1 Province of Newfoundland THIRTY-NINTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NEWFOUNDLAND Volume XXXIX Third Session Number 42 VERBATIM REPORT (Ha nsa rd) Thursday, 8 November 1984 Speaker: Honourable James Russell

The House met at 3:00 P.M. side of the House were very pleased to see that the people of MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Menihek were prepared to send a Order, please! message to the government in the recent by-election. STATEMENTS BY HINISTERS MR. SPEAKER: The hon. House Leader, President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I did not have the opportunity to advise the official Opposition of this statement beforehand, for which I apologize but I know that they, as well as all members of the House, would wish to be associated with the government in extending best wishes to the new member for Menihek (Mr.

Fenwick) who was elected in the recent by-election there and ensure the hon. gentleman of the complete co-operation of the Government of the Province and the Party on this side of the House, and, I know, of the official Opposition. We will do everything we possibly can to co-operate with him as we try to do at all times with all members of the Opposition. My purpose in getting up at this particular time, Mr. Speaker, is to welcome the hon. member to the House on behalf of the government and I am sure associated with me in these remarks will be all members of the hon. House. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to second the welcome which the hon. minister has extended to the new member for Menihek (Mr. Fenwick). I look forward to working with him and I must say that we on this SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. BARRY: We hope that the minister's protestations of co-operation, Mr. Speaker, will be there when we come to consider the new Elections Bill which everybody expects will come forth in this session of the House. And as you know, Mr.

Speaker, there is concern by the member and his Party that they are not being treated fairly in that bill and we would ask government to consider this when it is raised before this House. MR. SPEAKER: Oral questions. MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, I have a Ministerial Statement. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Is it agreed to revert to Ministerial Statements? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Labour. MR. DINN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I apologize to the House. I was talking to the Clerk at the time. Mr.

Speaker, as minister responsible for housing I would like to take this opportunity to advise members of the House of Assembly of further initiatives of Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation in the area of land development. Commencing on November 19, the corporation will L4606 R4606

be offering for sale an additional seventy-nine lots in the Cowan Heights development. This component forms part of a new phase consisting of 105 lots with the remaining lots to be placed in a sales position as servicing is completed. Cowan Heights is 100 per cent provincially funded and represents a continuing commitment on behalf of government to ensure a ready and adequate supply of reasonably priced serviced building lots in the St. John's area.

This land assembly combines with the corporation's development in Mount Pearl, Newtown, to form an effective and complimentary alternative to private sector development throughout the region. I would like to take this opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to provide some background information on the Cowan Heights development which consists of some 290 gross acres offering potential for some 1,700 units of residential construction. The first phase of the development consisted of 208 building lots, with the first lots being placed on sale during the Spring of 1981.

In view of the slow sales activity experienced at that time, primarily because of high interest rates, you may recall government initiated a lot subsidy programme in June of 1982 involving a price reduction of 20 per cent for the first 50 lot offering. I am most pleased that the success of this programme provided the impetus for the sustained sales activity which has since been experienced with regard to the remaining lots to the extent that 95 per cent of the lots previously offered for sale have now been sold.

I should also point out that the servicing of this initial phase is now completed with the installation of pavement and sidewalks as well as infrastructure services being provided by way of school construction and plans for recreation facilities next Summer. In conclusion despite the fact that housing starts in the Province and indeed throughout the country are down in excess of 25 per cent to date in 1984 over the number registered for the same period last year I am encouraged by the ongoing demand for serviced building lots in the corporations Cowan Heights and Mount Pearl, Newtown developments.

Looking ahead to the coming months I am hopeful of a continuing period of stablized interest rates and a favourable construction climate to promote sales activity and related home ownership opportunity in these areas. Thank You, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. member for LaPoile. HR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, one would have thought, after the House being shut down now for six months, that we would have had a litany of Ministerial Statements today in the House starting with the Premier on the horrible state of the Newfoundland economy, record unemployment, layoffs, business closures, and so on. MR.

MARSHALL: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The hon. President of the Council on a point of order. MR. MARSHALL: The gentleman has forgotten the fact that he is cast in a new role in the House. The hon. gentleman is responding to a Ministerial Statement. The Ministerial Statement related to housing, Mr. Speaker, and the hon. gentleman surely has to confine himself to the statement and the substance L4607 R4607

that the hon. minister was speaking of. MR. SIMMS: Interest rates are going down now. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! To that point of order, it does appear, at least to the Chair, that the hon. member for LaPoile (Mr.Neary) was wavering somewhat from the rule of relevancy with regards to the Ministerial Statement on Housing. MR. NEARY: Purely a

preamble, Mr.Speaker. So I suppose in one sense we should be thankful for small blessings. The administration must have been scraping around the bottom of the barrel today to come up with a Ministerial Statement. Now, Mr.Speaker, the Ministerial Statement tells us that there is going to be some more building lots put up for sale in the Cowan Heights area and that may or may not be a good thing. The statement also indicates that housing starts in the Province are down this year by 25 per cent.

Even though in other provinces of Canada housing starts are on the upswing, on the increase, in Newfoundland we decreased by 25 per cent over what housing starts were in this Province last year, and that is a clear indication, I believe, to all and sundry of the horrible state of the Newfoundland and Labrador economy. I noticed that the minister did not in his statement take the usual flick that the administration take at Ottawa about the high interest rates. Now that their buddies are installed, their pals are installed up in Ottawa, Mr. Speaker, you do not hear the hon. Minister responsible for Housing (Mr.

Dinn) getting up and saying it is all Ottawa's fault that these lots are not being bought and development is not taking place. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, they are not down far enough yet for people to start building houses. MR. SIMMS: Give them time. MR. NEARY: But, Mr. Speaker, the significant thing today - and we will see a lot of this now, I imagine, in this Session of the House - backing away from things they demanded from Ottawa and from the Liberal administration. They will be backing away now and there will be no more flicks about the interest rates. MR. SPEAKER (Russell Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired. ORAL QUESTIONS MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Premier.

I would like to ask the Premier whether in light of the September unemployment statistics showing 21.2 per cent of the labour force out of work, or 22.9 per cent on a seasonally adjusted basis, and in light of the more than 100 soon to be laid off in Labrador City, and in light of the several hundred soon to be laid off in Corner Brook, and in light of the thousands of plant workers and fishermen unemployed as a result of the trawlermen's strike, and in L4608 R4608

light of the willingness of government to delay steps necessary to ensure additional employment from Hibernia development, does the Premier have immediate initiatives available to reduce the level of unemployment and the suffering presently experienced by the thousands of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, and what are those initiatives? MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Obviously, Mr. Speaker, we are as concerned about the unemployment rate in Newfoundland as is the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Barry) and other members of the House no doubt, on this side and on that side of the House, and it is an ongoing concern.

Now I do not know where the Leader of the Opposition has been over the last few months, but I guess he must recognize that over the last few months this government signed seven agreements with the federal government in a rush of agreement signing when the Liberals in Ottawa thought that they might be able to cling on and therefore were going to change their approach and stop talking about co-operative federalism being dead and try to resurrect it in time to get re-elected, so we signed agreements, Hr. Speaker, to lead to job creation as it related to mineral developments.

It is not a well known fact that the reactivation of the St. Lawrence mine, and the building of a mill there for the first time in the history of St. Lawrence to actually process that ore, was as a direct result of promotional activities initiated by this government. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: We will be creating 200 or 300 permanent jobs for the people of St. Lawrence. Mr.

Speaker, I guess it is known a bit better to everybody that it was the initiatives of this government that led to the reactivation of the Bale Verte Asbestos mine on the Baie Verte Peninsula, which has created and sustained 200 or 300 or 400 permanent jobs in that area. I think it is starting to become well known, and it will over the next month, that it was solely as a result of the thirteen month effort of this government that we are going to see a modern permanent paper mill in Corner Brook. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER PECKFORD: It is because of the initiatives of the last Budget to reduce the sales tax on capital equipment that led Abitibi-Price to commit $33 million for the moderizationof the mill in Grand Falls. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: So these are some of the initiatives we have taken. The Mineral Development agreement, Mr. Speaker, which sees more promotional activity done so that we can find more ore, it is as a result of an amendment that was brought into this House by yours truly, Mr.

Speaker, when I was Minister of Mines and Energy, and led to the new gold discovery on the South Coast, which will see a gold mine in a couple of years. So there is gold in them there hills. L4609 R4609

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: So, Mr. Speaker, on the mineral side of things, and in pulp and paper modernization agreements, talking about the new government in Ottawa and job creation, Mr. Speaker, since we had the amendment to the pulp and paper moderization agreement giving a few million dollars extra to Corner Brook for three years, in seven days we are able to negotiate $7 million and another four years to the agreement to up the amount of money forCorner Brook from $33 million to $40 million. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr.

Speaker, I think that is performance as it relates to trying to ensue that job creation continues in this Province. In rural development, Mr. Speaker, we signed an agreement for $18 million just recently to create jobs in this Province. I would commend to the hon. the Leader of the Opposition's (Mr. Barry) attention the following brochure which has been issued detailing this, which obviously he did not see. And we have the Planning agreement, $4 million, the Minerals agreement, $22 million, the Burin Peninsula Development fund, Mr.

Speaker, which has led to the Cow Head oil rig servicing facility, which is going to create over 100 permanent jobs and which is under construction at this very moment. The road is just about completed. There was a major dynamite blast down there yesterday to complete the causeway. There are 602 people now working at the Marystown Shipyard, a record number. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER PECKFORD: The Bow Drill I is in Marystown, the Bow Drill II is in Marystown, and we can work on both oil rigs at the same time as a result of our transferring the Green Bay ferry down there to make it a second boat so that both drill rigs can be worked on at the same time. Before the Green Bay ferry was transferred down there f or that kind of a boat we could only work on one oil rig at a time. The Fogo Island ferry is being built down there in this Province, to service the people of Fogo Island. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: Under the Ocean Industries agreement, Mr.

Speaker, $28 million is going into ocean industries. The Minister of Development (Mr. Windsor) announced the other day support to another local industry that is established creating permanent jobs. There is an Incentive programme, there is a Tourism programme here to provide grants and low- interest loans to entrepreneurs out there who want to enlarge their motels, build parks, provide promotional activity to ensure that we get more of the tourist dollar in Canada than we are getting. The pulp and paper modernization I already mentioned, the St. Lawrence mine and the Cow Head development.

Through this $165 million of government money we are going to stimulate a total of $400 million of activity over the next three to four years in this Province. Mr. Speaker, that is performance. May I also point out to the Leader L4610 R4610

of the Opposition (Mr. Barry), another job creation activity that we got involved in in the past year is that we provided $90,000 of assistance to Aqua Fisheries, we provided to Atlantic Fisheries a total of over a half million dollars, to Bay Bulls Seafoods, $250,000, to the Bay St. George Fisheries, $74,000, to Belle Island Seafoods, $400,000, and on the list goes, Mr. Speaker. MR. TIJLK: What about Triton? PREMIER PECKFORD: Triton is $1 million, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: One million dollars to Triton.

