April 18, 2005 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV

No. 12

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

This afternoon we have members' statements as follows: The hon. the Member

for Bay of Islands; the hon. the Member for Humber Valley; the hon. the Member

for Grand Bank; the hon. the Member for St. John's North, and the hon. the

Member for Terra Nova.

The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to extend

congratulations to the winners of the 2004 City of Corner Brook Molson Sports

Awards.

Last evening, I had the pleasure of attending the Annual Corner Brook Sports

Awards and Banquet. With its beginning in 1967, this event is designed to

recognize the accomplishments of individuals and groups within the amateur and

elite sporting community of the City of Corner Brook. These awards have grown to

include all facets of athletic endeavour, including events, school programs,

officials, lifetime achievement and distinction.

The recipient for Corner Book's Male Athlete of the Year went to

cross-country skier, Andrew Casey, while Noelle Kenny was named Female Athlete

of the Year. Colin Pike-Thackray was named Youth Male Athlete and Kelsey Flynn,

Youth Female Athlete.

Coach of the Year went to Humber Valley Speed Skating coach, Brian Bonnell,

while Tony Baird took the Official of the Year award, with Marian Casey

receiving the Distinction Award.

Introduced for the 2004 Awards is the Masters Male and Female Athlete of the

Year, recognizing the sporting accomplishment of an athlete at the Masters level

in sports. Awards went to marathon runner Michael Coyne and Sheila Ereaut.

Volunteer of the Year award went to Jeannie Colbourne for her contribution to

the city's minor softball program, while the Lifetime Achievement award went

to Claude Anstey.

The Team of the Year award went to Bas Buckle's world championship curling

team, while the Event of the Year was the 2004 World Broomball Championships,

and School of the Year was Presentation Junior High.

I ask all members of the House to join with me in extending congratulations

to the award recipients and all nominees for their accomplishments and

dedication to their individual sports.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear. Hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS GOUDIE: Mr. Speaker, as the Member for Humber Valley, it is with great

pleasure that I rise in this House today to congratulate the Deer Lake Red Wings

on winning the Herder Memorial Trophy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS GOUDIE: This Sunday, the Red Wings edged the Conception Bay CeeBees 3

to 2 in the seventh game of the Newfoundland and Labrador's senior hockey

championship.

Mr. Speaker, this series drew sellout crowds in St. John's and Corner Brook

and is proof that senior hockey is alive and well in Newfoundland and Labrador.

In a year without the NHL, hockey fans in our Province were reminded that you do

not have to look any further than Newfoundland and Labrador to see some great

hockey.

I would like to express appreciation to Darren Langdon for providing

exceptional leadership and drawing on his vast experience in helping lead the

Red Wings to the Herder victory. I would also like to thank the many players who

travelled from all over this Island to play their hearts out for Deer Lake,

including the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile's son. Although MVP and stars

were selected in this tournament, it was a team effort that led to their

victory.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate and recognize the Deer Lake fans

for their passion for the game and fierce loyalty to their team. Their steadfast

confidence, no doubt, helped the Red Wings to victory. The many volunteers and

organizers that helped out at every step of the way in this tournament also

deserve many thanks.

While I take great pride in congratulating the Deer Lake Red Wings on their

victory, I would also like to extend heartfelt congratulations to the players,

coaches and fans of the Conception Bay North CeeBees. It was a hard fought

series that was decided by a single goal in the seventh and final game and they

should be very proud of their efforts.

Mr. Speaker, this series was a testament to the determination and spirit that

is so characteristic of people from all areas of this Province. I ask all

members to join me in congratulating everyone involved in this year's Herder

tournament.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, today I recognize David King of Grand Bank. David,

who is twenty-two years old, was selected the most outstanding performer at the

2005 Newfoundland Open Senior Weightlifting Championships held in St. John's

on April 2.

David's provincial record saw him named best male lifter as well.

David set three consecutive records in the Clean and Jerk seventy-seven

kilogram class. The old record was142.5 kilograms. He started with 143 kilograms

and followed that up with 147.5 and 150. Combined with his 112.5 kilogram lift

in the Snatch category, he set a new total record of 262.5 kilograms. David

qualified for the 2005 National Senior Championships being held in Saskatchewan

in May. As well, in May he will convocate with a degree in pharmacy from

Memorial University.

David comes by his ability naturally. His father, Jim, and brother Steven are

both weight lifters. His parents are Jim and Joanne King of Grand Bank.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating

David King.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDGLEY: Mr. Speaker, it was approximately five years ago that this

hon. House passed

an act to establish Holocaust Memorial Day in this Province.

Last night, I was pleased to attend the Holocaust Memorial Service held at

Prince of Wales Collegiate. While we all know the story of the Holocaust, it is

still important for us to take time to remember that 6 million people, including

1.5 million children, were mercilessly killed simply because they were Jewish.

It is important to recall that the Holocaust saw infants used as target

practice, and another 1 million people killed because they were disabled or

homosexual.

Mr. Speaker, there is an ongoing program of Holocaust education at PWC, and

students from that school are the first in the Province to take

part in the

Asper Foundation Human Rights Program. Special mention has to be made of one

teacher, Mr. Keith Samuelson, a recipient of the Prime Minister's Award for

Teaching Excellence, for his efforts in promoting Holocaust education. Last

night's memorial service also saw a presentation by the students of a Terry

Reilly play, Some Picnic , as directed by Mr. Tolson Barrington.

As we in this House take time to remember the Holocaust, we have to realize

that anti-Semitism is still alive in our world, and we commend all those

students, staff and others who strive to fight this and all forms of prejudice

in our world.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ORAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer my congratulations to a number of students

from my district who participated in a local contest that was launched by DFO at

three schools in my District of Terra Nova in 2004.

Students were asked to submit creative and original pictures that would

capture the intent of local lobster conservation initiatives. The Eastport MPAs

Steering Committee reviewed the entries and chose winners from primary,

elementary, junior high and high school submissions. The winning entries were

provided to graphic artist Derek Peddle from Vivid Design who, in turn,

developed the final Eastport MPAs logo. Prizes for the winning entries will be

supplied by DFO and the Kittiwake Economic Development Corporation.

The following students were awarded: Primary, from Charlottetown Elementary,

first place went to Candace Murphy, second to Brandon Abbot, and third to

Lyndsey Drover. Elementary, from Holy Cross School in Eastport, first was Haylee

Brown, second place was Amber Dyke, and third place was Rebecca Bradley. Junior

High, from Glovertown Academy, first place went to Adrian Locke, second to Holly

Wells; and third to Gerri-Lynn Arnold. High School, also from Glovertown

Academy, first place went to Matt Glover, second to Christina Elliot, and third

to Jessica Lewis.

Mr. Speaker, I kindly ask that all hon. members of this House join with me in

congratulating these students on their fine work and achievements.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, last week I had the honour of accompanying

twelve Newfoundland and Labrador companies on a Team Canada Atlantic trade

mission to Chicago. The companies represented a wide variety of industrial

sectors and, I am pleased to say, came from all over Newfoundland and Labrador.

The companies that participated in the trade mission include: Labrador

Preserves of Forteau; TUC of Nain; Wholesome Dairy Ltd. of Stephenville; Terra

Nova Industries Ltd. of Glovertown; Compusult Ltd. of Mount Pearl; and from St.

John's, iDance, Meditrain, Nearshore Atlantic, Systems N' Solutions Ltd.,

thedog8it!, Unity Bay Energy Ltd. and Verafin Inc.

I would like to welcome Mr. Dave Cowan and Mr. Bill Burton of Meditrain, who

are seated in the gallery today.

Mr. Speaker, this was the first visit to the Chicago area for most of these

companies. While in Chicago, the companies had one-on-one meetings with

potential customers from the Tri-State area of Illinois, Wisconsin and Missouri.

The companies attended sessions and events with key Chicago decision-makers

who shared valuable information for understanding the Tri-State market,

information which is critical if our companies are to successfully compete in

that market.

And, while the Newfoundland and Labrador companies gained greater knowledge

of the Tri-State market, they were also tremendous ambassadors for our Province.

Individually and collectively, they raised awareness amongst American business

people about Newfoundland and Labrador, and the benefits of doing business with

Newfoundland and Labrador companies.

I am pleased with the work done and the progress made by our companies on

this mission. The contacts made and the market intelligence gathered will be

extremely valuable to the companies as they pursue opportunities in this market.

With over twenty-three million people in the Tri-State area, and less than 1

per cent of Newfoundland and Labrador's U.S. exports going to that region, the

federal-provincial partners of Team Canada Atlantic believe this area represents

a huge untapped market for our companies.

Mr. Speaker, approximately 95 per cent of businesses in Newfoundland and

Labrador are small businesses. This government recognizes the significant role

small businesses play in our economy, and is providing an array of tools to

support their development and growth, including a $10 million revolving fund

announced in the budget, access to venture capital and the opportunity to

participate in trade missions.

Mr. Speaker, I am confident this recent trade mission will prove to be

successful for the companies who participated, and I look forward to continuing

to work with them in the future.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the minister for an advance copy of her Ministerial Statement

today. A trade mission such as this is very important, as we know. The more

local companies that participate, hopefully they will have the kind of

experience that will enable them to participate and trade worldwide.

The day I will be really excited, Mr. Speaker, is when the minister brings

into the House a Ministerial Statement talking about the plan for rural

Newfoundland and Labrador. I am pleased to see that some of the companies that

participated were, in fact, from rural Newfoundland and Labrador, but

unfortunately there is no plan that I am aware of that will see them benefit to

any great degree from anything that this government has done.

I would suggest to the minister that we have seen 2,600 people leave this

Province since she has been the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural

Development. It might be worthwhile, if she were to really be interested in

small business, that she would talk to her colleagues in government and look at

some of the decisions that are being taken of the departments that impact

negatively on rural Newfoundland and Labrador. One, in particular, I think of a

small businessman in Fogo who has eight trucks in his trucking company. In fact

it costs him, because of the ferry increases, the rate increases in the ferry,

$152 a day just to get a truck off the Island.

I would suggest to the minister, if she really wants to help small business

in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, she might want to look at some of these

initiatives that are not too popular out there today, and maybe we will see it

stem to the out-migration.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, want to congratulate the twelve companies who participated in this

trade mission with the minister and her government. These kinds of activities, I

hope, are very positive. I hope that the twelve businesses involved were happy

with the investment they made in seeking new markets in the United States.

