PROVINCE OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY Volume 1 Number 103 4th. Session 34th. General Assembly VERBATIM REPORT TUESDAY, JUNE 9, 1970 SPEAKER: THE HONOURABLE GEORGE W. CLARKE

June 9, 1970 The Bouse met at 10:30 A.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair: Tape 1177 RON. J. R. SMALLWOOD (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the Rouse. I am aura, will hear with profound regret of the sudden death, at 1:00 A.M. this morning. of Hr. Ross Young. PK - 1 Mr. Young was stricken with a heart attack two or three days ago, was rushed to the hospital where he was put in the Intensive Care Department of the hospital, but died at 1:00 A.M. this morning. He was one of the most distinguished of all the public servants of this Province, He was a man of quite extraordinary energy. He did the work of several men.

He was constantly on the go. He virtually commuted back and forth between St. John"s and Ottawa and Montreal. Be was the principal adviser to the Government in all matters concerning the fisheries. He was a very valued adviser of the Canadian Government. Be had a very special relationship with all the high-ranking officials of the Department of Fisheries and associated departments at Ottawa, where he was greatly trusted and highly respected, and the slightest bit of advice that he ever gave them vas received ~ith confidence and respect in Ottawa, as it was here in this Government.

He vas trusted by the fish trade, by the Fishermen's Organization and by the two governments. lt will be quit~ impossible to replace him. ·There is no man that I know anywhere, on either aide of the Cabot Strait, who can take the place of Rosa Young. He worked years ago in the office of the Royal Stores. He moved from there to the office of Crosbie & Company, where he worked up during the years when Crosbie & Company were in the fish business, worked up to a position of eminence and became the 65~0

June 9th. 1970 Tape 1177 PK 2 firat peraon ever to become a director of the Crosbie Buainess . Enterprises who vas not a member of the family. Be vas the first non-member of the Crosbie family ever to be~ome a director. It was from that firm that I invited him to join the government as a high- ranking civil servant. b a member of the Fisheries Development Authority, he served the fishing industry of this Province in a remarkably able and aatiafactory manner. I knew him peraonally for a great many years. I knew his father well. I knew his grandfather well. And I know his son, Mr.

Victor Young, the Associate or Deputy Secretary of the Treuury 'Board of thia Province, of this Governn.nt, and one of the most proaisinR civil aervanta we have in Newfoundland today. A man of extraordinarily fine character, integrity and ability. They do not come vary oftan like Rosa Young, and the loas is a tarrible one for this Province and for this Gove.ament. To his family. I know our hearts go out as we mourn the loss of a great Newfoundlander.

While I am on my feet I would like to report what I have learned of th~matter that was raised in the Committee of the Whble yesterday or last night with regard to buildings of the Newfoundland Liquor Commission that are rented to the Commission by the Royal Trust Company. In most, if not all,of these cases where it is the Royal Trust, the actual construction was done by the Firm of Lundrigans; and the initial contact with the Liquor Commission was made by the Lundrigan Firm, one or other member of that firm.

The same firm have built the Royal Trust Building on Water Street, and I believe, they are building a Royal Trust Building,at the present time. in Halifax. And they seem to be the builders for the Royal Trust in quite of number of cases. 65!)1 r

June 9th. 1970 Tape 1177 PK - 3 The rent is paid to the Royal Trust. The Royal Tru~t presumably are the owners of these buildings, but they were constructed by the Lundrigan Firm in all the cases. There are some, I think, thirty-five or forty buildings in the Province, that are owned or rented by the Liquor Commission and some five or six of them are these Royal Trust Buildings. HR. A. J, MURPHY (Leader of the Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, 1 would like to join with the hon. the Premier and the rest of the House in saying how very sorry I am personally and,as a matter of fact, we all are in the tragic death of the very fine man in the person of Rosa YounR. When I went to work on Water Street,some forty years ago, Mr. Young was then a very valued employee of Crosbie & Company. I knew him very well. I knew his father, Mr. Hiram Young, and his brother, and Hr.

Young's own family, The Premier, of course, is in a far better position to let us know just how valuable he was in the Public Service; and I am sure we must all agree that, to my knowledge and from what I have seen of Mr. Young, I could never understand what kept him going, He seemed to be perpetual motion. Whenever you saw him, he wu running with a bunch of papers in his hand. Possibly this might be one of the means of hastening his rather premature death. They tell me he was a man who took his work very, very seriously.

He carried a lot himself perhaps, rather than ahara it with other members of his staff down there. But it is with deep regret, Mr. Speaker, that I rise to support this motion of sympathy, to his family,possibly, in the first instance, but 1 am sure that his loss is a very great one indeed to this Covernneri~, and ve can ill-afford to lose such outstanding men, with the talents which they possess • 6 5 J 2

June 9th. 1970 Tape 1177 MR. J. C. CROSBIE: Mr. Speake~, I too would certainly like to join in the ~emarks made by the P~emier and the Leader of the Opposition about Mr. Ross Young. My firat memoriea of him, and they h.ve neve~ changed, his appea~ance ha~dly ever changed durin~ the last thirty years, were PK - 4 when he vas manager at Crosbie & Company., when I was a boy and used to go in there occasionally. I think he was the same then as he was certainly last weak, a dynamo, always moving, having his fingers on everything, efficient and always pleasant. I think that was one of the characteristics of Mr. Young.

No aatter how busy he vas, at least my experience of him. vas that he was always pleasant and polite to everyone. In those days Crosbie & Company were in the herring and whaling business and aalt fish. Mr. Young, I think, was a Certified Public Accountant. It was the Premier who enticed him sway from Crosbie & Company. I do not know when that was. I think it was in 1953. I know that since he went with the Government he was certainly one of the main-stays, not only of the Depa~tment of Fisheries but I know the Premier relied on him to a great extent.

In the two yea~s that 1 was in the Gove~ment he was ce~tainly very much in evidence on all matters to do with the fishe~ies or finances. He was a tremendously hard worke~. knowledgeable, and his death at this time (and Mr. Young was not all that old. I Ruppose he was in his sixties) is ee~tainly a great loss to the Province, Mr. Speaker. He has left behind him an extraordinary family, I believe. This is another one of his great accomplishment~. Of his children, two were doctors, one nr~ Bob Youn~,whom I Auppose is certainly one of the tor in Newfoundland in his speciality, which is Internal Medicine.

He has another son who is a doctor, I believe a ~eneral practitioner. 65D3

June 9th. 1970 Tap e 1177 PK - 5 The Premier has mentioned Mr. Vie Young, who is a very, very promising public servant here in Newfoundland, now with the Treasury Board. Another son, Howie Young, who is, I believe, a Oruggist, and now looks after the Dale Carnegie Courses, here in Newfoundland. So Mr. Young has left behind him an extraordinary family, all of whom are goin~ to make a great contribution to the life of this Province, in their own fields, in the next twenty or thirty years. That is certainly a great monument to him. We certainly join in extending our sympathy to Mrs.

Young and the family and to the Government in the loss of such a valuable and faithful, hard-workin~, top-notch civil servant. HON. E. WINSOR: Hr. Speaker, I would like to join with the other hon. ~entleman in paying respect to Ross Young. I knew Ross Young first, as others, when he worked with Crosbie & Company, on Water Street, and several times I had dealin~s with him. I always found him to be a very pleasant, congenial and co-operative. But, Sir, I got to know him best just recently, when I took over aa Acting Minister of Fisheriea.

He was a very reliable and dependable man, with a terrific amount of knowledge. He developed a wonderful relationship, as the Premier pointed out, with the Fisheries Department at Ottawa. That was quite evident to me at least, during the Fisheries Council Meetings, which took place here a couple of weeks ago. It was only on Friday afternoon he came to see me and he said that he had a bit of a cold but he thought he would fight it off over the weekend. And I said to him: "Ross, t think you are rushing around a little too much. Why do you not take it easy?" 65D4

June 9th. 1970 Tape 1177 PK - 6 MR. WINSOR: But that was not the nature of Ross Young. And, Sir, in the Department of Fisheries he is going to be ·greatly missed and he is going to be a very difficult person to replace. Sir, on behalf of the Department of Fisheries and myself, I would extend our condolence to Mrs. Young and the family, and as I said, he is a great loss to Newfoundland and to the Department of Fisheries in particular. PRESENTING PETITIONS RON. J.A. NOLAN: (MINISTER OF SUPPLY): Mr. Speaker, I have a petition that I have been asked to present to this bon. House by the Retail Sales Personnel in St.

John's and the immediate area. And it is signed by 700, and indeed had time permitted, I am informed by the people conce~ed that this petition could very easily go to 2000, it is only a matter of simply having more names added to the petition. The prayer of the petition is that the maximum opening hours of six days and two nights, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Saturday, 9:00 A.M. to 5:30P.M.; Thursday and Friday 9:00A.M. to 9:30P.M, Christmas opening hours; December lOth. to December 23rd. inclusive. Christmas Eve 9:00 A.M. to 5:30 P.M.

The holiday is as presently proclaimed • The request is that we give every consideration to this petition, which I am most happy to support, and indeed proud to have the opportunity of presenting this petition at this time in behalf of the 700 people who signed the petition.

And in addition, of course, representing all those too who, while they may not have signed this petition at this time, would certainly do so at time permitted, and as I indicated earlier would be more than happy to sign a petition or another one,if necessary, in order to get this point across because I have met with many of the retail people and they are quite concerned about the hours that they have been requested to work. 65D5 1

June 9th. 1970 Tape 1177 PK - 7 MR. NOLAN: I do know from my own that from my own experience, as Minister of Municipal Affaris, that in other areas of the Province where opening hours are effected, store opening hours, it is done through the store closing regulations in many areas. And perhaps this is the way it should be done in this particular instance also. I am sure that perhaps, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition may wish to support the prayer of this petition. I would though at the re~uest of the people concerned table this petition - ask your permission to table the petition, Mr.

Speaker, and to have it forwarded to the department concerned. MR. SPEAKER: Moved and seconded that this petition be received and referred to the department to which it relates. MR. A. MURPHY:(LEADF.R OF THE OPPOSITION): I would like to support the petition very much. I do so with a powerful sense of frustration. As I look around this hon. House,and I think back, I think, it was three or four years ago, where a committee, I believe there were four of us under the Chairmanship of the hon. the Minister of Provincial Affairs.

And we spent many, many hours,both inside and outside the House, I mean when the House was closed. And we had many briefs from various firms, not only employees at that time, but I think, a great majority of the firms in St.

JohnJs, particularly on Water Street at that time where very, very worried about the fact that stores were kept open much, much longer in the evenings and everyday of the week except Sunday. tJe gave it awful lot of thpught, an awful lot of discussion, but we ended up and the conclusion was arrived at by this Committee, and we are governed by the law relating to hours of work in shops, (I think, the hon. minister will bear me out on this) where we felt that we could only regulate the number of hours worked by employees.

Now whether we can go any further or not, I do not know, and I think the hon. minister who presented this petition, I believe, maybe aware of this. I do not believe the hon. minister is in the House, I am not sure if he was at that time. Well, anyhow. 65~6

June 9th. 1970 Tape 1177 PK - 8 MR. MURPHY: But basi~al,ly we gave it awfUl lot of thought, we received thousands of signatures, dozen .s of submission .s from firms. And I. feel myself that with this · eo.nstant oompetition between stores and employees, as I see it now, are not in a position in most cases to }qt_ow ~ust what day of the week they are going to be .off, what hours they will have to work because they are working apparently from - 9:00 A.M. until 10:00 P.M. and 11:00 P.M. in the night, with the opening of the new suburban supermarkets and different outlets. So it is become 65D7

June 9th., 1970 Tape no • 1178 Page 1 Mr. Murphy. from a rather frustrated group of people who are the retail c!erks in these stores. I certainly support it, and I would hope that this Bouse can come up with something and give us the power to actuall7 regulate store closing and store opening hours. But, as I say, up to the time that we had met on this committee(and there was a committee of five and as I said earlier) we spent many, many hours and heard many witnesses actually which were brought in to give evidence.

