May 4, 2005 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No.

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: This afternoon we have members' statements as follows: the

hon. the Member for the District of Gander -

MR. E. BYRNE: A point of privilege, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: A point of privilege by the Government House Leader.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is often said in the House that when you rise on a point of

privilege, it is not often you do it because it is a serious point, I guess, you

make. I have been in situations in my twelve years in the House - have found

myself offsides with the Speaker on a number of occasions and have, I guess, as

somebody in the House who, over time, has found myself on challenging the

rulings of the Chair, both inside and outside of the House, have come to

understand the rules of what the House is about.

My point, I guess, that I raise today is with respect to comments made

publicly by the Leader of the Opposition last night on an Open Line program. I

want to just read for a minute, Mr. Speaker - it is not a point of privilege but

really is what I believe, in determining what he did last night and saying what

he did, holds the House in contempt. In saying that - I want to get to my case

in a moment, but I do reference when the current Premier was Leader of the

Opposition, who made comments in a local newspaper at the time, questioning the

impartiality of the Chair, basically questioning the authority and impartiality

of the Chair. Everybody knows in the House of Assembly that if you question the

impartiality of the Chair or if you question a decision of the Chair, that there

are appropriate ways to deal with it but speaking out publicly really questions

the authority of the entire House. Now, when the now Premier, when he was Leader

of the Opposition did that, the now Leader of the Opposition was Premier and his

House Leader, Mr. Lush, at the time, rose and here is what he said with respect

to the

article that appeared in The Telegram : It is the responsibility of

all members to ensure that the confidence of the Chair is maintained because it

is the confidence of the Chair which keeps the House going. Without that

confidence, the House of Assembly or Parliament would be on the brink.

Last night the Leader of the Opposition - and I will just quote quickly what

he said on an Open Line program in reference to the Deputy Speaker, who was in

the Chair, who asked the Leader of the Opposition, he made a determination about

what was unparliamentary. I am quoting the Leader of the Opposition: So, I

believe they have made a mistake. He asked me to withdraw and the way our rules

work, Linda, if I withdrew it, then from this day on it would become

unparliamentary. Mr. Speaker, he knows that is not true. You could say something

today or use a word today that is not unparliamentary, use it again tomorrow and

it could be considered parliamentary, depending on the situation, depending on

the reference that was made, how was it made, what way it was said. There is no

way to codify or to say: These words today are unparliamentary forever. That

does not work. Modern day Houses do not operate that way, and the Leader of the

Opposition knows it.

Here is what I think puts him offsides with the Chair, Mr. Speaker. He said:

The Deputy Speaker, Mr. Fitzgerald, was - and I believe he made a mistake. It is

fine to believe that but we are obligated, and there is precedent right across

the country - every member in this House knows that - if you are going to

question a decision of the Chair, there are ways to do it. Publicly saying that

the Chair of the House made a mistake really holds the House in contempt.

I guess the difference between privilege, or someone's privileges being

breached, which, if the member's privileges were breached, are this: Members

have certain rights, and they are known and listed.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: I am getting to it. It is important to get to it, and I am

just about to, I say to the Member for Bellevue.

Privileges are known rights, to come and go from the House when you want,

unobstructed, et cetera, et cetera, but contempt for the House is different.

I will just quote very quickly the authority on parliamentary privilege in

Canada, which all of us use here in the House: Contempt is more aptly described

as an offence against the authority or dignity of the House. While privilege may

be codified - or, in other words, it may be listed what privileges are -

contempt is not, because new forms of obstruction are constantly being devised

and Parliament must be able to invoke its jurisdiction to protect itself against

these new forms.

Mr. Speaker, I submit to you that the Leader of the Opposition should

withdraw his comments on questioning a decision of the Speaker at the time. If

he has a fundamental disagreement with it, he should go and visit the Speaker;

but, having said that, to go out publicly - and when he was Premier he advanced

the same argument and the now Premier, then Leader of the Opposition, stood in

this House and withdrew the comments he made in public.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Absolutely, there is a difference.

Mr. Speaker, the fact is, I believe that the comments made publicly - I

believe there is a sound case for it - I ask you to judge that. I believe that

the House has been held in contempt as a result of those comments.

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will just respond briefly to the comments of the Government House Leader.

We have had many issues raised in this House in the last couple of weeks, all

kinds of issues of security, who is in charge of the place, whether it is the

Speaker, whether it is the government, whether it is the Premier, and emotions

have been running pretty high, not only in this House but I would submit in this

Province, as a result of actions by this government.

The Government House Leader talks about privileges. One of the basic tenets

and one of the basic privileges that a person has, not only in this House but in

society, is called the freedom of speech. Now, the Government House Leader is

famous for standing up in this House and telling us: Don't try to do through

the back door what you cannot do through the front door.

I submit, Mr. Speaker, that the comments by the Opposition Leader on the Open

Line show is an exercise of his freedom of speech, and if the government thinks

that, by trying to invoke privileges in a Parliament here, they are going to

muzzle us and shut the Opposition up when we exercise our freedom of speech,

they have another thing coming. This has nothing to do with anybody's breach

of anybody's privilege in this House. This has all to do with an individual

voicing his freedom of speech.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to make a couple of comments on that.

I am well aware of the matter to which the Government House Leader refers.

The current Premier, while Leader of the Opposition, made comments to the media

which were not that the Speaker had made a mistake - because I do not think

perfection is demanded of a Speaker or Deputy Speaker - but was that the Speaker

was bias against him. That is a very different matter and has to do with the

function of the House, and whether or not the Speaker is impartial and

independent, and it was recognized that there was a proper forum for bringing

that up within the House.

It is no different to say that the Deputy Speaker made a mistake than to say

a judge made a mistake. Lawyers do that all the time. They say: We think the

judge made a mistake so we are gong to the Court of Appeal; or, we think the

Court of Appeal made a mistake so we are going to the Supreme Court of Canada;

or, you can even say the Supreme Court of Canada made a mistake. You have to

live by it, but you do not have to agree with it.

There is a very big difference than suggesting that perhaps the Deputy

Speaker was somehow imperfect, because I do not think perfection is what we

expect here. We do expect regard for the Chair in this House, and regard for the

rulings of the Chair in this House, and I think by leaving the House when asked

to do so by the Chair, the Leader of the Opposition in fact did that. That is

showing respect for the Chair.

I recall one time, not a very long time ago, when the Government House Leader

was asked to leave by the Chair and did not leave for a day or so, causing a

major crisis, and I think he has learned from that.

MR. E. BYRNE: I did apologize.

MR. HARRIS: He did apologize, and he did learn from that.

I think the Leader of the Opposition, by leaving, even though he disagreed

with the ruling, left the House, and to say afterwards that he felt a mistake

had been made is a legitimate exercise in freedom of speech and not a matter of

privilege before this House.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

As members would know, the role of the Speaker is to determine whether or not

a prima facie case of breach of privilege exists.

The Speaker will review Hansard, and he will also seek the transcripts from

the public broadcast; I think it must have been on VOCM last evening. I will get

that and review it all, consult with the Table officers, and come back to the

House on tomorrow with a ruling.

MR. GRIMES: A point of privilege, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: A point of privilege is raised by the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to raise a point of privilege with respect to my expulsion from

the Legislature yesterday. I believe it was a clear violation of my privilege as

a Member of this House of Assembly. I was instructed by our rules, by the Deputy

Speaker who was in the Chair at the time, to withdraw certain remarks, which I

refused to do knowing full well that he would enforce the rules and ask me to

leave the House, which I did out of respect for this House and its rules. I did

choose, Mr. Speaker, to leave the House when requested to do so by the Deputy

Speaker, even though I believe that everything he had done was in error up to

that point. Mr. Speaker, I chose not to disrupt the House further but to make my

points outside, which I have done, and to arise at the first opportunity when

returning to the House to raise the issue again, which I am doing now. I have

also written Your Honour with respect to this issue.