Small business is very important to this Province, and particularly to rural

Newfoundland. I note one of the gentlemen in the gallery, Mr. Chafe, from

Wholesome Dairy Ltd., is a new entrance to business and produces a terrific

product that I have seen in the stores. I hope that he and all the others who

participated in this trade mission found it worthwhile and are able to get some

contacts, some customers and some ideas as to how to proceed from here. I think

this is the kind of activity that needs to be encouraged in order to build our

capacity to create and build the small business sector in Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further Statements by Ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take this opportunity to recognize a very

important celebration this week in Newfoundland and Labrador. April 17-23 is

National Volunteer Week. It is an opportunity to honour the many people who, by

volunteering in social, recreational, economic and other community nonprofit

groups, make our Province a better place to live.

National Volunteer Week is sponsored by the Canadian Association of Volunteer

Bureaux and Centres in partnership with the Voluntary Action Program.

Provincially, the Community Service Council will be sponsoring a variety of

events and activities to pay tribute to volunteers in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Voluntarism enriches our community and makes a valuable contribution to our

provincial and national character. The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador

encourages and supports community partnerships in economic and social

development. Volunteers are one of our most important partners. Our volunteers

give endless time to social interests and causes. In addition, though their work

is beyond monetary value, voluntarism contributes significantly to our local

economy.

The work of volunteers in Newfoundland and Labrador is diverse. In our

Province there are more than 4,300 voluntary, community-based organizations

employing thousands of people. Equally impressive, there are over 138,000

volunteers who donate the highest average of annual hours to volunteering in

Canada. Newfoundland and Labrador's voluntary sector relies on its volunteers

to provide community programs and services that enhance quality of life.

Volunteers support cultural diversity and heritage by promoting the arts,

celebrating cultural identities, and preserving historical sites. Many

volunteers also advance issues and priorities important to women in our

Province.

On behalf of this government, I would like to thank all volunteers in our

Province for their social and economic contributions to our lives.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I would like to thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement

today.

I am sure we would all agree, that we stand many times in this hon. House and

celebrate and honour people within our Province, but I believe none is more

fitting than the people we are recognizing here today, the volunteers, this

being Volunteer Week, April 27-23.

Mr. Speaker, I know I can speak for my district, and I am sure each and every

member in this hon. House can speak for the people in their districts. I think

about the Run for the Janeway, the Lion's Clubs, the fire departments, the

search and rescues, people who go into schools and assist teachers on any given

day, and those who go and assist seniors in the homes. I think, Mr. Speaker, of

all those people who go door-to-door on behalf of the various nonprofit

organizations. They do a marvellous job, Mr. Speaker, and those volunteers come

in all ages and they play a major role in each of their communities. By doing so

they are making their communities stronger. By doing that we really see what is

happening here within our Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, and we, on this

side of the House, Sir, want to say hats off to the volunteers.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am happy to join in recognizing the community volunteer-based sector and

the over 135,000 volunteers in Newfoundland and Labrador. It is said sometimes,

Mr. Speaker, that the volunteer sector is a third pillar of society, along with

the public and private sectors. Here in this Province we have everything from

municipal councils, fire service, as well as - they form a very important role

in protecting the public and providing democratic operations in the Province,

and, as well, as the social, recreational community and economic value that they

contribute to. So, we do want to join in recognizing them and thank them for

their service.

We are a little bit strained in this Province though, Mr. Speaker. We have a

smaller number of volunteers than we used to and the number of hours, has been

mentioned -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's allotted time has expired.

Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The numbers are going up because the volunteers that we have are doing, as

has been said in the statement, the highest average of annual hours of

volunteering in the country. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, part of the reason for

that is that government services have been decreasing and are inadequate in the

area of home care, in services for women. Women centres have been complaining

about providing basic services instead of doing advocacy work. We would really

want to see government welcome and champion the use of volunteers where it is

appropriate but not fall down on the job in terms of providing the kind of

services that ordinary people need and relying on volunteers instead.

In congratulating the volunteers on their efforts, I also raise the concern

that government not fall asleep at the switch and cut back on services that

people need.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers.

Before we move to Oral Questions, the Speaker would like to welcome in the

Speaker's gallery a former member of the House, Mr. Glenn Tobin, the Member

for Burin-Placentia West. He is accompanied by Mr. Mike Monahan.

Welcome to our House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Oral Questions

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, during Question Period on Thursday past we were

shocked to learn that the Finance Minister participated in the Cabinet decision

regarding the implementation of production quotas in the crab industry in the

Province. This decision, Mr. Speaker, was taken, even though the Finance

Minister admitted that he has immediate family members who are still involved in

the crab processing sector in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister, why did he not find it appropriate to excuse

himself from the decision and avoid being placed in a potential conflict of

interest?

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, when I got into politics in 1992, I moved

quickly - even in Opposition, with no requirements - that there would not be,

not only any conflict, nor perceived conflict. I, within months, sold all of my

assets and anything I had been involved in dealing with business. I declare, on

an annual basis, every single thing that I own. There is a public disclosure

statement released by the Commissioner of Members' Interest. I fill it out

promptly within days of receiving it. I return it, and I have always gotten a

return from the Commissioner indicating that I am not in conflict in any way.

The Commissioner can tell you that.

To raise those issues here is inappropriate. It is character assassination in

public, for the Leader of the Opposition to imply that I might benefit

financially by making decisions done. It is completely an attack on someone's

character; wrong attack on their character.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, I would like an opportunity to answer the

question. The question has been directed to me.

I very honestly and faithfully dealt with every single issue I have had in

the past. I dealt fishermen. I dealt with plant workers. I have people from my

family who do not live in my household, who do not have any ways, any dealings

with, financially or otherwise, in the business. Harvesting, that is opposite

sides of this government. The position we have taken on is completely opposite

side and there are some people, employees, often some part owners in the fishing

industry.

I, in no way, in any way, have been in conflict. He can find that out from

the Commissioners. I invite anybody of the public. I think it is improper, Mr.

Speaker, to move in and bring in an individual attack on somebody in an area.

That is completely unjustified. I think any hon. people out there today, anyone

in our Province, should stand up to this kind of action here and take great

offence to it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, whenever an issue is discussed in Cabinet that may impact a

minister directly, or a member of the minister's immediate family, that

minister is expected to excuse himself or herself from the discussion and not

participate in the final decision. This has always been the practice, Mr.

Speaker, not only for Cabinet members but for all of us as MHAs as well. It is

spelled out, as a matter of fact - if he thinks it is inappropriate, maybe he

might want to change the House of Assembly Act. It is spelled out in

section 21

of the House of Assembly Act, and I quote that section, "A member shall not

make or participate in making a decision in his or her capacity as a member

where the member knows or ought reasonably to know that in the making of the

decision there is the opportunity to further, directly or indirectly, a private

interest of the member or the member's family."

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister why he feels he does not have to follow the

established guidelines for conflict of interest as a member and a Cabinet

minister when it is clearly pointed out and stated as the law of the land, not

something inappropriate, but the law of the land in Newfoundland and Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

[Disruption in the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Visitors in the gallery are welcome in our House. However, over the last

number of days visitors have been disrupting the proceedings of the House. The

Speaker is mandated in our parliamentary system to maintain order and decorum.

Democracy is a very fragile thing. We have many of our Canadian sons and

daughters around the world, as we speak here, trying to preserve, protect and

encourage democracy.

We ask all members who are visitors to this House to respect this House, to

respect the Speaker, and to respect our traditions. If the Speaker has to remind

members again, then the Speaker will have to consider closing the galleries and

he does not want to do that.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Under the conflict of interest under the Legislature, I am quite familiar

with it. I report it and I file it every year, everything honestly and

accurately.

When Brian Tobin was Premier of this Province and the Leader of the

Opposition sat there, they brought in regulations that governed people in

Cabinet. I have absolutely followed, to the letter of the law, every single

thing. If he wants a legal opinion on that, or whatever, I would be only too

delighted. If he wants to go out and get an opinion, if he wants to ask the

Commissioner of Members's Interests anything, absolutely.

It is very unfortunate and unfair when members of the Opposition - and I know

in particular a number of the Opposition have been calling around in regard to

fishermen, stirring up things that are improper and false, and putting it out in

the public. It is unfair and it is a character assassination on something that

is unjustified.

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Finance Minister seems to be confused between two concepts. One is

disclosure of our involvement, which we are all expected to do, and we have done

it again this month. I am glad that he is following the law for disclosure like

we all do.

Section 21 of the Act talks about participating in decisions when

there might be a conflict of interest. That has nothing to do with disclosure.

I ask again, Mr. Speaker: Why is it, and can he provide the documentation -

this morning, his friend, the Minister of Natural Resources, in trying to defend

him on the public airwaves, said he divested of his interests, and he said it

himself. Will he now, in this Legislature, place on the Table exactly when he

divested of his interests, because some of them, I understand, were in fish

plants, and to whom? Further still: To whom did he divest his interests? To whom

did he sell his interests?

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am very familiar with that

section of the Act. That

section of the act

indicates: that if some member of your family is living in a household supported

financially by you and so on. He was a Cabinet Minister in his day and he doesn't

even know that. He is trying to put out something that is absolutely false to

the public, and that is wrong.

I divested of my interests, I believe it was May of 1993, to a member of the

family, and the business is not even in the ownership of the family anymore. The

business, for a number of years, has not been in the ownership of the family

whatsoever; and the interests I had. Not only that but I eliminated other

interests that have no bearing on the operation here, so that there wouldn't

even be a perception of conflict. I absolutely, and I said to the media when

they asked me on Friday, when this character assassination took place in public,

I have two properties I own. I own a property in Fermeuse and I have a property

in St. John's that I pay a mortgage on owned by myself and my wife, and I have

nothing else of any property value that I own. It is almost a decade since that.

It is wrong, it is false, it is not even under the family ownership anymore. He

knows it and he is trying to raise this issue here to create a character

assassination.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, we have known on this side for some time that

there are certain members on that side who think they are above and beyond the

law. The law is clear. You have divested.... If you want to clear the

information, lay it on the table and tell us exactly who you sold your interests

to, and then there will be no further questions.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier, or maybe the Minister of Natural Resources,

the House Leader, who wants to defend everybody on that side - we are talking

about participation. We are talking about participation. I ask the Premier: What

are the rules for participation in the Cabinet? The rules are clear for the

House of Assembly: You are not to participate in any debate or decision that

might directly or indirectly impact a family member. Now, I ask the Premier:

What rules are they operating under for the Cabinet -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: - for participation in a decision that might directly or

indirectly impact a family member?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I have no trouble defending a colleague or

colleagues who not necessarily need defence but who are being improperly, by the

Leader of the Opposition putting out certain perceptions and motives where he

said exactly - and I have it here. He said, on Friday, that the Minister of

Finance knows and may be participating in decision where money is actually going

into his own pocket.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. E. BYRNE: Would you like me to read it for you? Participating in a

decision which is going to actually put money directly in his own pocket one way

or another.