We could only go according to the Act then set up - the hours of work in stores and that was to lim~the number of hours that any employee worked and after that he received his overtime pay and so on. Now there are members of the committee in this House and I think, particularly, the Minister of Provincial Affairs,who could perhaps give a more concise summing up of our findings and perhaps just let the House know and perhaps give us some direction.

I would be only too happy to work on any committee to establish regular hours , because after all in these days, I feel that clerks are getting back to the position of being more or less slaves or ~erfs. They cannot get this time off to spend with their families like they should. Possibly, it is within our jurisdiction to do something about it and actually accede to the prayer of this petition. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, we would like to support the prayer of this petition received from <he retail sales clerks, presumably in the St.

John's area.which asks that the store opening hours be six days and two nights a week. Now, ~lr. Sl)eaker, · I think this whole issue is arising again, because of the pressure from shopping centres in the suburban areas about St. John's. ~herever shopping centres have developed, in the metropolitan areas, anywhere on the North American continent, this problem has arisen and has arisan, of course, again here in Newfoundland because of pressure for six nights opening a week. It is from shopping centres and stores located 65DH .

June 9th., 1970 Tape no 1178 Page 2 Mr. Crosbie. in shopping centres. These are the store owners who wish to remain open six days and six nights a week. As I understand it, there is no desire at all for most business establishments on Water Street, most business establishments who are not located in shopping centres, such as one establishment I would not name now. There is no pressure from them that there be six nights and six days store openings a week.

But because or if the shopping centres, their competitor~ are allowed to open six nights and six days a week, other retail establishments have absolutely no choice. It is either do the same or go out of business. So, ~he matter is squarely within the juris~iction of this House of Assembly, the Government and the members of the House of Assembly. I think that this six days and six nights a week is hard on the employees, even though the maximum number of hours that you are permitted to work without overtime .ia•·forty hours.

It still means that every employee has to take his turn working nights and without a long weekend and the rest of it. It is a very difficult situation. So, we support the principle of this petition and are quite willing to serve on the committee or discuss with the Government what action the Government may want to take on it. HON. G. A. FRECKER (Minister of Provincial Affairs): Hr. Speaker, without delaying the proceedings, I might add to what the hon. Leader of the Opposition had said.

We did have a Select Committee of the House, and we did interview many people. ' Of all those we did meet, I do not recall any who were opposed to what was being recommended; namely, five days and one night or two nights at the most. At the present time the House of Work Act provides for a forty hour week with certain rates, perscriptive rates,so that a person is not obliged to be on his feet or to be working consistently without a break for more than so many hours. Anything over the forty hours a week baa to be paid as time and a-half. 65D9

June 9th., 1970 Tape no 1178 Page 3 Mr. Fr~cker. Now the thing that struck me, when we were receiving delegations and submissions,was that practically all the retail stores, not only the employees but the management on Water Street, were in favour of not having too many nights open. Even the food establishments,like the supermarkets they were quite willing to be reasonable. They had problems but they could be resolved. Now the House will be interested to learn, Mr. Speaker, that we have had approaches mades to us, quite recently, by the Newfoundland Board of Trade.

I do not know if it is still called the Newfoundland Board of Trade or the Newfoundland Chamber of Commerce. I saw something in the paper r~cently which would leave me to believe that the name may have been changed. But the letterhead that we received was the Newfoundland Board of Trade •. They were speaking on behalf not only of their own immediate members in St. John's but on behalf of a number of Chambers of Commerce distributed around the Province.

The problem is a complicated one because whatever we do, if we do it by law, becomes the order of the day for the Province as a whole and wha~ may be suitable in St. John's, Corner Brook, Grand Falls, may create genuine hardships in other areas. So, I just want to let the House know1 at the present time,that we have this very problem under active consideration within, making approaches to the various provinces to determine the exact trend because the problem is not just pative to Newfoundland. It is one that is arising all over the country.

Quebec has recently passed a law which makes it obligatory not to be open more than two nights a week and to close a 5 p.m. on Saturdays, and it is getting quite a lot of support. But, we cannot just aay what we will be prepared to recommend until we have had more opportunity to investigate the problem in depth. I might add that we have also been in touch with the retail people themselves, 6600

June 9th., 1970 Tape no 1178 Page 4 Mr. Frecker. the employees. So, we are working on it, Mr. Speaker, and when the petition presented by the hon. Minister of Supply and Services is referred to the Department of Provincial Affairs, which I believe is the department to which it should be referred, rest assured, Mr. Speaker and bon. members,that the problem is receiving active . consideration and we will do the very best we can. MR. SPEAKER: Is is moved nnd seconded that this petition be received and referred to the department to which it relates. Those in favour "aye," Con'trary "nay." Carried, NOTICE OF MOTION.

MR. SMALLWOOD. Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a Bill, "An Act Further To Amend The Government­ British Newfoundland Exploration Limited (Authorization of Agreement) Act, 1957, And The Agreement Made In Pursuance Of That Act." And, a Bill, "An Act To Authorize The Lieutenant-Governor In Council To Enter Into An Agreement With British Newfoundland Corporation Limited And N.M.

Rothschild & Sons, Supplemental To The Agreement Dated The Twenty-First Day Of May, 1953, Aa Heretofore Amended." And, a Bill, "An Act To Make Consistent The Provisions In Various Acts Respecting The Insertions Of Public Notices In Newspapers." HON. E. WINSOR (Minister of Labrador Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a Bill, "An Act To Repeal The Salt Codfish Marketing (Control) Act, 1964." And, "An Act To Repeal The Salt Codfish Marketing Board Act, 1964." ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS. MR. SMALLWOOD: Mr.

Speaker, Question no. 536 1 on the Order Paper of May 28th., in the name of the bon. the member for St. John's East (Extern). The two years in question, the answer is as follows: 1968-1969, wooden c~eosoted poles, $64,371 - 1969-1970, wooden creosoted polies, $9,916. 6R01

June 9th •• 1970 Tape no 1178 Page 5 MR. NO~: Mr. Speaker. I would like to table the answer to Question no. 519 asked by the bon. member for St. Barbe South on the Order Paper. dated May 22nd. During the financial year that ended March, 31st •• 1970 how many school desks were purchased by the department on behalf of the Department of Education and in connection with such purchases were tenders called in all cases? The answer, 30 916. Part (2). yes.

(2) In connection with each purchase of school desks or each tender call in connection with school desks, outline whether tenders were called. from,whom the desks were purchased in each case, the number purchased in each case. and the price and the cost of the school desks purchased in each case? The answer to the first part of that question: tenders were called in all cases. The answer to part two of the question: Newfoundland Hardwoods Ltd.

The answer to part three: during the financial year ending 31 March, 1970, the following desks were purchased; large combination desks, 1,509 0 unit price $19.98; medium combination desks, 10 454 0 unit price $19.29; small combination desks. 783, unit price in this case was $18.60i large separate desks. 32 were purchased. unit price of $15.98; medium separate desks, 77 purchased. unit price of $15.48; small separate desks, 27 purchased. unit price of $15.05; kindergarten desks 30 at a unit price of $17.50; teachers' desks 4 at a unit price of $65.00. The total quantity in this instance, Mr.

Speaker, is 3,916, The third part of the question is: were the school desks in every case purchased from the person or firm who submitted the lowest tender and, if not, why not? The answer to that is, yes. I will table ~he answer to that question, Mr. Speaker. I would also like to answer the Question no. 537, asked by the bon. member for St. John's East (Extern) on the Order Paper of May 28th •• What was the total cost of (

a) asphalt (give also the gallonage) (

b) other materials purchased from Newfoundland Hardwoods Ltd in 1968-69 and 1969-70? The answer for 1968-1969, asphalt 24.306 tons - the total cost was $1.717,883,16. Part (2) of this question for 1968-69, Mr. Speaker. R.c •• 70- "31,000 gallons- total cost $13 0 460.60. 6602

June 9th •• 1970 Tape no 1178 Page 6 Mr. Nolan. The answer for 1969-70. the answer to part (1), asphalt 23,532 tons. t:o'tal cost $1.626 1 255.22 and part (2) of this answer: R.C. 70 and 250- 48.955 gallons- total cost $ 18.116.69. MR. CROSBIE: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Was the total for 1968-69. $1 1 117,0001 Is that the correct total because for half the tonnage the next year, it was $1,626,000? MR. NOLAN: This is the answer provided by the officials. I would certainly be more than happy to check this, Mr. Speaker. MR.

CROSBIE: You know it is hard to see how 44,000 torts is $1.7 million · and 23,000 tons the next year is $1.6 million. The minister will check that will he? MR. NOLAN: I would be very happy to, yes. MR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, before orders of the day, I ask leave to move the adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a matter of extreme public importance; namely, the alarmingly high unemployment rate in Newfoundland. It is causing great distress and hardship to the people of this Province.

And to censure this Government for its failure to recognize that such unemployment has reached crisis proportions in its failure to initiate remedial action and programs. MR. SMALLWOOD: Mr. Speaker, I suppose I scarcely need to object to this motion. It is not urgent that the matter be debated today. It is not urgent that all other business of the House be dropped now so that this matter may be debated now. There are ample opportunities throughout the remainder of the sesaion,that .are coming up in any case,for this matter to be debated, including the estimates of my Department of Economic Development. MR.

SPEAKER:If no other hon. member wishes to comment, I have already intimated. I think, to the person attempting to move this motion that this is not the kind of motion that calls for the interruption of all the other business before this House. Nobody denies the urgency of the matter, 6603

June 9th., 1970 Tape no 1178, Page 7 Mr. Speaker. but to stop all other business in the House at the present time in order to discuss this question of unemployment, in my opinion, is not the type of motion that is acceptable to the House in order to put all other business aside at this particular time, This has already been pointed out.

There will be opportunities within the day or so, when,on the various items of the budget, reference will be made and has already been made to the unemployment situation and members will get an opportunity to make motions or to express their feelings about the matter in connection with this. For that reason., I do not see why we should put other .business aside right at this present time in order to discuss this particular motion that is before us now, MR. COLLINS: Mr.

Speaker, with respe~ sir, I cannot accept that argument, because certainly one of the moat important and one of the most pressing problems facing Newfoundlanders today is the difficulty in obtaining employment. We have as much as fifty or sixty per cent unemployed, •• MR. SPEAKER: I have already said that I cannot, under the circumstances, - I do not under the circumstances feel that this is the type of motion that we can accept right now,to disregard all other business and go into a special debate on this, when there ia opportunity being offered very shortly to discuss the same matter.

Now that is my ruling and it is not, of course, subject to debate. MR. NOLAN: Mr. Speaker, I wonder, if I could have permission to correct an answer that was given, sir? MR. SPEAKER: By leave of the House. MR. NOLAN: Very quickly, Mr. Speaker. The answer, I understand is accurate as printed. I believe I may have said in the answer for 1968-1969 for asphalt, 44,000

whereas 1.ndeed it should be 24,306 tons and 6604

:1 June 9th., 1970 Tape no 1178 Page 8 Kr. · Nola~. the same figures as given would apply and I will table this answer. Thank you. On motion, that the House go into Committee of the Whole on Supply, Mr. Speaker left the Chair. MR. HODDER (CHAIRMAN OF COMHITTEES) Heading XIII - Municipl Affairs and Housing - 1301-1. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a few preliminary remarks on this heading before we go down through the departmen~. The Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing is a very interesting one. an important one, Mr. Chairman. I would like first - well I think to get this out of the way.

I would like first to address a few remarks to the question of Elizabeth Towers. The St. John's Housing Corporation reports to the Minister of Municipal Affairs or at least is supposed to report to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Elizabeth Towers Limited is a subsidiary of the St. John's Housing Corporation. It comes under the housing part of the minister's department. The St. John's Housing Corporation. Mr. Chairman. I do not think anybody could argue has not performed a very valuable service in the St.