Mr. Speaker, if I could just take a minute, because I believe this is

extremely important and serious. My view and understanding, having been a member

here for sixteen years, is that the role of the Speaker is to maintain order and

decorum and enforce our rules; not to make his or her own rules but to enforce

our rules. The rules are clearly spelled out in our Standing Orders, that we

have precedents of this House, other jurisdictions that follow the same rules

where there have been precedents and other authorities. Mr. Speaker, the rules,

over hundreds of years of democratic debate in Parliaments like this, are pretty

well defined around the whole issue of acceptable parliamentary language as

opposed to unacceptable unparliamentary language. Every time in the past -

because I have been found guilty, I admit, of using unparliamentary language in

this Legislature from time to time. Every single time in the past, Mr. Speaker,

when that has been brought to my attention by a person in the Chair - Speaker,

Deputy Speaker or otherwise - with an indication and a citation showing the

precedent whereby that language has clearly been deemed to be unparliamentary, I

have followed the instructions of the Chair and withdrawn the unparliamentary

language. I think everyone in this House knows that to be the history and the

record of my involvement.

I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, that it is not the role

of the Chair to try to control debate by stifling what members can say or how

they go about saying it. I have heard the former Premier, the Member for

Lewisporte, the Minister of Transportation and Works, say it in his own words

just recently, that everyone makes their point in their own particular way. It

is also, I would contend, Mr. Speaker, not the Chair's role to try to protect

government members from political references being made to them or of them. They

do that themselves very well in their own debate in answers to questions and

dealing with the points.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, just because all of us here know that the Minister of

Finance - whom I addressed by his title, and Hansard will show that, our record

will show that. I addressed him as the Minister of Finance, recognizing his

position in the government, because he doesn't like to be reminded in debate

or questions or otherwise of his current potential conflict of interest. It is

no reason for the Chair to try to stop a member from talking about it or

questioning it. As a matter of fact, I have questioned that very issue as to

whether or not the Minister of Finance is in a potential conflict of interest on

numerous occasions in this House and never has there been an issue raised as to

whether that language was parliamentary or not. The questions were accepted, the

questions were answered, the explanations were given. Yesterday, in my view, Mr.

Speaker, was an unwarranted intrusion by the Chair, the Deputy Speaker at the

time, into a free-flowing debate. There was nothing unparliamentary said. A

reference to the Minister of Finance and then an aside saying: Old conflict of

interest himself. Mr. Speaker, that was exactly what was said in the midst of a

free-flowing debate. The Chair, in my view, as I said publicly last night, made

a mistake, erred in judgement and stood and suggested that the language was

unparliamentary and should be withdrawn.

I asked the Chair, Mr. Speaker, if he would even recess, or try to find some

precedent, or some previous place, or some quotation, or some ruling, or some

order on which he could justify suggesting that the language that I used was

unparliamentary, and none was forthcoming. So then following the rules, the

Chair decided to proceed to the next step, which was to ask me to withdraw three

times, which I refused to do. Our rules are - I couldn't even say something

that was totally unparliamentary. There are well-defined lists of those that are

unparliamentary every time you say them. I could say that five or six times, but

as long as I was willing to withdraw it the third time, I am allowed to stay

here. When I said something that no one could suggest to me was in any way

unparliamentary, something that I have said in this House many times before in

the last number of weeks and was never challenged on as to the parliamentary or

unparliamentary nature of it, that a Chair, in my view, made a mistake. But out

of respect for that Chair, when he followed the orders, I left the Legislature.

I believe I was deprived of my privilege to be here yesterday in error.

I have written you, Mr. Speaker, asking you to review the written record, to

review the tapes, because there was some suggestion that body language might

have made innocuous parliamentary language unparliamentary, and I believe the

tapes will show anything but that. I have asked for an apology, because I

believe if we have to respect the Chair then one of the things that does make a

democracy work is that if a mistake has been made the acknowledgment of it makes

the process work even better.

I would ask, Mr. Speaker, that you do take my written representation that I

passed along to your office this morning seriously, that you do review the

circumstance, because I do believe that my privileges were seriously breached

yesterday and I was deprived of an opportunity to participate in the full debate

yesterday and last night by a mistake and an error in judgement made by the

Deputy Speaker while he was chairing the session and the proceedings in the

House of Assembly.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to state my case.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Leader of the Opposition has asked for a ruling, and I think the member

makes a serious point. There is a question as to how one proceeds. In a question

like that, whether it is a ruling that is not subject to appeal under our rules,

but how one deals with that is an important point. The fact that he has raised

it at the first opportunity is appropriate. I have not had sufficient warning of

this to make any comment on the precedents of the House, but it seems to me,

Your Honour, something that should be carefully researched. We need to know

whether or not this is a matter of privilege that can be dealt with in this

House or if there are other methods whereby recourse may be had for a mistake of

this nature, without overturning the rules of the Speaker or having the kind of

circumstance that we had before where a member who is dissatisfied with a ruling

ups the ante by refusing to leave.

I think it is a serious point and look to Your Honour to do some careful

research and get back to the House on it.

MR. SPEAKER: I thank the members for their presentations.

Members will know that the Chair extended some liberties this afternoon to

make these presentations, but under normal circumstances the Chair should only

be questioned or challenged by way of a substantive motion. We did, in the

interest of democracy and freedom of speech, permit the dialogue to go beyond

where it quite normally has been.

The Chair will review the entire matter and will come back to the House very

shortly, hopefully by tomorrow or Monday, with a decision.

The Members' Statements are as follows: The hon. the Member for Gander; the

hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave; the hon. the Member for the

District of Mount Pearl; the hon. the Member for the District of Grand Falls-Buchans;

the hon. the Member for the District of Labrador West; and the hon. the Member

for the District of Bay of Islands.

The hon. the Member for the District of Gander.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize

the life and accomplishments of a dedicated and great Newfoundlander.

Mr. Speaker, this week has seen the passing of Mr. Edgar Baird of Gander, at

the age of ninety-three. Mr. Baird is noted for his distinguished careers in

aviation and forestry. At the age of twenty-four, he became Chief Woods Ranger

for Newfoundland and Labrador. He eventually served as Flight Lieutenant in the

Royal Air Force, and as Superintendent of Newfoundland Overseas Forestry Corps.

Mr. Baird's accomplishments continued after his war service as he operated

successful business ventures, including bush flying, hunting camps and

lumbering. Mr. Baird is renowned as the person who built the first private

dwelling in Gander in 1951. He was later appointed the first Chairman of the

Gander Local Improvement District.

Mr. Baird has been honoured twice by the Town of Gander, having both a street

and a local trail named in his honour. In 1987, the Canadian Institute of

Forestry recognized his achievements and presented him with the Forestry Merit

Award. Most recently, his lifetime of unselfish dedication to our Province was

recognized with the awarding of the Order of Newfoundland.

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

Mr. Baird and his many contributions to Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to recognize a talented young lady from my district who has been

recognized for her artistic work in honouring the many who have fought and died

for our freedom during World War I and World War II.

Mr. Speaker, each year students from all over the Province recognize the

price paid for freedom and promote the theme of remembrance by competing in the

Royal Canadian Legion's Remembrance Day Literary and Poster contest. These

poster submissions are forwarded to the Royal Canadian Provincial Command Office

here in St. John's.

Along with being selected as the best in the Province, winners in the senior

categories are awarded a trip to Beaumont Hamel to tour the memorials and

participate in the July 1 Remembrance Day Ceremonies.

Randye Lynch, a Level III student at Ascension Collegiate in Bay Roberts was

the winner in this contest. Her colour poster entitled, "Reaching Out For

Memories" was honoured for its tremendous artistic content. Her poster

shows a grieving woman standing over a grave covered with poppies, holding a

letter. In the background, the same woman is bidding goodbye to her husband

before he leaves for the war.

Mr. Speaker, Randye's poster submission was supported by the Royal Canadian

Legion, Bay Roberts.

I ask all members of this hon. House to recognize her achievement and to

recognize the Royal Canadian Legion for their work in ensuring our students

recognize the sacrifice that was given during World War I and World War II.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DENINE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today, Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to the nominees and the

winner of the 2004 Mount Pearl Citizen of the Year.