Those are your words, I say to the Leader of the Opposition. The fact of the

matter is this: The same rules apply to this Cabinet that applied to every other

Cabinet, and if you have any evidence of any member, as opposed to standing up

and trying to assassinate a character or somebody as being beyond reproach,

whether you disagree with them or not, lay it on the table. If not, stand up and

apologize to the member right there!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Colleagues, order, please!

The Chair recognizes the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the Government -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the Government House Leader that if he is living by the same set of

rules that we live by, the Minister of Finance would have excused himself from

the table when production quotas were being discussed.

Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Fisheries. Last week, the

minister said that an independent arbitrator will make the final decision or the

final determination as to what quota -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Colleagues, I appeal to you. We are in the middle of Question Period; time is

passing. Question Period is thirty minutes.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Minister of Fisheries.

Last week, the minister said that an independent arbitrator would make the

final determination or the final decision as to what quota each crab plant would

receive this year. I ask the minister: Is it true that this arbitrator is really

not independent, as the final decision would still rest with the minister, and

that this arbitrator is only advisory in nature?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we announced on March 4 that an independent arbitrator would set

the shares within 90 per cent to 105 per cent of the previous three year average

production for the various processing facilities throughout the Province.

As a former minister, I guess the Member for Twillingate & Fogo would

know that at the end of the day the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture signs

the conditional licence and the licence for each processing facility. We have

said that we will take the information provided by the independent arbitrator

and would assign those shares as a conditional licence to the various production

facilities. So, at the end of the day it is my signature that goes on the

licence but it will be consistent with what the independent arbitrator says.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Twillingate& Fogo.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I do not think the minister understands what the word independent means,

because he still has the final say as to what quotas each plant gets.

Last week the minister led us to believe that all plants in the Province

would receive 90 per cent of the average of their last three years of

production. Will the minister now confirm that in actual fact some plants will

receive more than 90 per cent while others will receive less than 90 per cent?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot confirm that one way or the other. There is a process

that has to be gone through. The numbers -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, the shares will be based on the previous three

year average production. Ninety per cent will be the minimum based on the

previous three year average.

Mr. Speaker, there have been roughly 8 per cent -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TAYLOR: For sure, you know what you are talking about.

Mr. Speaker, there has been roughly an 8 per cent reduction in the overall

Total Allowable Catch. That will have some impact, but at the end of the day the

shares will be set by an independent arbitrator and the basis for it will be 90

per cent to 105 per cent of the previous three year average.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister, if he cannot confirm what he is saying in the House of

Assembly, he should not be making those comments, because that is what he told

us here last week. We all know that there are a number of processors who will

receive less than 90 per cent this year, while others will, in actual fact,

according to his own formula, receive more than the 90 per cent.

Mr. Speaker, it appears that the plants in St. Anthony, Englee and New

Ferolle will not be operational this season for various reasons. The plant in

New Ferolle is closed. The plant in Englee was closed down last year, and

probably will not be operational this year. I do not know quite about St.

Anthony, if they have their equipment installed. Will their quotas be

transferred from the Northern Peninsula this year, and will they have decreased

quotas next year as a result of their inactivity this year?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, issues of transferability are not issues that need to be

discussed right now. We are pretty confident that the plant in St. Anthony -

[Comments from the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, the Speaker appeals to the visitors in the gallery.

The long-standing parliamentary rule is that visitors are not to participate.

They are not to show approval; they are not to show disapproval. They are not to

participate in any manner whatsoever. The only people who are allowed to

participate in debate in this House are the duly elected members of the House.

I appeal to all visitors to respect the rules of the House and let us

continue without any further interruptions.

The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister, the issue of transferability needs to be discussed in

this House and it needs to be discussed right now before you go ahead with this

hair-brained scheme.

Mr. Speaker, in light of the fact that the Member for Bonavista North

confirmed publicly last week that production quotas did not work for caplin and

they probably will not work for crab, will he not remove this scheme from the

table and only implement production quotas if - and I say if - and when they are

agreed to by the fishermen of this Province, as was recommended in the Dunne

report?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Before I permit the minister to answer, I apologize to him. In the last

exchange I should have gone back to him rather than going to the member, so I

will let him have some extra seconds to make the reply to the question just

asked.

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the issue of transferability - to go back to the previous

question - is an issue that has to be dealt with in the longer term if this ever

becomes a permanent part of our fisheries management approach. Mr. Speaker, that

is one thing.

Secondly, we are reasonably confident that St. Anthony will be in production,

and we are reasonably confident that New Ferolle will be in production.

Mr. Speaker, those are the facts of the matter, so those issues will not have

to be dealt with on a temporary or a permanent basis.

Mr. Speaker, to go back to the last question on - I lost my train of thought.

I lost the question. Do you want to ask the question again?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I said, in light of the fact that the Member for

Bonavista North stated publicly last week that production quotas did not work

for caplin and they probably will not work for crab, when are you going to

remove this scheme from the table and only agree to production quotas if, and

when, it is agreed to by the fishermen of this Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, when the former minister was minister, he did

not come up with any ideas on how to manage this fishery. We have put forward

raw material sharing as an approach that was recommended by four different

organizations, four different groups, Mr. Speaker, that were paid for by him and

his government when they were in power.

Mr. Speaker, we are only trying to implement a system to stabilize the

fishery in the short term and the long term. That is what we are trying to do.

When will we remove raw material sharing from the table? We will remove raw

material sharing from the table when it is demonstrated that it is not working

and when somebody can give us a viable solution or a viable alternative. Thus

far, nobody on that side of the House and nobody in the industry has provided us

with it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Government Services.

Mr. Speaker, last Friday gas prices increased again in our Province even

though the price of oil went down all week. There have also been occasions when

the interruption formula has been used but there was no interruption in supply.

When will this government amend the Petroleum Products Pricing Act to fix the

interruption formula and prevent prices from going up, like they did last week,

when they should have come down, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, the government has no control over gas prices. It

is beyond the control of government. It is dictated by the world market. As the

hon. member knows full well, regulations have been put in place with the prior

Administration. Those regulations were put in place to stabilize the prices at

the gas pumps, and that is what it has done, so it has worked.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: It appears she is very clear on her portfolio.

Mr. Speaker, gas prices went up last week only because there are problems

with the formula that need to be fixed. It is clear. With prices over $1 a litre,

the Minister of Finance is awash with cash from windfall profits from taxes

collected from gas. When will the Minister of Finance reduce the original

portion of tax on gasoline and allow consumers some relief?

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The price for gasoline in our Province is not related to the tax on it. The

tax -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: I would like for him to let me finish.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: The tax on gasoline is 16.5 cents per litre, whether it is

two cents a litre or whether it is apart from that, or $2 a litre. In fact, it

is based on the consumption. When gas is more expensive, sometimes people

conserve it and use less, which means we get less revenue on the tax when the

price goes up.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: On the 15 per cent harmonized tax, Mr. Speaker, while we

may lose 16.5 cents on every litre we lose, on the HST portion we will get seven

cents on each ten it goes up; but that is tied into the other Atlantic

Provinces, a deal that the former Premier of the Province, the Leader of the

Opposition right now, their government struck this deal with the Atlantic

Provinces, the Harmonized Sales Tax, in which they cannot change it without the

majority consent of other provinces. They locked us into a particular deal on

this issue. That is the fact of it. They put us into a conundrum on that area.

Besides, we would lose revenues if people burned less (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: The answer is no.

MS THISTLE: Yes. I knew it would be no, even though he has the choice.

You can change the 16.5 cents on the taxes anytime you want to but you do not

want to. That is why we had $100 million extra in gasoline taxes last year.

Mr. Speaker, another issue. The Department of Government Services revealed,

during Estimates, that it has put money into the Budget to hire two additional

people this year to do a further review of the operation of the department, even

though Ross Reid got his work done. Can the minister tell the House why existing

staff in her department cannot do the review, and how much is this exercise

going to cost the taxpayers of our Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, Government Services is, indeed, looking at its

role and its mandate. It has been in existence for nine years now and the review

was supposed to be done by the former Administration. I do not know why they did

not get to it but this department is now looking at the review and we will be

completing that review in approximately nine months.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

Will he acknowledge that if it wasn't for his action and the decision of

the thirty-three dictators opposite, that fish harvesters in this Province would

be sitting down and negotiating crab prices instead of settling in for the long

haul and figuring out how they can survive, while this minister presides over

the destruction of the crab fishery for the entire season?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I am sure, from the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi's comments, that he cannot remember last year, when we adamantly opposed

the implementation at that time of raw material sharing, said we were not going

to be implementing it, said that we would not put it, in 2004, in the crab

fishery. Yet, we had to bring in Bill Wells, Max Short and Joe O'Neill to sit

them down with the various parties after a number of attempts to try to get

negotiations going. Even then, the price for crab was not settled until May 3;

May 3 of last year. In 2003, the price was settled under Final Offer Selection

and the fishery closed down in late May for three weeks.

Now, Mr. Speaker, those are the facts. Everybody, including him -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TAYLOR: The facts are, Mr. Speaker, that if we did not have raw

material sharing on the table right now, there would still be a racket on the go

in the crab fishery.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister knows that despite its faults, Final Offer Selection worked.

Mr. Speaker, back in the national convention former Premier Smallwood labeled

those who would refuse even the choice of Confederation on the referendum ballot

to twenty-nine dictators. Now we have thirty-three dictators opposite who will

turn back the clock and give power to the processors and remove choice from fish

harvesters in this Province. When will this minister and his government back off

this destructive policy and return to some consensus in the fishery where people

can go fishing and have some choice as to where they sell their fish and run the

industry properly?

[Applause from the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair wishes to advise visitors in the gallery, if there should be any

further interruptions the Chair will have no choice but clear the galleries.

Order and decorum must be respected, must be preserved. That is the

parliamentary tradition. That is the role of the Speaker, to maintain order and

decorum. I ask you again for your co-operation, but, if need to, we will have

the galleries cleared.