John's area over the past twenty years, in the development of service land for both commercial purposes and for housing purposes throughout this area. There is a great feeling around, and I think there is quite a bit of merit to it,that in the last few years. perhaps for as long as eight or ten years, really, the corporation has not being doing as much as it could to keep the price of serviced land as low as possible. In other words it is my feeling or I believe that if a public agency is engaged in the business of providing serviced land then it should provide it at the lowest possible coat.

The corporation should not make a profit on its land operationa. What baa been happening in St. John's, 6605

June 9th. , 1970 Tape no 1178 Page 9 Mr. Crosbie. in the past few years in any event,is that the St. John's Housing Corporatbn sets the price for serviced building lots.Because whatever price it sets, determines what any other private developer is going to be able to set for building lots. If you can buy a serviced building lot in St. John's Housing Corporation for $60 a Loot frontage. you are not going to go to some private developer and buy a lot from the private developer at $100 a foot frontage or $90 or $80 or $70. So 1 they have by and large to keep in line with the St. Jphn's Housing Corporation. Now, Mr.

Chairman, I believe and I think any investigation of the financial affairs of the St. John's Housing Corporation will show that over the past number of years the St. John's.Housing Corporation has made money and considerable sums of money on developing and selling serviced building lots and bas consistently lost money on the rental, construction and renting of apartment units. What is happening is that the people who are buying land, buying building lots from the St. John's Housing Corporation are in effect subsidizing its other operations which are losing money.

This has been the general effect over the past few years and the St. John's Housing Corporation 1 instead of having the effect of keeping the priceof serviceabuilding lots down,has really been doing the same thing as any private developer would do, charging what the market will bear rather than what should be the other way around. Mr. Chairman, 6606

June 9th, 1970 Tape 1179 JM - 1 MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Chairman, that is the general observation on the St. John's Housing Corporation. Now it has done a good job., a good physical job in obtaining the land, providing lots, industrial sites and so on but I think it is a matter of policy within that corporation. It has lost sight of what its real function should be and that is to develop building,serviced land in St. John's and sell it at as cheap a price as possible,covering its cost and no more. But the St.

John's Housing Corporation is doing much more than that: it is making money on its development ofserviced lots, to cover its losses it is sufferin~ on its apartment projects. Now Elizaheth Towers, ~r. Chairman, on Elizabeth Avenue, is certainly one example of a lack of sense of priorities. It is an example of severn! thinp,s. It is an example, first, of not having proper priorities in Government. That is one example. Secondly, it is an example of an absolute lack of planning. That is the second point in connection with the Housing Corporation.

In fact, these are the two major points in connection with Elizabeth Towers. It shows lack of planning, lack of a sense of priorities, disregard for the people's right to information about what is being done with public monies. Now when Elizabeth Towers started,and I think it was in 1966, we II fl can all remember Terry the Tiger Carter, Terry Carter, and his campaign against it and at that time it was said that Elizabeth Towers, this apartment project,was p,oinp, to cost $2.5 million.

Terry Carter then said.in his own inimi- table way, that it was goinp, to cost at least double that, $5. million, and there was quite a campaign and a controversy went on at that time. \•!ell, it turns out, Mr. Chairman, four years later that"Terry the Tiger"Carter was exactly right that Elizabeth Towers did not cost $2.5 million. It cost, in reply to questions asked in the House here, the total cost of Elizabeth Towers was $5,395,000. Now the $5,302,000. was the cost of the building and the $93,000. was the cost of furniture, equipment and furnishings.

So SS,39S,OOO. altogether for this luxury apartment building. So Terry Carter was not only right when he said $5. million but he was below what actually turned out to be the case. I presume, I am not sure 6607

June 9th, 1970 MR. CROSBIE: Tape 1179 JH - 2 about that, but I presume that includes architects fees. I think it is the total cost. I believe that was the way the question was asked so that would, I assume, include the architects fees and all the costs of Elizabeth Towers. Now why did this happen? Well, number one, Mr. Chairman, the architects who prepared the plans must have assured the corporation that the apartment building could be constructed for $2.5 million, that must have been his advice to the St. John's Housing Corporation, obviously.

The corporation, taking his advice,did not call tenders for the construction of the whole complex, one tender called for the whole business, foundation, the structure, everything complete. But what the corporation did was call tenders first for the foundation and then, I think, it called tenders for the steel and then it called tenders for the rest of the buildin~. When the tender came in for the rest of the building, for the whole thing, they were faced not with $2.5 million but with a price in excess of $5. or $6. million. The architect had been wrong in his advice.

He had been out at least one hundred per-cent. But it t"as too late to do too much ahout it then, Mr. Chairman, because the foundations were now there and, I believe, the steel work was there then in the process of being erected. So there was very little that could he done about this extraordinary difference in costs, the actual cost and the advised cost. The corporation was trapped with this building because of the way that the tenders were called on it. That was one unfortunate thing, that was the poor planning. What is the position now? Here is this $5,395,000. structure.

It is financed through a ten year loan from the Canadian Bank of Commerce, $2.5 million; a five year loan from the Toronto Dominion Bank, $1.5 million and $1,195,000. provided by th~ St. John's Housing Corporation all of which loans are guaranteed by the Government. We are told that the average interest rate on these loans is eight per-cent. Now, of course, one has to ask, where did the St. John's Housing Corporation get Sl,l95,000. to advance for the construction of Elizabeth Tot-1ers?

It has either got it from retained profits and the profits must have been made of the sale of land or it borrowed the money itself or got it somewhere .because the St. John's Housing Corporation has $1,195,000. in this .6608

June 9th, 1970 MR. CROSBIE: Tape 1179 JM - 3 Elizabeth Towers complex. Now if the answer is right and the interest rate on these loans is eight per-cent, eight per-ce~t of $5,195,000. comes to $415,600. a year in interest, eight per-cent of $5,195,000, is $415,600. interest a year. Now I mentioned that becau~e in the expenses that the ~linister has given this House the interest on bank loans he has given as $341,000. and the interest on advances from St.

John's Housing Corporation is S38,000. makin~ a total of approximately $380,000. in interest which looks to be too low, about $30,000. too low, if this average interest rate is correct. The expenses appear to be understated. Now this Elizabeth Towers has 102 apartment units and four hotel type units; fourteen one bedroom, eighty-eight two bedroom and four hotel units and on February 1st, 1970 there were only ten one bedroom apartments and twenty- two two bedroom apartments rented, that was thirty-two apartments rented.

Accordingito the answers to these questions,ninety-two, ninety-three and others, the corporation this year, the present financial year, expects total income $458,000., total expenses $591,000., so the Government estimates a loss this year of $133,750. on the operation of Elizabeth Towers. I would say, Mr. Chair­ man, that the loss is going to be far in excess of that unless all these apart­ ments are pretty soon rented. The income from apartment rentals is given as $253,000. Now there is not a hope of achieving that rental unless all the apartment units are rented and I do not believe they are.

The income from commercial rentals is $202,000. The interesting thing to note about that, Mr. Chairman, is that nearly all those commercial rentals are coming from Government agencies. The estimate is $202,000. and we know from other answers to questions tabled in this House that four Government agencies are paying a total of $153,690. in rents to Elizabeth Towers this year. So of the all the income from commercial rentals over three-quarters of it is coming from Govern­ ment agencies, $153,000. out of $202,000.

Newfoundland and Labrador Water Authorities $75,000: Newfoundland Medi :_ Care Commission $47,000.: St. John's Metropolitan Area Board S65,000.: Newfoundland and Labrador Computer Services $92,000. So nearly all the 6609

June 9th, 1970 MR. CR05BIE: Tape 11"19 JM - 4 commerc :".al rentals are coming from the Government. The apartment rentals, that income is not going to be there unless they are all rented. When you look on the expense side the interest figure looks like it is low,.the other figures we do not know. If we accept all these figures from the Government the loss is $133,000. but it is more likely going to be $200,000. or $250,000. this year. Now that is the information we got in answer to questions. lolhen I say we, some questions were asked by the official opposition and some by us.

What did the manager of the whole complex say, ~r. O.L. Vardy? lolhat did he have to say about the position? On January 26th, 1970 in the Evening Telegra~. and January 26th, 1970 ~1as only a month before the House opened, Mr. Vardy, the Chairman of the St. John's Housing Corporation, took the Telegram to task for saying that Elizabeth Towers would lose more than $100,000. in its first year of operation. Mr. Vardy said that the income of Elizabeth Towers would be just below, well in the present year, that might mean the last financial year, 1v0uld be just below the $360,000. expenses.

He does not know where the Teler,ram gets its figures. They did not discuss it with him. That was for the last year, $360,000. Now the Telegram should get its figures correct and there would be no problem. Anything the Government is involved in there is always a tendency to use it as a political football. There certainly is, Mr. Chairman, the Govern­ ment uses it as a political football when it is in the Government's favour and if it is not in the Government's favour, of course, other opposition groups, their partie~ use it as a political football. Has that not always been the case?

Has anybody heard of a success the Government has had that was not made into a political football and kicked all around the Province? Likewise with mistakes the Government makes. lolhy should they not be political footballs too? According to the statements made by the Government,reported in January 1970,the revenue of this complex is going to amount to $565,000. a year, that is $100,000. more than is shown in this House. The expenses were goin~ to be ~563,000. which is $30,000. less than the answers to questions showed and there was going to be a $2,noo. profit.

To make the $2,000. profit the apart­ ments would have to be ninety-five per-cent occupied. The point is, Mr. Chairman, 6610

June 9th, 1970 Tape 1179 JM - 5 HR. CROSBIE: that even if the Elizabeth Towers was highly profitable, suppose it was a good investment, suppose the thing really made good money, it is not the kind of investment a Government should be interested in making, luxury apartment buildings~ That is not where the $5. million of the ~ewfoundland Government's credits should be tied up. There is $5.million,credit of the Newfoundland Government and agencies of the Newfoundland Government, tied up in Elizabeth Towers and we all know a hundred good things that could be done with $5. million in this Province.

Every Minister could use it, every Department could use that capital expenditure, even just in the housing field. Look at the number of things that could be done. We could have the $5. million at twenty­ five per-cent with the Federal Contribution and that would make $20. million available for subsidize rentals around the Province. That is one use it could have. It could be used to develop and purchase land at reasonable costs. The Government talks about land banks being a good policy, buy land before it becomes expensive and the services reach out. With S5. million you could do that all around the Province, Mr.

Chairman. You could estimate what areas are going to have growth and go out with $5. million today and buy thousands of acres of land that within the nex~ five or'ten years is going to cost any­ one who buys it $40. or $50. million. That is what you could do with the $5. million for housing. You could have a second mortgage fund, you could use it for second mortgages to provide second mortgages at a reasonable interest rate. The people in Newfoundland who are buying properties and do not have enough down payment just use the first mortga~e. The first mortp.age today, Mr.

Chairman, is what, ten per-cent, eleven per-cent? Between ten and eleven per-cent for a first mortgage on g~od residential property in St. John's and a second mortgage you cannot get. But when you can get a second mortgap,e it carries interest of fifteen or eighteen per-cent. Now that $5. million could he in a second mort~ar,e fund for the people who need it to get second mortgages at some reasonable interest ra~e~. they need them to make up the purchase price of a home. Subsidize rental, urban renewal - urban renewal, the urban renewal scheme in Corner Brook, the 6611

June·9th, 1970 Tape 1179 JM - 6 MR. CROSBIE: one in Hundy Pond had been cut down because the Federal Government has limited the amount of money it will pay. So the guts have been cut out of both those urban renewal schemes to fit the amount of money that is available. Well, you could go on in any number of areas where $5. million borrowed by the Newfoundland Government or its agencies could he better used than in the Elizabeth Towers. That would be the case,whether it was a terrific investment or not it would make no difference.