The total comes to $29,490,470 that we have provided this present year in order to stimulate job opportunities in the fishery in rural Newfoundland. These are some of the ways in which this government is trying to address our malaise, our unemployment problem, and others will be announced in due course, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, very much. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

It is amazing how the Premier can refer, for example, to modernization of the Bowaters mill, and now the Kruger mill at Corner Brook, and omit to make any reference to the 300 to 500 men and women who will see jobs lost as a result of what is taking place in Corner Brook. I wonder is the Premier aware and these are in September, Mr. Speaker, before the worst part of the season is upon us - is the Premier aware, has he looked at the statistics which indicate that on the Avalon Peninsula we have 18.8 per cent jobless, 20,000 men and women, Mr. Speaker?

On the East Coast and the Burin Peninsula, 34 per cent for 7,000 men and women jobless. On the West Coast and Labrador, 21.2 per cent for 11,000 jobless. Central and Northeastern Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker, 22.5 per cent for 12,000 jobless. The youth unemployment rate, Mr. Speaker, is 35.5 per cent. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Sometimes in an original question there is a little bit of time allocated for some kind of a

preamble, but certainly the Chair recognized the hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Barry) on a supplementary question, and really there should not be any need of a

preamble for a supplementary question and the hon. Leader of the Opposition, I am sure, is aware of that. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I started off my supplementary with the words, "Is the Premier aware," a question, Mr. Speaker. Of these statistics, including the youth unemployment rate of 35.5 per cent, the highest in Canada, a shameful record on the part of the government opposite, and, Mr.

Speaker, in light of this, and in light of the fact that we have so many plant workers and fishermen suffering as a result of the trawler strike, would the Premier indicate whether he has given directions to the directors of FPI concerning the approach to be taken in attempting to resolve the trawlermen's strike L4611 R4611

and what are these directions? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, obviously the Leader of the Opposition wants me to bargain in public. If I had to give the directions, if any, that the government had made to the directors of FPI, obviously I would be negotiating in public. I would be saying here in this House, to the public of Newfoundland, what tenor and form the negotiations are going to take at the table. It would be completely inappropriate and irresponsible, Mr. Speaker, for the leader of the government to do that kind of thing. Suffice it to say, Mr.

Speaker, on the question of the offshore fishery as it relates to Fishery Products International, the Minister of Labour and Manpower (Mr. Dinn) and the officials of his department and the government generally have been successful over the last few days in getting both sides back to the table. I think that is a significant move given the length that this strike has gone on in the last while. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. PREMIER PECKFORD: You know, we will do our part, Mr. Speaker, as it relates to that. Obviously the question that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Barry) asked, am I aware, it goes without saying that everybody in Newfoundland has been aware from time immemorial that we have one of the highest unemployment rates not only in Canada but in the Western World and that it is not an easy problem to solve. Some of the problem of the unemployment relates to the seasonality of some of our work, some of it right now relates to the fact that there are a number of labour disputes ongoing.

The government is doing, it believes, all it can to try to alleviate that but we do need additional economic impetus and incentive in order to do it and the $400 million referred to, which has not flowed into the economy yet and will not start flowing until 1985, will go a long way to try to alleviate that. As it relates to Corner Brook, just let me say, Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Barry) seems to want to emphasize the jobs that are lost. How about the jobs that have been saved, Mr. Speaker, in this Province as a result of this government's efforts? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.

PREMIER PECKFORD: You know, it is the same as happened in Stephenville. The linerboard mill in Stephenville had a lot more people working than are working there now, there is not question about that, but they ran the place into the hole and the Government of Newfoundland and the taxpayers of Newfoundland had to pick up close to $500 million as a result of that. But we still have a stable, commercially viable industry out in Stephenville. That is what we have to have in Corner Brook. Today in Corner Brook, contrary to popular opinion in Corner Brook and on the West Coast, that mill is losing money.

The Bowater company had been selling paper at $150 a ton when Kruger Incorporated out of Quebec was selling it for $357 a ton. They had to close down the suiphite mill because to leave the suiphite mill open and feed that into the production of paper means an inferior paper. You have to expand the thermo-mechanical pulp L4612 R4612

operation, which will take a few months to do, and in order to do that you have to close down one machine, otherwise you would still be selling inferior paper if you left the sulphite mill open. But the whole substance and thrust of this government, and why Kruger was picked in the beginning, was to ensure that we had not only a substantial company,but a company that would put up front from the money they obtained from the banks of this country to ensure that we would have a viable industry in Corner Brook. It is no good to have 2,000 people working in the mill and losing $200 a ton every day.

It is a lot better to have 1,000 or 1,200, or whatever the number would be, working in the mill and have a company that is making money, Mr. Speaker. Surely, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Barry) is not asking for us to have every industry in this Province go in the hole by keeping everybody on when the reality of the situation is that we have to compete in world markets and therefore we have to produce a quality product. That goes for forestry, that goes for the fishery, that goes for mining, that goes for every other occupation or industry in this Province: We must be competitive.

I think that the people of Corner Brook and the people of Newfoundland are relieved, not only relieved but overjoyed that we were able to bring of f the kind of deal that we did in Corner Brook. There are a lot of people around who are saying a number of years ago and last year that it could not be done, that Corner Brook was doomed, that there would be nobody come on the scene that could put up the money that was needed. We understand there is a serious unemployment rate, but it is not going to be solved, Mr. Speaker, by keeping people on in industries that are losing money but by creating new industry.

It is to be solved by signing agreements like the $400 million one I just talked about and by getting a sensible and sane deal with on the offshore which will see the spinoff industries come toNewfoundland, and by having extra money coming in that we can use that money to put back into industries . That is the way we have to go. We just cannot keep having bankrupt industries along the line that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Barry) insists that we must have. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

I think we might have gotten some indication in the Premier's last remarks as to what he meant by his statement about the new fish company being run as a company in the private sector. I hope the good people of Grand Bank are listening to what the Premier just said with respect to not permitting plants to operate that are losing money. And at the appropriate time we will be asking the Premier to clarify his remarks on this. But, Mr. Speaker, as a final supplementary, I refer to the statements made by the ministers of energy , both federal (Ms. Carney) and provincial (Mr.

Marshall), and ask the Premier would he not agree that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador should have had its work done, should have had its plans ready for alternative modes of development, and, forgetting the associated benefits relating to Hibernia, that it should not be necessary to have this delay with respect to the filing of Mobil's development plan and environmental L4613 R4 613

impact study and that it should not be necessary to see the probable delay in Hibernia development which will result from this, and that it should not be necessary to inflict this additional suffering upon the thousands of men and women who will go unemployed that much longer while this delay is in effect? PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKEORD: Mr. Speaker, on two points, first of all the Leader of the Opposition (Hr.

Barry) well knows that it was his Liberal cohorts in Ottawa who wanted Grand Bank closed down and put a piece of paper on the table to that effect and we forced them to keep it opened. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: I can produce the documentation on it. It was the Liberal government in Ottawa that said, 'Close down Gaultois we are not going to keep it open.' We forced them to back away from that. 'Close down Harbour Breton, close down Gaultois.' MR. NEARY: They wanted it open and you want to close it. PREMIER PECKFORD: No, no. They wanted it closed down.

Caultois had to be closed down, Ramea had to be closed down, Harbour Breton had to be closed down, Grand Bank had to be closed down and Burin had to be closed down and they were not going to agree to keep them open. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! PREMIER PECKFORD: They do not like the truth, Mr. Speaker. When you start hitting them with the truth then you hear them speak, then they will not keep quite and let me answer, Mr. Speaker. I was quite when the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Barry) asked the question, now let him be quite while I am answering it, Mr. Speaker. That is fair ball.

The Leader of the Opposition says he is going to be fair in this Session of the House. Well, that is one way now he just broke that promise. Now, Mr. Speaker, there was a proposal put on the table to close down those plants and it was this government that forced the Liberals to keep it open, the Liberals now kicked out of Ottawa, perhaps for that reason among others, because they were so contemptuous of the Canadian people. We would not let them do it.

Futhermore, let the Leader of the Opposition read the agreement, and if he reads the agreement he will see that what we have said there is that these plants have to be kept open for the foreseeable future, that they have to be made to work, that there is a resource utilization task force that has to report upon the amount of resource that is available to see that they are kept open.

At the same time we are not going to - and this is what I am getting at when I am talking about working like a business - we are not going to be like the former Liberal government which stopped and inhibited this company from working by insisting that they were going to have a day to day say in the management of Fishery Products International and it was Mr. Bell and Mr. Lumley and Senator Austin and the rest of them that inhibited this company L4614 R4614

from working. One could almost say they had something in the back of their minds about not wanting this company to work. There was no way that we could get an agreement because Mr. Bell and other people who wanted to operate Fishery Products International and wanted to be able to say how the company was going to be run on a day to day, week by week basis. I say that is wrong, Mr. Speaker. If you are going to have political interference daily and weekly in a company that you establish, you have just scored the death knell of that company and therefore we were opposed to it.

So when I talk about private enterprise, I am talking about the board of directors and the management of the company being able to operate it on a day to day, week by week basis. There are provisions in the agreement which means they have to consult with the shareholders from time to time and give reports. And if there are going to be any layoffs over 100 jobs, then it has to come back to governemnts first and then governments will have the responsibility to work that out. So we are covered under that agreement, Mr. Speaker And I am ready to debate this in the House with the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Barry) any day of the week because the facts of the matter, when they are put on the table, show that this government is more compassionate towards the people of the areas we are talking about than the Liberal government in Ottawa and at the same time the Liberal opposition were supporting them, acquiescing to every wish and whim that that Liberal government wanted. MR. DINN: Exactly. PREMIER PECKFORD: As it relates to the second part of the Leader of the Opposition's (Mr.Barry) question, Mr.

Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition knows that there is still a significant number of studies being done as to the mode that has to be used for the development of Hibernia, of the first hydrocarbon resource off our shores which is declared commercial. There is a lot of complex technological work being done to determine which is the proper mode, which is an economic mode, and so on. And those studies are still being done by the oil companies, as by COGLA, as by the Petroleum Directorate. Now, Mr.

Speaker, it is refreshing to see that we now have a Federal government in Ottawa which is willing to Listen to Newfoundland's concerns and they have agreed with us that we should delay for six months the filing of that environmental impace statement which will also contain a lot of information about the mode of development or the development plan until the Province and the Federal government are convinced that there is enough evidence and enough studies complete to ensure that we are going to be able to do good comparisons.

It is to this government's interest to ensure not a quick f ix to the Newfoundland economy, not to suddenly try to blow the Newfoundland economy up in expectation, without having all of our studies done. We want to be sure, Mr. Speaker, that when decisions are made on the mode of development for Hibernia, all the information is in.

We think that when all the information is in that we will be able to make a very, very strong case to increase the number of job opportunities and the amount of work that is done in Newfoundland over and above what the companies might have wanted to do in Newfoundland and Labrador and, for the first time, we have a federal government L4615 R4615

that is sensitive to this very, very important point. A lot of studies have been done but there are more that need to be done, and there are more studies going on immediately. So we are taking the cautious approach to ensure that we have, the federal government has, and everybody has a good handle on what is an appropriate mode and to try to make as strong a case as we can that that appropriate mode, after there is a reasonable return to the companies, will be a mode which will enhance job opportunities for the people of this Province, and try to solve some of the questions that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Barry) asked earlier in the Question Period when he talked about unemployment. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, just one further short question. I realize under the regulations there may be certain time periods which would come into play once the environmental impact statement is filed, but I can assure the Premier that we on this side of the House, and I am sure the member for Menihek (Mr.