The Chair recognizes, I do believe, the Minister of Fisheries and

Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we decided to go down the road on raw material sharing based on

the analysis that was done by four different groups who looked at the fishery in

Newfoundland and Labrador over the past four or five years. We took those

reports as the basis for the decision that we took. We are trying to implement a

system, Mr. Speaker, that will stabilize the fishery in the short term and also

to try and set the stage for a more orderly industry, going forward for the next

five to ten years.

The system that was in place in the past, in spite of all the protestations

from people, like the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi and the Member for

Twillingate & Fogo and others, did not work and everybody knows it did not

work. There were countless, countless disputes in the industry over the past ten

years, many of them leading to extended tie-ups -

[Comments from the gallery]

MR. TAYLOR: - many of them leading to extended shutdowns. Many of them,

Mr. Speaker, leading to disorder in the industry -

[Comments from the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TAYLOR: - and many of them compromising people like plant workers and

crew members in this industry.

[Comments from the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair has no choice but to recess the House, have the galleries cleared

and they shall remain cleared for the balance of the sitting day.

Recess

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Before we were obliged to recess the House, I believe there was about a

minute and thirty seconds left in Question Period.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture said that they were only following

the recommendations of four reports of the government.

Mr. Speaker, will the minister tell the truth, be honest with the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador, and acknowledge that not one of those reports

recommended that this government do what they are doing against the will and the

wishes and consensus of fish harvesters in this Province? Will he acknowledge

that, Mr. Speaker, and tell the truth to the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, the truth is that there were four reports over

the past ten years that recommended that RMS be implemented. Those are the facts

of the matter, Mr. Speaker. There were four reports that said this was an

approach that should be considered, that this was an approach that should be

attempted on a pilot project basis, and that, Mr. Speaker, is what we are

attempting to do. We are attempting to try and deal with the legitimate

objections and concerns of fish harvesters and plant workers. That, Mr. Speaker,

is what we are trying to do.

We are not trying to do, like the Member for Twillingate & Fogo did, we

are not trying to keep our heads buried in the sand hoping that nobody will find

us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time allocated for Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees.

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

MR. SPEAKER: A point of order raised by the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, just to raise a point of order from a question

and an answer in Question Period. I believe the House is owed an explanation or

an apology by the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. He was asked three

times about the arbitration process and he referred to it an independent

arbitrator.

Mr. Speaker, I will just use this one quote from a letter from the Deputy

Minister on Friday past, April 15, to all snow crab license holders. It says:

The word arbitrator is used only to describe the selection of an impartial

decision maker and it is used only as a term of convenience. This is not a

formal arbitration because the minister has the final say in these shares.

I ask, Mr. Speaker, if the Minister of Fisheries would like to stand up and

try to explain to the House how this letter can be out there to all the

processors, and how it contradicts his answer, when he is trying to make us

believe, where we are sworn to honesty in this House, that it is an independent

arbitrator, when this letter says it is only a term of convenience and the final

decision rests with the minister.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Leader of the Opposition and all members of this House would know that

points of order should relate to something in our Standing Orders or something

in the traditions of Parliament. A disagreement between two hon. members as to

the facts is not a point of order. Therefore, the House and the Chair will have

to accept, at times, two different versions of the same event, but certainly it

is not a point of order.

We were presenting reports of standing and select committees. The Chair had

recognized the hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS GOUDIE: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Select Committee appointed to

draft a reply to the Speech of His Honour, the Lieutenant Governor, I am pleased

to present the Report of the Select Committee as follows: To His Honour the

Lieutenant Governor, The Honourable Edward Roberts, Q.C. May it please Your

Honour: We, the Commons of Newfoundland and Labrador in Legislative Session

assembled, beg to thank Your Honour for the Gracious Speech which Your Honour

has addressed to this House.

It is signed by myself, the Member for Humber Valley; the Member for

Burin-Placentia West, and the Member for Port au Grave.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Presenting further reports by standing and select

committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

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

Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will, on tomorrow, ask leave to introduce a bill

entitled, "An Act To Amend The Executive Council Act." (Bill 7)

I also give notice that I will, on tomorrow, ask leave to introduce a bill

entitled, "An Act To Amend The Income Tax Act, 2000." (Bill 8)

I give notice that I will, on tomorrow, ask leave to introduce a bill

entitled, "An Act To Amend The Public Service Pensions Act, 1991, Teachers'

Pensions Act And Uniformed Services Pensions Act, 1991." (Bill 9)

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion.

The hon. the Minister of Government Services

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will, on tomorrow, ask leave

to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Services Charges

Act." (Bill 10)

I give notice that I will, on tomorrow, ask leave to introduce a bill

entitled, "An Act To Establish A Financial Services Appeal Board."

(Bill 11)

I give notice that I will, on tomorrow, ask leave to introduce a bill

entitled, "An Act To Repeal The Investment Contracts Act." (Bill 12)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion.

The hon. the Minister of Education.

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

leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Repeal The Literacy

Development Council Act." (Bill 6)

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition on behalf of a group of fish harvesters,

plant workers and crew members in the Province today who are adamantly opposed

to the government's decision to implement production quotas.

Mr. Speaker, basically, the petition is calling upon government to shelve

this plan, a production quotas plan, up until it is agreed to, if and when it is

agreed to, by the fish harvesters in the Province - who, up until this point, I

say, Mr. Speaker, have not even been consulted about this plan let alone have

the opportunity to be able to sit down with the minister, and with the Premier,

who seems to be so adamant in pushing this forward, to be able to discuss their

concerns.

Mr. Speaker, throughout this whole debate, in the last week or two, the

minister has risen time and time again, along with the Premier, talking about

the need to bring some stability to the industry. Even today, when the minister

got up in his last statement today, anyone who is out there listening would

certainly be led to believe that it is the crab fishermen and the crew members

in this Province who are causing the chaos, and that the processors did not play

any

part in that, Mr. Speaker.

I beg to differ, because the final offer selection model that was established

back in 1997 worked quite well for seven years. The only reason that it is not

working today is because the wealthy processors from around the Province, as far

back as 2002, came to me and said: Gerry Reid, if you do not implement

production quotas we are pulling out of the final offer selection.

The reason they did that was to do exactly what is happening here in the

Province today, to create chaos in the industry so that a weaker government

would bow to their wishes and implement production quotas.

Mr. Speaker, the reason they are doing it today is because they know the

Premier and the Minister of Fisheries are on side with this, even though the

majority of the people in their caucus who represent fishing districts are

adamantly opposed to it, but unfortunately their views and their wishes, if

heard, are not paid heed to and they have no say over there.

Mr. Speaker, if there is chaos in the industry, I personally believe that it

is being caused by the processors by pushing government for these production

quotas, by pulling out of the final offer selection. Unfortunately, we have a

minister today whose view is, all chaos in the industry is coming from the

harvesters, which is very unfortunate, because he keeps saying that the only way

to fix it is to bow down to the processors without even consulting with the vast

majority of the people in the industry, and those are the harvesters.

I do not understand how this government, led by this Premier, who happens to

be a businessman himself, thinks that he can wake up one morning and tell 6,000

or 7,000 or 8,0000 independent business people in the Province - the harvesters

I am talking about - how he thinks that they should not count when it comes to

business. It should not count that they have millions of dollars, some hundreds

of thousands, millions of dollars invested into a business that they really are

not looked at as business people. For some reason he has a different view of

business people than those that he looks at in the fishing industry. Maybe the

only business people that he has any respect for are those living in St. John's

or those who go to meet him in a shirt and tie, because he obviously has no

respect for the independent harvesters who, many of whom, have invested in

excess of a million dollars into an independent business that this government,

led by this Premier, is going to destroy on them overnight. You do not have to

believe me, all you have to do is go around this Province, as I am sure the

members opposite when they go home to their districts - if they have been going

home recently. I understand some of them have not been because of the fear that

they have from the harvesters and the plant workers in the area. If they were to

go home and listen to what these people have to say (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MR. REID: By order, to clue up, Mr. Speaker.

MR. E. BYRNE: For five seconds, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MR. REID: I would suggest that they listen to their constituents, remove

production quotas and only bring them back to the table if - and I say if - and

when the harvesters in this Province and the FFAW agree that they should be

brought back.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions.

The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

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

I, today, stand and present a petition on behalf of the harvesters, plant

workers and all those involved in the industry with regard to the raw material

sharing system that is being implemented by the minister.

I want to begin by - I do not want to use this as a prop, Sir, because it is

the wonderful Speech from the Throne, but there is something there I want to

quote. It says: "It is time to put the bountiful resources of our Province

to work for our people so that our sons and daughters can remain here to raise

sons and daughters of their own. These sentiments are echoed in the powerful

lyrics of bands like Great Big Sea..." It says this, Mr. Speaker, and I am

not going to sing it because I might clear the Chambers like you cleared the

gallery. Anyway it says:

"In this beautiful life,

there's always some sorrow

It's a double-edged knife,

but there's always tomorrow

It's up to you now if you sink or swim

Keep the faith and your ship will come in."

Mr. Speaker, I say that for a reason. Those people who are out there, who are

against this proposal, they have gone through their rough times. They saw times

when they were wondering if they were really going to sink or swim in their

industry and thank God, they listened to their forefathers, their grandfathers

and their fathers, and they built an industry, an industry to the point where

they stand today, and they stand very proud.

Mr. Speaker, I have to say, the other part of it says: "Keep the faith

and your ship will come in." I say to those people, their ship has come in

and they are trying to hang on to what they have built over a number of years.

Here we are with a system being put in place, and they are very fearful of what

is going to happen. It is going to go backwards in their industry. I know the

Premier, on numerous occasions, has said that it is only a two-year pilot

project.

I want to read from - and this is what was classified as frequently asked

questions. It was put out when the raw material sharing system was brought in,

announced. It says: Will transfer of shares be permitted between plants,

communities or regions? The answer says: No. During the course of the two-year

pilot project, no permanent transfers will be permitted and any temporary

transfers will be only considered if under exceptional circumstances. However,

it goes on - and the Premier of this Province is always saying words are

important. Then you go on and they say, "However, if the crab resource goes

into serious decline..." -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. BUTLER: It doesn't matter who said it, it was wonderful words.

It says, Mr. Speaker: However - they are important. It goes on to say,

"However, if the crab resource goes into serious decline and quotas are

reduced significantly, it might be necessary to consider transfers at some time

in the future." If this is only a two-year pilot project, why are we

worrying about what we are going to do with it in the future? I am saying, and I

put a challenge out and a word out to the plant workers because I am going to

tell you, what is stated here, a lot of it we are going to see take place in

that two-year pilot project if it ever goes ahead.