It is a misuse of public funds to provide housing that only those people who are wealthy can afford to rent. The rents are, I think, from $200.00 to S500.00 a month. Now I am not going to pursue that any further, Mr. Chairman. There is no point . it as the facts are all there. I think it is a great tragedy. Now if the Government could find or St. John's Housing Corporation can find someone who will buy Elizabeth Towers, some private firm or corporation or individual willing to buy Elizabeth Towers 1 I would say, Mr.

Chairman, that the Government would be well off selling it even at a loss and a substantial loss,to free up this $4. or $5. million even if the loss they took was a half million or a million, to free up the $4. million that the Government or its agencies are paying eight per-cent on,and use it for some other better purpose. Just realize the mistake and cut thelosses. It is tragic really this Elizabeth Towers and it is twisting the St. John's Housing Corporation, that and Pleasantville and the other apartment complexes are twisting the St.

John's Housing Corporation from its original purpose, to provide service land in the St. John's area at a decent price.Because,make no mistake ahout it, the St. John's Housing Corporation.is making good money on the development anrl sale of building lots when it should be doing it for cost or near cost. Blackhead Road, ~he urban renewal scheme I want to mention too, Mr. Chairman, and I want to mention it for several reasons.

The Blackhead Road situation is certainly a difficult one for any Government and one of the great problems being up there, I believe, the lack of what the Ninster of Welfare calls participatory democracy. That there has not been enough information going from the officials who are involved in the Blackhead Road, if what you bear from the people up there is correct, they have not received 6612

June 9th, 1970 Tape 1179 JM - 7 MR. CROSBIE: proper information on what is involved in this whole scheme and that has been the case for the last several years and that is a great pity. If any of the members gets this paper that has been put out on the RJ.ackhead Road, the u . Blackhead Road Householder News Letter; they will see the problems that they are having up on the Blackhead Road •. Now, Hr.

Chairman, there ~;-e bound to be a lot of problems on the Blackhead Road due to the fact that construction had to be carried on in the area, water and sewage put down, new roads built and houses moved while everybody continues to live up there.

The decision was made a long time ar,o that because the people of the Blackhead Road area did not want to leave,they had a great community feeling there, they did not ~•ant to leave the lllackhead Road area that because of that the choices that were open to the Government were (1) to move everyone off the Blackhead Road and resettle them somewhere else, that was one alternative or (2) to try and build a modern community with all the public facilities up there and rehabilitate and renew the whole f\l11ck- head Road area.

The Government decided on the second choice and this is what the people of the Blackhead Road area wanted.But I do not think that they had ever fully understood what is involved in this scheme and there are many questions now, if the :·linister can enlighten us,he should enliP,hten us on. One of the problems is this, what is to happen with the housin~ t~a~ is moved but is still used up on the Blackhead Road?

Suppose it is housi:lt; that is not of a good standard but a person is going to continue to live in the houses, it is not taken rlown, it is not destroyed in the course of this renewal scheme, how is the individual concerned going to he ahle to improve or renovate his house? How is he going to be able to pay for the water and sewage and pipes and fixtures that will have to go into his house to have it attached to water and sewage~ How is ~e going to improve his home if he does not have any money himself to do it?

Are the Government of Canada and the Government of Newfoundland going to make loans to these people who are in that position? Are they going to make grants to them for those purposes? What is going to happen to those particular people? What is going to happen when the urban renewal scheme is over, when construction is over? Is the Blackhead Road 6613

June 9th, 1970 Tape 1179 JM- R MR. CROSBIE: area to be incorporated as a separate municipality or is it to be taken within the city of St. John's, within the city limits o.f St. John's to become part of the city? If that happens,is the city to get financial compensation,for taking it · ove~ for all the expenses that would be involved? Where will the money come from to operate the community once urban renewal is finished? In other words; to operate public services like roads and maintain them, to main­ tain and operate the water and sewage systems that is going to cost money and who is going to pay those costs?

The people living on the Blackhead Road, are they going to be taxed, are they going to have to pay water and sewage rates? What is ~o happen to them when construction finishes this summer? That certainly is important for them to know. Is the water turned on .there yet, is the city no~.r supplying water to the water and sewage facilities up on the Blackhead Road now or when has the city agreed to start supplying water? How many people up there have had their homes destroyed from necessity during these projects? When is public housing going to be built there or is there any public housing under way there now?

Are there going to be subidized rental units constructed on the Blackhead Road or public housing of some kind for the people to move into who have lost their properties? What are the prices of the lots going to be up there? These are some of the questions that the people on · the Blackhead Road would like answered and I am sure that anyone interested in the question would like answered. There is another burning issue up there, Mr. Chairman, which I am going to mention because of the foul attempts by some politicans to try to blame it on me personally.

In 1964 this House passed the Family Homes Bxpropriation Act, Act (61) of the Statutes of Newfoundland 1966-67 and that Legislation was passed, Mr. Chairman, when I was Mini~ter of Municipal Affairs. I am sorry, that was the Amendment. The Act was paased in 1964. That ia Legislation which provides that where a family home iR expropriated the bash of compensation is not the market value of the property, not whnt you would get for the property if a willing seller sold it to a willing purchaser, which 6614

June 9th, 1970 Ta1.·e 11 7'• JM - 9 MR. CROSBIE: had been the law until 1964. That Legislation changed that so that if it is a famiJ.y home that a family is living in, that the compt' ,s ation would be based not on market value, not on what a willing buyer would pdy a willing seller but on the· basis of what it would cost the people 1 whose property had been expropriated, what it would cost them to get a reasonably equivalent home . . The intent of the Act was that the owner shall receive such compensation as will· ensure that the family unit is in no worse position as a result of the expropriation.

It being recognized that strict market value is not in all cases a true compensation to a family unit which is dispossessed since it may not provide equivalent accommodation. Now this just applies to a family home and not a home that somebody had as an investment that they were renting out. It did not apply to that, not to a commercial property but to a family home that a family was living in.

In other words, market value, if you are living in a home that might have a value of $4,000. or SS,OOO. that mi~ht be quite comfortable and you maybe able to live alright in that home,but if it is expropriated anrl you have to move and look for another house reasonably equivalent and the same size as that one,it might cost you SlO,OOO. or $12,000. to buy a reasonably equivalent house today. Now under the old system you would only get $5,000., the market value of your old one when it might cost you $10,000. or $12,000. to get an equivalent home today. That was why the Act was passed.

Now in 1966-67 Act (63) of 1966-67 was an amendment to that Act and that was an amendment that was introduced by me,as Hinister of Hunicipal Affairs at the time 1 on behalf of the Government. That Act amended the Family Ilomes Expropriation Act, it changed the rule with respect to family homes where a family home was expropriated in an area where there is an urban renewal scheme. 6615

June 9th. 1970 Tape 1180 PK - 1 MR. CROSBIE: I was the minister then who produced it. But everyone in the Government, everyone on the Government side had to support it. It was a Government Bill. against it. And members of the Official Opposition then voted MR. MURPHY: Inaudible. MR. CROSBIE: Yes, I am not saying. There is no reason why you should have not voted against it. MR. ~IURPHY: I just wanted to make it known. I wanted to get my name in the paper. MR. CROSBIE: You are going to get your name in the minutes, Mr. Leade~, do not worry about that.

This Act of 1966-67 states that,"where there is s.n urban renewal scheme and a family home is expropriated, lf the family home is "A", substandard by reason of its size, construction, or deterioration, if it is substandard or if it is unfit by ordinarily accepted property standards for human habitation, no compensation is to be paid with reference to the expropriation, except what is based on market value under the old law." In other words; there is not a sum sufficient to put them in an equivalent position, with market value.

But where that is the case, where such rental accommodation becomes available and is operated as a public housing project by the Province, etc., those persons must be offered rental accomModation, in a public housing project, at a rental which is fair and reasonable, havin~ regard to the income of the family unit concerned, etc.

The purpose of the amendment is that if there is an urban renewal scheme and sub-standard homes or homes unfit for habitation are being destroyed or expropriated but there is going to be public housing in that area and those persons can live in public housing, they will get market value for their properties and be given accommodation in public housing at subsidized rental. Now this is an amendment passed by the Government. And, as I remember it, Mr. Chairman, passed by the Government because the Blackhead Road Urban Renewal Scheme would not have gone ahead without that amendment.

The Government of Canada would not have agreed to the 6616

June 9th. 1970 Tape 1180 PK - 2 MR. CROSBIE: Blackhead Road urban Jenewal S:heme going ahead, if that amendment had not been passed. That is what I was told by my officials, and this is what I believe. that the Government was told, that is why the amendment was passed. Why not, because the cost of the urban renewal scheme would have skyrocketed, if compensation had to be p~id based on the 1964 Act in that urban renewal area. No one knew what· the courts could decide the Act meant, _how much would be. involved. The cost would at least be doubled, if not more than doubled.

And as I recollect the Government of Canada said we cannot get involved in this matter, where we do not know how much it is going to cost us to expropriate the land. There is no standard :to go by; and this is required if the scheme.is to go ahead. That is wh~ the amendment was passed. Now some poltroons, Mr. Chairman, people in political life, when people of the Blackhead Road had gotten after them about this, have been foul enough to say, that this was the amendment, Mr. Crosbie put through the House. Hr. Crosbie,is responsible for that. Not the Government is responsible for it.

Not that the Government did it. }fr. Crosbie. John Crosbie put that through. This is why you are not getting $10,000 instead of $5000. Dirty poltroons! That is why I am making a point of it today. This amendment was put through by this House of Assembly with the official oppo~ion voting against it. And everyone on the Government side supportin~ it, it was Government legislation. The Government supported it. Everyone of them. \~e did not want to do it. But the choice was; no urban renewal scheme on the Blackhead Road or make this amendment. That was the choice.

That is the only reason why I accepted it . for the Governme.nt. If .anVQnl! on the Government side of the House or the Government thinks this is not fair today, bring in a Bill and repeal it. That is the answer to that. Do not go sneaking around the Brow, telling them that John Crosbie put that through, ·and that is why they cannot get the compensation they are looking for. Dirty rotten tricks. 6617

June 9th. 1970 Tape 1180 PK - 3 MR. CROSBIE: I tell the people of the Blackhead Road, if you are not satisfied with that legislation, ~et after your member, get after the Government to bring in and repeal that amendment this session. That is · who is responsible. That is who is keeping it on the books. And that is why it was done, and I am certainly prepared to accept responsibility, as one of the members of the Government who passed that Act. But I am not going to have them 1dirty scoundrels 1 up around the Blackhead Road telling them that John Crosbie screwed you out of your money. Imagine the dishonesty of it.

The people of the Blackhead Road, Rear this! Hear this! Hear ye! What is it that Pumphrey says? I forget his great slogan he uses on his Open Line Program. The Government can bring in a Bill into the House of Assembly and repeal Act ~o. 63 of 1966-67, and you will then come under the Family Homes Expropriation Act. There is not a doubt in the world about it. If the Government cannot do that for the people of the Blackhead it RoadAis because the Government of Canada would not go ahead or would not have gone ahead with the Blackhead Road Urban Renewal scheme if that amendment had not been made.

But if the Government of Newfoundland is prepared to find all the extra money to compensate you under the Family Homes Expropriation Act, it can do so, it can repeal its Act, and it can do so. Do not let them tell you that John Crosbie is stopping you from getting your money. There is not a word of truth in it. Now that is the position of that amendment. Now, if I were correctly informed now that the urban renewal scheme cannot proceed without that amendment, then the amendment was right. Because there would be no urban renewal scheme up there without it, the minister might clarify that position.

