a few more mini-hydro sites on this Island, to be

able to tap into them and be able to bring power into, for instance, the city of

St. John's or any other particular town on the Island. We should never be

dependent on such a system as we have. I know it is one of the best but this

particular situation with regards to the mini-hydro sites would see private

development and Newfoundland Light and Power would be able to take it and feed

it into St. John's, Gander, Grand Falls, or wherever. It would be nice this

morning for Newfoundland Hydro to be able to hook into 50 megawatts or 100

megawatts if they had it, so this is another example of what could happen under

this particular program and I again commend the minister.

Is this third reading now? No, we are in committee. Will this

be going through tomorrow?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Third reading tomorrow.

MR. WOODFORD: It will be going through tomorrow. Then, I

say to the minister that I suppose in the next week, within a couple of weeks

Newfoundland Hydro will be calling for proposals.

DR. GIBBONS: Next week.

MR. WOODFORD: Next week. Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Motion, that the Committee report having passed bill No. 18

without amendment, carried.

On motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and ask

leave to sit again, Mr. Speaker returned to the Chair.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity - Bay de

Verde.

MR. L. SNOW: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole have

considered the matters to it referred and have directed me to report Bill 18

carried without amendments and ask leave to sit again.

On motion, report received and adopted, Bill No. l8 ordered

read a third time on tomorrow.

MR. BAKER: Motion 1, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion 1, the adjourned Budget debate.

The hon. the Member for Bellevue.

MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday I adjourned the

debate and I have a few minutes left. To get back to my former profession I

guess I should review what I did twenty minutes before last week. Normally, as a

teacher you would review what you did the day before so the students could be up

on the information you had provided the day before but since it has been two

days it may take me a little longer today. We just heard a debate on the

petitions I had presented in terms of how Bellevue district had been treated

over the last seventeen years. On Tuesday I outlined the kind of treatment the

district received in terms of municipal capital works. In roughly about a seven

or eight year period the total allocation was about $700,000 or $800,000 in

municipal capital works in the municipalities in the district of Bellevue. In

the last three years since this Government took office there has been roughly

$7.7 million allocated in the district of Bellevue in municipal capital works.

I presented petitions a few minutes ago from three

communities complaining about the condition of the road. When I got elected

three years ago in the district of Bellevue we had a lot of communities that

just had dirt road. In fact in the district of Bellevue there were fourteen

communities out of the thirty-six that had gravel roads. Some of those roads

were not only roads within the communities but roads connecting communities. We

had a situation in the town of Markland in the Spring of the year where the

potholes were so deep you could lose a car. In the last three years out of the

fourteen communities that lacked asphalt in the District of Bellevue, after this

year's roads program there will be only four left. In other words, ten

communities in the last three years have received - I don't want to brag too

much because on Tuesday I am travelling throughout the district with the hon.

the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation to look at some of the

conditions that presently exist in the district. So I have to be very careful

when bragging about what happened in the last three years because he may cut me

off and not give me anything else. But out of the fourteen communities, ten of

them.

There is one community that is going to be done this year

that I have received many calls on, not only from the district but from all over

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. As a matter of fact, the phone never

stopped ringing after the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation

announced the roads program. I think it even came up on Open Line, as finally

the people of Adeytown got their fairness and balance. We all know the history

of the paving of Deep Bight and Adeytown, and what happened -

AN HON. MEMBER: What did happen?

MR. BARRETT: What happened? The money was allocated for

the paving of Deep Bight and, of course, Deep Bight was in the District of

Trinity North. For some reason the contractors couldn't tell the difference

between Adeytown and Deep Bight. So the hon. Member for Trinity North, the story

goes, and I think it is accurate, was on his way home to his district on the

weekend and he saw the paving machines in Adeytown. I mean, this is a true story

because it was on Open Line and everybody remembers it. The paving machines were

in the Community of Adeytown and when the member saw them he said: My Gracious,

they are in the wrong community. So he had to go and order them back into Deep

Bight to start putting the asphalt down in the Community of Deep Bight.

Well, the people of Adeytown, even though they didn't vote

for me in the last election - I did not win the Community of Adeytown but I can

assure you that I will win it the next time - the Community of Adeytown this

year, under the roads program, will get their local roads within the community

paved. Not only Adeytown, but the Community of Ivany Cove with about nine or ten

houses will get asphalt, and also that great Community of Northwest Brook will

also get asphalt.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: Also, to show you how fair and how balanced

this is, the Community of Adeytown didn't vote for this government. The people

of Northwest Brook did and the people of Ivany Cove did. But not to be outdone

and to be fair to everybody, not only throughout the Province but to be fair to

people in districts where they normally don't support the MHA that was elected,

we had to get fairness and balance.

Of course, the hon. the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation, when he announced the roads program also announced that the road

between Bellevue and Bellevue Beach will be paved this year, six kilometers

between Bellevue and Bellevue Beach. Even though in the last election I guess I

got the highest number of votes of any Liberal candidate in the communities of

Bellevue and Bellevue Beach - fifty-nine people voted for this Liberal

government, but there were more people voted for the other side than voted for

us - in fairness and balance, the road between Bellevue and Bellevue Beach,

which the hon. minister and myself on Tuesday will travel over so that he can

see why there was a great need to pave that particular stretch of road, will be

paved.

Now that we have a lot of the gravel roads within the

District of Bellevue being looked after we have a situation now where we have

roads, such as the roads in the communities of Dildo, Chance Cove and other

communities, that were paved, I guess, with election pavement years ago. In a

lot of cases what happened was that the pavement was just laid on the bogs.

Probably some were laid in the wintertime. We have a situation in the

communities of Dildo and Chance Cove right now where the roads are in very

deplorable condition and they need extensive resurfacing and upgrading. If we

continue on with the fairness and balance of this particular government, over

the last three years there has been an average of $1.5 million or $2 million

under the provincial roads program that has been allocated to Bellevue district.

We still need some equalization payments. We were successful in the municipal

capital works to receive equalization payments and to correct some of the ills

that were inflicted on the people of the Bellevue district over the years. But

after next year's road program I am sure that these roads will be looked after.

Because I am sure that they will be - if we look at the Province as a whole and

in terms of the priorities, that they will get on the list to be done.

The other things in the Budget this year that is applied to

my particular district, of course, was the clean up of the waste in the

community of Come By Chance. It is a project of mine, one that I have had for

the last year and a half, and I was pleased when the Budget was read that there

money allocated for the waste clean up that was a carryover from the oil

refinery and the old pulp mill in the community of Come By Chance. The people in

that community are very happy that this work is finally being done, as are the

people in Makinsons and the people in Gander who will -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I have to inform the hon. member his time is up.

MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave! By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bellevue has consent

of the House to clue up his speech.

MR. BARRETT: The other area that was announced in the

Budget of course was the fact that the new youth centre in Whitbourne would be

open this year. Probably one of the areas where there would be an expansion of

staff would be at the youth centre in Whitbourne, which is I guess a

state-of-the-art facility that will probably be a leader for the rest of the

country in terms of service to young offenders, and the people of that area in

terms of the economic stimulus that will be created because of the 150 jobs that

will be created at that particular centre. I am sure that it will have a great

impact on that particular area. The number of positions that will be created of

course will depend entirely on the transfer from St. John's to the boys' home in

Whitbourne. But we are looking forward that there will be an expansion of staff

and that there will be some people from the local area who will be hired and

there will be some jobs.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Grace.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRANE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am very pleased to

have the opportunity to stand and say a few words on the Budget Speech that was

so ably delivered by our Minister of Finance just a little while ago. What

amazes me about this Budget Speech is that I listened to the Opposition Finance

critic for almost a week, and most of the time it seemed like he was trying to

convince himself there was something wrong with it. He had a very difficult time

coming up with anything wrong with it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)!

MR. CRANE: Why don't you be quiet, now? I don't barb you

when you get up. Just shut up for a while.

It is embarrassing when you get a person like the Member for

Mount Pearl, who knows so much about budgets and has been around so long, and

could not find anything wrong with the Budget Speech of this minister.

The one thing I think he did find that was giving him a

problem, was that any pensioner who was making money had to pay taxes. That was

a real problem. Mr. Speaker, I am sure that in these difficult times many

Newfoundlanders are accepting the Budget as being a very fair Budget.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) gallery today!

MR. CRANE: Oh, I noticed the people in the gallery, some

of those people do have a quibble with it. But they would have a quibble like

you fellows regardless of what went on.

Some of the things that I feel that have caused the problems,

the fishery, Mr. Speaker. You know, what really amazes me is to sit here and

listen day after day to the people across the way who say: we are going to unite

this House and we are going to send a message to Ottawa that -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. CRANE: Hold on, now. We are going to send a message

to Ottawa that we are really going to tell them that they are the problem; that

they are causing the problem and they should do something about it. But when

everybody walks out of this House, everybody seems to go their own sweet way.

Yes, okay, you can point at who you like. It really does not matter to me.

Everybody seems to have their own agenda when it comes to the fishery, and that

is what is embarrassing to me. The Minister of Fisheries is going his way. The

opposition are going their way, and every individual seems to have their own

agenda with the fishery. I think if everybody stuck together and worked their

energies in the one direction we would certainly do something more constructive

and maybe more beneficial to the fishery.

Everybody acknowledges that the fishery is the backbone of

the Newfoundland economy. In my district of Harbour Grace they are no different

than anybody else. When the fishery is dead, the economy is dead. We have two

fish plants that employ people from my district, about 400 or 500 people. At the

present time there is not one, I don't think, working, and some of them are

beginning to run out of stamps. I think this year if the fishery is as bad as it

was last year, we are really in for trouble.

In the fishery you can blame who you like for what has caused

the problems in the fishery. You can blame the seals. You can blame the

foreigners. You can blame who you like, but in my opinion the problems have been

caused in the fishery by successive federal governments. The federal government

are the only people who can control our destiny in the fishery. It is not only

the present federal government that have mismanaged, in my opinion. It has been

successive federal governments. However, our present federal government does not

seem to be inclined to do much about it, and regardless of what one might think,

we might want to do it ourselves.

The opposition keeps asking: what are we doing as a

provincial body? I can tell the opposition, in my opinion, that the provincial

body can do nothing unless the federal government is willing to make the

changes.

Other things that are causing our problems is the recession,

of course, and it is not a Newfoundland recession. It is a countrywide and

worldwide recession, and the federal government are having their own problems

financially. In trying to balance their own books they are cutting into the

transfer payments of provinces like Newfoundland.

We are not the only ones having financial problems. I will

tell you, last year when the Premier, and Cabinet, and government - this

government - began to freeze wages and cut jobs, many provinces in Canada

laughed and said, what a stupid way to fight your way out of a recession.

Ontario said that. They said, it is a stupid way to fight your way out of a

recession.

AN HON. MEMBER: Fourteen billion later.

MR. CRANE: Ten billion dollars later, they are still in

trouble in Ontario. Even the Liberal Government in New Brunswick thought it was

crazy, but I see this year that they are cutting hospital beds like nothing

else. Saskatchewan, who has an NDP government, a people's government, were going

to spend their way through. Their credit rating is after dropping in the last

few months a couple of notches, and at the present time they are on par with us,

which is nothing to be crazy about. Now they are talking about cutting $115

million from hospitals, schools and municipalities.

So you see, it is not a Liberal philosophy or a Conservative

philosophy, or an NDP philosophy. When there is no money to spend, you have to

cut.

AN HON. MEMBER: That is not true.

MR. CRANE: It is not true? I did not figure it would be.

I did not figure it would be, because listening to the Opposition House Leader

over there, it is not true.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. CRANE: It wasn't you, was it? You know what amazes

me? If the members on the other side only knew how to run a government when they

were in as well as they know now, boy we would have had a great Province here,

and never would the crew on this side ever have been a government, because they

seem to know all of the answers right now, and three years ago they did not have

either one.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. CRANE: Pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. CRANE: Oh yes, I got that in Labrador City.

You know, the Member for Mount Pearl got really taken up on

taxes - the increase in taxes. I think I heard a quote the other day at a

funeral home that really suited the Member for Mount Pearl. He said: Why is that

the Tories are always one up on you fellows?' I said: I don't know. Explain

that. His father was lying dead in the funeral home, by the way. Well, he said:

you fellows will tax you to death, and the Tories will tax you after death.

Seven per cent GST on the grave digging.

The Budget had some pretty good things in it this year,

things that will please a lot of people. One thing they had in it that in our

opinion was good was getting rid of the school tax. That certainly was the

ambition of this government when they came to power, to get rid of the school

tax and to level up school boards across the Province. To some people that is

terrible, because they are not going to get an increase this year. But to people

in the outports, every school board outside the overpass will improve. Their

funding will improve. We do not hear - I do not know about the Opposition, but

out in our districts we are not getting any flak on abolishing the school tax

and putting it into income tax.