The City of Mount Pearl, in conjunction with the Mount Pearl Kinsmen Club,

hosts this event each and every year,

whereas they select someone from the

community for this very prestigious award. To be nominated as Citizen of the

Year is a reward in itself. It is a reflection of a person's commitment of

enhancing the lives of others and making the City of Mount Pearl a better place

to live.

This year, Mr. Speaker, the nominees were: Helen Baggs, Steve Best, Brenda

Butt, Betty Cole, Claudette Coombs, Catherine Fagan, Ian Graham, Dan Maher,

Maxine Thistle, and Clare Wall.

Mr. Speaker, this year's Citizen of the Year is Catherine Fagan, and I

would like to mention some of the contributions that Mrs. Fagan has made to our

City: Lifetime member of the Provincial Catholic Women's League, serving as

President in 2004; she is a member of the church community Bereavement Team and

in 2004 she chaired the World Prayer Day; a member of the Mount Pearl Seniors

Independence Group; door-to-door canvasser for the Lung Association; Salvation

Army Christmas Kettle volunteer; Knights of Columbus volunteer; Canadian Society

volunteer; volunteers her time during the week visiting and shopping for seniors

with Alzheimer's -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

MR. DENINE: Leave just to -

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MR. DENINE: - a volunteer for the past two years with the Father John B.

Kent Literacy support team, helping Grade 1 and Grade 2 students at Mary Queen

of the World School.

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

congratulating all of the nominees and this year's Citizen of the Year,

Catherine Fagan.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to be in attendance last evening at the

Newfoundland and Labrador Organization of Women Entrepreneurs, NLOWE, 2005

Entrepreneur of the Year Awards Gala, held at Fairmont Newfoundland, where a

constituent of mine, Michelle Critch of Badger, was named the 2005 Central

Regional Entrepreneur of the Year.

Mr. Speaker, Michelle Critch is the owner-operator of her own salon called

Hair Alive. She started her business twenty-two years ago at the age of

twenty-one, and over the years she has grown her business by providing quality

service to her clients. She is the first to say that she gets a great deal of

satisfaction listening and talking to her clients, and she has been a source of

encouragement to young people in her own community of Badger, many of whom have

since gone on to become well accomplished in their own careers.

Mr. Speaker, the self-discipline that has allowed Michelle success in her own

business is also evident in her many accomplishments in the sport of karate. She

is a provincial, national and world champion, whose most recent accolade was

winning a gold medal at the World Karate Championship in Switzerland, October 8,

Michelle has faced many challenges over the years, with the most devastating

being the Badger flood of 2003. Even though her own business was under water,

she faced that ordeal head on and was up and running again in a matter of days.

Her determination, hard work and commitment to everything she does makes her so

deserving of this award.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am very proud of her success. She is definitely an inspiration to others.

Mr. Speaker, I would like all member of this hon. House to join with me in

congratulating Michelle Critch on being named Central Regional Entrepreneur of

the Year, and I wish her continued success in the future.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to compliment the Atom A hockey team from Labrador West, who

participated in a hockey tournament in Baie Verte during the Easter break.

Mr. Speaker, the team won the silver medal and I congratulate them on their

achievement; however, my statement today is not about winning or losing. It is

about an even greater reason to be proud of them.

All too often, Mr. Speaker, we hear about who won or lost. We hear of any

fights that may occur, of unruly conduct or bad attitudes, but seldom do we hear

the good things. However, this is such a situation, Mr. Speaker, and it is

worthy of note. I believe it is best described by reading a letter written to

the media in Labrador West.

It says: I am writing to congratulate the children who represented your fine

town in the past Easter hockey tournament. Unfortunately, the children did not

bring home the gold medal but they can hold themselves proud and the town should

honour them for the exemplary conduct put forth. Manners that are seldom used or

heard any more were used constantly, and all who attended exercised patience.

He congratulated the people of Labrador and the team, Mr. Speaker, on their

proud achievements and they way that they conducted themselves.

Mr. Speaker, the players and coaches and parents are to be commended, and you

can be sure that the people of Labrador West take great pride in our young

people for being such great ambassadors for our communities.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to recognize a group

of athletes from my district who attend Templeton Collegiate High School in

Gillams.

Under the guidance of coaches Derek Locke and Clinton Byrne, the Templeton

Tigers Wrestling Club had a very successful year. In February, eighteen

wrestlers represented the school to compete in the Provincial Age Group

Championships. They won eighteen medals, including ten gold. The team placed

third overall and won the Senior Boys Division. In mid-March, team members,

Adrian Byrne and Matt Cassidy, travelled to Charlottetown, P.E.I. to compete in

the Atlantic Championships. Both wrestlers were medal winners, with Adrian

winning the silver and Matt winning the bronze.

In early April, both the boys and girls teams won the High School Regional

Banners and qualified for the Provincials with all twenty-eight members winning

medals, including twenty gold. Overall, so far this year, the Templeton Tigers

wrestling club has won over seventy-five individual medals and three team

awards.

I ask all members of the House to join with me in congratulating these

students for their sporting achievements and wish them well in future

competitions.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

It being Wednesday, under our Standing Orders, unless we have leave, we have

to go to -

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: We have leave to continue with routine proceedings. I have a

request by the Government House Leader, the Member for Kilbride, if he could

have leave to make a member's statement.

Has leave been granted?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride, and Government House

Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise to ask the House to note the passing of a resident of the

District of Kilbride, a Mr. Les Bruce. While he would be known to many people in

the House, particularly on the opposite side, as a political activist and

somebody heavily involved in the Liberal Party, I know that on Monday past he

was buried.

He will be remembered most as a loving father, a loving husband and a loving

grandfather. An individual who has made, I believe, an outstanding contribution

to the community that he has lived in, in a variety of forums through the

Knights of Columbus, et cetera.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the House, if we could, and all members join

in passing on our condolences to his wife, his siblings and his family, and if

the House would mind doing that on our behalf.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

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

Minister Responsible for Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House this afternoon to

inform members of a significant ceremony I attended last Thursday on behalf of

the provincial government at the Samiajij Miawpukek Reserve in Conne River.

I, along with my colleague, the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune, and

two momentous occasions; the signing of a self-government framework agreement

with the Miawpukek First Nation and the federal government; and the announcement

of a Land Transfer Agreement with the Miawpukek First Nation and the federal

government to transfer land to the federal government for the purpose of

expanding the Reserve.

Mr. Speaker, it was roughly a year ago that I rose in this House to inform

members of our government's intent to enter into negotiations with the federal

for a land transfer agreement to expand the Conne River Reserve. I am delighted

to report today to this House that the Land Transfer Agreement has now been

concluded.

Mr. Speaker, this additional land will allow room for additional housing

development and the pursuit of economic development opportunities for the

Miawpukek First Nation. It will also ensure the community has the space it needs

to grow well into the future.

Mr. Speaker, our government has also supported the aspirations of

self-governance for the Miawpukek First Nation. Our government recognizes the

Miawpukek First Nation would like more in terms of responsibility for the

programs and services offered in the community. We are pleased to be moving

forward with the negotiation process.

Mr. Speaker, our government made a commitment to work in partnership with

Aboriginal communities and the federal government, to encourage and assist

economic and social development policies that are best suited to the culture and

needs of Aboriginal peoples.

Mr. Speaker, our government values and remains committed to our relationship

with Chief Misel Joe and the Miawpukek First Nation. On behalf of the Government

of Newfoundland and Labrador, we offer congratulations to Chief Joe and Mi'Kmaq

of Conne River for reaching these milestones. We look forward to strengthening

our positive relationship with the Miawpukek First Nation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advanced copy of his statement. I will say again,

another initiative that was started by the previous Liberal government. I was

glad that I had the opportunity, as the Minister of Labrador and Aboriginal

Affairs, to travel to Conne River to start the negotiations.

Certainly, Mr. Speaker, it is a good news story for the people in Conne

River, and as an Aboriginal person and a member of the Labrador Inuit

Association, I want to offer my congratulations to them as well.

Mr. Speaker, the minister talked of having a good working relationship with

the Aboriginal people. We signed the final agreement of the Labrador Inuit

Association land claims in Nain, in January. It is unfortunate that we cannot

say the same about the Metis people, which the government made many promises to

before the election.