And if that is not the case still, then let the Government introduce a repeal of that amendment. Do not let us have anyone from the Government or anywhere else or any other politican up there snooping around the hill, trying to say that one person is responsible for it. Because there is not 6618

.June 9th. 1970 Tape 1180 MR. CROSBIE: a word of truth in it. And when that Bill was introduced in this House, I believe that this explanation was given then. And the hon. gentleman was sitting to the right, was he not? MR. MURPHY: Inaudible. PK - 4 MR. CROSBIE: Well perhaps it may have not been mentioned. But I an mentioning it now, and for a very good reason, and for a very good reLson. MR. MURPHY: I was not aware of it. MR. CROSBIE: Well that is the Blackhead Road, well~that is enough in general remarks.

But I raised some questions which I would like for the minister to deal with, some point during these estimates. Municipal Affairs, Mr. Chairman, it is an importaQt part of the department. In fact there are a lot of important parts to this department. There are some worrisome things - MR. CHAIRHAN: Inaudible. MR. CROSBIE: No, it is not carried yet•, I mean I may go another hour, there is lots to be said about Municipal Affairs, and this is the time to say it, so why carry it too soon? That would not be right. On Municipal Affairs, Mr. Chairman, there are some things that need to be considered.

One is that in the estimates of the Department of Municipal Affairs, the Government is getting more locked in every year with payments that the Government must make to the municipalities to meet the cost of water and sewerage, road paving and the rest of it. In other words, in the estimates of the Department of Municipal Affairs there are built-in costs that must be met every · year, if municipalities are not ta default, and this is becoming an ever increasing part of the monies that are voted to Municipal Affairs, and should be causing an increasing amount of concern to the Government.

Whether it is or not I do not know. As we go down through the individual items, we can see that. Another thing that should cause the minister concern is this; in the answer to question Q62, the question was asked about what are the Government ·guaranteed bank loans, as at April 1st. 1970? Government guaranteed 6619

June 9th. 1970 Tape 1180 PK - 5 MR. CROSBIE: ~a~k loans to municipalities. And the answer was tabled, Mr. Chairman, and it showed a total amount. Bank loans now, not debentures, not long term borrowings, bank loans to municipalities ~uaranteed by the Government $6,930,000, of which the balance left then was $60099i000. Now if you go through that list, Mr. Chairman, you will see of that amount repayment is due in this fiscal year 1970-7L $4,093,000 of those loans must be repaid this year. These are Government guarantee~ bank loans, and some of them are five years, two years, three years, six months loans.

If you go through them and see which of them had to be repaid in 70-71, there i•<$4,09J,OOO to be repaid this year. Now the municipalities have not got the money to repay them, they can only be repaid if the debentures are sold by the Government on behalf of the municipality. What is the position, Mr. Chairman, on that? Are there going to be debenture issues,floated this year, sold this year 1 guaranteea by the Government,for municipalities? What is the backlog now? How much now has to be floated to repay these bank loans and other debts this year? And Wben are they going to be floated?

And how do they fit in with the Governmen~s borrowing program? The Government is borrowing so much direct, it is guarante~ing so much for various other projects, Melville, and Come-by-Chance, so.on and so forth. Where is the money going to come from to repay those municipal bank loans? Some are five years and now the five years •re up. The minister might enlighten us on that.

The minister was asked another question about loans made by the Newfoundland ~1unicipal Financing Corporation, which was asked by the Leader of the Opposition. ~fuat loans were made by the Municipal Financing Corporation for municipalities in 68-69? And there were loans made to municipalities in 1968, $7,036,000 that was in 1968. And in the year 1969 $7,596,000 making a total for the two years was $14,600,000 ( in round figures) • And the interest rate and the term is given.

Now of course the Newfoundland Municipal Financing Corporation cannot makes loans to municipalides unless it gets the money itself to make the 6620

June 8th. 1970 Tape 1180 MR. CROSBIE: loans with. What money have the Newfoundland Municipal Finance Corporation got now? Or when is ~t ~oing to get more to lend to municipalities? Where does that fit in the Government's borrowing seheme .this year? PK - 6 One of the great jobs that the Department of Municipal Affairs has to do, Mr. Chairman, is supervise what the municipalities are doing. Because here in Newfoundland we got many new municipalities, very few of them have got experienced municipal staff.

They all have their problems, most of them get a large part of their money from the Government of Newfoundland, andJone of the department's job is supervising them, seeing that they are doing their job proper!~, seeing that they have the right financial record; seeing that their financial records are kept up. There have been several questions asked in this house, in this session about the Town of Bay Roberts. The hon. minister was mayor there, I believe, for seven or eight years, up until last Fall sometime.

There have been reports that the town of Bay Roberts hatr . ·been having some problems, and that investigations were being made and so on. So there have been three or four questions asked about that. Now from the answer of the last one, we know that the town of Bay Roberts has an indebtedness of $298,000 (in round figures) on bond issues or debentures, guaranteed by the Government; $65,000 in bank loans; $19,000 in loans from the Government of Newfoundland; and $31,700 in loans from other persons or corporations.

That is $115,000 plus $298,000 - · is $400 and some odd thousand, the Town Council of Bay Roberts owes. Now that indebtedness, the bond issue or debentures are guaranteed by the Government. We got all kinds of innocuous answers to the original questions. But in the last one.509, we are told that there was some problem that the accounts were not written up properly etc., and the Auditor General is over doing an audit. We presume that the audit is finished now. 6621

June 9th. 1970 Tape 1180 MR. CROSBIE: Well I happen to have the Financial statements of the Town of Bay Roberts for the year ending December 31st. 1968, prepared by the Auditor General. And the Auditor General's rep~t points out that in that year the expenditure exceeded the budget by $50,174,000, the approved budget was exceeded by that much money. PK - 7 The allowance for doubtful accounts was understated in his opinion, $4200 more was required for estimateable uncollectable taxes and rates. He reported that the Tax Register was not written up for the year, that is the year 1968.

He reported that forty-two cheques were cancelled by the Town Manager, or forty-two cheques which had been cancelled by the Town Manager were not available for audit examination. He reported the council had not adopted the recommended procedure of recording in a minute book approval of invoiees for payment. He reports that current accounting work is in arrears. And as the 1969 cheque register was not · written up, it was not possible for the auditors to reconcile the town's bank account at the date of the audit. There was a deficit during the year.

Centennial project grant from the Province is $6,000, That seems to be overstated and the ·deficit was understated by a similar amount. A bank loan of $30,000 was obtained with the approval of the Minister of Municipal Affairs for construction of retaining walls and a causeway. It appears that a substantial portion of this amount was expended for other purposes. These are some of the comments made in the Auditor General's report on the Town of Bay Roberts,for the year 1968. We do not know what his report is for the year 1969. That was the report for the year 1968.

And that certainly shows,for a large town like Bay Roberts, an unsatisfactory state of affairs. Tax register not written up; cheques cancelled not available for audit; recommended procedures of recording the minute book; approval of invoices for payment not followed; current accounting work in arrears, the town's bank accounts could not be reconciled as at the date of the audit; a bank loan of $30,000 obtained, approved by the minister for one 66~2

JW1e 9th. 1970 Tape 1180 PK - 8 MR. CROSBIE: purpose, and used for some other purpose. That does not sh1N a very good state of affairs. One would have expected by now, Mr. Chairman, one would have expected some kind of a public statement on the situation at Bay Roberts, after questions have been asked in the House for several months. There is a lot of spectulation about it in Bay Roberts. After special invest1gat1on3 having been carried on for three or four months, one would expect some kind of an explanation now when these estimates go through,on ~hat the situation in Bay Roberts is. Has this been corrected?

The minister might also explain to me, Mr. Chairman, why he spent an evening,with the Bay Roberts Town Council, attacking me. Attaching me, telling t~e Bay Roberts Town Council that I was against the water and sewerage system, against them having that, or preventing them from getting it or was against it. And that I was against the hospital for Bay Roberts. Why did the minister spend the evening out entertaining the Town Council with that kind of tommyrot, about the hon. the member for St. John's West] Complete and utter tripe. MR. HICK}~: You are going to have an inferiority complex, if you are not careful. MR.

CROSBIE: Well, when you get a reliable report that the minister is ~r ballyragging the Bay Roberts Town Council with that kind of stuff, instead of attending to the serious condition that exists in the municipality of Bay Roberts, then one naturally feels that one should bring it up in the House. Bay Roberts certainly needs a water and sewerage system, Mr. Chairman, needs it badly. But because of the cost involved it is only going to r,et it if it is through the DREE Program or some pro~ram where there is going to be a contribution from a government that has money towards the cost.

Because as I remember the capital cost of putting the t.rater and sewerar-e system in Bay Roberts is so high in comparsion to the number of taxpayers and what they can afford to pay a year on water and sewerage rates, and what this . Govern~ent can afford to pay a year· in subsidizing the water ~nd sewerage rates, that it was not and is not feastble without this help from 66~3

· June 9th. 1970 Tape 1180 PK - 9 MR. CROSBIE: the Government of Canada. But for anybody to sneak around saying that because of these reasons I was against the water and sewerage system· ·for Bay Roberts, it is unspeakable. I do not care if it is in polit{cs or what it is in, it is untri.Je, not only is it untrue, it is unspeakable. And a hospital for Bay Roberts, if this Government cannot afford in every community that asks for one, I am all for a hospital in Bay Roberts too.

But I will tell you what I am really for and that is the application of reasonable common sense and rational principles for the development of public services in this Island. And I am not for and I cannot see how we can afford to have hospitals in towns thirty miles apart. I cannot see that. That is something this Province cannot afford. Construction of good public facilities on :a reasonable basis, I am for that.

And I am for grasping the nettles, grasping the thorns and giving people the facts and the truth, not pretending there is going to be a hospital in Carbonear or pretend there is going to be one in Bay Roberts and pretending there is going to be one in every place under the sun. I prefer telling them what the real facts are, what has got priority. How much money the Government has got, what it is going to do with it first. Not bluffing along, and bluffing along, that is what I am for.

But against the hospital for Bay Roberts.tripel If this Government has the money to build a hospital in Bay Roberts and one in Carbonear and to fix up the Western Memorial, and to fix up the General and to do Twillingate, to do all of that and the medical school, and the University Hospital and all the other things required in Newfoundland I say go to it, I am all for it. I expect better of the minister. That stuff, that sneaking kind of stuff. Now I raised a few questions and a few issues, it is time for me to let the minister give us the answers, if he will.

There are a lot of other things that should be talked about, but they are better talked about as we go down through the estinates. I think these are ssme of the main ones 66~4

June 9th. 1970 Tape 1180 MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Chairman. HON. ERIC DAWE: (MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS ANU HOUS,ING): With permission of the hon. memher,with regards to the questions raised on housing and Elizabeth Towers and the Blackhead, I am prepared, if acceptable,to go into all these extracts of questioning, and give what answers we PK - 10 have here on these when we come to that part of the estimates. I mentioned that here last night, and that is what I intend to do, as far as possible, to give the all the explanations as soon as we can, that is usually possible to give.

With reference to the Town of Bay Roberts,which the hon. member just raised, I was not the ~myor at the Town of Bay Roberts when this last report came in. And I did not receive it at the office until sometime in December of last year, and i~ediate as I received it I send it out to my officials,all the depa~tment, and instructed them to take any action they wo~ld deem necessary. I realize that my position there and beinv the former Mayor of Bay Roberts, 1 left it completed in the hands of my officials to take what appropriate action they felt was necessary.

I did not interfere with them in any manner, shape or form, I left it with the officials of the department, and that is what they did. An inspector i~ the regular manner went out to look into the affairs of Bay Roberts, and they came back 6625

lb. June 9 1970 TApe 1181 page 1. with the report as I indicated by answers in this House. These answers· were factual and they were to the point. And at the present time the regular audit of the phase of the town of Bay Roberts is now being under­ taken and I would assume that that would be completed within one or two week•~ This is being carried out by, in the normal manner by the Auditor General's Department .in his regular routine visits in that area.