As far as I am concerned, the school tax was the worst thing

that ever could hit this Province. With a person making $7,000 or $8,000 a year

and a person making $100,000 a year paying the one tax, it had to be the most

unfair tax that was ever introduced by any government. So the Tories on the

other side can always be proud of that. They introduced to this Province the

most unfair tax ever levied.

Income tax. The income tax is a very fair tax. If you make

money, you pay money. Why shouldn't somebody making $100,000 a year pay a little

more towards education, health and every other facility in Newfoundland? To the

poorer section, the lower class, the lower income people, right now they are

very proud because from $30,000 down will pay less. From $7,000, $8,000, $9,000

they will pay nothing. So they are certainly better off than they were before.

The people making $50,000 to $70,000, like my hon. friend from Flatrock, he will

have to pay a little extra. I am sure he does not mind because he has....

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

AN HON. MEMBER: He'll make it with a few seals.

MR. CRANE: Yes. A little while ago the minister was asked

a question about seals. The Leader of the Opposition was saying they had a

market for seals. Well, I think we have one of the best sealers here, except his

brother who is up in the gallery - he's gone now - and this brother here says

the Newfoundland Sealers Association never had and have not got any sale for

seals.

AN HON. MEMBER: That's not true!

MR. CRANE: He says it -

AN HON. MEMBER: He doesn't know what he is talking about!

MR. CRANE: He does, he's been at it a lifetime.

MR. RAMSAY: No, no, you don't know, Harold, no

(Inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible)!

MR. CRANE: Okay. Some of the better things in the Budget.

Funding provided for the third phase of the Opening Doors program in public

service. Works, Services and Transportation. I do not think - I have heard more

about Little Bay Islands and Pilley's Island ferries from the member opposite in

the last couple of years, but I have not heard him say a thing about those

ferries since the Budget came out, and say we are going to reinstate that

service.

MR. RAMSAY: Not interested. We solved it for him.

MR. CRANE: The Petit Forte service, South East Bight. All

last year that was one thing I heard here from the Member for Burin. Over and

over, every day he would be talking about Petit Forte, South East Bight. Today?

Never heard of it. Because it is looked after for him.

MR. RAMSAY: Responsive government.

MR. CRANE: The only thing, sometimes I feel that these

fellows are taking advantage of us because of fairness and balance. We are being

too fair, right? That is something they would not know anything about over

there.

MR. RAMSAY: Waving their $3 million capital works in our

face.

MR. CRANE: That's right.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRANE: Fisheries funding; $300,000 has been provided

for the Province's campaign against overfishing. I do not know what $300,000 or

anything else could do against the Province's campaign on overfishing. I think

right now the Premier is putting on a good campaign. We have had other members

put on good campaigns. The Member for Port de Grave is stressed out - beating

himself out. He is worn out going around the Province trying to inform people of

what is going on on the Nose and Tail of the Grand Banks.

AN HON. MEMBER: Spokesman (inaudible).

MR. CRANE: Oh, he is not a spokesman any more that

anybody else for the Liberal party, but at least he is doing something, and that

is more than I can say for a lot of people on the other side. Even the

fishermen, like the Flatrock -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. CRANE: But I sincerely think that if this House of

Assembly and the members of the House of Assembly concentrated on bringing the

problem to Ottawa - the only people who can solve the problem. There is nobody

else who can solve the problem. You can send out boats. You can send out what

you like, and you can talk to the foreigners, but really, basically you have to

get down to basics. The only people who can solve our problem in the fisheries

is the federal government, and I do not think the federal government is fussy

about unilaterally taking over the Nose and Tail of the Grand Banks or doing

anything else.

Education; the Minister of Education is not here today, and

the Minister of Education is very proud of his

part in the Budget. Although

there are some flaws in the Budget, I am sure that freezing wages again this

year has to be something that people are accepting very well because they

understand that you cannot spend money if you do not have money. We do not have

a money tree in the basement, and I think people are beginning to realize that.

That is one of the roughest parts of the Budget, but I think even today that the

majority of people out in the District are beginning to understand it. Maybe one

time, because they thought people spent like drunken sailors that there was a

money tree in the basement of the Confederation Building, but believe me, ladies

and gentlemen, there is no money tree here, and the only money being spent here

is the taxpayers' money.

I think right now, with the Minister of Finance, the Minister

of Education, and the other ministers we have now, they are spending very wisely

and prudently.

MR. RAMSAY: Tough medicine for tough times.

MR. CRANE: Tough medicine for tough times, but there will

be brighter days ahead, and this Finance Minister will bring down many more

budgets, I am sure, if he stays around.

The only increases in taxes that I did not like was the

increase on cigarettes. Being a chain-smoker, I tried to get the Finance

Minister to cut out that tax and drop it back, but he is so prudent that he

would not even listen to me. That has been a terrible tax, and I have been

terribly penalized by that tax, Hubert.

Health care; since we came into power the health care budget

has gone up by millions, and our health care minister is doing everything he can

to re-organize the health care system so we will get more bang for our buck. I

am sure, over the next year or two, we will see where we have made great strides

in health care since coming into power.

MR. RAMSAY: Other provinces are looking at us now.

MR. CRANE: It got to the point now where other provinces,

including big provinces like Ontario, are phoning and looking for the minister

to inform them on how he is making such great strides.

Development; one the smartest ministers of Development we

ever had.

MR. RAMSAY: A top notch minister.

MR. CRANE: Yes, one of the top notch ministers we have

today, and a man who is travelling world-wide and logging many hours for this

Province. I am sure, in the not to distant future, you will see many enterprises

because of his hard work.

We are a very dedicated, hard-working government - a

government that certainly we cannot expect the opposition to appreciate. I would

not expect them to appreciate it. What really bugs me more than anything else, I

know some of the opposition members who stand and make great speeches, and

speeches I would like to hear some times. The one thing that bugs me in the

House is because of people yelling back and forth across the House, I have great

difficulty when the House Leader stands up and makes a great speech about the

fisheries over there, sometimes he does not make much sense but usually he makes

a great speech, and it is those speeches that I would like to listen to

sometimes, instead of people yelling across the House and making a mockery of

the House. So that is one of the things that has bugged me since I came here. I

think one of the best weeks I spent in this House was the week when we had the

Meech Lake Accord on the floor, and everybody was under the gun and under the

lights, and they played ball very -

MR. RAMSAY: It was the best decorum (Inaudible).

MR. CRANE: It was the best decorum I've ever seen in the

House and I really appreciated that week. Although it might have been a

strenuous week at that. So in future I would like to see a little more decorum

when I can sit down and enjoy the speeches of all hon. members.