Certainly, Mr. Speaker, to the people of Conne River, this is a good

initiative and I offer them our congratulations.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the Minister for an

advance copy of his statement.

Indeed it is good news, Mr. Speaker, to see the progress that has been made

in Conne River by the Mi'kmaq people and the Miawpukek First Nation over the

last number of years. Anybody who had been to Conne River back in the last 1960s

or early 1970s will be amazed and proud of the transformation that has taken

place amongst the Mi'kmaq people, Mr. Speaker, the pride, self-respect and

increased self-esteem that has happened as a result of the self-determination

being -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MR. HARRIS: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MR. HARRIS: I should have asked at the beginning, Mr. Speaker, because I

only -

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Perhaps we can deal with in our committee, as the Government

House Leader suggests.

I think, Mr. Speaker, anybody who has been to Conne River prior to the change

and transformation that has taken place as result of the Mi'kmaq people

getting actively involved in the self-determination of their own future, to take

over an education system which they now control, see this as a model that we

hope can bring the same kind of hope and future to the Innu people of Labrador.

I urge this government to try to help, as quickly and as much as they can, to

assist the Innu people in the North of Labrador to achieve the same kind of

goals.

There are problems. The M P tis

have been mentioned and this is something that we regret as well. The Mi'kmaq

people on the Island also deserve to have a go forward. We do see progress being

made, Mr. Speaker. It is very positive and it does provide encouragement, I

think, to the Innu people of Labrador to see that this can be done right here in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further Statements by Ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Many of the thousands of home care workers in the Province have not received

their fifty-cent raise the Minister of Finance promised in his Budget. Private

operators, Mr. Speaker, cannot afford to pay out the extra cost. There was no

consultation. This was not thought out by the government. In fact, Mr. Speaker,

private operators learned of their new financial obligation on the day the

minister announced the Budget in this House. Mr. Speaker, they asked for full

recovery costs and they were told that a decision could only be made after

consulting Treasury Board.

We all know, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister of Finance, the acting Minister

of Health, is also the President of Treasury Board. I ask you today, Minister:

Will you consult with yourself and commit to pay the seventy-three cents to the

operators in this Province so they can give their workers the salary increase

that you promised in the Budget?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance, and Acting Minister of

Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

At least I might get a more sensible conversation and speak with the member

across the House.

Treasury Board consists - I might say, seven ministers sit on Treasury Board.

There are seven ministers.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: The member is a little misinformed on the issue. We

announced in the Budget that there would be fifty cents for home care workers.

We also made provision -

MR. BARRETT: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: If the Member for Bellevue would let me finish.

For the first time, to my knowledge, on April 1 of this year the boards were

given their budgets for the entire year. The former government used to give them

in October or November. That has not been uncommon. They were given - monies

flowed through to allow a fifty cent increase for home support workers. In lieu

of that, and the administrative cost of handling that by home support agencies,

we will put another eleven cents, which is equivalent to a 22 per cent

administrative cost on top of that fifty cents to be able to do that.

The member should check on that and do her homework on it before she asks the

question.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: I have done my homework, I say to the minister, but let's

tell the truth here now. The Premier, last year, set the precedent when he went

out to the West Coast of the Island. He offered up a salary increase to the VON

workers on the same day that his party was having their fundraising golf

tournament on the West Coast and now, Mr. Speaker, they are looking for a way

out.

My question is this: Does the minister know that the private operators are

involved in labour relations? They are currently being told that while they are

bargaining there is a statutory freeze on wages. I say to the minister: you

committed the increase to the workers, ante up, give them the money they are

asking for.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Board and Acting Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The member should know, she sat in government. I think she was around the

Cabinet table, I know for a reasonable amount of time, and she should know that

the workers of home support agencies are not employers of government. They do

not negotiate with government. They do not have dealings with government. I

believe it was her government that brought in legislation to say exactly just

that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, Abitibi has openly stated in their so-called survival plan that

they are looking at developing three power generation projects for their

Stephenville mill operations. Now, let me paint a picture for you. These

projects are the Badger Shute, Red Indian Falls, Four Mile Pond and they are all

on the Exploits River.

Mr. Speaker, can the minister confirm today that if government approves these

power projects that the benefits derived will guarantee a two machine operation

at the Grand Falls mill?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources, and Government

House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

First of all, it is my understanding, in our discussions with Abitibi, that

what they have talked about is the potential for two further developments on the

Exploits River, not three. They have never talked to government about three

potential further developments.

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, there are three developments already on the river. One

of those developments, or one-and-a-half of those developments, signed by the

former government. The benefits from those power developments are not applied

against the manufacture cost of wood. In other words, the cost of producing

paper per ton, which is a question that people must answer. To the question -

sorry, the former government must answer.

To the question of: Should we get into a power purchase agreement? Will we

make that apply to a two machine operation in Grand Falls? Let's not put the

cart before the horse. We are not into any discussions or formal negotiations

with Abitibi on power because, first and foremost, before we would even consider

that, Abitibi must commit to a two machine operation in Grand Falls and until

they do, we will not be discussing (inaudible) with Abitibi.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, people in Grand Falls-Windsor are still not

convinced that government is doing all it can to ensure the future viability of

the mill and protect the jobs for Central Newfoundland. The Minister of Natural

Resources is on record as saying that he will enforce the provisions of Bill 27

and take away timber rights from the company if they close number seven paper

machine.

Will the minister commit today that if he has to revoke the timber rights to

Abitibi that he will put the wood supply assigned to the Grand Falls mill in

trust for the exclusive use in a two machine operation at the Grand Falls mill?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources, and Government

House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I have been very clear, very upfront and very truthful with the people of the

Province, and in particular, the people in Grand Falls and Stephenville, about

the situation with Abitibi. I think they have taken some confidence in that. I

know the union representatives that I just met with before coming to the House

at 12:00 o'clock today have taken some confidence in that. The member has

asked me - and I appreciate the questions she is asking because it is a serious

issue for her district and I take it in the spirit that it is meant. She has

asked me today: Will I commit? In other words, will I commit to ensure that if

we revoke the licences on one hand, which represent about 60 per cent of the

wood supply for Abitibi, that somehow or other we do not try to navigate a way

around that to give it to them in another way. I believe that is the question

she has asked.

Not only will I commit today to that, Mr. Speaker, but last night in this

House, in response to her colleague from Twillingate & Fogo, we made that

exact commitment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

Minister, yesterday your colleague, the Minister of Transportation and Works,

said, and I quote: The RNC did not need to ask, and neither should they, about

putting cameras on public buildings.

We have seen the bunker mentality of this government: riot police, armed

guards, undercover police, cameras on every rooftop and flagpole. Can you advise

the people of our Province, Minister, who is protecting our civil liberties? Is

this being condoned and authorized by the Department of Justice or the Premier's

office? And, since when do the police - in this case the RNC - run this

Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, after hearing the answer from the minister

yesterday, to the question asked by the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, I

inquired today with my officials and I am advised that a temporary camera was,

in fact, placed in the building by the RNC. The police use security cameras from

time to time for evidence gathering and for surveillance purposes. This is a

standard operating procedure of police forces throughout North America.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, thank you.

I say to the minister, he should get tuned in here. Security is one thing.

Invasion of privacy, violation of civil rights, and trampling of democratic

rights, is another. Can you, in your capacity as the Attorney General - and I

specify, as the Attorney General - as opposed to the Minister of Justice, the

top law officer in this Province, assure the people that you will protect our

liberties and not allow the Premier and the RNC to trample our rights and run

roughshod over us?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I will be happy to give that assurance. I

am pleased to say to the hon. member that we have the Charter of Rights and

Freedoms and the Human Rights Act in this Province that protect the rights and

freedoms of Canadians.

While I, as the Minister of Justice, have responsibility for the police, the

Chief of Police has control and administration of the force subject to my

direction and we will direct the police to act appropriately, but when it comes

to operations I do not tell the police how to conduct their operations. They are

the experts in that and we rely on their expertise. I just want to say that the

RNC should be commended on how they acted this week.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Public order was maintained. Public safety was

maintained. No one was hurt. No major damage was done. The RNC acted prudently,

responsibly. They acted with discretion. They are to be commended, Mr. Speaker.