And he has been out there now I think for about some two weeks and I understand usually from four to six weeks before the audit is completed and nnee that audit is received and if there is any recommendation on behalf of the auditor general that ~ny action should be taken on behalf of the ~overnment we will do so. As of now we have not received that audit but I say as soon as we receive it I will pass it on to my officials for their instructions any action they deem necessary. The pr9blem with Bay Roberts mainly is probably most like the other communities.

The assessment in Bay Roberts actually is not high enough to meet their current expenses. The last act, one of the last acts we did there on the last council,was that we proposed double increase of taxation throughout the town. That would !ive the council.they estimated~ an 'extra $40,000 a year revenue. And that,with the current revenue they hav; there now,would at least be sufficient to look after all the major current expenses of the council at that time and probably we could,with proper supervision, redeem some of the guaranteed loans for which the town is responsible.

I realize that my position in this matter,~ I say­ I am leaving this completely with the officials of my department to take whatever action they deem necessary and any action,if it is reported should be taken,tben this will be done. The hon. member referred to my visit to the town of Bay Roberts. I did visit the town of Bay Roberts,as he indicate~on their invitation. And I did refer to the water and sewerage system and I did refer to the hospital. 6626

lb. June 9 1970 Tape 1181 pap;e 2. And I expressed the opinion I did not say the hon. member was against it. I did not use these terms, I did say we received very little support from the hon. member when he was minister of Municipal Affairs in support of our water s~tem for the town of Bay Roberts. Now the hon. member probably has explained the position here today. We know that this government has granted substantial subsidies throughout, for other municipal services throughout the Province,and this is clearly indicated by the answers tabled in this House.

And I felt that a town the size of Bay Roberts as was,.eligible for a water system,based on the annual subsidy the other councils received,as any other council throughout the Province. I did not say the hon. minister was against it. I did say, and I say that honestly and sincerely, I would say that before the minister at any ti~. that I was of the opinion and I say that sincerely that the minister may have justifiable reaeons for taking that position but that is my sincere opinion and I have no reason to retract that position.

Now with tegard to the hospital at Bay Roberts. 'lThis has been under some discussion for some time. And if the hon. member will recall the discussion we had in the members common room • I am not trying to invite any personal vendetta between him and I, I do not intend to do it. But I just want to explain my position. MR.CROSBIE: You are doing your best to start it. MR.DA\~E: I am not doing my best to start it.

I have no intention of doing it because I have had always person regard for the hon. member and he well knows that prior to this. 'on many occasion I have met with him and he has no reason to feel that I have personal vendetta against him. But I will say that in the members' common room I raised the point of the question, the hospital at Bay Roberts, that was two years ago. And the hon. member said to me if the hon. the Premier wants a hospital to be butlt at Bay Roberts he will resign his position as minister of Health. Now how would I take 66~7

~o. June 9 1970 Tape 1181 page 3. that,as a member of a government,and the hon. member had been a member at the same time I was myself. Would not they assume normally that in his position the man was against the hospital in Bay Roberts~ Probably that is my position that I took. If he went and explained further he knows well that the obligation for a hospital at Bay Roberts was given before the commitment was made in Carbonear, some ten years ago.after Bell Island. Our committee was promised by the government that the next hospital would be built in Newfoundland would be built at Bay Roberts.

We had a large delegation call on the Premier at the time in the Cabinet room but represen­ tatives from all the communities from Marysvale in Harbour Main District to Tilton in Harbour Grace District and we were authorized then to start a collection to raise $100,000 towards this hospital. We had immediate success and we have 2000 doners, subscribers to the fund. And there is $40,000 now resting in the two banks towards a proportional part of $100,000.

And many people here concerned are naturally very anxious to see what developments will take place in regard to the hospital and they are wondering,if there is no hospital to be built there,naturally the money should be returned. So that we have no objection to a hospital going in Carbonear. But we feel that the obligation to Bay Roberts should be met in some manner and I certainly subscribe to their idea of one central hospital. If this is what really is needed.

But I feel that the hospital should not be located in Carbonear and the people of Bay Roberts be denied,The obligation was given. l feel that the obligation to Hay Roberts should be fulfilled first because the obligation was given to Bay Roberts first before the new commitment was made to Carbonear. They have a hospital there but I believe in centralization and I have been convinced more than ever since we have the new regional high school at Bay Roberts. I was very actively part of erectin~ the Ascension Collegiate there.

And as I said before: when we started this school we could not foresee the possibility of getting 300 students. Now we 6628

lb. June 9 1970 Tape 1181 page 4. have about 620 and they come from Brigus to Upper Island c~ve. And I think the same thing would apply to one central hospitaiL iii. the area.- · And I am prepared to recommedd to our group that a compromise would be made. That a relocation of the hospital in the araa should be made to serve all the area, in a central located community, We feel that the most central part would be in the west end of Harbour Grace.

Our doctors in our particular area, we have a new doctor now at Brigus, two doctors at Bay RoLerts, they have doctors in Harbour Crace and they are trying to get a doctor at Spaniards Bay. That would mean that our doctors would have to travel seventeen miles to this hospital daily. That is from Bay Roberts, Hrigus to Carbonear and back, thirty-four miles a day. The doctors in Carbonear will travel one mile.

This is my main object!on; is it fair for us to commit our doctors forever to have this commuting distance forever~ And while a doctor in Carbonear would have to commute a mile, if it was split up they could move it to the west end of Harbour Grace would reduce our mileage down to about ten miles, the doctors in Carbonear would have to commute about six.

We are not concerned too much about the people themselves, because, as we all realize,that once you are aboard of a car to go an extra five miles means nothing,to attend the hospital.But our objection .,mainly, is to at least look after our doctors interest because we feel that we may have difficulty holding doctors at Bay Roberts if they have to continue this commuting distance forever. And that is our main objection,we are not objecting to Carbonear hospital not in the slightest. And I hope that I have made my position clear with the hon. member, I am not going to get into any personal vendetta with him.

I do not intend to. And I think that in my position I have reason to be doubtful of the hon. member's intention, probably I did not come to the proper conclusion as far as the hon. member is concerned but this is the reasons that I have stated. And I can assure him that I will not be going about this Province carrying 6629

lb. June 9 1970 Tape 1181 page 5. on any personal vendetta against the hon. member for St. John's West. MR.MURPHY: Mr. Chairman, I think we are on Municipal Affairs. We have been ou Public Health, we have been on the Liberal Common Room, 1.•e have been on internal struggles within the Liberal Party between members. Thanks be to Cod I am not one of them over there.

I would like to say just a few words on this heading and I am prepared to wait until we get down to the various items and I think that is the proper place to discuss them as the items are called and we are really dealin~ with the matter in hand then instead of roaming all over St. John's and Bay Roberts and Harbour Grace and so on and so forth. All at one time. But the remarks that the hon. member for St. John's W~st prompted me to stand and this is in connection with the Blackhead Road development which is a very, very serious matter at this time. I am getting numerous calls from different people up there.

I have not become involved in any way politically, because I do not wish to, with this , and I do not wish to use political propaganda or anything else when very serious business is being transacted up there. But I have to refer to the remarks of the bon. member for St. John's West with regard to the 1964 Act. And this was the expropriation of homes. That was a matter which I was very much concerned with, and deeply involved in. And that was when St. John's Municipal Council decided in a mad rush of castles in the air and everything else that is so apparent in all forms of government in this Province.

To dream up huge schemes and millions here and beautiful things there and destroyed the whole centre of St. John's. The lower part of St. John's, with bulldozers and graders and so on and so forth. We had great great visions of a great development down there and at the present time four years later we are about to have our great city hall completed but the rest of it there is an eyesore and it is a disgrace to any city to -have in an area which should be beautiful and I think of this great downtown mall they had on Water Street last year with flowers and fo.untains and so on and so forth .

Here is an area there where there are ,, still many hundreds of people living with nothing but a bleak,rotten,rocky, 66:]0

lb. June 9 1970 Tape 1181 page 6. barren parking lot for out of town buses and motor cars instead of spending a few dollars or using what they used on Water Street last year to beautify the place a little bit and at least make the place half habitable for the people in the area. I am referring to this expropriation act and what brought this about and I am not in this instance trying to immortalize myself I do not want statutes built anywhere around Barters Hill or Lime Street or anywhere else. Because I am a very humble person. Bur Mr.,Chairman, at that time . much the same was going on in St.

John's Centre as is going on now as I can understand on the Blackhead Road. They came to people and gave them notice of expropriation, you have to move we are going to do this that and the other thing and we will give '!lOU $1500, we will give you $2000, we will give you $3000 for your house&. I heard of this because it is in my district and I advised them no one, not one person make any deal with the Municipal Council. I said wait a few days I will get organized and I will have a mass meeting of all people concerned, which we did in the Star Hall on Henry Street.

And my advise then was - aa we used to say in the old days, when we were going around, "hit one hit all". "We are cln the beam we are going to be a group here." And we fought it. And the contention was this, that we are not dealing with houses here this is not a real estate group that are seiling houses. These are our homes and a man's home is his castle, so I would like to believe. !hey had grown up there and most of these people have been in the area for forty, fifty, sixty, seventy, eighty years, had brought their families up there. They did not want to move out of it. Someone wanted to move them out of it.

So, if you move me from my home you find another home, Not a home in Kent's Pond Development we did not go that far. But a home that is fit and clean and suitable to bring my family up in. And through a unified effort this is what came about. Now I have had contacts. I have not gone to Blackhead Road to meet people. I know an awful lot of people up there through my 66:l1

lb. June 9 1970 Tape 1181 page 7. dealings over the years with a lot of the longshoremen so on and so forth. down town and I received-communications from them. Down in this lobby the other day I met three or four, a group of three or four of them. They were having a meeting then I think with the minister I think they are having meetings continuously with the minister. T hey brought up the fact that they were led to believe whether intentionally or not by a member of the St.

John's Metropolitan Con~ission, That when this development started they would be treated under this 19 fA Act which was not in existence as it was at that<.tilne because as the hon. member said when he was minister of Municipal Affairs this Act was amended. And I remember 1\ere in this House the minister introduced the Act, he has explained it today it is the first time I have heard it.

That this deal would not go through unless this was changed and the morality in the Act, the morality of fair play to the individual householder that morality the morals of that Act had to be taken out before the development, basically this is what it means, that the sense of charity and justice could no longer be used under this Act so we have to change it and treat these people as second, third, fourth class citizens. And we go in and lGok at your house and say it is worth a $1000, ~1200 and if you do not take it we will come tomorrow and bulldoze it down. This is the story.

We fought it on this side we fought it right to the hilt, everybody on that side, supported it. J:verybody supported it. Now I am informed and again I have not any direct dealings with this group. They had a meeting last week which I could no; attend one of my colleagues went up and attended, just to heat, not to become involved to the extent that to make a political football out of this, this is too important Hr. Chairn-.an. To use human beings for political purposes. Too important we are dealing with human beings now, preachers of God, and we must be fair and we must see that justice is done.

As far as I can understand one man told me he is 66:J2

lb. June 9 1970 Tape 1181 page 8. getting a pittance for his house and if he wants to still live on the Blackhead Road, whether this is right or wrong I do not know, he will have to pay more for a piece of land to put a house on than he is actually getting for the house he is living in. Now people say, a lot of these people living in shaaks.They can describe what they like but they have been living in them and if they have been living in shacks,as some people ~iutain that is our fault not theirs. We should see that they are given proper living accommodations.

This development has now been promised for a long long while. At laet it has taken place. I have been up there twice since the development started. I have my own ideas on it. This development. I have my own ideas and 1ft my opinion it is an absolute waste of the public money. This is my opinion. 1 asked several people;would you rather live up here with all this developr.~nt or would it be better for the goverilll\ent to buy homes for you down somewhere around St. John'sl And some people said yes, but I think it came to a vote I am not sure on this now, and the people decided to stay on the Blackhead Road.