Fenwick), would be prepared to consider this as well if it meant employment that much earlier for men and women in the Province, but would not the Premier be prepared to request Mobil to go ahead and file its environmental impact statement and make that available to the members of this hon. House and to the men and women of Newfoundland so that, while the Premier and his federal counterparts, and the Minister of Energy (Mr.

Marshall) are looking at these alternative modes of development and carrying on their studies, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador would have an opportunity to study at least the first suggestion by Mobil, and have the opportunity of making their own minds up as to whether or not this was environmentally sound and for the maximum benefit of the people of this Province? MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. the Premier. PRMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Barry) should know that, when this is developed, as part of our regulations and as part of the thing that I am sure that the federal government is going to agree to, there is going to be lots of time for public input and public hearings as it relates to the development plan in any case. There is going to be lots of time for that. We wish to have additional time ourselves as governments to fully assess the various modes. There are a lot, as I say, of studies on the go by all three parties involved in this and there needs to be more work done.

And if you put out something now which was preliminary, a lot of the stuff where Mobil might be saying 'maybe', you might be creating the wrong impression. But I can assure the Leader of the Opposition that, when the environment impact study is tabled and when the development plan is done, this government, under the new agreement that will be signed in the not too distant future between the minister reponsible for Energy in Newfoundland (Mr. Marshall) and the Minister of Energy (Ms. Carney) in Ottawa, we will have the major say in the mode and in the way the development goes.

And there will be in that agreement and within those regulations ample time for the Leader of the Opposition, and anybody else in Newfoundland who is going to be affected, to L4616 R4616

comment upon in a public way that mode of development and that plan. That is there, Mr. Speaker, and that is our undertaking, that there will be sufficient, plenty of time for everybody to have a say on the mode of development. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell: The hon. member for LaPoile. MR. MORGA1: Be fair to the new member for Menihek. Give him a chance to ask a question. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I will yield to the hon. gentleman if he wants to ask a question. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Menihek. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

FENIrJICK: It looks like one of the problems of being to the right of the Liberals is that you get no recognition at all. I am going to have to jump up a little faster, I am afraid. I was pleased to hear the questions that were just brought out on unemployment, because the question I have is a very particular one and it has to do with a number of people who are facing that prospect approximately a week before Christmas. My question is to the Premier. The Premier has, I think, belatedly learned that the Iron Ore Company of Canada is laying off 118 men just a week before Christmas begins.

The Premier is also aware that being laid off in a one-industry town, isolated from the rest of the Province by hundreds of miles of wilderness, makes it extremely difficult to locate to a new job without the expenditure of thousands of dollars. In most cases the laid off workers cannot sell even their homes for enough to cover their mortgages let alone leave anything to move with. Last year the government implemented a mobility programme to provide some financial assistance to help those affected move closer to their relatives into areas with better job prospects.

My question to the Premier is this: Will you extend the deadline in the mobility programme for another year and allow those workers who are being laid off this Christmas to avail of the same programme? MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, we did. We did not get all that much credit for it last year when it was done. We established a Task Force in Labrador West and as a result of that instituted a programme that helped a lot of the people in Labrador West, because it was a massive layoff at that time, hundreds and hundreds of workers.

We went ahead and did it while the federal Liberal Government sat on their hands and did nothing and then, very late in the day, they decided to come in and do what was their responsibility from the beginning because we should not have needed to have a programme at all. They were supposed to have the money allocated under their department for this and they had done it in other parts of Canada. I do not know whether we are going to be able to continue to extend that programme. We have other L4617 R4617

parts of the Province which, while not as isolated perhaps as Labrador West, where similar circumstances could exist and, knowing our financial means, I do not know if we can extend that programme. Mr. Speaker, there could be layoffs again next year in Labrador West, in either Wabush or Labrador City, and I do not know whether we have the fiscal capability and financial means to continue to extend that kind of programme. It was brought in at that time to deal with a fairly significant situation when we are talking about hundreds and hundreds of layoffs.

We did not bring it in earlier when there were fifty layoffs or 100 layoffs in Labrador West a few years ago. But when the degree of the layoff was as great as it was, the magnitude of the pain was as high as it was, we did institute this problem but I do not know if we can continue the programme given our present financial situation. I think it is being reviewed right now, but whether we can continue it or not I can not give a definitive answer on. But I would say off the top of my head it is going to be very difficult, knowing our financial situation, to continue to do that for one area of the Province. MR.

NEARY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. member for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a couple of questions to the Premier too that have to do with unemployment. I ask this of the Premier in all seriousness because apparently the companies have been ignoring the hon. gentleman and the administration and not advising the administration when they are going to cut back or close down or lay off workers and we saw that in the district of Menihek.

Could the hon. tell us the House if he has been advised that the BTM station in Port aux Basques will be phased out and by the end of March sixteen or seventeen men will Lose their jobs? Has the gentlemen been advised that TerraTransport is shutting down the truck-to-truck operations in Port aux Basques and laying off six employees of TerraTransport in Port aux Basques? If the hon. nt1inmn h hcn dvi1 nf these matters, would he tell the House what action his administration have taken to stave off these layoffs?

By the way, I would also like to toss this one in; has the hon. gentleman been advised that the BTM Station in Argentia will also be closed down? Is the hon. gentleman now prepared to lay back and let Ottawa ride roughshod over this Province, lay back and do nothing? There are three questions there for the hon. gentleman; the BTM Station in Port aux Basques, six to be laid off immediately, seventeen or eighteen before the end of March; truck-to-truck, which was the saviour of Port aux Basques, being shut down, six more laid off; and I do not know how many will be laid off in Argentia.

Could the hon. gentleman tell the House what the administration intends to do about this? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I can tell the hon. gentleman what we intend to about that. After talks with the federal government the federal government, has agreed and announced that they are going to go ahead with the political L4618 R4618

announcement made by the member for LaPoile's (Hr. Neary) confrere who got defeated in the previous election by going ahead with a $6 million or $7 million water system in Channel - Port aux Basques, which will also mean a few million dollars by the provincial government in a new road network in Channel - Port aux Basques. I can also inform the hon. gentleman that we are going to go ahead and award a tender in the next few days for the first phase of the industrial park for Channel - Port aux Basques. So those are two things that we are doing and are going to do. MR. NEARY: These were all Liberal projects.

PREMIER PECKFORD: There is $6 million there and we will be putting in $4 million, plus the industrial parks, so there will be, over the next couple of years, close to $10 million spent in Channel - Port aux Basques, Mr. Speaker, as a result of this. MR. NEARY: That has nothing to do with you. That is all federal. PREMIER PECKFORD: No, it has a lot to do with us, Mr. Speaker, a lot. We have to operate that industrial park and it is going to cost us ten times as much as the capital cost of it after it is built and the road network that is being put in is going to have to be put in by us.

So there are two things that we are doing in Channel - Port aux Basques, Mr. Speaker, to alleviate what the hon. gentleman is talking about. As it relates to Argentia, the hon. gentleman is not aware, I do not think - or is he aware -? that the provincial government is in the final stages of concluding an agreement with the United States Government and the Canadian Government for the release of a fair amount of land at Argentia to allow for industrial development at Argentia as it relates to the offshore, and there are already several companies interested in investing in that area of the Province.

So that is what we are going to do as it relates to Argentia to offset the announcements that supposedly the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) is privy to. So every time there is a little bit of a downturn in a certain area there are millions of dollars going in in another way to offset it and to create permanent jobs. So, Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to be able to inform the hon. member for LaPoile (Mr.

Neary) that at Channel-Port aux Basques, yes, there is close to $10 million over the next few years which will alleviate some of the problems that he just mentioned; yes, there are negotiations underway to take some land away from the lease that the Americans now have to allow private sector interests to go in and create jobs in the Argentia area. So I hope that tomorrow the member for LaPoile will again have a few more questions like that so that I can respond again to show him not only how we are mitigating the problem but even alleviating it or eliminating it completely. Thank you, very much.

MR.SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please! The time for the Question Period has expired. NOTICE OF MOTION MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Minister of Justice. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following bills: "An Act To Amend The Motor Carrier L4619 R4619

Act.""An Act to Remove Anomalies And Errors In The Statute Law." MR.SPEAKER (Russell): The Hon. Minister of Health. DR. TWOMEY: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Dispensing Opticians Act." MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Minister of Labour. MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following bills: "An Act Respecting The Department Of Labour."and "An Act To Amend The Labour Standards Act." MR.SPEAKER (Russell): The Hon. President of the Council. MR.MARSHALL: Mr.

Speaker, on behalf of the Hon, the Minister of Consumer Affairs and Communications (Mrs Newhook), I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act Respecting The Department Of Consumer Affairs And Communications." and "An Act Respecting Collection Agencies And Collectors." And on behalf of the Minister of Career Development and Advanced Studies (Mr.

Power), I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following bills: "An Act Respecting The Department Of Career Development And Advanced Studies.—'An Act To Provide For Payment Of Financial Assistance For Students Attending Post-Secondary Education Institutions." and "An Act Respecting The Establishment And Operation Of The Institute Of Fisheries Marine Technology." MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Minister of Public Works and Services. MR. YOUNG: Mr.

Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following bills: "An Act To Provide For The Calling Of Tenders For The Execution Of Public Works And The Acquisition Of Goods And Services By Government Funded Bodies". "An Act To Provide For The Calculation And Consideration Of Provincial Content Factor In Awarding Tenders By Government Funded Bodies." MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. 4R SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following resolution.

WHEREAS the trawlermen of this Province have been out on strike since July 1984; and

WHEREAS the telephone workers have also been out on strike since July 1984; and

WHEREAS the teachers and public employees of the Province are being frustrated in their attempts to bargain with government; and

WHEREAS the attitude of the present Progressive Conservative administration is one that is no longer fairly balanced between business and labour; and

WHEREAS the government of this Province is L4620 R4620

attempting to take away rights and privileges trade unions have achieved over the years; and

WHEREAS female workers in this Province do not receive equal pay for work of equal value; THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this honourable House strongly condemns the attitude towards labour relations which is presently prevalent in government and calls on government to immediately call a conference of business, labour and government to obtain a harmonious consensus for labour peace and economic development in the Province. If a seconder is needed it is the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary), Mr. Speaker. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. MARSHALL: Order 5, Bill No. 18. HR. SPEAKER (Russell): Order 5, Bill No. 18. Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Occupational Health And' Safety Act." (Bill No. 18). MR.

NEARY: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: I recognize the hon. the member for LaPoile on a point of order. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I do not know if the hon. the Government House Leader (Mr. Marshall) is aware of it or not but Bill No. 18 has not yet been distributed. We tried to get a copy today and we were told that the bill could not be released until the minister gave permission to release the bill. We have not had an opportunity to look at it.. It is very unfair to call an order, Mr. Speaker, when the legislation has not been circulated.