I feel like my district is not being neglected, but when I

hear some of the members standing up on this side I am not sure that I am

getting my share for my district. I was kind of embarrassed when the Member for

Bellevue was up there preaching about all he had over in his district. It made

me feel sort of embarrassed, because I thought I was doing very well out in my

district until I heard all of what he is talking about down there. But

nevertheless, I will be chasing the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation to see if there is any more money available after this.

This government has one philosophy and that is to treat all

members and all districts fairly. There is no trouble to see it these days when

you see a member on the opposite side with $2 million and $3 million going into

his district -

AN HON. MEMBER: For capital works.

MR. CRANE: - who was in - for capital works, from any

department. Certainly that was never the case before this government came to

power, because the Member for Port de Grave was in there four years and he could

not get $15,000 to put water into ten houses up in Makinsons one time. He had to

go to the federal government and get it. That was fairness and balance with the

other government. So I am sure it is great to see that changed. It is nice to

see the Opposition members getting some money going into their districts, as

well as we ourselves.

In my district the needs are not as great as some districts,

but in work, employment, at the present time, running about 35 per cent, I would

think, and certainly that is one thing we could use. Any kind of employment. If

the fishery does not pick up I am afraid we are in for a bad year again. Outside

of employment opportunities, my district I imagine is looked after and has been

looked after as well as one can expect, and I am quite happy with the

government's philosophy of fairness and balance. I hope it keeps up in the

future.

I listen to some drives back and forth across the way

sometimes and the Opposition is quite happy to tell us that we will not be here

after the next election. But we have news for those fellows. We spent seventeen

years out of government, and I think that we are going to have seventeen years

in here. So, Mr. Speaker, with those few words, thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would

like to have a few words to say on this Budget. If you would bear with me, I

would like to hear what the Member for Port de Grave said, but I will just wait,

we will wait another day to hear what he has to say. I am sure it cannot be very

supportive of the government that will not support him in his fight for

fishermen in this Province. But we will wait for awhile to see what (Inaudible).

Mr. Speaker, I heard on the radio one day that the Minister

of Finance - they were changing their dates several times about when they were

going to present their Budget. I heard finally one day the Minister of Finance

say to this House that he was going to present his Budget finally, the

long-awaited Budget, on March 26, I believe was the date that he announced it.

Ironically, on the very same date, in the mail coming on my desk was this

notice. I had thought it was a notice that had to do with the Budget. It said:

Forage Focus '92, Manure Management Workshop. I expected that was what the

Minister of Finance was going to deliver.

After he did deliver it, I am afraid that it would have been

better, it would have made more sense to me, to have gone to this Manure

Management Workshop than to sit here and listen to the garbage that the Minister

of Finance delivered in this House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: The only other possibility was a press

release that came out from the Member for Mount Scio-Bell Island, who said he

was going to deliver a paper on behalf of the Minister of Development and

Tourism, maybe he delivered that Manure Management Seminar; I am not sure which

one of them did it, but I guess one of them did.

Mr. Speaker, of all the ironies you see in this House of

Assembly, of all the hypocrisy the public would hear if they were listening to

what is happening in this House of Assembly, there has to be a particular one

last week - or the week that the fishermen's group came back in the trawlers

when they returned to St. John's. We were in the House of Assembly during

Question Period that day, when the Minister of Fisheries got up and lambasted

the President of the Fishermen's Union.

He said everything he could about the President of the

Fishermen's Union to put him down; then, when the Member for Burin - Placentia

West, stood up and said: 'I think we should close the House and go down to the

waterfront to meet these brave Newfoundlanders who went out trying to protect

our resource.' And what did we see in the paper the next day? The height of

hypocrisy, Mr. Speaker, the Member for St. John's South and the Minister of

Education, waving for an hour to Ricky Cashin coming in the Narrows. I am not

sure what the gesture meant, it looked friendly when I was talking about it, but

that is the picture in the paper, the Member for LaPoile was there, and they

were in the House five minutes later, insulting and embarrassing the President

of the Fishermen's Union.

But, on that same day, even more ironical, when all of these

guys who thought the cameras would be around at the waterfront, rushed down to

see the President of the Fishermen's Union and all the fishermen come back in,

the Premier was at the airport all by himself without anybody to see him. He was

supposed to be away somewhere fighting for Newfoundland and where did his

members go, where did his caucus go, did they go out to the airport to welcome

the Premier back for doing such a fine job for Newfoundland? No, Mr. Speaker,

they all went to the waterfront and the Premier came home all by himself - I

guess, as he was when he came back from Meech Lake, crying at the airport,

except this time he wasn't crying because there was no one around to see him

cry.

He was probably crying when he heard that his members were

down at the waterfront shaking hands with Richard Cashin and welcoming him back,

when their Premier, who was supposed to be representing that crowd - I don't

think he was representing me very well - Mr. Speaker, up working on behalf of

Newfoundland, we all thought, that's what you were telling us he was doing

anyway, and you wouldn't welcome him back to this Province, you went down and

welcomed Ricky Cashin. That certainly has to be an irony of that day and I hope

that day goes down in history, Mr. Speaker.

I cannot find the - That is why I should have gone to that

Manure Management Seminar, but I don't need too much fertilizer in my

strawberries next summer, because I understand the Member for St. John's South

drives by every day going home to Tors Cove, so if I could get him to divert a

couple of days and come for half-an-hour into the strawberry patch, I am sure he

will help with the fertilization of the strawberries for next year. Mr. Speaker,

the picture that was in the paper really speaks for itself and I suppose - I

can't get over this picture, I really can't. I wish they would put that back in

the paper twenty times.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: No, I was sitting in the truck. I saw you

all there, I got wet, you see, I didn't have a coat on, and the rain on my bald

head was running down into my eyes, so I had to get out of there, but I saw that

the closer the boat got, the more they would squeeze over towards the cameras,

the whole lot of them. Finally, they got one little bunch, and the nephew of

'Tom Murphy', the Member for St. John's South, must have come up and taken the

photograph of his uncle.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. R. AYLWARD: But I don't blame him, he should be proud

of him.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's South, on a point of

order.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Just a few short days ago the Chair, I am not sure, but I

think it was Your Honour, was very adamant about hon. members in this House

addressing other hon. members by their names. I just want to remind the Member

for Kilbride of your ruling, Sir, and I would ask you to remind him, also.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South

raises a valid point of order. Members are to keep in mind that when addressing

other hon. members, they should refer to them as the hon. members for the

particular districts they represent.