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.

Mr. Speaker, there is a great sense of impending disaster looming over the

crab dispute in rural Newfoundland and Labrador today. School children are now

starting to demonstrate their feelings and fears and their worries about their

families' future. Fish harvesters are being forced to examine the prospects of

selling crab outside the Province in order to save their enterprises.

Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, this is a man-made disaster and it can be solved.

I want to ask the minister: Why is he worried about capitulation, as he

stated yesterday in the House? Is his ego and that of the Premier now standing

in the way of a solution to this problem? Is it now about saving face, or is it

about finding a solution that can allow the crab fishery to produce crab and

operate properly in this Province this season?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, what I said in the House yesterday was that compromise was not

about capitulation. We had heard from the people in the industry, from fish

harvesters, from plant workers, and from the FFAW.

[Comments from the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Visitors in the gallery should know that they are not to disrupt the House,

not to participate or show approval or disapproval in any manner. I ask them for

their full co-operation.

The Chair recognizes the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I indicated then, as I have indicated along the way, that we are

in interested in finding a suitable compromise that ensures that we have a raw

material sharing system tried in the fishery, the crab fishery, in Newfoundland

and Labrador. That is what we are trying to do. We know that there are a number

of issues that need to be dealt with. We have indicated from the beginning that

we were willing to try and deal with those issues. We are interested in a

compromise, Mr. Speaker. We are not interested in capitulation on either side.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What the minister is clearly saying is that we want a raw material sharing

system to go forward whether the union and its members like it or not.

Mr. Speaker, that is about winning. That is about us getting our way. It is

not about compromise. It is not about finding a solution.

Will the minister say that he will sit down with the fish harvesters and

their organization and take this off the table, that is standing in the way of a

solution, and legitimately consider all the options for getting the crab fishery

going this season in the proper way?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I can say that on, I believe, four or five occasions over the

past two-and-a-half weeks, I have sat down with members and leadership of the

FFAW, with the leadership of the FFAW. I had a discussion with the

Secretary-Treasurer of the FFAW as recently as this morning.

Mr. Speaker, we are interested in finding a resolution, and a long-lasting

resolution, to the problems in the crab fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador. We

are not just interested in finding a short-term stop-gap measure, as some people

in the past have been prepared to do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There has been much discussion over the past number of weeks from the Premier

and the Minister of Fisheries regarding the protests by crab harvesters. The

Premier, even though he has not a shred of proof, continues his attempt to paint

these protestors as criminals, and says the public should not condone their

actions.

I say to the Premier, Mr. Speaker, and the minister, what a difference a

couple of years make. I ask the Minister of Fisheries: If he is so adamant that

these protests should not be taking place and should not be condoned by the

public, why did the minister and the Premier, on April 29, 2003, visit fishermen

who were illegally occupying the Department of Fisheries and Oceans offices, and

stayed there for three days, and encouraged them to keep up their fight? Why the

hypocrisy, Mr. Speaker?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I have absolutely no idea what the Leader of the

Opposition is talking about. I have no idea what he is talking about. I

certainly did not, since I have been in politics, occupy any office, and

certainly did not stay there for three days, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I am sure it will all come back to him. I know

he is confused at this point in his life.

Mr. Speaker, the minister constantly describes government's fishery policy

as follows - and these are his words, Mr. Speaker: There are too many plants.

There is overcapacity in the fishery, and new licences would only redistribute

poverty.

It is in Hansard. It is in public documents. He said it repeatedly. If that

is what he truly believes, and if that is the government's fishery policy, how

did he and how can he justify the new crab licence for St. Anthony?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we justify a fish licence, a fish processing, crab processing,

licence in St. Anthony based on a commitment that a colleague of his made in

1998, based on the determination by three Supreme Court Justices that the

decision made by his colleague, the former Minister of Fisheries and

Aquaculture, the current Member for Twillingate & Fogo, was a patently

unreasonable decision at the time. That, Mr. Speaker, is the basis for the

decision in St. Anthony. It is based on a commitment that was made by a former

member, by a former minister, and a patently unreasonable decision that was made

by another member who still sits in his caucus. At the time, he denied to the

people of St. Anthony the licence that they were supposed to have. He turned

around and issued a shrimp licence in Twillingate and reactivated a crab licence

in Twillingate.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me quote from the court decision. It says, when the decision was

overturned by the Supreme Court, it follows and says: The issuance of the

requested licence to St. Anthony, however, does not automatically follow as a

result of this decision.

So, Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister again: If the objective is to

rationalize, if the objective that he stated in this House is to have fewer

plants, if the objective as he states it is to stop redistributing poverty, how

can he legitimately now try to talk about, with any kind of credibility, the

issuance of a licence in St. Anthony that adds overcapacity to the sector in a

year when the quota itself is being reduced?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I have said everything that the Leader of the Opposition has

just spoken about. Yes, I have said there is overcapacity, as has his former

minister said there was overcapacity. His former minister said, when he was

sitting in that seat that the Member for St. George's-Stephenville East sits

in right now, that a former minister issued too many licences and I cannot do

anything about the situation in St. Anthony even though I know they were

promised a licence. That, Mr. Speaker, is what the Member for Twillingate &

Fogo said when he sat in that seat over right here.

Mr. Speaker, the situation in St. Anthony, a wrong was made and a wrong was

righted. That is what the Court of Appeal upheld. The Court of Appeal and three

Supreme Court Justices said that the Member for Twillingate & Fogo, when he

was the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, made a decision that was patently

unreasonable and ordered me to reconsider it. How do you reconsider a patently

unreasonable decision and make it right without reversing it?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, three years ago when the former government tried to transfer a

crab licence from Ramea to St. Anthony, all the processors were strongly opposed

to the idea. In fact, most of the PC caucus, I am looking in their faces right

now, the ones that were out front in the rally, said: Don't transfer the

licence to St. Anthony.

I ask the minister: What has he given to or promised the processors of the

Province to buy their silence at this point in our history when they were out

there in big numbers, going to tear down this building three years ago because

they objected vehemently to a licence going to St. Anthony? What has changed?

What has he said and done and promised to the processors to buy their silence

now?

[Comments from the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again I remind visitors in the gallery not to participate in any way. This

Speaker does not wish to have the galleries cleared. We want dialogue to

continue.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I expect I got the same thing as the Member for Twillingate

& Fogo got when he issued a licence for shrimp in Twillingate in the face of

overcapacity and when he reactivated a crab licence in Twillingate in the face

of overcapacity: absolutely nothing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe he is not listening. I am not suggesting he got anything. I would not

do that. I asked him: What has he promised to the processors?

Mr. Speaker, three years ago, as well, the plant workers, non-unionized ones

in particular, were strongly opposed to the issuance of a licence for St.

Anthony, including an individual who the minister has met quite recently, Ms

Mary Shute. She helped lead a protest outside this building against the transfer

of the licence and stated, using the same words as the minister: It would only

redistribute poverty in the industry.

I ask the minister: What has he told or promised Ms Shute in the last number

of meetings he had with her, to convince her to stay quiet and suggest that now

it is okay to put a licence in St. Anthony?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, there is no level low enough that the Leader of

the Opposition will not stoop.

Mr. Speaker, I met with Mary Shute and some plant workers throughout

Newfoundland and Labrador, not Friday past but the Friday before, I guess it

was. Anyway, it does not really matter when it was, but some time in the last

two weeks. That is the first conversation that I had with Mary Shute in the

about three years.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess he does not want to tell us what he told or promised either the

processors or Ms Shute and her group.

Mr. Speaker, let me pursue another issue. Can the minister, and would the

minister, please explain what he knows about the relationship between the new

licence issued for St. Anthony Seafoods Ltd. and Mr. John Risley, the man

promoting the demise of communities like Harbour Breton and Fortune, as a board

member of Fishery Products International?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I don't know what the Leader of the Opposition

is fishing for. Everybody in this Province knows that John Risley, who is one of

the major owners of Clearwater Fine Foods, is, I don't know, 50 per cent, 60

per cent or 70 per cent - I am not sure what the percentage is these days. It

was 50 per cent when the partnership was formed. It may have changed since then,

but I am not sure of that. Anyway, he was - maybe he still is - 50 per cent

owner, or his company, Clearwater, is 50 per cent owner, of St. Anthony Seafoods

Ltd. That is the extent of my knowledge about John Risley's involvement in St.