We have no idea what is in the legislation, we have not had time to study it. How can we be in a position to debate a law that has been made, a statute that will become a statute of this Province if we do not have the bill in front of us, Mr. Speaker? I would submit that the hon. gentleman should reconsider calling that order and postpone debate on that bill for another day, say tomorrow, because, Mr. Speaker, it is very unfair. We do not know what the bill is all about. The first indication we will have of what is in that bill is when the Minister of Manpower (Mr.

Dinn) introduces second reading and that is very unfair, Mr. Speaker, and no way to treat this House. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, to that point of order. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. the President of the Council to that point of order. MR. MARSHALL: First of all, that is no point of order. I had information that the bill had been distributed, but, in any event, first reading of the bill has taken place, it is in second reading.

The purpose of the bill is for the minister to explain the bill in detail, which is what the hon. minister will be doing, and if the hon. gentleman has not got a copy yet, I am sure there will be a copy on his desk in a minute's time. But it is certainly in accordance with the rules of the House. It has been properly called. L4621 R4621

MR. BARRY: and then we will go on to other To that point of order, Mr business. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): To that point of order, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, technically or legally the hon. minister may be correct that the government is within its rights to push through and force debate upon a bill which has not been presented to the Opposition for study. But, Mr.

Speaker, whatever the technicalities and the legal rights of the government the Opposition would submit that that is not the way to ensure proper and productive debate on any piece of legislation going through this House; it shows contempt for the Opposition, it shows contempt for the House, it shows contempt for the democratic process and we would ask the hon. minister to reconsider that. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, it is not the intention of this government to show contempt for this House.

If this government has done anything it is to make this House a more democratic institution than it has ever been in the history of this Province. Mr. Speaker, just to show the hon. gentlemen if the hon. gentlemen wish it, I suggest what we will do is the hon. minister will now get up and introduce the bill and explain it, then we will move the adjournment of the debate to give the hon. gentlemen time to consider not just the text of the bill itself but the explanation that the hon. minister has given MR. NEAR?: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. member for LaPoile. MR. NEAR?: Mr.

Speaker, I thank the hon. gentleman, I think that is fair enough. The hon. the Premier intervened there and advised the hon. gentleman that what he was doing was not right, that it was wrong, it was not fair. I think it is fair now, Mr. Speaker, so in that case I do not see any need for any further debate on this matter. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order was raised and indeed from the Chair's viewpoint, of course, it appeared not to be a point of order but certainly a difference of opinion between the Opposition and government as to how to proceed in introducing a piece of legislation.

So in reality it is not a valid point of order as such. The hon. the Minister of Labour. MR. DINN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I thank hon. members for their patience. I believe the bill is being distributed now. It is a bill on Occupational Health and Safety and I am sure all hon. members are interested in some of the things that we are attempting to do with respect to Occupational Health and Safety. The brief explanation of what the three main points of the bill are goes like this: Number one, for example, provides the authority for the Lieutenant Governor in Council to appoint sub-committees L4622 R4622

of the Occupational Health and Safety Council. Now as all hon. members know we have an Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Council that does considerable work for the department and provides considerable advice to the minister with respect to changes to legislation and, for example, codes of practices in mining operations, etc. But what happens at certain times is that the Board requires specific information and needs some expertise in certain areas on different problems as, for example, with respect to different trades.

They may not have a representative on the Advisory Council to advise them with respect to issues as they relate to gaseous substances, with respect to mining diseases, with respect to boiler and pressure vessel and compressed gas legislation and operations.

So what they are attempting to do here is since the Advisory Council itself does not have the expertise in order to discuss it fully, they would like to appoint a group who do have the expertise - they will make recommendations to the minister who will have the Lieutenant-Covernor in Council approve these people - so that they can get expert advice in different areas, which is very important, Mr. Speaker, with respect to the operation of the Advisory Council on Occupational Health and Safety.

Number two: The authority to make regulations respecting health and safety of workers in mines is transferred from the Regulation of Mines Act to the Occupational Health and Safety Act. As hon. members may or may not know, we do have these regulations in the Regulations of Mines Act, etc., but they need to be under the auspices of the Occupational Health and Safety Act so that the Advisory Council can deal with the problems associated with the mines area. That is one that is important but it is not one that I think hon. members opposite may be overly concerned about.

And number three, which I consider a most important amendment, would permit changes to the funding arrangement between the Workers' Compensation Commission and the Occupational Health and Safety Division. As hon. members may or may not know the function right now with respect to payment for occupational health and safety is one whereby those functions that the Occupational Health and Safety Department perform for or on behalf of Workers' Compensation is basically paid for by Workers' Compensation. I give hon. members an example. Several years ago we had a dust study done in Western Labrador.

The dust study itself cost $2.4 million. That dust study basically was supposed to be paid for by government, the companies, and it was to have a small input, a nominal small amount by the unions so that throughout the whole process the three parties responsible or involved in some way could have total capability of knowing not only what was going on, what the parameters of the study would be, but also guide the study as it went along.

So you had a kind of executive committee that was composed of myself as minister responsible for Occupational Health and Safety, you had the presidents of the companies, and you had the presidents of the union that were totally involved in the study as it progressed along. And then below that executive committee we had a working committee made up of the experts put forward by the different groups. For example the union put forward a gentleman by the name of Lorne Herd, I believe, L4623 R4623

who is a member of the International Steelworkers of America. MR. SIMMS: Who was that, Herd? Herd, who provided very valuable input to that committee. MR. SIMMS: What was his title? Well, he was a member who worked with the Steelworkers of America, and he was their expert, we will say, on Occupational Health and Safety. When all these groups got together, they basically picked out a team of individuals who had the expertise required in order to carry out this study. Dr. Irving Silikoff for example, although he did not participate himself had a representative who participated.

And these experts, who are renowned in their field, produced the dust study in Western Labrador, but it cost $2.4 million. Now part of that study was environmental, and part of the study was community related. Of the $2.4 million, that amounted to something like $670,000. Well, what happened there was that the government itself paid that because it was not something that we attributed to the mine itself, although the mine caused, or presumably caused some of the problems.

But the government, through the Department of Health, and the Department of Labour and Manpower, paid that six hundred and seventy-odd thousand dollars for that study. The remainder of that study was paid for, on a fifty/fifty basis by the companies involved, and we prorated that, it was a formula that we came up with through discussion. Of the two companies involved, the Iron Ore Company of Canada because they had a bigger work force etc., paid more, the Wabush Mines people paid a certain amount, but they paid half and the government,through Occupational Health and Safety and Workers' Compensation paid the rest.

MR. SIMMS: Do you mean to say the unions did not pay any of it? MR. DINN: Well, the unions participated all the way through, but they did not participate with respect to the dollars. It was a nominal amount anyway, it was not something that we got overly excited about. But we thought it was a good thing for them to do it initially, and they had agreed to a nominal amount, but they could not get it from the international nor could they get it from their locals up there, so we did not - in the final analysis, you know, it was something like $5,000 so we did not push it.

So the study then was paid for environment-wise and community health-wise. It was paid for by government through the Departments of Health and Environment, by Occupational Health and Safety, and the remainder of the study, which involved the mine sites themselves and the workers in those mines was paid for, half and half, by Workers' Compensation and the employers. So what we are doing here is, it clears the way for thatsort of funding arrangement.

We had the power under Occupational Health and Safety, the authority under the bill, but now this clears the way so that what we are attempting to do now is more or less set aside a percentage, a ceiling, we will put it in by regulation, but we will set a ceiling for so much money to be provided or set aside L4624 R4624

by Workers' Compensation for studies and, you know, we are talking about something like 2 per cent of the revenue per year, but something like that, so that we can put that aside.

It can come under the auspicies or the authority of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, so that in the event that we require studies, for example, in Baie Verte or a follow up with respect to the Iron Ore Company of Canada or Wabush Hines in Western Labrador then we will have some funding set aside so that it will not come out of or it will not be something that you will hit Workers' Compensation with and they not have provided for that capability. So these are things that we are attempting to do with this piece of legislation, and I think hon. members will agree that they are very important things.

I will just to give hon. members a rundown of basically what is happening in Occupational Health and Safety while I have an opportunity in running this bill through second reading. Hon. members may know that occupational health and safety in the Province really was kind of non-existent from the point of view of having

an act and having a piece of legislation and having people responsible for occupational health and safety up to 1979. Now it started back in 1976 when the department convened a major conference in St. John's on Occupational Health and Safety to obtain the views of management, labour and health professionals on proposed changes to the structure. And this is basically how occupational health and safety in this Province evolved.

The conference recommended that Health and Safety services be consolidated, new legislation be drafted and that we get on with the job of bringing the different inspection services together in one area, at the time the Department of Labour and Manpower, so that we would have that occupational health and safety capability and we would have the professionals that we required all in one area under an Assistant Deputy Minister and give it more emphasis and also have legislation installed which had some teeth in it.

And as a result of that, of course, the Occupational Health And Safety Act was passed in the House of Assembly in June 1978 and, of course, when I came in in 1979, when I was appointed under this administration, when the Premier asked me to take over the Department of Labour and Manpower, it was my first responsibility to take these inspection services and put them all together in one department with health and hygiene. We now have a training section. By the way, just another point in passing. Some of the training that we provide in the Province is provided by, for example. St.

John Ambulance and the Newfoundland Safety Council. And what we do is we set aside an amount of funding based on, in the case of the Safety Council, the number of students they put through their system. The courses, of course have to be approved by the Occupational Health and Safety

section of the department, and then we pay on the basis of the number of students they put through. But it amounts to, to those two organizations something like $100,000 a year or more for training with respect to some areas that St. John Ambulance and the Newfoundland Safety Council provide. - MR. NEARY: You do not have mines, do you? L4625 R4625

MR.DINN: Yes. The inspection of mines now is over in the department under Occupational Health and Safety. So we have two acts now. When we made up the Occupational Health And Safety Act, we brought most of the regulations with respect to safety of mines into Occupational Health and Safety, and what we are doing here is attempting to bring the remainder over so that we have the capability under the Occupational Health and Safety legislation for the regulation of mines as it pertains to safety and health. So, Mr.

Speaker, when we attempted to get the different groups together to bring them under the Department of Labour and Manpower we had to bring in the Industrial Safety Division that was part of Workers' Compensation. And that is one of the reasons why employers in the Province who pay the assessments to Workers' Compensation, pay for the industrial safety component of Occupational Health and Safety which is now in the department.

We have mines inspection that came from the Department of Health so you can see that we had all these different inspectorates spread out through government and we attempted to bring them under one head in the Department of Labour and Manpower under Occupational Health and Safety. Industrial health in the Department of Health also came over, electrical inspection from Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro became part of the Department, the boiler and elevator inspections became part of the Department of Labour and Manpower under Occupational Health and Safety.

Radiation inspection, which was a newly established programme at that time that we brought it in, was spread out through the departments, the Department of Health did some of those inspections but now that is consolidated in the Division of Occupational Health and Safety in the Department of Labour and Manpower. So the Division of Occupational Health and Safety then became responsible for the administration of different pieces of legislation as it pertained to Occupational Health and Safety.