I have met with plant workers this week at a couple of functions and it is

the first time they have really come out and spoken. They said: When you go back

into St. John's into the House, give a message to the Premier for us. Just

tell him - they were not angry about it. Not one bit. They want to be back to

work. They said: Tell him this system is not going to work. Listen to the

harvesters about what is going on. They have major concerns about it. There are

people out there wondering now if they are going to get back in the plants this

year, number one, but a lot of them are very fearful that if the plants do open,

with the reduction in the quotas - and we have heard different figures than 90

per cent, and they will all come out in the wash in the next few days. They are

really concerned that if they could not qualify last year, how are they going to

qualify this year with the reductions that are coming? In my area it is pretty

good I suppose because I think the quotas are handy about on par with last year,

but there are other areas around the Province where it is not going to happen.

I have to say, and people have said to me: You are only standing up and doing

this because you are in Opposition. Farther from the truth. I stood with the

plant workers in Port de Grave when our government was in office, when they were

fearful their transfer was going to St. Anthony. I will sit -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, want to present a petition on behalf of fish harvesters who are

really upset with this whole idea of the Raw Material Sharing system.

Mr. Speaker, we have heard form fish harvesters now, day in and day out,

about this system and about how they are having great difficulty with what is

being proposed by the government. I should say, what the government is insisting

on taking place. The reality of it is, Mr. Speaker - and I am not sure how many

people on the government side recognize this - but really there wouldn't be a

fishery if it wasn't for our fish harvesters. Where would we be if we didn't

have fish to process. I think what we are seeing today, of course, is that

because we don't have our fish harvesters out there fishing for crab, then

there is not going to be raw material to share with anyone.

Unfortunately, what is happening is that we are going to see a lot of the

impact of this, a very negative impact of this, take place in rural Newfoundland

and Labrador. I am sure many of the members on the government side, just as the

members here on the Opposition side, who represent rural districts, must have an

understanding, an appreciation, for what that will mean to rural communities;

not only with the fish plants themselves, but in terms of the fallout from the

fact that there won't be any crab being processed. In fact, what we will see

are other businesses feeling the impact of the fact that there will be no income

in that community that can be circulated, and see other businesses survive as a

result of having a viable fishery.

Unfortunately, what this government is doing is that - the minister keeps

saying this - they have four reports that tell them to go down this path, and we

know that is not true. That is simply not true, and especially if you want to

take the Dunne Report. While it talks about this particular program, what we are

seeing instead is Mr. Dunne making it very clear that this should not happen

without consultation. How the minister can stand in his place and say, this is a

recommendation of four reports, and refer to one of them as the Dunne Report,

knowing full well that he is not being upfront in terms of what Mr. Dunne

actually recommended - Mr. Dunne was very, very pointed when he said that while

this was a way government might go with Raw Material Sharing, you must do it

only after consultation with the major stakeholders. Of course, we all know that

the major stakeholders include the fish harvesters themselves and the plant

workers. That simply is not happening.

What we are seeing is a group of fish harvesters who are very worried. They

know history. I listened to a gentleman on the radio talking about being

involved in this business for thirty years. When he was asked if he had ever,

ever encountered such an abuse of power, of being told what to do without any

consultation, he said, this was the first time in the thirty years that he has

been involved in this industry that he has ever seen a government behave in such

a manner as this government is doing. He called on both the minister and the

Premier, whom he felt were the architects behind this, to actually put it aside,

work with the fisher harvesters, work with all of the stakeholders in the

industry, and come up with a system - if that is what they want to do - that

will ensure a viable fishery, but one that is fair to all: processors, fish

harvesters and plant workers. He really felt that there is no way he can support

this decision, and the way that -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, thank you very much.

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

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

Before I move to motions of the day, I want to stand on a point of order with

reference to what I believe to have been unparliamentary remarks directed at

members in the House today by the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

It is very difficult in today's Legislature or any Legislature across the

country where you can actually produce a list of words which say that is

parliamentary and that is not; because, the fact of the matter is, words judged

today as being parliamentary may, in fact, be judged unparliamentary tomorrow,

and here is why: In dealing with unparliamentary language, the Speaker takes

into account the tone, manner and intention of the member speaking.

In this respect, the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, in my view, certainly

playing to the galleries, directed and called each and every member on this side

dictators. Mr. Speaker, that is clearly unparliamentary. It imputes motives on

individual members.

The Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi can wink and laugh all he wants at his

colleagues on that side, that is fair enough, but I have always known him to be

a fairly honourable gentleman when it comes to the practice of Parliament.

The fact of the matter is, he can say that the government has acted in a

dictatorial manner, or that the government is dictator-like, but he cannot point

to thirty-three members and call them, individually, dictators. That is clearly

unacceptable.

It goes on to say, Mr. Speaker, that the person to whom the words were

directed - which were thirty-three members in this House - the degree of

provocation and, most importantly, whether or not the remarks created disorder

in the Chamber.

Mr. Speaker, I would submit that any honest, unbiased view of this, of those

remarks, were meant and were said in front of an audience who were upset by a

decision taken by government, were meant to create the type of effect that they

have, and were clearly unparliamentary, Mr. Speaker, and in your review - even

before you get to review, I would ask the hon. Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi

to do the appropriate thing and withdraw those remarks from the floor of this

Legislature.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a great deal of respect for the Government House Leader, but I would

submit that what the Government House Leader is doing today in his remarks is

splitting hairs.

The other day, a member on this side of the House used what was termed to be

unparliamentary language and the Government House Leader rose and said, you

cannot say that about one person, but if you are saying it about all of us it is

okay. Now he is saying, because I said something that affected all of them over

there, that it is unparliamentary because each and every individual is affected

by it.

Mr. Speaker, what I said was that the decision that was made over there was

made by thirty-three dictators. I stand by those remarks. It is a dictatorial

decision. It is attempting to dictate to the fishermen of Newfoundland and

Labrador against their wishes, against the reports and recommendations that have

been received by this government.

I stand by that remark, Mr. Speaker, and I do not intend to withdraw it.

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I do not often agree with the Government House Leader and I find, on this

occasion, I cannot agree with him either.

He uses the words quite often here: imputes motives. The word used by the

Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi was quite clear. It was descriptive of a type

of behaviour by the government. Because somebody uses a word, dictatorial or

dictator, as he himself indicates, it depends upon the language that was used

and the context in which it was used.

He made it quite clear that the behaviour of the government, everybody on

that side - and they cannot deny this - you can talk about what words you do or

do not use, but you cannot deny that the type of behaviour that the member

referenced is exactly what we are experiencing. We are experiencing forceful,

dominating, dictatorial type of behaviour. There are no motives imputed here, as

the Government House Leader says. The Leader of the NDP was quite clear and

unequivocal. He did not impute anything. He said the attitude of this government

is dictatorial, and that is exactly what type of behaviour we have here.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, I think what we have here is a case where the

government members may be a little bit nish, as we would say, a little bit

thin-skinned, cannot accept some comment about the government's behaviour. I

say, if you are in the kitchen and you are going to cook, and you are going to

make some hard recipes that people do not want to swallow, you have to be

prepared to have people coming at you and saying that they disagree with you,

rather than standing up here and trying to use sometimes archaic rules about

what is or is not parliamentary language, to try to squeeze out from what was an

embarrassing situation.

MR. SPEAKER: A further comment by the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If I may add, I went even farther and explained to the House of Assembly the

context in which that term was used in a previous Parliament, a national

convention, where former Premier Smallwood - he was not Premier at that time -

talked about the fact that twenty-nine members of that Assembly removed the

choice. When I was talking about dictating, I was talking about the removal of

choice. I explained the context, that in a removal of choice situation it was

described as dictators, and the response of the label that was place by the

former Premier was twenty-nine dictators and I said we now have thirty-three.

choice from fish harvesters of this Province as to where or how they are going

to conduct their business, and removal of power, taking away of power, and

transferring it to someone else.

Mr. Speaker, I believe, I firmly believe, that those kind of remarks, in that

context, are quite appropriate and quite defensible and I stand by them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair will review the transcripts and will come back to the House with a

ruling, hopefully by tomorrow.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, Motion 1, to move that this House approves in

general the budgetary policy of the government, commonly referred to as the

Budget Speech and the Budget reply.

I believe the Member for Port de Grave was on Thursday, and will now

enlighten us with some of his remarks.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

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

I appreciate the opportunity to stand and say a few words with regard to the

Budget. A lot of people are saying this is a Budget of missed opportunities. I

have to say from the outset, no doubt like any Budget, there are many good items

in the Budget that people will see and get advantage of - various items - over

the next twelve month period.

When I look at the Budget, Mr. Speaker - and I have heard many speakers say

this before and I do not want to rehash it - to me it is almost like when you

are watching The Price is Right and they have this shell game. There are

three shells there with a ball under one of them, and you have to guess where it

is in order to win a prize.

I believe, Mr. Speaker, that is what they have been doing, playing a shell

game, because they are trying to tell us that we had a cash deficit when in

actual fact we know to this very day that there was a surplus. That is why I say

it is a Budget of missed opportunities, because there are so many issues around

this Province that a very minor amount of money.... When you look at the $103

million that was taken to pay off some mortgages - and that is wonderful, that

all has to be done, but when we look at probably $10 million or $12 million,

what it could have done to many areas of this Province. I think it is wonderful

to pay down the mortgages, yes, but I think about the facilities and the

equipment that they are looking for on the Burin Peninsula. I think about the

cancer clinic in Grand Falls. I think about the auditorium in Labrador, in Happy

Valley-Goose Bay. Mr. Speaker, I think all of those issues could have been

resolved and still millions of dollars could have been paid towards the

mortgages that we hear so much about.

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the Member for Terra Nova last week

when he was standing and praising the Budget, and rightly so, that is his

democratic right. He was put here to do that. He was put here to listen and say

what he believes in. I know he made a comment once about how his daughters had

flipped out, and I think it was when he was praising the speech about how his

daughters flipped out. I have to say, I think the member himself probably

flipped out a little bit, because I think he went overboard in praising the

Budget. I think he went too far with it, because he mentioned small businesses,

and we all know what small businesses mean to this Province. I have to say, the

people that we present petitions on day in and day out, the fish harvesters of

this Province, to me they are small businesses. They are not looking for money

to do anything. They are not looking for handouts. They are just looking for

respect that they have had for many years after fighting very hard to receive

that respect.