The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I

apologize for misnaming the hon. the Member for St. John's South, who moved out

of his district two days after he was elected and went to live in Tors Cove. I

could refer to him that way, which would be parliamentary, I believe, but it

won't work for the next election, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, along with the many disasters in this Budget,

one thing that really irritates me is this government's attack on the senior

citizens of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, if the government of our Province has to attack

senior citizens in such a way, I think we have to be in very hard shape. We can

see from this Budget - well, we see from 1989 when they got in, the public

service pensioners in this Province have paid more than their share of the

recession in this Province. The average public service pension in this Province,

from figures that I have, is about $8,000 a year. Now, that is not very much

money, in this day and age, to try to live on. The average public service

pension, including teachers, as I understand, will be $10,000 a year. Now, Mr.

Speaker, that, again, is not a very big pension for anyone to try to live on in

this Province.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I know every time I say this, the Minister

of Finance tells me I am wrong, and the reason he tells me I am wrong is that he

is embarrassed that he is receiving a pension from Memorial University and

getting $120,000 in this House, too. That is why he says I am wrong, Mr.

Speaker, because he is receiving his own pension and he is not receiving $8,000

or $10,000 a year. And I wonder if the Memorial University pension is indexed. I

don't know for sure if it is or not. It would be interesting to know. But that

is why the Minister of Finance shouts out every time I try to make a point here

for the pensioners of this Province whom I have met with. I talked to them on

the phone last week when I brought in my Private Member's motion and we weren't

able to do it. I spoke with them on the phone. I got the facts and figures from

the pensioners association. I am not making this up, Mr. Speaker. They didn't

know that the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Education were receiving

pensions along with the $108,000 or $120,000 cheques they are getting besides

that, Mr. Speaker. No wonder they can't feel for the pensioners of this

Province. No wonder they cannot give them even a miserable 2 per cent or 2

and-a-half per cent raise they gave the social services people. We gave them a

raise every single year we were in, Mr. Speaker, and I am proud of it. We gave

them raises every year, something you will not be able to see during the next

election. Mr. Speaker, we gave them raises every year that we were in - not

enough, I agree, not enough, but as much as we could afford, a raise, Mr.

Speaker, not a decline. What has happened this year, not only do they not get a

raise, but any of them who were fortunate enough to put some money away in RRSPs

or - they would have to do that to be able to survive, have money from some

other source, because they will never survive on the pensions you are giving

them. Mr. Speaker, any of those who did happen to have a bit of money put aside,

when they became 65 years old, at least when we were in government, they could

depend on it that they wouldn't have to pay at least one tax. They wouldn't have

to pay school tax when they became 65, Mr. Speaker. That was at least guaranteed

to the senior citizens of this Province.

Now, Mr. Speaker, what happened in this Budget, the senior

citizens who become 65 and were expecting not to have to pay school tax next

year will now have to pay an increase in income tax to substitute for the school

tax. The public service senior citizens in this Province get penalized for

having no wage, by having an earned income. Having lost out on their income

since 1989, since their last wage increase, they are probably 12 to 15 per cent

behind in spending capacity or money. In real terms, they are 12 to 15 per cent

behind, because they haven't received any raise. Not only that, Mr. Speaker, now

they get nailed with an income tax increase so that they will have to pay school

taxes now, along with all the rest of the taxes that have to be paid in this

Province.

Mr. Speaker, another thing in this Budget that really

irritates me - it irritated me last year and it is even worse this year - is the

payroll tax. This province has never been a 'have' province. We have always been

a long way from being a 'have' province. But as long as I have been involved in

politics, every public opinion survey that has ever been done - bar none; even

in good times or bad times - the number one issue by a long shot was jobs. They

want more jobs, we need more jobs, we have to keep people home who will get

educated. We have to try to bring people back to this Province who have been

educated and left. That is always the number one issue.

What does this government do last year and increase this

year, triple this year? They bring in a payroll tax for someone creating a job.

If you create a job today you will be taxed for it. That is almost unbelievable

in the Province that needs more jobs and needs jobs more desperately than any

other area in Canada.

MR. WOODFORD: They are going out to get their sign!

MR. R. AYLWARD: They are going today, Mr. Speaker, but

they will be back. There will be more back tomorrow. They have gone out there to

get the signs made up for tomorrow. I have not gotten around to what this Budget

has done with Bill 17 yet. I have not gotten around to the bill that was just

dropped on our desk a few minutes ago.

One way I knew for sure - when I was talking about pensions I

forgot it - that the Ministers of Finance and Education were getting pensions

was that the Member for Bellevue in this House of Assembly a few days ago - I do

not know if I have the exact quote here now. The Member for Bellevue was the one

who put me on to the fact that the Ministers of Education and Finance were

receiving pensions when he referred in this debate to people over sixty-five - I

don't think either one of those members are over sixty-five - but he was talking

about pensions, and talking about people over sixty-five who were making

$150,000 a year. There are only two I know in this Province who would be close

to sixty-five and who are receiving a pension. Both of them are in this House of

Assembly. One happens to be the Minister of Finance, who is presently in a

conflict of interest in making decisions about the pensioners of this Province.

I would say it is a direct conflict of interest that he can make decisions on

what the pensioners of this Province can have when he has no realisation at all

what the pensioners of this Province are suffering.

Mr. Speaker, there are also two other members on that side of

the House of Assembly who are getting pensions, by the way. They are not getting

public service pensions. The Minister of Fisheries is getting a pension, plus

$120,000 a year from the taxpayers. He is getting a pension for years served in

the federal system, I would imagine. The Minister of Justice, who is not in this

House of Assembly - I made a mistake, he is not in here yet - the Minister of

Justice for this Province is presently receiving an MHA's pension. He is

presently, this day, receiving an MHA's pension, and he also receiving a

minister's salary. Whatever a minister gets - I do not know what it is now,

thirty-odd, $37,000 to $40,000.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: So, he is receiving an MHA's pension,

which I would guess to be around the $30,000 mark, maybe a bit more, I am not

sure. He did serve a good amount of time here. So he is getting an MHA's pension

in the thirties, he is getting a minister's pension in the $38,000s, he is

getting expenses paid by the minister's office. Another thing I can't understand

is why the Minister of Justice in this Province has an executive assistant.