It was not only the Occupational Health and Safety Act, and regulations themselves, but the Radiation Health and Safety Act, as it deals with X-ray machines, etc., in hospitals, X-ray machines in dentist offices, etc., all come under this inspectorate.

The Regulation of Mines Act as it relates to health and safety, the Safety of Workmen Act, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Act and regulations, the Elevators Act and regulations, Amusement Rides Act and regulations, and the Building Accessibility Act, which was brought in, I believe, about a year and a half ago and put through the House of Assembly, also come under the Division of Occupational Health and Safety in the Department of Labour and Manpower.

Some of the major provisions that may be of interest to members of the House as it relates to Occupational Health and Safety are as follows: it provides a worker with the right, for example, to refuse to do any work that he has reasonable grounds to believe that is unsafe or dangerous to his person or to someone else. He can refuse to do the work. It provides for the establishment of health and safety committees at all work places where there are ten or more employees engaged. It provides for a worker health and safety representative in work places where there are less than ten workers employed.

It places specific obligations on the Crown, L4626 R4626

on the employees, on workers, on the employers, on self-employed persons. It etablished, as I said, an advisory council to advise the Minister of Labour and Manpower on the administration of the act and for the first time all workers in the Province are covered by health and safety legislation, excluding those employed under federal jurisdiction. So whilst we do not have any authority with respect to federal employees, all other employees in the Province come under the auspices of the Occupational Health and Safety Act and the different acts that I outlined.

Just to give hon. member an example of how the division has grown over the past couple of years, the division has a total of 102 permanent employees, which is an increase from 84 positions which constituted the new division in 1979, and the 102 positions are assigned as follows: We have in the Electrical Inspection Branch 42; the Mines Safety Branch 14; we have in the General Health and Safety Inspection and Education Branch 18; the Engineering and Technical Services Division have 21; and the Medical and Hygiene Services have 7 for a total of It believe 102 people.

Also hon. members may want to know that, for example, since the Occupational Health and Safety Act was passed in this House, and became a responsibility of the Department of Labour and Manpower, over 800 joint work place committees have been established in work places where ten or more persons are employed, as required under

Section 35 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act. This also includes, for example, as hon. members may be interested to know, all offshore rigs operating off the coast of Newfoundland. All of these rigs have health and safety committees that on a regular basis send their minutes into the Division of the Occupational Health and Safety.

These minutes are gone through and where the gentleman for looking after this sees that there may be a problem with respect to Health and Safety and the direction that the committees are taking, this gentleman goes out and sits down with the committees on the rigs - he has done it several times over the past year or so - and sets them on the right path. MR. SIMMS: Do you have branch offices of Occupational Health and Safety throughout the Province or just here in St. John's? MR. DINN: Yes, we have branch offices, not just offices here in St. John's. That is absolutely correct.

And the fact of the matter is that we are the only place in the world where these Health and Safety Committees operate and operate as effectively as they do. And any problems that come up with respect to these Health and Safety Committees are generally recorded in the minutes. The person responsible in Occupational Health and Safety immediately gets in touch with the two Co-Chairmen of those committees and attempts to help them out and straighten them out with respect to the rights of workers, etc.

So I think this may be of some importance because we sometimes hear in the media and around different places that there is no protection. There is absolutely the same protection for rig workers as there are for miners, as there are for people in industrial areas in the Province, at Bowater, Abitibi-Price and so on. They all have the same sort L4627 R4627

of deal and I was very pleased about that. MR. WARREN: But you do not have anything to do with the safety of shipping, do you?. MR. DINN: That is right. Shipping and everything like that is outside of my territory. I think it is a big enough responsibility to look after Occupational Health and Safety in this Province and attempt to keep a finger on the pulse to make sure that the inspections are carried out without spreading it to shipping and all the rest of the areas that are involved. That is not part of Occupational Health and Safety.

Reports of committee meetings are received and monitored by staff, and, as I said, through this monitoring any necessary follow-up that needs to be done is done. Work place inspections are conducted on a regular basis throughout the Province in areas such as mines, construction projects, logging operations, fish plants, electrical installations, boilers and elevators, radiators and all other types of equipment, and inspections are done on rigs on a regular basis. Regular inspections are also carried out in the offshore, as I said, at three week intervals, every three weeks.

Each rig is visited and inspected and when a problem appears in the minutes of committee meetings, the inspector when he goes out sits down with the committee and talks to them about it and finds out what the story is and so on and reports back. So we have education courses and seminars for workers and these have been greatly increased under the Occupational Health and Safety Act through the combined efforts of staff in the Division of Occupational Health and Safety and under formal training agreements, as I said, with the Newfoundland Safety Council and the St. John Ambulance.

Last year over 10,000 workers received various training programmes in such areas as first aid, health and safety, committee organization, accident investigation, back injuries, defensive driving, etc. A major study into health effects of dust exposure, as I said, in the mining operation in Western Labrador was conducted during 1979 through to 1981. As a result of that study, by the way, with respect to threshold limit values, TLVs they call them, have been changed with respect to the operations of the mines in Western Labrador in the Iron Ore Company of Canada and Wabush Mines operations.

As a matter of fact, as a result of that $2.4 million study, people who are concerned with occupational health and safety in mines are currently looking at its results with a view to the possibility of implementing the changes that we are contemplating making in the mines in Western Labrador, using that information and using the different methods that we used for measuring dust levels, etc., in the mines in Western Labrador, taking that and making a kind of almost North American standard. So, Mr. Speaker, we in Newfoundland are leading in some respects with respect to occupational health and safety.

Certainly I do not think there is anybody in the House of Assembly who can say that our occupation health and safety legislation is not a good piece of legislation. I think you can talk to companies, unions, labour groups, employees - MR. SIMMS: Even Opposition members agree. 1.4628 R4628

MR. DINN: The Opposition obviously would say that that piece of legislation is a fantastic piece of legislation. It was introduced, by the way, by the former Minister of Labour and Manpower, the hon. Mr. House, who sits here in the House of Assembly today.

It is a tribute to his capability when he not only held the portfolio of the Department of Education but he also had the responsibility of the Department of Labour and Manpower and introduced the first piece, a very comprehensive piece of legislation, The Occupational Health And Safety Act and as a result of that it became my responsibility to bring it together and it is together and functioning as a very efficient unit. As a matter of fact, lately I have gone through an exercise of finding out how much we are spending with respect to occupational health and safety in this Province.

I have not got all the information compiled yet but I am doing that investigation. I have some assistance in that from a source with respect to the costs of occupational health and safety in this Province. And I think we are bit modest with respect to taking some credit for some of the things that we are doing in occupational health and safety. MR. SIMMS: You are too modest. You should brag a bit more. MR.

DINN: I already outlined the lead we took in the dust study in Western Labrador, but I do believe at times that this government is a bit modest as it relates to some of the things we are doing in occupational health and safety.

The preliminary information that I have, for example, with respect to occupational health and safety - and as I say I do not have the information from all the provinces of Canada and the territories - but the preliminary information indicates that we are spending more on a per capita basis in this Province as it relates to occupational health and safety than the provinces that I have gotten the information back on to this point in time; for exampLe, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, Quebec and Ontario.

We have information from these provinces and it indicates to me that we here in the Province of Newfoundland, where we are number ten on the totem pole in Canada as it relates to just about everything - per capita income, earned per capita income, unemployment the highest, employment levels the lowest, the highest taxes in Canada, etc. - with all of this going on here we seem to be able to get enough money to put in there.

It is because we believe that not only by bringing in legislation because that is only part of it, anybody can bring in legislation - but making sure that companies follow that legislation, that workers have their rights, that workers have their rights and workers are looked after in this Province.

Wein this Province, based on the study that I have to date, and I do not have all of the provinces, as I said, but I do have some of the major ones, and I can tell you that Ontario does not spend on a per capita basis as much as the Province of Newfoundland does in the area of occupational health and safety, that we are leaders with respect to dust related diseases in mines. The hon. member for Menihek (Mr. Fenwick) may or may not be aware of the study we completed. As a matter of fact, if he wants me to I can get him a copy of the complete detail of that study. MR. SIMMS: L4629 R4629

Careful now! MR. DINN: It is a public document. There are no secrets in this government. MR. SIMHS: Do not be too confident. MR. DINTh There are volumes and volumes of information related to the dust study in Western Labrador. Towards the end of this month, I believe the 24th or the 25th or 26th the experts from Canada and North America who conducted that dust study, some of the best experts in the world, aregoing to be getting together in the hon. member's district in Western Labrador to sit down with the companies and the unions and complete the code of practice for the mining operations in Western Labrador.

The hon. member will be happy to hear that because I know he is very concerned about dust related diseases in his area. I saw a programme on TV - well, part of a programme because I was busy at many other things, about the Baie Verte mine. And, Mr. Speaker, I was a bit concerned. I did not get the full detail since I did not see the whole programme. MR. WARREN: You did not want to. MR. DINN: I was very interested in it, but I did not get to see the whole programme, and I was very disappointed that I did not see it because I would have liked to.

But some of the attitudes that I perceived coming out of that programme as it related to Baie Verte seem to indicate that the government was not doing enough or something like that. MR. T1JLK: That is true. MR. DINN: Well, Mr. Speaker, I would like to go through a little hit of the history of the Bale Verte operation as it relates to occupational health and safety. Most of Ihisinformation hon. members know, but I think it bears repeating. I think it bears putting on the record of this House basically what happened as it relates to Baie Verte. MR. SIMMS: Some of us are interested. MR.

DINN: Some people in this House are interested,says my hon. colleague from Grand Falls (Mr. Simrns). MR. SIMMS: The crowd opposite might not be interested. MR. DflN: Hon. members know there was a study done in Baie Verte, I do not think that is a secret, I do not think that is a surprise to anybody here in this House. But I happened to get a bit of information together the other night as it related to the Baie Verte operation, and it seems to me that the information that I have was a little contradictory to what I saw or what I perceived was happening on CBC television.

I saw them on TV talking about Bale Verte mines and everything like that, and things were not being done. Well - MR. NEARY: You have all the information.? MR. DINN: Oh, yes. I thank the hon. member. He knows that when I get up to speak I have the information. MR. WEARY: That is what I am looking for. L4630 R4630

HR. DINN: I may not have it in order all of the time, but I always have it. And I can heave it out of me the odd time. But the background as it relates to Bale Verte, I think it is interesting just to go through chronologically basically what happened in Bale Verte. In Bale Verte there was a problem. \'Jell, Mr. Speaker, as everybody knows a report was done entitled A Clinical Survey,:- now I am not sure of the pronunication of this word, but we will have a go at it- Chrysop lie Asbestos Miners and Millers in Bale Verte, Newfoundland. As hon. members know, that was done and submitted to government by Dr.

Irving Silikoff in 1976, the result of a study conducted by Dr. Silikoff at the request of the union. Now here is something was initiated by the workers themselves, and something that I was very appreciative of at the time when I got in Cabinet, because it hangs over a member's head when you hear about mines and asbestosis and pneumoconiosis and all this kind of thing. You hear these words and they frighten the life out of you, you cannot sleep sometimes, but this study was done and I understand it was a pretty good study. Not all the information that was available to Dr.