We also know that when he was up speaking with regards to the health care

issues, and he said: We all love to have everything in our own areas. That is

true, I suppose, but he mentioned that he would love to be able to go back to

his constituents and say that possibly they were going to build a hospital in

Glovertown. That tells me where his priorities are, when we look at the serious

situation in Grand Falls, when we look at down on the Burin Peninsula, where

those people have to travel so far to get services and the type of facilities

that they are receiving those services in. I mean, to go from Glovertown to

Gander is a very short run. I can understand fifteen, possibly twenty minutes, I

guess depending on how fast you are going.

Mr. Speaker, the other issue I want to bring up - I want to say that prior to

the House recessing, I was asking many questions to the Minister of Human

Resources, Labour and Employment about how things are working out in her

department and about the issue of child poverty in this Province. She said to me

one day: It is not a study or a report that we are doing when we are putting

this $200,000 into, it is a strategy. Anyway, I said maybe there is another

meaning to strategy that I am not aware of. So I went home, over the Easter

break, and took the opportunity to get out Webster's dictionary. I cannot tell

you which edition it was, but I read very clearly what a strategy is. It states

very carefully: it is a careful plan or a method. It also goes on to say: It is

a cleverly contrived trick or scheme for gaining an end. I am fearful that is

what they are up to, Mr. Speaker, because they said in their Blue Book that they

AN HON. MEMBER: Schemers.

MR. BUTLER: Yes, schemers. I do not know if that is parliamentary, Mr.

Speaker, but I guess if it is not you will bring me to task.

Mr. Speaker, here we are - and this was a promise that was made in the Blue

Book that we were going from a Province with the most poverty in the country in

a ten-year time frame to the Province with the least. Here we are, we have two

years gone and I am just wondering how good this strategy is going to be. Is it

going to be a careful plan where this is going to be eliminated? Or is it a

clever plan to say we are dealing with it, but just to get away from really what

has to be done?

We talk about child poverty in the Province, and I appreciate anything that

government is trying to do to deal with that. There have been many suggestions

made, and I guess at the end of the day - and I had major concerns when I heard

in the Budget, even though I know the Kids Eat Smart Program, I understand that

they have so much funds on hand but each and every year they were allocated

$500,000 and this year, Mr. Speaker, it has been cut back to $250,000. I spoke

with people within that organization and right now they are not too concerned

about it, the $250,000 coming out, because they have a reserve there but if

anything should happen and the money they have in that reserve is used up - and

they have had a reserve. This is not the first year they have had a reserve. If

anything should happen, that they would have to take care of some major issues,

would the money be there to come back into it or was the money taken to proceed

with this cleverly contrived strategy?

Mr. Speaker, every time someone on this side of the House gets up and speaks

and asks for something in their area or how come this is not going ahead, the

ministers, or whoever opposite, will always get up and say: Well, look at the

mess you left us in. Look at the mess you left. We are up to our ears in debt

and we cannot do it. The next day they will get up and talk about: No, don't

forget now, we have only been here for eighteen months and in eighteen months we

cannot do everything. I agree with that. Definitely cannot do it. I agree with

the financial situation but, Mr. Speaker, let's look at some of the things

that have actually happened since they took over power, some of the things that

have gone ahead. It has nothing to do with the finances of this Province prior

to what anyone else has done, and it has got nothing to do with how you look at

some situations but it has to do with some of the ideas that they had and they

went ahead with.

Let's look at the office that was going to open up in Ottawa, $350,000. It

had nothing to do with the financial situation of this Province, nothing to do

with a former Administration. They decided they were going to take $350,000,

probably more, and open up an office in Ottawa. And who should he select to go

there? One of the most popular people in this Province. You see, the Premier was

down and out a bit before this happened. He knew that the people of this

Province loved and respected this gentleman, Mr. Bill Rowe. Who should he send

to Ottawa - because I think he sent him to Ottawa for his own personal gains. I

really believe that, Mr. Speaker. Because, what came out of the trip to Ottawa?

The only thing we have heard publicly was heard from an MP - I think the federal

riding is Mount Pearl, St. John's West-Mount Pearl, I could be incorrect on

that - when he said that the only thing he saw from him, he was invited out to a

breakfast or a lunch one day. Mr. Speaker, I do not know if there is anyone

there now or not. I know they are going to be looking for somebody to send up

there, but we are talking about wasting and spending money. We do not have money

to do this and do that. That is $350,000 that could have been probably better

spent.

We talk about the $350,000 for the study on the tunnel. The Premier knew full

well what was going to come back from that report even before they were asked to

proceed with it, Mr. Speaker. Another $350,000 that I believe could have been

spent somewhere else. Then we talk about the $800,000 that the Province put in

for the additional work that the wardens, people on the rivers and in the

country looking after poaching. I am not standing here and condoning poaching,

don't get me wrong. Then again, if that is a federal responsibility, Mr.

Speaker, why would we, right up front, take $800,000? Hopefully, they are trying

to get the $800,000 back. The best of luck if they can, after getting our

Atlantic Accord, because I think what we got from Ottawa we got.

MS THISTLE: (Inaudible).

MR. BUTLER: Probably, the letter - my hon. colleague from Grand Falls

says maybe the letter is not even written yet. But still, there is $800,000 that

was spent on something that could have been spent on the cancer clinic, on the

auditorium in Happy Valley-Goose Bay or on the Burin Peninsula, Mr. Speaker.

Then we talk about - I can remember the Premier saying prior to the election

and since the election, with regard to contracts. He said: there will be never

no more contracts going to Liberal cronies. He kept his word, I can guarantee

you that. The other thing he did not say is: I will be giving them to my

cronies. Because, Mr. Speaker, there was $200,000 spent on an advertising

contract, patting ourselves on the back because we signed the Atlantic Accord,

but it has not gone through the House of Commons yet. I hope it goes through

tomorrow, Mr. Speaker, because we need it here bad enough.

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to contracts, when you say something you have to

live by it. We are always hearing different issues like that, Mr. Speaker;

$200,000. The courthouse in Corner Brook: I hope the courthouse goes ahead in

Corner Brook, and I think it will. To hear the hon. member from that area saying

that we have $400,000 on a study on a plant and it will probably be built in the

next ten to twenty years - I am not making this up, Mr. Speaker. Those are his

own words and they are in print. There is a lot of money being spent in

different ways. It has nothing to do with the former administration, it has

nothing to do with the finances of this Province, but it has to do, Mr. Speaker,

with getting your priorities right.

When the minister stated to me, I didn't know what a strategy was, I looked

through the dictionary and there is another word there. It is called compassion,

and you have to have compassion for people, Mr. Speaker.

We are talking about road conditions. I have asked numerous questions to

different people in my area. What happens to the road conditions in this area?

The hon. members across the way were more or less saying, oh, the roads were bad

all along, well I want to say to the hon. members, the snow that fell this year

didn't fall under the Liberal administration, it fell this past fall, and

there is nobody on the roads.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BUTLER: I have travelled around the bay day in and day out, and I

went there more than once in fairly half decent snow storm, not to the point

that everything was closed down, but I am going to tell you the plows were

scarce. When I talk to the people at the depots, Mr. Speaker, they are saying to

me: We cannot do the work, we don't have the forces to do it, we don't have

the manpower. What are we hearing now? Thirteen depots closing down, summer

maintenance gone all astray, Mr. Speaker, and this is what is happening around

this Province.

Contacting out: Oh, no, there is not going to be any contracting out. Well, I

would like for someone on the government side to explain this to me. In Bay

Roberts they have a loader. What do they do? Because the loader is to the point

that they could not drive it up the highway and get it up to the gravel pit, in

the pit where they get their sand and everything, what do they do? Rather than

put on a flatbed and take it up there, and one of the workers in the Bay Roberts

office could operate it and work it all summer, they put a contract out. This

guy, God bless him, hope he makes a million dollars from it. He has his loader

up there and from my understanding it cost quite a few dollars, and here we are

with a loader in the yard. They won't put it on a flatbed to take it up there,

they would rather contract it out. We are going to see a lot of that, Mr.

Speaker. That you can be assured of.

Another case in point in my area: There are seven or eight backhoes behind

the depot in Bay Roberts. None of them are operational today, but for very few

dollars, $1,500, $8,000, $9,000, half of them could be up and running. What do

they do? They don't put five cents into the maintenance part and getting them

going, but contract out and hire a backhoe so that the backhoe can go down to

Port de Grave and clear the roads, with all the equipment up there and their

workers being laid off, Mr. Speaker, as everything is wonderful.

MR. DENINE: (Inaudible) purchase.

MR. BUTLER: It has nothing to do, I say to the hon. Member for Mount

Pearl, when it was purchased. It is having common sense, to put a few dollars

into it. The money that was wasted in sending Mr. Bill Rowe to Ottawa could have

bought backhoes, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BUTLER: I say to the hon. members opposite, talking about tendering,

and I mentioned it just now about the cronies, the Premier, when he was going

around, said there will be no more political appointments.

I guess he is true to his word, as we speak of today, Mr. Speaker, because he

has no one else left to appoint. They have all been appointed, every one of

them. I have letters in the system asking for information on how they were

appointed and so on, but no response back yet. No response back yet, but I guess

we will all hear about it. We will hear about it before too long.

Mr. Speaker, we talk about rural Newfoundland - a wonderful place. It is a

wonderful place, rural Newfoundland. We talk about rural Newfoundland. When the

Budget came down, I understand why the government said at the time, when they

came out - I think they were being honest and straightforward - that there could

be up to 4,000 people being laid off. We all know what effect that would have on

a rural area or an urban area, but now that the finances have become a little

bit better, thanks to Ottawa, millions of dollars coming in over the last twelve

months, we are saying that figure could be down now to somewhere around 2,000 or

less.

So, when it comes down to what I am looking at, did we really have to look at

and say we are going to get rid of 4,000 just because of the money purposes, and

forget about the services that were being offered to the people? Now that we

have a few dollars we are admitting: Oh, we need the people, we need the

services; but, surely goodness, the money that I just listed that has been

wasted on some of the issues that I have gone through, why put the people in

that turmoil, wondering what they are going to do from one day to the next?

We heard, Mr. Speaker - and this has nothing to do with the former

Administrations - that there will be no tax increases. Lo and behold, the first

Budget came down and there were 153 tax increases. I think it totalled up

somewhere around $25 million or $30 million. This was the new approach, and they

said there would be no tax increases.

This year we are talking about culture. Wonderful, Mr. Speaker, because we

have one of the greatest cultures in this world here in this Province, and I

agree with everything that is being done, every dollar that is being planned to

spend, but then we read, like the Arts and Culture Centres, I just forget the

dollar value now but I know it is quite a dollar that they are being asked to

cut from their budgets this year.