Anthony.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would think, to use a phrase they used a few years ago, he might be a

little bit more interested in what is happening in St. Anthony, in that he might

find out a few things about the ownership relationship.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask the minister -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: I will ask the questions, I say to the Government House

Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I am asking members to my left for their co-operation.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I asked a question and I got an answer. He said, as far as he knows, he is

the major owner of the company in St. Anthony. That was the question I asked. He

gave the answer.

Mr. Speaker, I will ask this question: What meetings and discussions has the

minister had with Mr. Risley and/or the company representatives? Because Mr.

Risley is the major shareholder and owner of the company in St. Anthony. What

meetings and discussions has he had with that company, and was Mr. Risley

himself involved in any of the meetings?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I have had, I don't know, two or three, probably, meetings -

two, I think it was - with Colin MacDonald over the past year probably, as it

relates to activities in St. Anthony. Mr. Speaker, I have never, since I have

been in politics, had a meeting with John Risley on issues as they relate to St.

Anthony.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, a further question with respect to the issuing

of the licence for St. Anthony. Can the minister try to explain why he bypassed

his own so-called independent licensing board in issuing the new licence? Why

would they not have been asked to consider this matter? Was it because he had

already promised the licence to some company or some person?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, the board was not in place. Secondly -

AN HON. MEMBER: It was so.

MR. TAYLOR: No, sir, it was not.

Mr. Speaker, in late October three Supreme Court Justices ordered the

Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture to reconsider all matters and all

documents related to the St. Anthony seafoods case. Mr. Speaker, I did that. I

reconsidered the matter. To take the issue that I was ordered by the court and

refer it to a licensing board would have abdicated my responsibility and would

have been in defiance of an order from three supreme court justices.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I guess he read as much of the court order as he

read of the Dunne report. He did not understand either one of them.

Mr. Speaker, let me ask another question -

MR. TAYLOR: (Inaudible).

MR. GRIMES: Yes, I do understand it very well, I say to the Minister of

Fisheries, a lot better than he ever will.

Mr. Speaker, let me ask this question of the minister: Can the minister

confirm this, that the only remaining support government has for production

quotas comes from FPI with Mr. Risley on the board, two companies that have

brothers of the Finance Minister in senior management positions and a company

that the MHA for Bonavista North last worked for? Isn't that the fact, I ask

the minister?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I do not know where he is coming from. On one hand he is saying

that I promised the processors something for all of their support, and on the

other hand he is trying to tell me that there is nobody left supporting what we

are trying to do. Mr. Speaker, he cannot have it both ways.

Mr. Speaker, when we rolled this out it was based on an extensive discussion,

extensive consultations that were done by Vardy, Dunne, Jones, among others over

the years, on various components of the fishing industry. Each one of those

reports recommended a trial on a raw material sharing system in our fishery.

Mr. Speaker, we have taken those recommendations, those board reports, and we

have tried to implement a raw material sharing system in crab. That is what we

tried to do. Along the way, we are trying to deal with the legitimate concerns

of fish harvesters and plant workers, and we remain committed to that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women.

Have you directed the Minister of Health to have all mammography units in the

Province certified immediately, and can you tell me which units are not

accredited throughout Newfoundland and Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance, and Acting Minister of

Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The head of the Canadian Association of Radiologists has indicated that all

the machines in this Province are safe. The provincial head of the Newfoundland

and Labrador Association of Radiologists indicate they are all safe. The

Regional Integrated Health Authorities are moving for voluntary accreditation,

and there is an individual from the Eastern Regional Integrated Health Authority

who sits on that board. Some of the reasons for accreditation might be the

amount of space they work in, not a reflection of the safety or the health that

is impacted on these.

This government put $2.5 million into the Budget this year to get four new

digital ones that do not require film production that takes up space. They are

moving forward on voluntary accreditation, that many other provinces are doing,

and they are certified by both of these individuals as being safe and they are

no danger. Some of the considerations in some have to do with space requirements

in others. That does not impact on the safety or the operation of these

machines. They are all (inaudible) years old.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Time for one final question.

The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister, there were health professionals this morning on the

radio, in my opinion, giving out some very alarming information. I would like to

say to the minister, there are very few health issues as unique to women as

breast cancer.

Would the Minister of Health today restore confidence in mammography units

and services in this Province and commit today to ensure that all of our units

are certified and accredited in Newfoundland and Labrador?

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

Board, and Acting Minister of Health and Community Services.

You have time for about thirty seconds to make your reply.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Dr. Wadden of the Eastern Regional Integrated Health Authority, who sits on

that committee, has indicated that they are moving forward with voluntary

accreditation. Mr. Laberge, who is head of the Canadian Association of

Radiologists, and Dr. Mercer, who is President of the Newfoundland and Labrador

Association have indicated that there is no problem with safety. These machines

are safe. There are numerous requirements. They are moving in phases toward

accreditation. It is being done on a voluntary basis, and if there was any

danger or any jeopardy to the health of people in this Province, the machine

would not be used.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time allocated for Oral Questions has expired.

Before we proceed, the Chair would like to draw attention of all members on

both sides of the House, that while we encourage a free-flowing Question period,

we should be very careful in our answers and in our questions, that we do not

impute motives in any way or manner. So, the Chair would issue a caution to all

members of the House: Be very careful that you respect the integrity, the

honesty and the sincerity of all hon. members, in both the posing of questions

and in replies thereto.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Tabling of Documents

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair would like to table the opinion of the

Commissioner of Members' Interests in a matter of an application by the MHA

for Exploits with respect to alleged contraventions of the provisions of part

two of the Conflict of Interest House of Assembly Act by the hon. the Member for

the District of Ferryland.

Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been given.

Petitions.

Petitions

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

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition on behalf of the fish harvesters in our

Province. I think we are all aware of the controversy and the frustration that

is existing throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, not just in the rural parts of

our Province, but in the urban areas as well.

I think we were all surprised with the number that turned out, actually, for

the protest that happened on Monday. I guess we should not be surprised because

when you realize how this government has treated the fish harvesters of this

Province, I am surprised that we did not have many more here at Confederation

Building.

This petition represents people from Chapels Cove, from Long Pond in Manuels,

CBS, Kelligrews and Conception Harbour. What we are finding, Mr. Speaker, is

that we are getting petitions now to present on behalf of those districts where

there is a PC member representing them. I personally had a petition that I was

asked to give to the Member for Burin-Placentia West by his constituents and he

was asked to present it in the House but he chose not to. I presented that

petition on their behalf, Mr. Speaker, because his constituents were so upset

and disappointed that the member they elected to represent them, chose to ignore

their issue when he had an opportunity to stand on his feet and speak publicly

about their concerns. Even though he says he brought it to the Premier's

attention and to the minister's attention, we know how effective he has been,

or the other MHAs have been, in terms of those who represent the crab harvesters

in this Province.

What we are dealing with today, when you look across the floor and look at

the number of members who represent rural areas in this Province, there must be

at least twenty of the thirty-four who represent rural districts where there are

crab harvesters. What we are asking them, along with the crab harvesters, is to

speak up for your constituents. Certainly, if you talked in caucus and in

Cabinet, if you talked in caucus at all about your concerns, if you have at

least spoken out, wouldn't your boss, wouldn't the Premier, have to listen

to you? You represent a majority of the people in government. Certainly, if you

were speaking out and speaking up, the Premier would have to listen. He would

have to listen to a majority of the people who form the government. My question

is, if you are speaking up, why aren't you being heard and why aren't you

frustrated enough to go public with it, like the Member for Placentia & St.

Mary's did?