Silikoff was made available to government, but the main information was made available. In the report Dr. Silikoff stated that fifty or approximately 10 per cent of the 500 or 550 in the work force at Bale Verte at the time had one or more radiographic anomolies present of the type commonly associated with asbestos exposure. Now if anybody has read anything about asbestos or asbestosis. People get visions of lungs gone, cancer and all this kind of thing setting in, and it is frightening at times. So Dr. Silikof if did this study and made it available to government, and I think we paid a fair share.

The hon. the Minister of Health made equipment available to Dr. Silikoff and , of course, we participated with respect to some funding. Well, subsequent to the Silikoff report, the Bale Verte medical examiners initiated studies to try to identify some high risk patients in the work force at Advocate Mines. Now I ask hon. members just to listen because this is basically what happened with respect to Advocate Mines. When I saw the Silikoff report initially, it frightened me to death. There were hundreds of miles of roads paved on the Bale Vert Peninsula and we got a few dollars out of the Federal government.

We went up and we waved the Silikof if report at them and told them about the problems we were having down on the Bale Vert Peninsulaand we had to have all the roads paved so we got something like 80 per cent. The Minister of Transportation (Mr. Dawe) is not here now, but I think we got an 80/20 deal on the main roads on the Bale Vert Peninsula. And, so, Mr. Speaker, the medical examiners, the people in the Department of Health got involved and said, 'Okay, let us see what Is going on here. If we have people in trouble we have to do something about it.

We cannot just sit and do nothing.' So we got a report that said fifty or more people had something related to a dust disease, they had anomolies with respect to their lungs, with respect to their X-rays. So they got into it and all the employees were examined through this surveillance programme and if any evidence of health effects showed they were advised to file a complaint with the Workers' Compensation Board. Because filing a claim with the Workers' Compensation Board L4631 R4631

brought a whole new group of professionals in and the Workers' Compensation Board then paid for some of the operation that was going on there. So in 1980 the President of the linion,and people will know this gentleman because he is a very active, very intelligent and articulate gentleman, Mr. Martin Saunders of Bale Verte, wrote the Executive Director of the Occupational Health and Safety Division enclosing a list of sixteen names of employees who medical examinations revealed that they has some problem with their lungs or air passages and requested an investigation.

Additionally the Bale Verte medical examiner referred a further seven to the Workers' Compensation Commission during 1981. These were employees who had questionable early changes on their chest X-rays. I venture to guess if anybody ever took an X-ray of my lungs I would have anomalies - MR. SIMMS: I do not know about you lungs. MR. DINN: -because I have not been able to cure that dreaded smoking habit that I have. MR. TULK: It is time for you to MR. DIIQN: Yes. I have tried many times, as the hon. the member for Fogo (Mr. Tulk) knows, to cure it, but I have not been able to, so I would have anomalies.

I guarantee you, if somebody took a chest X-ray of my chest, I would have anomalies with respect to lung-related conditions. MR. TULK: Do you do any jogging? MR. DINN: Well, the hon. member might be interested. I have lost twenty-six pounds, I am going away to nothing. I have to get a couple of new suits. MR. TULK: How much do you do? MR. DINN: I do about eighteen miles a week. MR. TULK: Do you? MR. DINN: Yes, I do about eighteen miles a week. That is not heavy, by the way. Co around my block four times and you have a mile and a half done, so there is no problem there.

You can sneak out the odd time and get this done or you can do it in the morning. You can get up at six o'clock in the morning and run down to the Janeway Hospital and back and I count that as two and one-half miles. So I do about eighteen miles a week. I am not in the best shape and I come a-huff in' and a-puffin' when I come back up over the hill from the Janeway. I do not run all the way. I run for a couple of hundred yards and then I try to get my breath back. Anyway, all workers at Bale Verte who were designated as working in a dust exposure - MR. TULK: Jogging is supposed to stimulate your brain. MR.

DINN: It does that too. MR. WEARY: What motivates you? MR. DINN: Well, I tell the hon. the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary), it is no trouble to get motivated in this L4632 R4632

Province when you are working in a government like this. I know the hon. the member for LaPoile did not get motivated very often when he was Minister of Social Services, but in this government you have to get motivated. If you do not get the job done, the boss will just run you of f your feet, so you have to get up in the morning early, you have to get your work done. You know, you have Labour and Manpower responsibilities, you have to run over to the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, whip down to the Workers' Compensation, check out Occupational Health and Safety, go to Cabinet, go to Social Policy.

Well, you have to be in shape, so that is what is happening with me. That stimulates the brain, you see. Once you get a little oxygen running through the brain cells you start regenerating brain cells and you get to thinking and you get moving. Anyway, that is what we are all doing in government, we are all on the move. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. DINN: Anyway, just to get back to this because this is very important.

I mean, we are on a very important subject and I do not want to get sidetracked by hon. members opposite because I think it is important that we relate basically what is going on in Occupational Health and Safety and we want to relate what has happened with respect to the Bale Verte mines. The hon. the member for Bale Verte - White Bay (Mr. Rideout) is sitting there in his chair and he is listening with bated breath although he has heard the information several times and he knows on a day-to-day basis, I bet you almost on an hourly basis, what is going on down in the Bale Verte operation.

But, anyway, where we have arrived now is we have had the Silikoff report, we have had reports of lung-related diseases and we have heard from the medical examiners in Bale Verte and the Department of Health, and the people in Workers' Compensation, and some of the workers were referred to the experts in the Health Sciences Complex and we have gone through the process and we have found out a few things: All the workers at Baie Verte who are designated as working in a dust exposure occupation under

Section 51 (1), (a), (i), (

b) and (

c) of Occupational Health and Safety regulations receive an annual medical examination as prescribed under

Section 51 (1) and (

g) of the regulations. That is done all the time. AN HON. MEMBER: All the time. MR. DINN: Yes. That is done on a yearly basis. These examinations, which include pulmonary function tests, X-rays as necessary, are performed by medical examiners appointed by the Minister of Health under the authority of the above regulations. The X-rays are assessed by radiologists in St. John's retained for that purpose by the Division.

Three, prior to the Occupational Health and Safety regulations (1979), these examinations and X-rays, less the pulmonary function testing - which was not done then, so less that - 'were performed under the Mines Safety Workmen's regulations' - That is what we are trying to do now, we are trying to get these regulations under the Occupational Health and Safety Act - 'and were performed since the asbestos mine commenced its operations in 1963.' So we had some of it going L4633 R4633

on. We did not have the pulmonary function test, but we had some of it going on. But now we are doing more comprehensive studies. Now Listen to this, I think this is important, 'To our knowledge the Medical Advisory Committee of the Worker's Compensation Commission have not as yet identified a case of pneumoconiosis asbestosis amongst the Bale Verte work force' although a number of workers are under the Worker's Compensation Commission Surveillance Programme.' They have a programme and they are regularly monitored.

In order to determine what future action might be undertaken with respect to medical surveillance of the Bale Verte miners, discussions were held this Summer with Dr. Henry Anderson.' Now we heard about the Silikoff report, how it came through, and the fifty cases and the different tests that we have gone through. As a follow-up, the Assistant Deputy Minister and some of the officials in Occupational Health and Safety got in touch with Dr. Henry Anderson, who is an associate of Dr. Silikoff. Dr. Silikoff, whom we would have gone to because he is one of the greatest experts in the world was not available. Now Dr.

Anderson - MR. NEARY: What about Dr. Silikoff? MR. DINN: Dr. Silikoff was not available but we have to make sure that what we are doing is right. MR. NEARY: He was not available for what? He was not available for our consultations. I mean, he is a busy man. So his protege, the next guy, I would say number two in the world, Dr. Henry Anderson, who was an associate of Dr. Silikoff and participated in the 1976 study, was asked what we should do now. As a result of Dr. Silikoff's report we had all these examinations done, this surveillance done on the miners, etc., all this information available, so we said to Dr.

Anderson, "What do you think we should do from here on?" MR. NEARY: What year was that drafted up? MR. DINN: The past Summer, June, July and August. 'Dr. Anderson is of the opinion that a need for further formal study has not been established.' With all the information now that we have with respect to the Baie Verte mine, and all the miners that were checked, etc., and all that information being available, he, the number two man inthe world, who worked on the study with Silikoff in 1976 - MR. NEARY: Is the member for Bale Verte aware of that? MR. DINN: Is the member for Bale Verte aware of it? MR.

NEARY: What did Dr. Edstrom say? KR. DINN: All the information goes to the member for Baie Verte. Look, it is like a stream. MR. TULK: He only asked you what he said. MR. DINN: Well, he did not indicate to me that there was something wrong and he got all this information, the same as I get it. 'Dr. Anderson L4634 R4634

is of the opinion that a need for a further formal study has not been established.

The basis for such a study would be determined by the number of cases of pneumoconiosis identified by the annual miners medical examination'- which included now the pulmonary function test - However, as stated above, no cases have yet been identified.' 'At this stage it would appear that the established monitoring and dust control prograuunes at the mine are adequate and, coupled with the annual miners' medical examination 'should ensure the health of the miners is protected.' 'Should' I mean, you can only go as far as some of the greatest experts in the world, but from all the information that we have been able to establish that is the result.

MR. WEARY: What about Dr. Edstrom? MR. DINN: Dr. Edstrom is totally involved. I mean, he is as involved as anybody else. MR. WEARY: Did he do a report? MR. DINN: Well, certainly Dr. Edstrom has not come forward in the past year or so and said to me that something else needs to be done. And if he does I will have his information investigated. MR. WEARY: He did do a report? MR. DIWN: He did do a report, yes. As a matter of fact, before 1976 1 believe Dr. Edstrom did a report on miners' lung. MR. WEARY: In Bale Verte? Well, Dr. Edstrom did a bit of a study on Bale Verte, too, but the biggest report that Dr.

Edstrom was involved in was the Labrador lung study. He brought forward the name 'Labrador lung' and he did some studies with respect to Bale Verte but we did not conclude that study for obvious reasons. 'The Division of Occupation Health and Safety, through the chief occupational medical officer, Dr. John Martin, is maintaining close liaison with the chief medical officer of the Workers' Compensation Commiss ion to insure that any cases diagnosed as pneumoconiosis cases are reported.' Well, the hon. the member for LaPoile (Mr. Weary) will have an opportunity to speak now.

I know the hon. the member for LaPoile is very interested in occupational health and safety in this Province. It is not a joke with him, Mr. Speaker. I am sure the hon. member will be able to add a great deal to the debate. I know he has had an opportunity now to read the amendments that we are attempting to make to The Occupational Health And Safety Act today. Some of them are big amendments, some of them are very important amendments to The Occupational Health And Safety Act. I am sure the hon. member, having read the piece of legislation, will agree with the legislation 100 per cent. But, Mr.

Speaker, I will be listening to all hon. members opposite who wish to participate In this debate, and all members on this side who wish to participate in this debate, and I will write down any questions that hon. members have and attempt to answer them to the best of my ability. And if I have not got the answers here - and I would say that I have most L4635 R4635

of the answers here - I can assure hon. members that I will get the answers before this debate concludes. So, Mr. Speaker, I would like to go through if I could, very briefly, what we are attempting to do with respect to the few amendments that we are bringing in here with respect to occupational health and safety. As I said, one provides for the Lieutenant-Governor in Council to appoint subcommittees. We have an Occupational Health and Safety Committee that have something Like twenty people on it.