AN HON. MEMBER: Over $300,000.

MR. BUTLER: Over $300,000, I have been told by the hon. member.

Like I have said, I agree with culture and everything that can be done, Mr.

Speaker.

We talk about rural Newfoundland. I do not think there is anything more

devastating that is going to happen - and this has nothing to do with any former

Administrations, like we always hear back and forth, or the finances of this

Province - than the state that we find ourselves into today with the fish

harvesters.

Mr. Speaker, that is rural Newfoundland. That is rural Newfoundland and

Labrador and, when you listen to those people, they have major concerns - major

concerns. They are not just coming here, day in and day out, to look down at all

hon. members on either side of the House. They are here because they are

concerned. They are here because they do not agree with what is being proposed,

and all they are asking is that the Minister of Fisheries and the Premier of

this Province do what was said in a letter that was signed off on, that we will

sit down with the harvesters and plant works and go over this before anything is

brought forward.

The Minister of Fisheries, every day, talks about the four or five reports

that he has. That is true, he has the reports, but I am going to tell you, not

in either one of those reports does it say: Go ahead and implement this without

any concern or compassion for the people who are out there.

Mr. Speaker, if this industry does not get back on track fairly soon, rural

Newfoundland is sure going to find the effects of it. I can only speak from my

area, and I do not think my area is any different than any other. I can honestly

tell you, I have spoken to people out there who are in the car industry, car

salesmen, and they are saying that this time of the year, with the fishery about

ready to open up, everything would be blooming, and they are very fearful of

what is going to happen.

I went to building supply operators out there, Mr. Speaker, and they are

saying: Everything is on hold. We do not think we are going to be able to keep

all of our staff.

This is a major concern. I honestly think that the Minister of Fisheries -

and I said this before - knows what effect this is going to have on the

industry. He is a man who was on the boats and sailed the oceans. He was a part

of the fishery. I think this is why they are so upset with him, knowing that he

knows the system inside out and still he is forcing ahead with it. I believe,

Mr. Speaker, that comes right back to the Premier. I think the Premier is the

one we have to be after, asking him to really size this up again.

Mr. Speaker, like I said before, there are a lot of good things in this

Budget, there is no doubt about it, but there are many things that could be

looked at, and some of the money that has been spent, I believe, could have been

spent more wisely.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I know my time is coming very closely to an end so I

will thank you for the opportunity and take

part in the debate another day.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is certainly an honour for me to stand up and speak today on the Budget,

and it is particularly good that I speak shortly after the Member for Port de

Grave. He is a good friend of mine. We actually spoke - well, we played phone

tag this weekend past about issues in the House.

The big issue here, Mr. Speaker, is our philosophical differences about the

Budget of this Province, and this is why, and quite obvious why, I stand and sit

on this side of the House and he stands and sits on that side of the House, Mr.

Speaker. It is not certainly of a personal nature but I certainly disagree with

about 99 per cent of what he just said, and I would like to bring up a couple of

those things that he just mentioned.

The first thing he talked about was the shell game, the ever proverbial shell

game that we are playing. Well, Mr. Speaker, I would say that this government

has been more than accountable. It has laid its cards on the table. It was very

much the last government that played shell games, not only with the finances of

this Province but when you talk about the pending election and the amount of

promises that were made into the tens and tens of millions of dollars, Mr.

Speaker. Where could we afford to do it? The money simply was not there. I mean,

if you look at today's deficit, we are looking at a $12 billion deficit that

we inherited. That deficit could have gone, by 2008-2009, to $16 billion, Mr.

Speaker. We are currently servicing the debt at twenty-five cents out of every

dollar collected, and that would have been the forty cents out of every dollar

collected by 2008-2009.

Mr. Speaker, we talk about the lack of public services now, or the appearance

of lack of public services. Can you imagine if we had to take another fifteen

cents of every dollar collected to service our debt and our interest charge, Mr.

Speaker? The lack of stuff we would have for health care and so on, and

transportation, it would be worse again. Mr. Speaker, I want to salute the

people of this Province for finally taking the bull by the horns and making some

drastic changes.

One of the things he talked about that I could not believe, actually, I was

quite frankly taken strictly aback by, was him saying the inland fishery, he did

not agree with it increasing from 350,000 to 800,000.

Mr. Speaker, I have had the opportunity of meeting with numerous conservation

officers dealing with this program over the last year - some of the successes,

some of the things they needed - and each, to a man, was proud of the job they

did. What they have done is, they have taken a resource that was in declining

stock - it is still in declining stock, by the way, I might add. Wait now, let

me rephrase that. By 1992 numbers, the stock is not in as good a shape as it was

in 1992. However, there has been some improvement in some rivers around this

Province. What that does for tourism in this Province, it is another piece of

the pie, another piece of the puzzle that keeps tourists coming back here.

I have had the privilege of salmon fishing in the last two or three years, in

the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair's district. To see the people from

all over the world in her district staying for a night, staying for a week,

employing young people who are building camps on the river, who are working, who

are guiding, and to say that now we should reduce because it is a federal

initiative, we should not spend $800,000. I cannot believe it, Mr. Speaker. This

is a resource that the federal government has decided not to protect. Mr.

Speaker, I am a firm believer it is our resource and we have no other choice but

to protect it. If we do not protect it, in years down the road we will have no

salmon fishery, no recreation salmon fishery that tens of thousands of people

enjoy every year.

I have corresponded with the President of the Salmonid Council of

Newfoundland and Labrador, as well as their national body, and I can tell you,

they are in 100 per cent support of this. Anglers around this Province are in

100 per cent support of this. Last year the success of that program saw some - I

cannot remember the exact number now, but I know there were dozens of poaching

charges laid. At last, we are about to curb one of the desperate things that are

happening in this Province and try to get it back under control. So, it really

shocks me when I heard the member opposite say that was a bad move and that was

bad money spent. It certainly bewilders me.

Another thing he talked about was the Ottawa office, and this has brought

some public debate for some time. We have to look what this Province

accomplished while the Ottawa office was actually there. We had a man there for

some time, by the name of Mr. Bill Rowe, and I think he did a remarkable job.

During that time we saw a Health Care Accord negotiated worth, I believe,

somewhere between $40 million or $50 million. We saw a change in the

equalization formula that saw, again, tens of millions of dollars come to this

Province. We are now somewhere in the $100 million range. Then we saw an

Atlantic Accord deal worked out. An Atlantic Accord which will see billions of

dollars come to this Province. So I say, it is billions of new dollars coming to

this Province over the next number of years. Having that office at a cost of

$500,000 a year, or the initial cost was $500,000 a year, to me, it is money

very well spent.

Mr. Speaker, in my opinion this has been a very good Budget when it comes to

the health care of this Province. There was a need, and this government - and I

want to take my hat off to this caucus, to this Cabinet, and to the ministers in

particular, who had to make some very, very tough decisions around the Cabinet

Table. I am proud to say that I sit with this government -

MR. BARRETT: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: I will always be proud to say, I might add to the Member for

Bellevue, that they chose the number one priority of the people of this

Province, and that would be health care, Mr. Speaker.

MR. BARRETT: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, the first thing, I guess, and the most important

thing, was the reduction of wait times in this Province. Waiting times have been

climbing. I will be the first to admit, it was an issue for residents in my

district. Wait times, many of them had to wait for different services, Mr.

Speaker. I am glad to say that there is an initial $23.2 million put into

waiting list reductions this year, of which $9 million will be repetitive year

after year after year. The $23.2 million was to buy the extra equipment, but we

are putting an extra $9 million in year after year after year to reduce surgery

lineups in this Province. I am certainly proud to be part of a government that

would do this.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to lay out a couple of the changes, a couple of

things we are about to do. One is a new MRI unit, at a cost of $2.6 million. An

extra 2,500 exams in this Province and will reduce wait lists from twelve months

to eight months. A phenomenal achievement, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: As well, Mr. Speaker, there will be two new CAT scanners put

in the St. John's hospital system at a cost of $2 million. We will see an

extra 4,000 exams next year, and will bring a five-week wait list down to a

two-week wait list, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: We will see three nuclear medicine gamma cameras, Mr.

Speaker, at a cost of $1.8 million. We will see another 1,000 exams next year

and reduce the wait times to three to four months. We will see two ultrasound

units, at a cost of $720,000, and reduce the wait times from twenty-one weeks to

seven weeks.

As well, Mr. Speaker, and this is one that is near and dear to my heart, the

orthopaedic joint replacement program, with a $2.6 million infusion of cash and

an extra 340 surgeries. Mr. Speaker, I can say this from a personal point of

view and personal perspective. Certainly, my mother, whom I live with currently,

had over the years severe arthritis and she has had her two knees replaced now,

and her two hips. Mr. Speaker, the quality of life, you cannot imagine, because

you live, from the time you lie down at night until the time you get up in the

morning, in constant pain. There is no relief for it, there is no pill that you

can take, you have to put up with it, there is no way around it. To have the

increase in the orthopedic joint replacement, Mr. Speaker, certainly hits home

with me. Hopefully, in my mother's case, she won't need any joints replaced.

I tell her she is worth a million dollars now. Please God, it will help others,

Mr. Speaker, and as I said, the removal of the pain from their day to day lives,

although not totally removed, is certainly a plus. I certainly salute the

government for making that decision.

Cancer surgery, Mr. Speaker: Everybody's family has been touched by cancer.

I guess there is not a member of the House, probably not a person in

Newfoundland and Labrador, who hasn't been touched by cancer. In that case,

Mr. Speaker, you will see another $3.5 million, another 740 surgeries next year,

a 30 per cent reduction in the waiting times for cancer patients in this

Province.

I can go on, Mr. Speaker. There is cardiac surgery, an extra $500,000, an

extra 184 cases; echocardiograms, $750,000, another 900 exams; and you will see

a five-month wait list down to five weeks. That is certainly a significant

achievement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, we all, in this political world, certainly,

spend a lot of time talking politics. I am sure all members of this House have

people - I think, she might be the only one that I have that I don't talk

politics to. I have a friend of the family, actually, and we never talk

politics. We socialize together, we travel together on times, but politics is

not something we talk about. It is just one of those things. Shortly after our

Budget, she called one night for my wife - and she works in the medical field -

and we talked for a minute and finally she said: Boy, a great budget. I started

to laugh. I said, here it comes, here comes a good crack, because that is the

only time we talk about politics, is over fun. I kept on talking to her and

began to realize that she was very, very serious. No, she said, Terry, I am

serious. I said: Gee, you never mentioned politics or budgets to me before. No,

she said, but at work there is a new attitude. I said: Is that right? She said -

and she has only been in the medical field now for probably three or four years.