Now, I don't understand for the life of me, the appointment

of an executive assistant. That side of the House tells us that an executive

assistant looks after district work for the ministers because they are so busy -

yet we have a Minister of Justice in this House who is not elected, who doesn't

have a seat, who doesn't have a constituency to look after, who has an executive

assistant. That is strange. I find that passing strange. We don't know why this

government, which wants to save money on the backs of the taxpayers who are

making $8,000 and $10,000 a year, would allow a Minister of Justice for this

Province to have an executive assistant when it is illegal. Well, it might not

be illegal, Mr. Speaker, but he doesn't have a district to look after.

We also have a Minister of Transportation who had an

executive assistant when he was Minister of Transportation. Now, I don't know if

the new Minister of Transportation inherited that executive assistant or if he

has his own, or that man is finished, maybe. The person who is executive

assistant to the former Minister of Works, Services and Transportation has

finished his job in the system, I guess.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: Well, I was just talking to him on the

elevator. I just went up on the elevator with him to the fourth floor.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: Yes, his name is Mr. Milley. I just went

up on the elevator with him a few minutes ago. I don't know if he is an

executive assistant right now or not. I forgot to ask him.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: Well, if he is not, I will accept your

word. But the Minister of Finance has an executive assistant, a pretty good one,

too. The Minister of Justice has an executive assistant, and he has a political

secretary in his office, yet he doesn't have a district. I don't understand

that. I don't understand, if the Premier of this Province is trying so hard to

save money on the backs of pensioners, that he would allow this to continue for

January, February, March, so far, into April, the fourth month. It has to at

least go into the fifth month. Probably he is keeping him on staff so he can go

up in Menihek and work on his behalf in the by-election, Mr. Speaker. That is

quite possible.

Mr. Speaker, another thing that this Budget does not do

directly - it intrigues me how the Premier over there can treat the people whom

the Liberals of this Province have sent into this House of Assembly. I

understand, Mr. Speaker, that the Premier of this Province is encouraging and is

in cahoots with the member who did the Task Force on agriculture, Professor

Hulan, to have him run, take on the nomination for the Member for St. George's,

now. He has been out there the last month going door-to-door. I don't understand

why the Premier of this Province would try to encourage another - I mean to the

detriment of the member who was sent in here by Liberals in that district. Why

would the Premier of this Province encourage another member, this Mr. Hulan, to

go out in the District of St. George's and try to knock off their own member. I

don't understand that, Mr. Speaker. I can't for the life of me understand why

the Premier - certainly, he is not a team player, in that case. But he was out

one day last month.

AN HON. MEMBER: Door-to-door.

MR. R. AYLWARD: He started his door-to-door already.

Well, I would tell him for the Member for St. George's, now, that he has a long

way to go yet, because the Member for St. George's will win the nomination. I

bet on the Member for St. George's to win the nomination.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: That is right. Despite what the Premier

wants, the Member for St. George's will win that nomination.

Now, there is a newer member in this Legislature, too, who

also has a problem with the Premier - the Member for Baie Verte - White Bay.

Now, he came in here in a hard fought by-election between him and his brother.

It was tough going. It was neck and neck all the way, and I congratulate him.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: He is the winner. He won it, and I

congratulate him for that. He obviously had more votes, and he had something

going that the other candidate did not. He was more popular or his policies were

better, or the Minister of Health went out and made promises he didn't keep. I

don't know what was the reason, but some of it was. But now that member has a

problem in his district. Who is the member - maybe the Member for Grand Bank can

help me with a name that the Premier is trying to set up out in Baie Verte -

White Bay against the member.

MR. MATTHEWS: Gus Roberts.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Gus Roberts - that is the person who has

met with the Premier now and who is out working in that district all ready to

knock off their own member. Now, I don't understand that. I find that offensive,

actually. I find that offensive. A man who put his career on the line, came out,

he probably will be neglecting his fish plant business and his fishing business

to try to come in here, and the Premier of our Province is not satisfied with

him. He wants to try to get rid of him in the next election. Now, Mr. Speaker, I

put my money on the Member for Baie Verte to win the nomination.

Mr. Speaker, I will put my money on the Tory candidates to

beat both of them the next time around. That will be the outcome of it, so it

doesn't really matter if they win the nomination or not because the candidates

we have out there are going to beat them, anyway.

There is another one, Mr. Speaker - I can't say it, though,

because he is in the Chair. There is another rumour I have heard, a very strong

rumour, Mr. Speaker - I almost can't even say the district now because of the

predicament I am in here - that a member very close to the Avalon region will be

called into the Premier's office very soon because the new Minister of Justice,

the non-elected Minister of Justice, might not be elected in Menihek.

AN HON. MEMBER: Naskaupi.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Naskaupi, I mean. He would never be

elected in Menihek. Mr. Speaker, it might be difficult for him to get elected in

Naskaupi. Now, that is what I heard. Now, the Premier has been up there and

tried to plead and beg the Liberal Association: 'Please give him to me for one

year. Please don't embarrass me by saying that we don't want him here in this

district. Would you please give him to me for one year, and I guarantee you that

I will make sure he never runs here again. Because he is not going to be much of

a member anyway, he is a bit arrogant and a bit uppity for the people of Happy

Valley - Goose Bay, Northwest River and Mud Lake. So, I won't leave him there

long. But I beg you to give him to me,' and they are considering it. I heard the

Premier of this Province on the radio yesterday, saying they are considering it.

Boy, you have a great team over there, that's all I say for you. You have great

team players on that side of the House. Mr. Speaker, it certainly is a formula

for disaster when you are not working with team work.

AN HON. MEMBER: Did you forget 1989?

MR. R. AYLWARD: No, I didn't forget 1989. We happened to

have more of the popular vote than you did. The numbers didn't work out right.

Mr. Speaker, because of that problem in Happy Valley - Goose

Bay in the Naskaupi district, because of the problem with the Liberal

Association up there, which really doesn't want to take the Minister of Justice,

which really doesn't want to take Ed Roberts -I can't call him by district, as

the Member for St. John's South so correctly informed me I did wrong before. I

can't call Ed Roberts by district. He is not in this House of Assembly right

now, and he is not elected, so I can't call him by district. But because of the

problem in the Naskaupi area of him maybe not getting elected, the Premier first

considered maybe waiting until the Member for Ferryland resigns, finally gives

it up. He might wait for that, but he found that was pushing it a bit too far.

`Now, if I am not going to get him elected in Naskaupi in a Liberal district, I

will have a harder job getting him elected on the Southern Shore. I will have a

very difficult job getting him elected.' So he decided: Well, I had better not

wait, and it will probably be too long, anyway. It will probably be a bit

longer. So by next week I am going to have to call in one of my members and see

which one of them is going to give up their seat. Now, Mr. Speaker, I have

someone lined up in Baie Verte - White Bay so I can't call him in, because I

don't want Ed Roberts out in that seat, and I have someone already lined up for

St. George's for the next time around, so I can't call him in, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Member for Mount Scio has the only safe seat

in the St. John's area, according to him. He keeps telling me that he has the

only safe St. John's Liberal seat.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who?