They represent industry and labour and special interest groups and some officials in the Department, Health and Occupational Health and Safety. While we have these people on the committee, sometimes, for various offshoots and specialized information the committee requires, they want advisory committees set up as one of their recommendations.

So we said it sounds like a good idea to us, we will get it passed into legislation, we will bring it into the House and get it passed and, when it is passed, you make your recommendations to the minister, the minister will bring them to the Lieutenant-Governor in Council and get them approved. Now you just cannot do it willy-nilly, there has to be a formal process, so this advisory committee has almost the same authority as under a Public Enquiries Act, has the authority to go and find and get the information. So that is one.

Number two is the authority to make regulations respecting health and safety of workers in mines transferred from under The Regulation Of Mines Act to The Occupational Health And Safety Act. Number three is a most important amendment.

I want hon. members to listen to this one because it would permit changes to funding arrangements between the Workers' Compensation Commission and Occupational Health and Safety so that we do not get stuck out in Left field, and, just because it is under the Occupational Health and Safety Act that I do not order the Workers' Compensation to pay part of the cost of a dust study; that they set aside some money every year out of their reserves for studies just in case something happens, say, down in Baie Verte and somebody shows up with pneumoconiosis or asbestosis, the miner's medical identifies a problem, we can get in there right away and we can go to the Workers' Compensation and they can pay for that kind of a study but they will have some money in a reserve for it so they will put away a portion.

We have not decided exactly how much they should put away every year, but we are going to set aside a portion so we are ready and we can perform those dust studies and that that part of Workers' Compensation becomes actuarially sound too. So if a problem arises, gaseous substance, things that we need to identify, experts are needed, we will have the dollars to do it. This is what we call preventive medicine. And the amendment clears the way for changes in the funding arrangements, (

a) by removing the requirement for the Commission to levy special assessments - Workers' Compensation will not have special assessments for this on employers. The same assessment arrangement applies, but they will tuck away, they will away in a special fund some money which will cover Occupational Health and Safety programme costs. And (b), removes the requirement that any funds collected by the Commission for occupational health and safety be paid over directly to the Consolidated Revenue Fund. The L4636 R4636

amounts and manner, as I said, will be prescribed by regulations. In addition, Clause 44 of the bill, 'Transfers a provisionfrom the Regulation Of Mines Act which requires the employer to pay for medical examinations.' Now I never mentioned that in the first part, but that is important too. Clause 44 of the bill, 'Transfers the provision from The Regulations Of Mine Act which requires the employer to pay for medical examinations on behalf of the worker.' So there is a problem there, the worker has to get medical examination, he goes and gets it and the employer pays it.

We are transferring that from The Regulation of Mines Act over to Occupational Health and Safety so that we now have under that umbrella all the inspection services, all the authority and all the regulations and the capability to carry out the mandate of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, and the other act that come under The Occupational Health and Safety Division. I look forward to comments by hon. members opposite and hon. members on this side if they care to participate in this debate. I look forward to the comments.

I will answer all the questions they may have with respect to occupational health and safety. Mr. Speaker, with that I move second reading. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. member for LaPoile. MR. WEARY: Mr. Speaker, we had originally intended, I think, through agreement with the hon. gentleman to adjourn debating the principle of this bill until tomorrow.

But after listening to the hon. gentleman, if it is agreeable to my colleagues and my friend to my right, I would not mind having a few preliminary remarks, in general, just tocomment on the things that the hon. gentleman said about the Department of Occupational Health and Safety, and then leave myself a few minutes to move the adjournment MR. WEARY: until tomorrow to debate the principle and the main clauses of the bill. I am sure my hon. colleague from Menihek (Mr. Fenwick) would like to study that bill too before commenting on it. So my comments at the moment will be of a general nature. Mr.

Speaker, I want to say at the outset that I am pleased that the government moved in the direction of establishing a special branch in the Department of Labour and Manpower, a special branch of Occupational Health and Safety, because of the nature of the industries that we have in this Province.

We have asbestos, which is a very hazardous industry, at Baie Verte, we had mining going on in Buchans where you had employees exposed to the dust hazard, you had people in the mills in Labrador City and Wabush exposed to a high velocity of dust, and you have people working in other mines and in other occupations, other industries, that are tremendously hazardous. I think that was a wise thing to do, Mr. Speaker, that was a smart thing to do to move in that direction to get it all under one roof, to get it all under one umbrella.

I approve of that and I agree with it because I saw firsthand from my experience on Bell Island, Mr. Speaker, the dangers and the hazards that men and women are exposed to. Asbestosis, for instance, we are told that sometimes you can contact asbestosi.s on the surface from the dust from the road over which the L4637 R4637

asbestos is being hauled. So, Mr. Speaker, that was probably a good move, and no doubt the health and safety aspect of working under these conditions has improved tremendously. I am delighted about that. I always felt, myself, that miners on Bell Island, for instance, who worked in the mines for twenty-five, thirty, thirty-five years whom the doctor diagnosed as having angina or asthma or bronchitis, Mr. Speaker. I always felt and I still do to this day that what they had really was what you call miner's lung. They had miner's lung.

But the medical practitioner on the Island at the time was also on Dosco's payroll and it is very unlikely that he would go against the company that was paying him. So all these cases were diagnosed, angina, bronchitis, asthma. And you can go on Bell Island today and you can meet men who are now in their late '60s and early '70s, mid '70s, late '70s and you can talk to these men and you would be amazed, Mr. Speaker, if you listened to their breathing, their heavy breathing. You could hear them halfway across this House breathing. And I believe that is a direct result of working in the mine.

They have what I would term as miner's lung. Mr. Speaker, they are not entitled to any form of compensation because they were not diagnosed, it was not associated or identified in any way with the dust in the mine. The doctor said that they had angina or bronchitis or asthma or they had pneumonia when they were young or something of that nature. So I hope, Mr. Speaker, that never again in the history of this Province will we have a situation develop like developed in St. Lawrence, because that is the scandal of all scandals.

And I am sure with the rules and regulations that are in place today, the organization that is set up under this Occupational Health Branch of the department will stand on guard against a situation occurring ever again in this Province like occurred in St. Lawrence, when men were just dying like flies and nobody seemed to want to do anything about it.

I believe it was through the initiative of the union, it was the union down there which took the bull by the horns and finally had a study done, brought in a doctor who called the men together one day in the union hail and said, 'Look, there is a bug in that mine and it is eating you.' Up to that time their pleas and their recommendations were just ignored by the authorities. Nobody paid any attention to them, they were a voice crying in the wilderness, Mr. Speaker. But now that we have this set up we have to be careful, Mr. Speaker, that it just does not develop into another bureaucracy. MR.

TIJLK: Leave it to them and it will. MR. NEARY: We have to see to it that it is very sensitive to what is happening in these industries where you have a high health hazard. You have to be very careful that it does not develop into another level of bureaucracy. Now the minister was a little bit on the defensive about Baie Verte. He should not be but he was because he saw bits and pieces of a programme last night on television involving the Chairman of the Workers' Compensation Board and some of the men who had been exposed to the asbestos dust who now have cancer.

The hon. gentleman seemed to be smarting under some of the things that were said on that programme and I think he referred to the attitude. L4638 R4638

Well, Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman might be well advised to send for that tape or to go down to CBC and look at that tape and make notes before he responds in an off-the--cuff way. Because, Hr. Speaker, there was a message in that programme last night, there was a message of concern in it. And as a result of that programme last night I did some research this morning myself and I talked to the gentleman who is the head of the union in Baie Verte, who initiated the Silikoff enquiry. I talked to that gentleman and I asked him if he had seen the programme. He said, 'Yes', he had.

I asked him if he thought that the statement made by Mr. Maynard, Chairman of the Workers' Compensation Board was correct, the statement that there is nowhere in the world where you have a programme to remove people from these occupations where you have a lot of dust, no programme in the world. Mr. Saunders told me there is one in Ontario. The Workers' Compensation Board have a programme in Ontario, and I believe there is one in Labrador.

The hon. gentleman told me earlier today, we were chatting out behind the curtain, that bC has a programme for taking people from the mill where you have a lot of dust and training them for other occupations within the framework of the company. So, Mr. Maynard was wrong. And I do not know how many more points he was wrong on. MR. DINN: He meant a regular programme. MR. NEARY: Well, all right, I will give him the benefit of the doubt. He did say that to his knowledge nowhere in the world did this type of programme exist. It exists in Ontario, it exists in Labrador, Mr.

Speaker, and I was rather shocked and amazed that the Chairman of the Workers' Compensation Board was not aware of that. Now, Mr. Speaker, I did not have an opportunity today tocomplete my research, but I want to throw a couple of statistics on the table. The hon. gentleman should not be on the defensive about that programme last night because there was a message in the programme.The message in the programme is a follow up, monitor, follow up. But I believe, Mr. Speaker, that there is a matter of concern as far as the miners of Baie Verte are concerned, because Dr.

Silikoff said this, the programme stated it last night, came through loud and clear, that it takes anywhere from twenty to thirty years before people who have been exposed to asbestos dust get the disease, get cancer or get asbestosis. It takes anywhere from twenty to thirty years. So a lot of the men who worked in Bale Verte for Advocate Mines still have ten or fifteen years to run before they will know for sure whether or not they will get cancer as a result of asbestosis. They will not know. I am told, Mr.

Speaker, twenty former employees of Advocate Mines in Bale Verte, since 1966, twenty former miners have died and seventeen of them, I am told, died with cancer. Seventeen out of the twenty former employees of Advocate Mines at Bale Verte have died with cancer since 1966. Now, Mr. Speaker, it is not for me to say whether or not the cancer was related to their exposure to dust from the asbestos. It is not for me to say but it is certainly an alarming statistic. Mr.

Speaker, the message that I got from that programme and the message that I got from talking to people who know, who are very familiar with the Bale Verte situation, tell me 1.4639 R4639

that the chief concern of all of those who are interested in that problem, the chief concern is follow-up and monitoring all those people who have been exposed to that hazard. I realize 1,800 people passed through the gates and the doors of Advocate Mines when they were operating at Baie Verte, 1,800, and they may be scattered all over Newfoundland and probably a lot of them in different parts of Canada, but, Mr. Speaker, surely in this day and age it must be possible to keep a check on the majority of these men and I am told that it is not being done. I believe the hon. gentleman told us about Dr.

Silikoff coming in - when was it in 1976? In 1976 Dr. Silikoff came here, who is the world's greatest authority on asbestosis, and we were very fortunate to have him come to Newfoundland. But, Mr. Speaker, when Dr. Silikoff finished his first report he agreed and it was generally understood that there would be a follow-up report three years hence, that three years after Dr. Silikoff identified the problem, submitted his report, in 1979 a second report would be made. But the second report was not made, Hr. Speaker, and I ask Your Honour, I ask the minister to tell us why it was not made. Dr.