She was doing her education for probably some nine or ten years to become what

she has become. She said: The mood around the health operation where she is at

is unbelievable. Because of the new infusion of equipment and the reduction of

wait lists, Mr. Speaker, these people, the actual front line workers, have

noticed the affect. These are the people, the most important people, and the

people we should be listening to. It is good to see that it is really being felt

on the front lines of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, another thing I would like to touch on, we get it occasionally:

Well, you do not cover everything. This drug needs to be covered, and there is

another drug. There is no doubt, nobody wants to take away what drugs need to be

covered in this Province. If we had a bottomless pit of money I am sure there is

a multitude of drugs that we would love to cover, but we have a $7 million

increase in that plan this year, up to a total of $114 million. Mr. Speaker,

that is a 10.3 per cent increase in the money we are putting into the drug

program of this Province.

We are going to see people with cancer, people with arthritis, people with

cardiac disease, people with lung diseases, people with diabetes - in total,

100,000 people in this Province will be affected by this increase in money and

will be touched because of these new drugs becoming available. Like I said,

there are many, many more that we would like to cover, and hopefully with time

and as the finances of this Province improves we will continue to build on that

list, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, another item that comes to mind quite a bit, and it has been

knocked in this House - members have said it is ridiculous thing - is the

Province's commitment to a provincial training centre, and its commitment of

$1.3 million toward that training facility. I do not know how many people in

this House have had the privilege, but I certainly did, to use the facility in

Torbay. That was a facility that was there for as long as I can remember. I

remember going there as a young kid, playing junior high sports. I played

badminton there, I played table tennis there, I played volleyball there, to

provincial championships. People from all around the Province came together,

Newfoundland and Labrador, came from all over, and played in this facility,

simply because of its size. It was big enough to host the major events. Because

of disrepair and rundown, that building has gone the way of the winter

hopefully, Mr. Speaker; it is gone. Now, under the guidance of the Newfoundland

Rugby Club - which I want to especially take my hat off to, for coming up with a

plan to bring us back to some form of provincial training facility. The total

cost of that is $4.3 million, of which the government has taken the lead and

went out and put the $1.3 million up first. I have every faith in the players

involved with the Newfoundland Rugby Union, Mr. Speaker, that they will make

this happen. They are a great organization to carry the ball on this, and I know

certainly that the other sporting groups and the rest of the sporting community

in this Province will certainly come together behind that group.

Another increase - and, you know, some might look at this as a very small

increase but it was certainly a significant increase and . I want to thank the

Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, and Minister Responsible for

Labrador Affairs, for coming to the plate for my district last year, and that is

dealing with the community recreation grants, and the increase of $100,000,

bringing that to $327,000.

What happened last year, I had a group of squash players who play out of a

facility, the same facility as the swimmers. It is a squash court and swimming

facility all into one. Hopefully it will be reopened soon. It is currently

closed, but will reopen any time soon is my prediction. What we saw was, myself

and the Member for Topsail put some effort into this and we got a film facility,

a camera that can be used underwater for the swimmers of our district as well as

for photographing squash players. Now, these squash players are not your typical

squash players, if I could. They do not play it for recreation. They play at a

very high level. Most of them have been involved in Canada Games and Eastern

Canadian Championships. The new level of coaching and technique today is not

throwing out the ball and the racquet and saying: Here, boys, go to it, and the

last one standing gets to go to the Canada Games.

Now there is a lot more detail put into the coaching aspect. They film the

kids. They tell them where they are going wrong. They work on their footwork.

They work on their shots. It is a very significant tool. Again, when we see

things like this available for our young people, it is all about participaction,

it is all about fitness, and it is all about a better quality of life for the

residents of our Province.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot go on and talk about the Budget without mentioning my

district, and how this directly affects my district; in particular, the

Multi-Year Capital Works Program on water and sewer. I found out recently -

well, I have known for some time but I had to get an actual number of the water

and sewer needs in my District of Conception Bay South. By 1998 numbers, of

which the last projections were done, it was $19.8 million; $19.8 million by

1998 numbers.

In the part of CBS of the Member for Topsail, we were looking at $5.5

million. So, combined, by 1998 list numbers, we are looking at in excess of $25

million worth of needs. If you put in today's figure, I am sure a $30 million

estimate would certainly be within the realm of some accuracy.

The Minister of Municipal Affairs recently negotiated with the town, and with

myself, an agreement for $7.1 million over three years for water and sewer and

roads. What that will enable the Town of CBS to do, it will enable them to

budget for the next three years. I know it is something that the Provincial

Federation of Municipalities has been a big mover in. I know every time I have

met with our town, that is something that they approve of, and certainly wanted

to see a three year plan. It enables them to do the planning, to tie it all into

their budget and to make things work.

Mr. Speaker, as it relates to Holyrood water and sewer, we are still working

on some announcements for Holyrood. There is currently one in the system, with

another couple hopefully coming soon. There are still some details to be worked

out, and I certainly would not want to make it public now.

Mr. Speaker, what happened last year was that the Town of Holyrood applied

for some green funding under the federal government. Actually, it is from the

federal municipal - what am I looking for? The infrastructure, it is the green

fund that is run by the Canadian Federation of Municipalities. They were

fortunate enough to get, I think, around $170,000 or $180,000 to put an

experimental system, if you will - I think there is one in place in Marystown

called an Abidas system - and that is going to look after a place in Holyrood

called Country Path Road, who would probably never be able to get water and

sewer services simply because of the cost per unit, per household. It would have

certainly been years down the road and would not have been a number one priority

for a town the size of Holyrood, certainly with the needs that they have. What

happened in that case was, the federal government came to the plate with a

third, the green funding - the town was allowed to use - the Minister of

Municipal Affairs allowed the green fund to replace the town's one-third and,

of course, then the provincial government kicked in one-third as well.

Mr. Speaker, we are hoping to have that - it is about a $650,000 project - up

and started this current year. I say to the residents in the area who have been

lobbying hard for that for a lot of years, they have a real problem there with

sewer in their area - it is kind of a wetland, if you will, in certain areas -

it is certainly good to see.

As well, Mr. Speaker, we currently have negotiated with the Minister of

Municipal Affairs again, who has come to the plate for the Town of Holyrood on a

rescue vehicle. I do not know how many people in the House know it, but a rescue

vehicle, if needed, does a lot of the calls on the Trans-Canada for bad

accidents and so on, and, as well, does the other towns in the area. If there is

a serious accident, Holyrood will get the call for a rescue vehicle.

Mr. Speaker, the rescue vehicle has not been ordered yet. We are still trying

to negotiate some prices with buyers, and with government and so on. Hopefully,

that will be done in the near days and weeks. It is certainly a big thing for

Holyrood, and indeed the whole area.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. Member for Conception Bay South that his time has expired.

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, if I could, just time to clue up?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave, the hon. member.

MR. FRENCH: I appreciate that. Thank you very much.

In this year's Budget, Mr. Speaker, there was an announcement in road's

work for $33.7 million for roads. That is an increase from the previous year, I

think it was $23 million. I am proud to say, and delighted with the Minister of

Transportation, who last year saw $750,000 in road work being spent on Route 60

in Conception Bay South and Holyrood. As long as I have been alive, I can never

remember seeing an asphalt spreader on Route 60. Let me tell you, the roads up

there are in disrepair. The volume of traffic that we have to deal with in

Conception Bay South, one of the fastest growing municipalities in the Province,

is phenomenal. I want to take my hat off to the minister, last year we saw a

number of kilometres done, a huge

section in Holyrood, as well as a huge

section

in CBS. We hope to continue on with that program again this year. I have had

numerous conversations with the minister. Hopefully, we will get some more

repairs done again this year.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank you for my comments, and hopefully I will

some more comments as time goes on.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate an opportunity to have a few words here on the Budget. Some

people do not understand, I guess in the general public, exactly what we do here

and why we are taking turns getting up and down, and having speeches, and why

are we here talking about a Budget that was actually read by the Minister of

Finance here some weeks ago. Of course, the purpose is that the Budget has not

been passed.

The minister announced what he had in his Budget, the details of it, but our

role here now as legislators of course, is to debate that back and forth, and at

the end of the day there will be a vote to decide whether or not the Budget

becomes law, and given, of course, that government have more members in the

Opposition, it probably will become law. It is also to point out, of course, to

the general public, that not everything that is in the Budget is necessarily

good and not everything, of course, that is in the Budget is bad. I am one, for

example, I certainly like to give credit where credit is due. There are some

things in this Budget that, no doubt, are good. You have to tell it like it is.

Where a government, any government, deserves credit for doing some things, they

deserve the credit for it.

For example, I am quite pleased and impressed that government saw fit, in the

health care piece of the Budget, to add some more drugs to coverage in this

Province. It is certainly needed. I have friends and relatives of my own who

will use those very drugs, actually. So, it is good to see that governments

have, at least, made some moves in the right directions. It did not go far

enough. Now, you can use all kinds of reasons as to why you did not go far

enough. A person can say we did not go far enough because we need that balance

between what money we have in the cookie jar versus what the needs are, and we

have to balance it out. We cannot drive ourselves too far in debt. Some people

would claim that you should look after people before you look after the cookie

jar. That is, I guess, where we come. We are more into looking after the needs

of the people. That is why - not withstanding the few things that are in the

Budget that are to be commended - there are many things that are not in the

Budget that needs to be done. Some of these things, you can take a shotgun

approach to this or you can take a general approach, or you can be very specific

on issues. It is kind of difficult with the Budget document to get your head

around it all in one speaking session.

A couple of things that I noticed, for example, common sense things that are

not there do not mean a lot to some people but mean a lot to others. The

Minister of Government Services and lands, for example, there is a little

reference in this Province, we make millions and millions of dollars a year from

the Registry of Deeds in this Province. If you get a mortgage or if you buy any

piece of land, for example, by law now you go get it registered, and when you do

you will pay a fee. Then, of course, if you go to a law firm to get a mortgage

somebody does a search on your property.

There are people in St. John's, for example, who have companies - there are

ten, twelve, fifteen of these companies around, searching services, that make a

living off searching titles in the Registry of Companies, and all the law firms

in the Province, for example, use these searchers. You call in when your client

wants a mortgage done. In Port aux Basques, for example, you ought to retain a

searcher and they go into the registry and do the search. What happens, that

searcher, for example - as