But the millions that are going to be spent up there Mr. Chairman, we could have purchased homes down nearer the scene of where some of these people are working. I think it would have saved a lot of monies in churches been and schools because it could haveAabsorbed into the city of St. John's. }fR.SMALLWOOD: Would the hon. gentleman yield a moment1 I think the whole government were in favour of· the thing that the hon. gentleman now says he is in favour of. We could not do it because the people up there wanted to stay there. Ana so we unhappily, quite un~appily,fell in line with it.

Unhappily because we knew that it was going to be enormously expensive, terribly, horribly, expensive that is why we were unhappy, but we fell in line with what the people wanted. Now Ottawa was unhappy too. And it was only because we insisted that Ottawa fell in line, Ottawa did not want the programme to go forward that is going forward. Ihey,like us and 6633

lb. June 9 1970 Tape 1181 page 9. like th•! hon. gentleman, the Leader of the Opposition, felt things would have been far better if the people moved out and other homes were found for them. And the place up there just cleared out. But this is not what the peqple wanted, it is not what the clergy wanted, we were put under tremendous pressure by the clergy. MR.MURl'HY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for that explanation. As I said I believe this was the situation, that the people wanted to stay there.

But did they want to stay there because of the fact that they were labouring under the misapprehension that they would be treated under the i964 Expropriation Acti This is the question I wanted to raise. I wonder at this time and again I have not all the details but if the situation is such that I have heard from some people where if they are going to remain living on the Blackhead Road it is going to put them in a position where this is going to put them in debt for years and years to come I wonder was the position put quite clearly at that particular time. Now, Mr.

Chairman, as I say there are lots of things that I would like to say on this.I think this department and what it represents has got to be in my opinion the Saviour of this Province. It has to be. Because here we have and the hon. minister very kindly gave me a copy this morning and I did not get it all down last night, ln this Province which in 1949 I beloieve we had twenty-three gro~ps of people throughout the Province organized under some form of government w!~e~her it ,is locally or whatever the case may be.

At the present time we have 202 incorporated areas which would be local government local improvemeats and so forth. And they represent sixty- seven per cent of the population of this Province and the minister anticipates that in another ten years they will represent some eighty per cent.I believe these facts are right. Now at last we have we can say responsible 66:J4

lb. June 9 1.970 Tape 1181 page 10. representation in pretty well every corner of this great province of ours. Any party or any government today that speaks of development of this Province must recognize this. Added to this we have these great development groups that are forming like Fogo 1 Burin ,you know,all these areas there. These have to be the guts,if you like, or the focal point on ~hich this Pro~i~ce must develop. These are the people that know what their awn •rea needs rrue at this time everybody is lookinp, to the government for milliDD& and millions, water and sewerage and so forth. But I believe Nr.

Chairman and I must repeat what the hon. member said earlier,that now is the time to face facts.! think he said that to grasp the nettle more or less to take the thorn in our hands and for Heavens Sake let us be honest, let us be honest with the people of this Province not like, and I will go back to Public Health for a moment. This Hospital that the hon. minister is talking about where he said; ·'we should get the hospital because we were the first to be promised the hospital'~: I think he said something like this ten _vean aRo now.

If we had to go back over the promises that were made over this past sixteen, seventeen, eighteen years,there is not enough money in the world to fulfill them, The bon. member for Bay De Verde I see there he still has not got the airstrip that was promised in 1966 down in Bay de Verde. But these are some of the 'things Mr. Chairman, and this is the department I say the Department of Municipal Affairs. We had this great department ·that administers tremendous numbers.

Now we have another department the Community and Social Development which in my opinion should be so closely interlocked with this dep~rtment that we could almost make one depar~ent out of it. One great department. 66:]5

\ June 9, 1970 Tape 11182 Page 1 MR. MURPHY: We have sixteen portfolios in this Government. And I was surprised today when I read that the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing was in that department. I always thought it was in the Department of Community and Social Development. So it was. So when we get into the Estimates, I JW hope we have an informative discussion on it. I think it is a great department, as 1 have said. It is the guts of what is going to happen in the future in our Province, let us face it. If we are going to stay living here in Newfoundland, and I do not mean "we" in the City of St.

John's, who are very fortunate, or in other larger areas, but the people throughout the rural areas of this Province - if they are going to live, they are not going to live any longer . putting out the pail at night for someone to pick up - or walking "fifty yards across the field to an outhouse. We have to consider that they have to be treated - because in this Province today as in the world, we are exposed so much to what is happening all over the rest of the world - that everybody feels he should, that should be a part of his living too. But we can no longer go on, I do not think Mr.

Chairman, making promises to people, and not fulfilling those promises. With reference to Elizabeth Towers, and 1 will not go into it now - we can go back two or three years when Mr. Ottenheimer I think, spear-headed the Elizabeth Tower attack, and all the questions that have arisen since and all the statements that were made, this was going to ope~te as a profit of $200,000 a year, so on and so forth - all the facta that we have nov. But 1 think we will discuss that under its proper heading. So Mr.

Chairman, there is not much else that I can add - only this fact, that it is dealing with the people on the Blackhead Road at the present time, and I know it is tremendous pressure up there. Let us temper charity and justice. Charity and justice and consideration with everything else that is going on. Shortly we will have to face another great developwent in Kwdy Pond, which has been promised at so many elections now, and so many meetings and everything else, that these people I think, are just about 66:}6

June 9, 1970 Tape #1182 Page 2 JW ready to throw in the sponge. Mr. Chairman, as I say, I hope to discuss with the rest of the Committee, various items as they come up. So that is all I have to say at this time. MR. CROSBIE: Before we finish with the general Item - as I said when I was speaking earlier that some of these things are best discussed under the particular Item. But the minister dealt with the question of the financial position of the Newfoundland Municipal Financieg Corporation.

He has not dealt with the problem of the $4 million and guaranteed bank loans that had to repaid this year for municipalities, or how that is going to be handled. I think that on this General Item there is where it should be dealt with, unless he wants to deal with it somewhere else. Now with reference to Bay Roberts. I want to make one further comment Mr. Chairman.

When I was minister of Municipal Affairs, and when I was Minister of Health, I made it a practice to tell the people I dealt with what I thought the facts were - not to buffalo them, or let them go along thinking that the water and sewerage system was in the bag, or the hospital was in the bag, when I knew they were not in the bag, and could not be in the bag - and there was no way they could be done in the next two or three years, because of our financial position. The present minister understands that. Now with Bay Roberts; and their water and sewerage system.

As I remember it, that the maximum subsidy that the Government has paid up until now - annual subsidies to any municipality to carry on a water and sewerage system is $70,000 or $75,000 a year. And the Government pays that I think in connection with the town of Winsor. Every year the taspayers of this Province pay $75,000 to the town of Winsor to help them meet their deficit on the water and sewerage system. They pay so much out there on water and sewerage rates that is not enough to meet the principal and interest on the cost •. and the general taxpayers of this Province pay $75,000 to help meet that.

The town of Bay Roberts, the proposed water and sewerage system for the town of Bay Roberts is very expensive, and I believe that the deficit 66~7

June 9, 1970 Tape #1182 Page 3 JW the annual deficit that the Government have to meet, would be around $110,000 - far in excess of what Government policy was, but the maximum the Government would pay was $75,000. These are the facts and those are the facts that were told the minister when he was made mayor of Bay Roberts. And anybody that ever came to me on water and sewerage or anything else got these facts, whether it could or could not be done, within the framework of Government policy. And it could not be done for Bay Roberts.

And as I said earlier this morning, it can only be done for Bay Roberts in view of the cost and their taxable capacity, if the Department of Regional and Economic Expansion is going to help with it. Now perhaps some people prefer to be told bull. Perhaps some people prefer to come into a minister and have him say, "yes, that water and sewerage system is going there, that is a cinch, that is it." And then year after year goes by and it does not go there. Well I do not happen to believe in that. I say it is better to give the facts.

So it could never be twisted that the minister, when I was minister, I was against some and community getting water~sewerage. I told the community what the position was and what the facts were, and the minister knows that. And for him to pretend,to anybody in Bay Roberts, that I was against their getting the water and sewerage system, was not the truth. And I will not pursue that any longer. The same position I took when I was minister of Health -it was chaos. the promises that had been made .as to where hospitals were to go and when - when I became Minister of Health, including Bay Roberts.

Now what do people prefer? Do they prefer.a promise that cannot be carried, or do they prefer to hear the truth, the cruel facts, and then try to figure out some way around them. In 1967,when I 'became Minister of Health, there were promises for a new hospital at Carbonear, Bay Roberts, Twillingate, Corner Brook, the General, St. Clare's, and any number of Cottage Hospitals. Now nearly all of those are not done yet, and there must be a list of priorities. The Minister of Health, the present one, is working today, the list of priorities. 66J8

June 9, 1970 Tape #1182 Page 4 And the priorities for other areas no matter what the promises are - the priorities, looking at it from the point of view of the good of the people JW of Newfoundland do not lie in Bay Roberts. Bay Roberts should have a hospital. It is not on top of the priority list. That is all that I ever told the minister, and that is neither here nor there, but that is the only approach that can be taken.

I do not care what promise anybody has given the people of Bay Roberts that is not capable of been carried out unless the Government makes a decision, that the number one priority in hospital construction in Newfoundland will be a hospital in Bay Roberts. The Government takes that position, then Bay Roberts will get the hospital. But the Government cannot pretend that it is going to be able to carry out all these promises at the same time. There is just no way for that to be done.

And that does not mean to say that the Government or a minister or anyone else is against some area having a public facility, that is just not true. The Town Council of Bay Roberts Mr. Chairman. The present minister was mayor of Bay Roberts during all of 1968 when I read the Audit Report for that year. And he was mayor of Bay Roberts for most of 1969. I believe the minister resigned when he became Minister of Municipal Affairs in November 1969. Up until that time as mayor of a town he must bear responsibility for what was happening in the administration of the town affairs.

And the Auditor General's Report and other information from that area show that all is not well in the town of Bay Roberts. And some explanation is due the public as to what the situation is now and that everything is in order there, and that all these systems are straightened out, and the records are now being kept properly, and bank accounts can be reconciled, and that cancelled cheques can now be found where they should be found for the Auditor and the rest of us. That is the position there. Otherwise,the Itema I prefer to discuas also,as we go down through we can discuss Urban Renewal and the rest of it. MR.

WELLS: I have just a few remarks to make at this stage,Hr. Chairaan, because most of the others should be debated specifically when we come to them. Administering the affairs or supervising the affairs of municipalities 66:J9

June 9, 1970 Tape 11182 Page 5 in this Province is not really a simple thing to do, because when we are talking about a municipality, we are talking about,generally, a confined area. With respect to the City of St. John's, we are talking about within the boundaries of the City of St. John's. Gander is within the boundaries JW of the Town of Gander, and so on. Now it is true that we have 202 incorporated areas. But that only covers a small part of the Province. It does not cover the whole of the Province - there is a substantial portion of it left out.

I would imagine that it would include the vast majority of the population, but again there is a substantial portion of the population that have no municipal services, or municipal administration, or municipal benefits available to them. And with respect to some areas, perhaps no matter what ve do, ve are not likely to be able to bring the ordinary municipal services and benefits of incorporatio~s to them. This problem could be largely corrected, Mr. Chairman, if we adopted a county system in this Province. Now I have mentioned this on many occasions.

I believe the first time was the first time I ever spoke in this House - that this is one area where we are lac~ing. We run into difficulties with respect to planning in particular - a matter with which Mr. Austin ~n the Urban and Rural Planning Department or Division are vitally concerned. It is all very well to plan for, or to assist municipalities in their plann1ng, because every municipality is not large enough to have ita ovn planning people and facilities available to them.