Silikoff, as I understand it, was available, but Dr. Silikoff is not a man who would work under another doctor who is not knowledgeable in these matters, or not as knowledgeable as he is. And the scenario that I have had laid out for me is this, that when Dr. Silikoff was asked to come back to do a follow-up report he was told he that he would have to work under another doctor, that he would have to work under a doctor in this Province and that arrangement was unsatisfactory to Dr. Silikoff. MR. DIWN: Or he would have to agree to provide all of the information within numerous studies. MR. WEARY: Mr. Speaker, Dr.

Silikoff, as the hon. gentleman says, would have to agree to provide all the information that he did not provide in the first study. That may very well be. I am only asking the hon. gentleman. I am explaining the scenario as I know it. I do not know what kind of information Dr. Silikoff did not give the Minister of Health or the hon. gentleman in his first report. I do not know what kind of information we are talking about, but what I am - HR. SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please! HR. WEARY: Does Your Honour wish to say something? MR. SPEAKER: Yes. MR. WEARY: Sure. Go ahead. MR.

SPEAKER (Russell): I thank the hon. member for LaPoile (Mr. Weary) for allowing me the time to announce that we have three questions for the Late Show this afternoon, the first one asked by the hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Barry) of the Premier with regard to Mobil's environmental impact settlement on the Hibernia field; the second one asked by the hon. member for LaPoile of the Premier with regard to the question on the BTM Station in Port aux Basques; and the third one asked by the hon. member for Henihek (Mr. Fenwick) of the Premier pertaining to the layoffs at bC in Labrador. L4640 R4640

The hon. member for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Anyway, Mr. Speaker, it was unfortunate indeed that some arrangement could not be worked out by the government, the union, and Dr. Silikoff so that he could have come in and done that follow-up report. It was tragic, unfortunate, that this dispute should have arisen that barred the 1800 or so former employees of Advocate Mines from having that follow-up done. Now, Mr. Speaker, I am told also that when the dispute arose, and the money would not be made available to enable Dr.

Silikoff to come to Newfoundland to do his second report, a local medical man was employed by the Workers' Compensation to do a report. Now I do not know what the terms of reference were for that doctor whom lonly know by reputation, who has a good name, probably a very qualified man, but I would have to say probably not as qualified in the field of asbestosis as Dr. Silikoff, but I am told that that gentleman was employed to do an enquiry, to do a report, paid for by the Workers' Compensation Board, so I am told, to the tune of $300,000.

I wish the hon. gentleman was in his seat to hear what I am saying because this is a very sensitive area that we are in here. I would assume from remarks the hon. gentleman made this afternoon that the report did not only include Baie Verte but Labrador City and probably Buchans, Mr. Speaker, there was a study done but the study in no way could take the place of the one that should have been done by Dr. Silikoff, in no way. But, Mr. Speaker, that report has been put on the shelf, The former employees of Advocate Mines, the union that was involved at the time, have not seen or read that report.

The government and the Workers' Compensation Board have refused to date, right up to this moment, to release that report to let the people who are attempting to do something about this problem read this report. And I ask the minister why cannot that report be made public? Why cannot copies of that report be given to the Steelworkers Union who played such a prominent role in trying to arrest this great problem in Bale Verte? Why can they not be given a copy of that report? Through a variety of circumstances, misunderstandings and disputes Dr. Silikoff could not come back to Newfoundland to do his second report.

I think the whole matter could have been resolved if the government had made a few dollars available to him. The figure I heard was $30,000. If he had $30,000 Dr. Si].ikoff could have come into Newfoundland, could have done his follow-up, could have made his recommendations, written his report and we would have had the advice and the recommendations of the top person in the world, the number one man in the world on asbestosis. We had to take second choice that, I am told, cost $300,000. Mr. Speaker, I do not know, that is the scenario I am laying out, I want the hon. gentleman to give me some information.

And no doubt the hon. gentleman is listening. But if it did cost $300,000 that is ten times more than Dr. Silikoff wanted. And then to add insult to injury nobody can see the report. And my hon. friend is right, there are a few things I have to say about this. Nobody can see the report, Mr. Speaker. MR. TULK: I knew there were. MR. NEARY: I doubt very much if there is L4641 R4641

anything in the report that is going to shock anybody out of their shoes. MR.TULK: Have you seen it? MR.NEPiRY: No, I have not seen it. It is safely guarded and protected by the hon. gentlemen there opposite and by the workers' Compensation Board. MR. CALLAN: It is not as readily available as the Mifflin Report. )41? ?flAPV It is not as readily available as a lot of other reports that are around. But, Mr. Speaker, the people involved have a right to that report.

And apart from that - I do not want to get sidetracked of on just making this argument over whether or not the government should release the report - I believe the Premier of this Province and his ministers have an obligation to get Dr. Silikoff back to Newfoundland and let him do that second report as was promised back in 1976. It should have been done in 1979. Get that second report done. Because, Mr. Speaker, we do not want another St. Lawrence type situation on our hands.

Asbestosis or cancer of men and women exposed to the dust hazard of asbestos will not reach its peak for twenty or thirty years after they come in contact with it. They still have ten or fifteen years to run and these people are walking around, Mr. Speaker, maybe with the disease germinating inside of their bodies because of some dispute or misunderstanding or not being able to get together, or somebody wanting the upper hand or somebody refusing to give us some information. Dr.

Silikoff would have come, gladly come, to Newfoundland to do this study if he had a free hand, if he was the boss, but he was told, 'You have to work under a medical man designated by us.' Now, Mr. Speaker, I ask Your Honour and ask members, is that good enough? That is why I issued the warning to the hon. gentleman that I hope that this does not develop into another bureaucracy, that it does not get bogged down, that it will be able to function the way that it should and that the potential dangers and hazards that are lurking out there in some of these industries especially the offshore, Mr.

Speaker, that they will be reduced to a minimum or eliminated altogether if it is possible. I doubt it is possible to eliminate these hazards altogether where you have high levels of dust in mines and in plants and so forth and so on. Now, Mr. Speaker, these are my preliminary remarks. I would like to get back on this bill again tomorrow and talk about the bill itself. I think by agreement we have already decided that I would move the adjournment, Mr. Speaker, of this debate. MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): Order, please!

The hon. member for LaPoile has moved the adjournment and the question is how much time does he have left in the debate? AN HON. MEMBER: About thirty minutes. MR. SPEAKER: About thirty minutes remaining, approximately. MR. MARSHALL: Order 4, Bill No. 2. Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Boiler, L4642 R4642

Pressure Vessel And Compressed Gas Act.t' (Bill No. 2). MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, we have amendments to the Boiler, Pressure Vessel and Compressed Gas Act just about every year. This is another update on that piece of Legislation. Basically the bill revises the duties of the Boiler, Pressure Vessel Advisory Board appointed under the Boiler, Pressure Vessel and Compressed Gas Act. The board would cease to act as an administrative entity and assume a purely advisory function.

The amendments would transfer most of the duties presently assigned to the Advisory Board to the Director appointed under the Act, and the remaining duties would be assigned to committees appointed under the regulations. We have had several problems with respect to the Advisory Board's capability to make decisions quickly and sometimes you have to make decisions relatively quickly here.

The Director, who is a professional in the field, is capable of making decisions and has on several occasions, and after several months of controversy surrounding the decision that was made by the Director, then we found that the legalities of the Director operating the way he was operating were not in the act so we have to change the act such that the Boiler, Pressure Vessel and Compressed Gas Advisory Committee do the role as an advisory committee and the Director, who is the professional, can make the day to day operational decisions.

These amendments were deemed necessary because of the few problems that we had as it pertained to the capability of the Director to make decisions under law. We have to change the law so that he has the power. The Director appointed under the Act may issue temporary certificates without any reference, for example, to the Advisory Board.

And what happens is in the event that you have a huge plant operation that needs a Class 1, say, or Class 2 power engineer, as the Act reads right now the Advisory Board, after he goes through a testing process, etc., can allow a qualified engineer, graduated from university, maybe operating in industry and working in industry for ten or twenty years with different or bigger power capabilities and boilers, etc., and plants, huge plants, might apply for a job in a plant, have all of the qualifications and capabilities, but one of the requirements is that he work six months in that plant to become acquainted.

But we might not have the capability of having somebody there to train him for that six months. So here is a qualified engineer who operated plants twice the size, knows what the capability of the boilers are, as a matter of fact engineers sometimes design them, you know, and these engineers have the capability of doing this, designing these buildings and plants and so on, these power plants. It has not got the capability because it has to go to the Advisory Board for certification for him to operate that plant.

So what we are saying here is the director, who is, by the way, a first-class power engineer, which is very difficult, it is easier to become an engineer in this Province than it is to become a first-class power engineer. MR. SIMMS: What is he director of? L4643 R4643

He is Director of Engineering and Technical Services. But he has the capability basically to operate just about any boiler or power plant in this Province. He has that capability. But one of the regulations states you have to have six months, and you have to be passed by the Advisory Board. But in order to go through that process the plant has to close because they do not have a power engineer to do it. So what this does is it permits the director to look at the guy's qualifications and say, you still have to pass the test, fellow, when the time comes, but you can operate that plant.

I mean, you have operated, for example, the plant out at ERCO, so surely you can operate the plant, for example, at the Grace Hospital. So he has to go through the process, his qualifications have to be checked out, but the director can make that day to day decision. Okay that is a temporary - MR. SIMHS: It might not sound like much to people, but this is a very, very critical. MR. DINN: It is very important. We have had several fairly critical operations.

In one instance, we had to take a retired power engineer who had the capability to operate this plant, and put him in with a qualified engineer, who could probably have designed the plant, for a period of three to six months and the company paid him to walk around behind him just because he had the qualifications and wrote the test and this guy could not write the test and go through the Advisory Committee process. So the plant had to hire two people. This will permit the director appointed under the Act to issue these temporary certificates.

The director appointed under the Act has the unreserved authority to grant exemption from strict compliance with the regulations in exceptional circumstances only without reference to the Advisory Board. This applies in situations where you have a plant, you have a qualified person to operate that plant, so the director, who is a professional in his field, a first-class power engineer, looks at the guy and says yes, you are an engineer, you operated a bigger plant, you might have even operated this plant or a similar plant, so you can operate this plant, go in and do it.

This temporary certificate allows that to happen and that function cannot be performed by an advisory committee, so this is what we are want to do here. And, of course, number three is the establishment of a Boiler, Pressure Vessel Appeals Board. Appeals were previously heard by the Advisory Board. Now, the Advisory Board is a fairly large board and they are attempting to deal with making regulations, providing advice to the minister; they meet on a monthly basis sometimes and they have quite a large agenda.

But when you have a case where you need an appeal body you generally only require one or two or three people to hear an appeal, so what we need to do here in the case of an appeal is to provide the capability of setting up this Appeal Board so the appeals can be heard by the Appeal Board and the Advisory Committee can go on with and perform their functions of going through regulations, of looking at the changes that are required in industry and making recommendations to the minister. So, Mr. Speaker, there are only three items.

I trust that I have provided hon. members with an outline of basically what we are L4644 R4644

attempting to do here and hope that they concur. And, of course, as with the previous