MR. R. AYLWARD: The Member for Mount Scio. He keeps

telling me that. He tells me he does his own polls regularly and all the rest of

the members are in trouble. He is not sure about the Member for St. John's West,

but he keeps telling me that he is the safest one in the St. John's area. That

will tell you something about how safe the rest of them are, if he is the safest

one.

Mr. Speaker, because he is the safest, probably I will have

to leave him there. Now, the Member for St. John's South won by one vote one

night and then he doubled his majority in a week's time. He won by two votes in

a week's time.

MR. MURPHY: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South, on

a point of order.

MR. MURPHY: I do not know if it is a point of order,

maybe a point of clarification.

MR. R. AYLWARD: You know it's not a point of order.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Is the hon. member on a point of order?

MR. MURPHY: Yes, a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. member made a statement which is totally incorrect.

I think it is a point of order I rise on. I increased my majority 100 per cent

and not many members do that. I just want to remind them.

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, the Member for St. John's

South is in his usual mode, he does not listen because that is exactly the next

statement I made.

MR. MATTHEWS: He did, he increased it by 100 per cent. He

had a one vote majority and then he got two.

MR. R. AYLWARD: And he got two. That is what I said. His

mouth goes in gear before his brain most often, anyway, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, what else do we have over

there? We have a couple of them looked after. Now, Danny Dumaresque, the Member

for Eagle River, there is no getting him to leave that seat. There is one way to

get him to leave and that is to get Bill Rompkey to leave but I do not think

Bill Rompkey is going yet because he knows he is not going in any Cabinet.

MR. MATTHEWS: Yes he is. Bill Rompkey is leaving. I found

that out in Ottawa the other day.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Well, the Member for Eagle River knows

because the Premier called him politically immature, or whatever it was, he was

immature. He is not going in the Cabinet with this Premier so he figures his

best bet is to get out and go federally and I wish him every success in the

world. That is a potential seat for the new Minister of Justice but the Member

for Eagle River will not do it to his constituents. It might hurt him in the

next federal election. It could very well. The Member for Port de Grave, now he

is one over there who is considering voluntarily giving up his seat for the

Minister of Justice. He is the only team player on that side. He is the only one

who will stick with the Premier and if the Premier's pleas to the Naskaupi

Liberals do not work he will volunteer to give up his seat.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. MATTHEWS: We thought they were the same John.

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. MATTHEWS: We thought the Premier and God were the

same person.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, the problem with that is the

Premier will not go and ask him. The Premier is too proud. The Premier knows

that the Member for Port de Grave is doing a good job for the fishermen.

MR. MATTHEWS: The Premier is afraid of him.

MR. R. AYLWARD: And what did I hear the other night? The

most visible cabinet minister in the Liberal Government was the Member for Port

de Grave and he is not a cabinet minister anymore. I heard that quote somewhere.

MR. MATTHEWS: Ray Guy said it.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Well, who else do we have over there who

might have to give up his seat for the Premier? Maybe the Member for Lewisporte

might but I do not think so.

MR. MATTHEWS: You know the story on him?

MR. R. AYLWARD: No.

MR. MATTHEWS: He was suppose to go up in the Premier's

office but Brian Tobin called, got upset, and wanted the Member for Stephenville

and he got pulled back.

MR. R. AYLWARD: I think he is a good choice by the way. I

would rather see the Member for Stephenville up there. I think he should be in

Cabinet because there should always be an Aylward in cabinet as I said before.

Preferably this one but if not then the Member for Stephenville should be in

there for the next, well, give him eight or ten months in there. He should have

one shot at it before he gives up. Now, another potential is the former Minister

of Justice, the Member for Humber West. Maybe he will give up his seat. He

wanted to give up being minister and nobody can figure out why he did it. He was

suppose to be the successor, I understood, to the Premier in a few years time

when the Premier wanted to go federally.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. R. AYLWARD: By leave. I have not told you which one

is going over there yet. You guys do not know. I still have to tell you which

one of you are going to get it.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Does the hon. member have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Before I recognize the hon. Member for Port

de Grave I would like to inform hon. members of the questions for the

adjournment debate.

Question number one: I am not satisfied with the responses of

the Minister of Health and the Minister of Environment and Lands to my questions

about the Corner Brook water supply. I would like to discuss these questions at

greater length on the Late Show - the hon. Member for Humber East.

Question number two: I am dissatisfied with the answer from

the Minister of Finance to my question today relating to the provincial sales

tax on building materials - the hon. Member for Mount Pearl.

Question number three: I am not satisfied with the answers to

my questions to the Minister of Fisheries regarding funding for the Canadian

Sealers Association - the hon. the Member for Grand Bank, a former teacher,

great speller and writer.

MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker, what was the first one again? I

did not catch it.

MR. SPEAKER: The first one was to the Minister of Health

and the Minister of Environment and Lands regarding the water supply in Corner

Brook from the hon. Member for Humber East.

AN HON. MEMBER: What was the second one?

MR. SPEAKER: The second question was the hon. Member for

Mount Pearl on the sales tax on building materials.

The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to say very clearly from the outset that I am very

pleased to be able to rise in the House of Assembly today and take up the time

allotted to me as a member of this House of Assembly. I have some thirty minutes

to speak on the Budget and things related to the Budget, related to the economy

of the Province and also related to my district. I think none of it is separate

from the other. When you talk about it and pull it all together, it is all one

and the same - the Budget, the economy considering the present situation with

the fisheries crisis, the economy of the Province, and what happens in each one

of our districts.

My district is no different than any other district around

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, and it is facing difficult financial

times - very, very difficult financial times. I will tell you very quickly, we

have eight fish plants in the district of Port de Grave and eight fish plants

today are closed. If you have those types of things happening all around the

coastal communities of Newfoundland and Labrador, just imagine the impact on the

economy in all the larger centres in Newfoundland and Labrador. Just imagine the

number of jobs lost in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador when the

fishing industry goes down to the low esteem it is held in today.

How can any government, regardless of its political stripe,

or how can any Minister of Finance draw up a Budget that he or she would like

to, with an economy such as this? How much choice do you have when you are not

bringing in the revenues you need in order to pay out and to provide the

services in health, education and other social programs, capital grants and

municipal grants in this Province? There is no magic tree growing out in

someone's backyard. There is no magic area out there where you can just take

money away and spend it just because people are asking for it.