When we listen to the harvesters, all they want is to go fishing. It is not

as the minister said, the Minister of Fisheries said, we are not going to

capitulate. It is not about capitulating. It is about doing what is right. It is

about listening to the fish harvesters. It is about listening to the plant

workers. It is about listening to truck drivers, and everybody who is being

impacted by the fact that the fish harvesters are not out on the water where

they want to be - and they want to be. They do not want to be treated like

second-class citizens. These are people who are independent businessmen, people

who have put a lot of money into this industry, and here we are today sitting

back and watching while they are not allowed to fish because we have a

government that is being headstrong, that is being stubborn, that is refusing to

listen to them. Why is it we have a government that thinks they have all the

answers, that they know better than the people who fish? Why is it we have a

government that does not understand that without the fish harvesters there would

not be a fishery?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

MS FOOTE: Time to clue up, Mr. Speaker?

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Extra time has been granted to clue up.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the government for giving me the extra time.

The issue here, Mr. Speaker, is that we all should realize that without fish

harvesters there would not be a fishery. There would not be fish to process, so

the fish plant workers and the processors themselves would not have an industry.

I am calling on the government to do the right thing and sit down with the

fish harvesters, take this pilot project off the table, and let them go to work.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition again today on the closure of the Harbour

Breton fish plant, and it comes from the council and the communities in St.

Jacques, Coomb's Cove; there are seven communities.

Mr. Speaker, I have stood in the House here on many occasions since last fall

and talked about the plight of the people in Harbour Breton. Today, for the

first time, I guess, I am learning that the guy behind the problems that we are

encountering in Harbour Breton is also the same guy who is going to be getting a

new crab licence in St. Anthony.

Mr. Speaker, after I realized that our community had been decimated in

Harbour Breton, the company, FPI, treated our people in Harbour Breton not as

human beings; they left us stranded. They would not even pay severance pay to

the people. They would not even give us proper notice because the plant that

they worked in was not fit for people to work in; Occupational Health and Safety

had condemned it. Who allowed it to happen? It wasn't the people in Harbour

Breton who had worked there. It was the people of FPI.

Now, today, I learned that this guy who owns 75 per cent of the plant in St.

Anthony is going to get a new crab licence in a community that already has a

plant, in a community that already has a shrimp licence. In Harbour Breton, a

community of 2,500 people, we have nobody working there, and within the last

couple of weeks more than fifty people have left the community. You call that

fair?

There is something basically wrong with that, Mr. Speaker, and I guarantee

you one thing: you will hear more from me and the people of Harbour Breton over

the next couple of weeks on this issue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand today to present a petition on behalf of fish harvesters in this

Province, fish harvesters who have come here day after day to plead with this

government, to make their case so that they can get the fishery back in

operation in this Province, but to no avail simply because they are being met at

the door day after day with stubbornness, with arrogance, on the other side.

That is what is happening. This is not an issue any more about getting a fishery

going, streamlining policies in the fishery. It is a situation where somebody

wants to be the winner and, regretfully, unfortunately for all of us, they will

have it no other way.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the people opposite, I cannot believe they can sit

in their seats day after day, knowing that there is half a million dollar

industry shut down in this Province, knowing that there are families today who

have drawn their last unemployment cheque, knowing that there are hundreds and

thousands of Newfoundlanders out there today who have no job to go to, simply

because this government refuses to back down - to back down on a policy and a

legislation that no one in this Province wants to see. I even heard a sister

from the Sisters of Mercy, I think it was, this morning on the radio, from the

Catholic church, saying: My God, why doesn't the government back off and let

the poor people in this Province go back to work and earn an honest, decent

living?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

[Disturbance in the gallery]

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

This House is in recess, and I order that the gallery be cleared.

Recess

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

When the House recessed we were dealing with petitions. The hon. member, I do

believe, is finished with her petition. I seek direction from the Acting

Opposition House Leader. Do we have agreement to proceed with Orders of the Day?

Orders of the Day

Private Members' Day

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, we are operating under leave, just for the

record, so it is Private Members' Day, supposedly, at 3:00 p.m. I know that we

had made arrangements for three petitions to be presented, but right now we are

proceeding with the Private Member's motion as presented by the Member for

Trinity North. I guess he will be our lead off speaker.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a real honour today, a real honour indeed, to be able to introduce this

motion before the House and ask my colleagues on both sides of the House in

joining with me in endorsing the motion that I am bringing forward. For the

benefit of the members of the House, I will read the motion, Mr. Speaker.

Veteran"; and

WHEREAS throughout Canada all citizens are being asked to pay tribute to the

veterans of wars of the last century; and

WHEREAS many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have volunteered to serve their

country, many of whom have made the ultimate sacrifice with their lives;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly call on all citizens of

Newfoundland and Labrador to seek out veterans in their community and thank them

for the contribution they made to preserving democracy and restoring peace to

the world, and to pay tribute to the many veterans who gave their lives for our

freedom."

Mr. Speaker, this Year of the Veteran, it is indeed a real honour to

introduce this motion before the House and to talk a little bit about the major

contributions that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have made to many world

conflicts, and continue to this day to make a contribution on the world scene

towards the preservation of peace, the restoration of peace and the protection

of democracy. It gives us an opportunity this year, and we are being asked to

acknowledge those veterans of wars, military conflict and peacetime. Since the

end of the Korean War, as a country, Canada has not been actively engaged in any

world conflicts.

Mr. Speaker, the history of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians involved in

world conflicts goes back to the First World War, when in fact, during the early

part of 1914 Newfoundland and Labrador sent its first 500 troops on the ship, Florizel ,

to England, being part of the First World War. They were a group of young men -

and I say young, because that is the operative word. Many of those people, their

grandfathers and their fathers before them, volunteered; again, the operative

word volunteered. They were not conscripted, they were volunteering to serve

their country. Many of them were lying about their age so they could volunteer.

Many of them were young boys, not men but just young boys, in the prime of their

lives. They made a major commitment to peace for their country.

Newfoundland and Labrador at the time, being one of the oldest colonies of

Britain, during that period sent some 8,500 soldiers to participate in that war,

and some 1,500 of them didn't return because they lost their lives. The

history of Newfoundland and Labrador being involved in world conflict goes back

to that First World War.

Much has been written, Mr. Speaker, about the heroism; the Battle of Beaumont

Hamel, when some seven hundred and seventy-odd people went into battle and the

next morning only sixty-eight of them answered the roll call. Heroics, stories,

documentaries have been made and told of the heroism of those people,

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, who participated in that First World War. In

fact, there is a theatre group from my own district, Rising Tide, who are, as we

speak, touring the Province presenting in high schools a play entitled No Man's

Land which depicts, Mr. Speaker, what it was like in that battle, where men,

young men, gave of their lives in a situation where, in fact, they couldn't

win.

When we think of their commitment, their heroism, I couldn't help but

reflect on - I just want to cite, because I want to reflect on a quote made by

the famous Prime Minister, Sir Winston Churchill, who made a speech in the House

of Commons in Britain in August, 1940, some twenty-six years after that battle,

when he was talking about the Battle of Britain. He said at that time - and this

is a quote that has been repeated many times: Never in the field of human

conflict was so much owed by so many to so few. Those words, even though they

were spoken some twenty-six years later, are equally applicable as we describe

and comment about the commitment of Newfoundlanders during the Battle of

Beaumont Hamel.

My colleague from St. John's North just returned from Turkey where he

helped celebrate the ninetieth anniversary of the Gallipoli campaign where the

Newfoundland Regiment was the only North American troop to participated with

Australia, New Zealand in that great campaign.

AN HON. MEMBER: St. John's Centre.

MR. WISEMAN: St. John's Centre, I am reminded. I have him placed in the

wrong district. In the right city, in the wrong district.

That particular campaign, Mr. Speaker: Newfoundlanders and Labradorians were

great contributors in that campaign.

The history continues well into the Second World War and again in the Korean

War, and today Newfoundlanders and Labradorians continue to make a major

contribution to world peace. Our military: Today, I understand, Newfoundlanders

and Labradorians still make up some 8 per cent of the recruits to the Canadian

Forces when in fact we only represent a little over 1.2 per cent or 1.3 per cent

of the entire population. I think, Mr. Speaker, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians,

since the First World War to this day, as we speak, continue to participate, in

this case with Canada, in the early years as a nation by itself, continue to

participate and make a contribution to world peace and democracy.