But when you allow indiscriminate and un­ controlled growth on the edges of municipalities or adjacent to it, this is just creation of problema for the future. As we are finding out much to our horror now -Corner Brook is probably a classic example of this. A portion of that City is well planned, well laid out when the original town vas 1ncorporated - very well done by the original company that was there. But they confined themselves to a certain

section of the town, and people who could not either get in,through company policy, into the town, or could not meet the requirements , or for whatever 66~0

June 9, 1970 Tape 111182 Page 6 JW reason, helped develop the fringe area that ~s causing a great deal of municipal problems in Corner Brook at the moment. And Corner Brook is only an example. It is by no means the only place where this baa occurred. It is only an example of it. But we should certainly learn by this example. It is going to cost a fortune to really plan for and now alter the situation, so as to have a well-developed and well-planned and well laid out City in Corner Brook, because of this lacking in the past.

We should take that as a lesson and make sure that,throughout the whole of the Province, we have planning - that some form of planning or regulation is applicable to the whole of the Province. As it is now, we have the two cities of St. John's and Corner Brook, and all of the incorporated towns are planned to a lesser or greater degree. The towns themselves do some regulation - what they have done they have been able . to do with the great assistance they have had from the minister's department, particularly the Urban and Rural Planning Division. And they have done a very good job.

I do not see how anybody can do anything but compliment them. Perhaps,as a politician, the most frequent complaints I get is about somebody being turned down because they cannot build here, or cannot build there, or something like that. And while you can have sympathy for persons who own land that they cannot uae in the manner in which they themselves want to us, I think you nonetheless have to realize that the welfare of the whole comes ahead of the individual. And this is the significance of planning. This is the purpose of planning.

And vhile you can have sympathy for the individual and do what you can for him, I have never agreed, and I do not now agree with trying to alter the decisions of the planning board to the extent that they will seriously affect the benefit of the vhole in the long run. You should not sacrifice that for an individual in any case, I do not think.

Now there are cases where there are·•hardships and so on, where you have to be a little bit flexible if it will not do a great deal of harm or a great deal damage, then okay, that is the purpose of an appeal board, and it is the purpose of being considerate and having some consideration for 6641

Jpne 9, 1970 Tape U1182 Page 7 JW the individual and his ability. But at the moment we are confined in our planning to the two cities and the towns, and the protected road zone. The Trans Canada Highway,! believe, is totally a protected road, and the protected road zoning regulations apply right along the Trans Canada, and I believe there are other roads that come under the provisions of the protected road zoning regulation. And so they should.

But that still leaves a substantial chunk of this Province without any real regulation and planning, and makes it nearly impossible, even if it applied to the whole of the Province - it makes it very nearly impossible for the Urban and Rural Division of the department to supervise the whole of this Province. I suppose we cannot affor• the kind of a staff that it would take to have men in the field everywhere throughout the Province supervising this. And this is where "the volunteer efforts of elected county officials could come in, and could be of great service to the Province.

Not only in • municipal planning, but I think this is where it is probably most significant - land use planning and municipal planning general~y, so that we do not make. or we avoid as many as possible of the mistakes of the past. And as long as we do not have something like this, we are going to run into these difficulties. AN HON. MEMBER: Would they be any better than a. Metropolitan Commission? MR. WELb6: Well a metropolitan commission is a different thing. Now the metropolitan commission operates for the city of St.

John's, and aaybe chat would be a homogeneous county - that area would form a homogeneous county. Maybe it is synonymous with what should be county boundaries in this area. But they would do essentially the same kind of thing. MR. NOLAN: May I ask ~ question? From the experience we have had with the Metropolican Commission, as I am sure the bon. member knows, I was wondering if we could not . look towards the same type thing, for example, in the surrounding area for say, Corner Brook.

I know,from being out there, that this _is something that · might be very, very valuable and I can see problems coming up there and we certainly had in St. John'a. MR. WELLS: I agree. I have a little note somewhere when we come to Item 1312 - Municipal Engineering and Planning to Corner Metropolitan area. It needs 6642

June 9, 1970 Tape #1182 Page 8 this at the moment. This is most desirable in my opinion. But it probably would not be necessary - it may or may not, depending on what would be the author~ty and the scope of a county set-up - a Metropolitan Commission may or may not be necessary.

If the counties were so set-up that they were confined say - a county in the Corner Brook area was confined to what is really the Metropolitan area of Corner Brook, then you would not need both, I do not think the county should be so small - I think what might be say, a homogeneous county involving the Corner Brook area, might in fact be the two districts of Humber East and Humber West together - might be a reasonable area where concerns are genuinely the same throughout· when you are talking about planning,whether it be for farm development, highroad extension, industrial development, or whatever , this area makes a homogeneous unit that might be considered, where the interested people and what they do and the kind of work they do and so on, are very much the same.

I would not proport to recommend to the Committee at this stage what should be the county area for St. John's or Coneeption Bay area, or Trinity or Bonavista Bay -but on a quick glance, you could say - take Gander - that whole sector of the Northeast Corner with its administrative center being Gander - the Bonavista Bay corner, that north corner of Bonavista Bay, might well be another homogeneous corner, where interests are somewhat similar - although they are not identical in every case. But Gander,for example, is genuinely an administrative center for that area - and is a confined area that you could identify.

MR. DAWE: Would the bon. member explain to the Committee what his views - through the functions of the metropolitan - this county council board would do, and explain what some of the functions are. MR. WELLS: Well, quite frankly, I do not know them all, but there are a variety of purposes that they could serve. The primary one is planning - planning is primary, and for the whole area - and the general pro.ation of social and economic development - economic in the main, but social service 66~3

June 9, 1970 Tape #1182 Page 9 JW development. I do not mean Community Concerts when I say Social Development - the development of social services, such as health facilities and housing and school, educational and judicial, welfare - this general thing - recreation facilities.

This is the kind of thing that proper planning for an area would avoid for example, the necessity 'of identical facilities in Corner Brook and Deer Lake - if we had a county system,wbere all of the people within that area could feel some connection,instead of a separation and definitive town and city municipal boundaries as we have now, There is nothing to attract people together so that there can be joint efforts. We have seen some kind of joint efforts probably more pronounced than come anywhere else in the Northern Peninsula.

They have~closer to this kind of thing than anybody else, but they have not,for exampl~, been involved in planning. It is promoti?n of development of social services and economic development. But this could go along with it as well. But I think the primary purpose is planning for the future, so that the development is proper and orderly and not duplicated within an area where it is unnecessary to duplicate it - it should as well Mr.

Chairman, greatly assist the Government of the Province , if they could rely as they do now, rely on the town councils within the confines of a town - they do now rely on the Town Council to advise them as to what is in the best interest, and where future development in the town should be - which way it should expand - this sort of thing. They rely heavily on Town Councils now for advice, and so they should, because the people in the area generally - well there may be local prejudices, but generally they have more knowledge than anybody else about the way it should be.

A planner, a properly trained planner may have more theoretical knowledge and be better able to apply principahof planning, but the direct knowledge and experience of local people, that when the two .are put together then you get the best results. But one without the other, you cannot count on .alvays getting the best results. How can you expect it? This would be the real value in the county system, but otherwise it there are a variety of values thatAcould have - but the primary purpose of it is in the planning for orderly development. And also Mr. Chairman, 66~J

June 9, 1970 Tape #1182 Page 10 and incidental almost - but something that would be quite valuable to us is, it should create more incentive in a local group within the area. It should do that, for the promotion, by themselves, it should give them more incentive to put more effort into it themselves - and this I think we are lacking. Sure, the people in Corner Brook or the people in Deer Lake, or at Stephenville, are interested in promoting their own municipality within its own boundary.

But you do not get many people, very few, except you get it or sometimes from such things as Chamber of Commerce, like you get it from the NORDA group. But in very few a~eas of Newfoundland, do you get the promotion from a local level, the efforts and promotion and development of an area, and this is what we should have. This is far more valuable than the narrow thinking of building within the confines of the existing Town Council - as they presently exist. JW MR. CHAIRMAN: It now being 1 o'clock, I do not leave the Chair until 3 P.M. 66·~5

PROVINCE OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY Volume 1 Number 104 4th. Session 34th. General Assembly VERBATIM REPORT TUESDAY, JUNE 9, 1970 SPEAKER: THE HONOURABLE GEORGE W. CLARKE

June 9th., 1970 Tape no 1183 Page 1 The House resumed at 3 p.m. MR. CHAIR}Uili: Shall 1301-01 carry? MR. WELLS: Mr. Chairman, before the lunch break, I was speaking about the desire for further municipal development along the lines of development of the county system in the Province. I do not put this forward as the be all and end all and the cure all of all our municipal ills, and I am sure it would not be that. But it is desirable for many purposes. May- be it did not develop in the past because of the nature of our social structure in the Province;

whereas in other provinces of Canada and other states of the United States they followed the English system of having a county administrative structure. We did not have this and indeed we had very, very little municipal development of any kind until the last fifteen years or so, when there has been a tremendous expansion in municipal development. I think now, Mr.

Chairman, that we would in the future very much regret it, if w~ did not take steps to have further municipal development ~ along the lines of the county level so that the entire Province, the rural part of the urban a~eas.- When you look around the Province, there are urban areas scattered around, small urban are~ albeit but neverthelessP by our standards, urban areas - if we did not develop something like a level of administration that is equivalent to the county administration in other provinces of Canada, in the not too distant future, I think, we would regret it very much, primarily, because of the lack of planning as I, indicated earlier.

There is no need to repeat all of those things. I do want to say that there are other advantages and benefits to it as well that are incidental and do not relate directly to municipal administration. Theteare other indirect benefits where the breakdown along county lines - take Nova Scotia for example our closest neighbour. The land registry system in the province and the land title system is broken do~·,a~ng

June 9th •• 1970 Tape no 1183 Mr. Wells. county lines and this vastly si~plifies it. Now we are finding,down in the land registry in the basement of this building. it is growing by leaps and bounds and it is growing at an incredible rate right now. I think the number of volumes may have aoubled in the last five years. I am quite confident that they have doubled. I think if you look at registrations about five years ago. the ~ume number would be around about 600 and now we are over 1 1 200. This is the registry for the whole of the Province.

This is one thing and it is only an incidental benefit and I suppose 1 perhaps, a county level of administration is not essential to have a breakdown in the land registry. bt it certainly makes it more practical and reasonable and more well defined. There are other things the courts and the general administration of justice in the Province would be practically, for practical purposes, not inherent purposes, from a practical point of view, it would be simpler and better. The same would apply to the field of education and youth and recreation, generally. It would have its advantages there.

We are now developing land taxation and property taxation for the support of schools. We passed

an Act in this session of the House that would allow the setting up of school tax authorities throughout the Province. I suggest, Mr. Chairman,that if we had a county level of administration and a county system in the Province, this could be much more easily administered. Because, sir, if you take an area like Corner Brook, there is and has been for many years - ( think it was the first in the Province - school tax authorities set up where the residents paid a tax on their property for the supp9rt of schools.

Now there are people from other areas adjacent to Corner Brook who have children going to school in Corner Brook. So, they are not contributing a fair taxation and it is almost impossible to administer. Deer Lake is a similar situation. TI1ere is no property tax for school purposes in Pasadena which is about midway ~G(7

June 9th., 1970 Tape no 1183 Page 3 Mr. Wells. between Corner Brook and Deer Lake. But a goodly number of children from Pasadena attend school in Deer Lake and the property owners in Pasadena and the parents of these children do not contribute to the Deer Lake School Tax Authority.

So that in order to be fair and reasonable to everybody and if we are getting into this level of taxation now and not just for school purposes, for ordinary municipal - to offset the cost of ordinary municipal services 1 and as well an incidental thing would be the promotion - it would promote the development of land, either the developing of it or the abandoning of it to the Government or the municipal authorities. Because at the moment, people can hold land forever