It is very difficult for any minister in any part of the

government to have to say 'no' to constituents - to have to say 'no' to the

people of the Province, and compare the low economy, the state of the economy in

the Province today, with the dept hanging over our heads of some $6 billion;

where over $500 million every year is paid in interest alone.

When you look at the needs of people in hospitals; when you

look at the needs of people working in the public service; when you look at the

needs of the pensioners, and you look at the needs of all of the services that

need to be provided in the Province, you have a choice to make. You have to do

the best you can with what you have until the economy rebuilds to the point

where you can spend the money in order to provide the services for the people of

this Province. Nobody in this Province in their right mind takes any pleasure in

saying 'no'. Everybody's needs are as important to those individuals as to the

other person. There is no one person who has a greater need than the other

person, whether it is in health; whether it is in the needs of education;

whether it is in the needs of services, or social services or jobs. It is

equally as important to those individuals as it is to the other person, and that

is what you have to keep in mind, Mr. Speaker, when you draw up a Budget. How do

you distribute that money equally and fairly in an effort to try to provide

services to the people, and a decent wage and a decent income so that all people

living in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador can live within the best

means of the economy and the financial situation that we are facing - and that

is the very, very difficult situation that we are facing.

Now why are we in this difficult situation? Is it any one

person's fault? Is it any one government's fault? Or is it any group of people's

fault? It does not really matter now. It does not really matter whether it was

NDP, or Liberal, or Tory, or one organization or union - it does not really

matter. The fact still remains that we are faced with this very difficult

situation, and it scares me and frightens me no end to look forward to 1992. As

I heard my hon. colleague from Harbour Grace say today, if 1992 is a repeat of

1991, God help us. I tell you, God had better be there to help us, because we

will be facing a total economic collapse in this Province if the fishing

industry fails. If anybody in this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador does

not believe that, then I feel sorry for them, and I feel sorry for this

Province. We cannot survive without the fishery. It is absolutely impossible for

Newfoundland and Labrador as we know it today to survive without the fishery. I

will try to explain that as I go on.

I spoke to some students at a high school this morning in my

district. I likened it to a large building where if you pull the centre pillar

out, the whole building collapses, it is the same thing with the fishery in this

Province. You take away the fishery in this Province and you are going to have a

total economic collapse.

I spoke to the Marine Institute students just about two weeks

ago; 1,000 students in the Marine Institute, each and every one of those

students is dependent on the fishing industry for jobs in the future. Where are

they going to get jobs if there is no fishing industry? Where are the students

from the Cabot Institute going to get jobs, where are the students from Memorial

University going to get jobs? I spoke in Grand Falls yesterday. Some people

joked with me and said, why would you speak in Grand Falls on the fishery, it is

not a fishing town?

You take all the coastal communities around that area,

Harbour Breton and all those people who go into Grand Falls -Windsor and spend

their money, you take away from it all the people there who go in that area, in

those towns and spend their money and I am going to tell you very much so, it

will have a drastic effect on each and every business in that community, in

those towns. It is the same in Gander, it is the same in every area in

Newfoundland and Labrador, it is the same here in St. John's, it is no different

from anywhere. Everybody is affected by the fishery, if it is good everybody

benefits, if it is poor, everybody loses.

Now it is getting to the point where we are scared there is

going to be a total collapse. How can you pay out wages if you do not take money

in?... that is the key question, Mr. Speaker. You cannot pay it out if you do

not take it in. If somebody in this Province has the answer on how to pay money

out without money being taken in, tell me. In all my years of business I never

learned it but I would sure like to sit down and listen. I would surely like to

be a recipient of how to manage a business, and a government is no different

from any other business, you take monies in and you spend monies out to the best

of your ability and to the best of your knowledge. Some administrations are a

little more careless than others, some are a little wiser than others but

nevertheless, it all comes down to the one thing.

You talk about the loss of jobs in this Province because of

the fishery; I am going to give you some examples, very quickly. This is how

serious we get when we talk about an issue that is facing this Province. In

1990, FPI landed 200 million pounds of fish -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: In landing 200 millions pounds of fish, Mr.

Speaker, they created 8,000 jobs; 8,000 direct jobs in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador. Consider the spin-off factor for 8,000 jobs and you

have 1.5, 8,000 times 1.5 is 12,000 jobs in the spin-off factor. In other words,

landing 200 million pounds of fish they created 20,000 jobs, that is a lot of

jobs. That is a lot of jobs for one company to create and we are only using that

as an example.

In that same year, the foreign countries reported to the

200-mile limit - 800 million pounds. If FPI can create 20,000 jobs by landing

200 million pounds of fish, the foreign countries took away four times that

amount, therefore that is a loss of 80,000 jobs out of the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador -

MR. MURPHY: Full employment John, full employment.

MR. EFFORD: 80,000 jobs, full employment, and that is

what is wrong with the economy of this Province. The fishing industry is the

main resource, the main basis of the economy. Everybody else is getting the full

advantage of it in the world except Newfoundland and Labrador. We are the

recipients of the loss and everybody else is the recipient of the gains of it

and we do not have the gumption to take control and take the problem in own

hands. I am not talking about the government, I am talking about the people of

the Province. In fact, very few people in this Province realize and understand

how serious the situation really is.

We talk about the seal population. We do not have a seal hunt

in this Province and we are still studying to see if seals eat fish. In the name

of God, what do they eat if they don't eat fish? If they don't eat Kentucky

fried chicken or turnips or cabbage, then they must eat fish and not codfish

alone. They eat caplin. They eat herring. They eat mackerel. They eat flounder.

They eat flatfish. They do eat cod, and they eat shrimp. Now let me give you

some numbers of what I am talking about, how frightening the situation is today,

and how four boats left Port de Grave last week, steamed 175 miles to the Grand

Banks, were gone six days, and came in without one fish of any kind.

AN HON. MEMBER: Never had enough for a stew.

MR. EFFORD: Never had enough to cook, and that is scary.

Does that not frighten you out of your very wits what is going to happen to this

Province if that happens again when they go out and cannot find any fish, and

again and cannot find any fish? A total economic collapse. We have pulled back;

the inshore fishermen have pulled back; the deep-sea draggers have stopped

fishing in Newfoundland, but while we have done that the foreigners are still

fishing, and the seals are still eating fish.

Let me give you some numbers about the seals. I have said i