We use today, in this House - in fact we heard today references to the

Freedom of Rights, the Charter, democracy. Words that we use today and use in

this House frequently, we use them flippantly and frequently. We talk about them

as if they are givens. Well, Mr. Speaker, that was not always that case. Without

the commitment of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians in the past and joining with

other nations, we would not be able to sit in this House today and enjoy the

freedoms that we now enjoy.

Mr. Speaker, there have been many references in recent days and recent weeks

about some of the issues we faced in this House of Assembly, in being able to

continue with the business of the people of the Province, but the reality I say,

Mr. Speaker, the reality of that today is that we have some people who have

joined us in the galleries to have their voices heard. Mr. Speaker, it is that

very freedom that many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have died for and have

made major commitments for. We have an obligation, I believe, Mr. Speaker, the

people not only in this House but the people in all of Newfoundland and Labrador

have an obligation - the biggest commitment we can make to the veterans who have

gone before us is that we will never allow their memory to die.

I ask each member of the House of Assembly to join with me today in endorsing

the thrust of this resolution. I think, as we talked about a debt that we owe -

it is difficult, in fact impossible, to replace the lives of the young sons and

the young women who have given their lives. We talk frequently of young men, but

there were many of our conflicts, World War I and II, where women - I think in

the Second World War there was some 700 Newfoundland women who were part of that

campaign.

I say, Mr. Speaker, it is impossible for us today, this generation and future

generations, to replace their lives, to let them relive the lost time they had

in that conflict. The one thing we can do, and should do, and are obligated to

do, is to never let their memory die and to never forget the contribution they

made. That is why I ask members of this House today to join with me in asking

all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to never let their memory die. We owe that

to them.

I ask people to join with me in asking the rest of the people of Newfoundland

and Labrador, to all of us in this Year of the Veteran, to make a special effort

to thank and to acknowledge the contribution of our veterans. I ask other

colleagues to join with me.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to say right at the beginning, that I support wholeheartedly the

resolution that has been put forward here.

I can remember, over the last couple of years when we were government, a

couple of things that we did, in particular to honour the veterans and, I guess,

to keep their memory alive, as the Member for Trinity North has just said. I

know that my colleague, the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace, designated a

special licence plate for the veterans. As far as I know, that is still there

and that is good. Also, my colleague here, my seat mate, the Member for

Bellevue, they named a highway, Conception Bay North, the Veterans' Memorial

Highway. I am sure long after we are gone they will be remembered from that.

Mr. Speaker, for me, personally, as a young person growing up on the South

Coast of the Province and as a young fellow going to school, I knew very little

about war, being isolated, no televisions and things of this nature and very few

papers, as such. I remember a gentleman in the community who is now deceased,

Mr. John Loveless. Somehow when you looked at the man, as a young boy, you were

somewhat curious about him, and, as I stated in the House before, as I got older

I appreciated what it was. He had been shot by a sniper just before the end of

the war. He told us, as boys, many, many stories. He had a number of medals for

bravery and so on. He told me, the first time the German sniper fired at him and

he did not see him, he cut the button off his tunic, and the second time the

German sniper fired, he put the bullet through his mouth and came out through

the jaw here. The jaw - of course, they never had the surgery in those days to

be able to put it back in the form that probably you could today. It was quite

noticeable, but, you know, he had tremendous respect. Every person in the

community respected him. I remember when I going to school he used to come out

on Remembrance Days and be able to speak to the class.

As I got a little older, another person - I guess I was in Grade 7 or 8 -

came to our community as a minister. The Speaker, himself, would be quite

familiar with this person. It was Enos Darby. Enos had fought in World War II

and had been a gunner when the ship was struck and the artillery and the metal

and so on from the gun, as it explored, struck his face. He deceased a few years

ago, but the Speaker knows him, as I said, quite well. Here in his forehead was

about a two-inch scar that was replaced by plastic surgery, and the nose itself

also was probably replaced. He told the story where he was unconscious for - I

think it was for about sixteen or eighteen months that he did not know he was in

the world. He came around and lived to be a - had a great life and was a pastor

in our community when I was a boy. I think it was in Grade 7 and 8.

Then, as I became older and went to high school, you start to read some of

the poems. I remember a poem that had an impact on me. It was by Thomas Hardy

and it was called: The Man He Killed. I just want to read it into the record.

Had he and I but met

By some old ancient inn,

We should have set us down to wet

Right many a nipperkin!

But ranged as infantry,

And staring face to face,

I shot at him as he at me,

And killed him in his place.

I shot him dead because

Because he was my foe,

Just so: my foe of course he was;

That's clear enough; although

He thought he'd ́ list,

perhaps,

Off-hand like just as I

Was out of workhad sold his traps

No other reason why.

Yes; quaint and curious war is!

You shoot a fellow down

You'd treat, if met where any bar is,

Or help to half a crown.

Thomas Hardy in that poem probably looked at war, in a sense, a little sad

about what it does. I can remember the thing that really did it for me to

rekindle, if you wish, the whole idea about war and how we appreciate the people

who fought for us, was when I had an opportunity to go to Beaumont Hamel myself

in 2001. It was the same time that the Newfoundland Pavilion was opened there. I

can remember, on this day, laying a wreath on behalf of the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador - and, by the way, we did sponsor students. I am sure

the Minister of Municipal Affairs, in his capacity, still does that. I think I

heard the Member for Port de Grave talk about where one of the students from his

community was selected through a contest.

I remember my wife and I, on the field of Beaumont Hamel, walking down and it

was not level. There were mounds, of course, because of all the shooting and

stuff. We walked down right at the edge and saw where the Newfoundland Regiment

had gone that morning, the 873 of them, and how they were sacrificed, if you

wish, to move ahead. They did not have a chance. As a result of that, there were

just a few of them returned. We walked through the cemetery. Having children of

our own - the thing that really amazed me were the row and row and row of

crosses. You look at them and some of them were our own sons, Newfoundlanders

and Canadians. On the cross, on the epitaph was seventeen-years-old,

eighteen-years-old, nineteen-years-old. Very few of them were in their twenties.

You look at it and say, what a supreme sacrifice they made that we might have

freedom of worship, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom to speak,

freedom to associate. It was through their sacrifice, World War I, World War II

and the Korean Wars, that people did that; our people, people that we know. I

would think that everybody in this Legislature, the forty-eight of us, knows

some person who gave of his life, or her life, so that we might be able to have

a way of life that we enjoy in the form of democracy.

If I live to be 100, I will never, ever, ever be able to forget. I can never

explain the feeling that I had, as I said, as I walked the field, and probably,

in a sense, knowing that some limb from some person was somehow under that

particular field. It was like, in a sense, in the biblical connotation, you

wanted to take off your shoes because the place that you were standing was holy

ground, because they had fought for our freedom.

I also had the opportunity, as a part of that particular trip to Beaumont

Hamel, to visit some of the tunnels and see how these underground tunnels - how

they had been able to cut down through and then go on the back of the enemy, the

German forces, and to come up from the rear. To see how they had done that gives

me an appreciation, I guess, of the sacrifice they made to have life like we

have it.

Really, in a sense - I do not want to prolong it or to go on any longer than

that. I think I have said what I wanted to say, and I think that is important. I

have tremendous respect, I have tremendous adoration for the people who fought,

that we might have the type of life that we have. As I said, it was enhanced for

me when I had an opportunity to go to Beaumont Hamel to see it firsthand and be

able to, on that day - and I felt proud, very, very proud when they opened the

Newfoundland Pavilion and seen some of the Newfoundland artifacts that were

there. It is an experience that all of us, I guess, should try to experience

sometime during our lives. It had an impact on me, one that I can - I am like

Wordsworth, in a way, speaking. I cannot find words to be able to express the

feeling and how I feel about it, but in my own heart I realize the contribution

they made; very, very young, gave of their lives that we might we able to enjoy

peace. I think, as the Member for Trinity North said, they did it of their own

volition. They were not conscripted. They went voluntarily, and many of them,

not knowing the supreme sacrifice they were going to pay. Really, as

Legislators, we can never forget the sacrifice that they made. Today, and

through this here this year, I honour the sacrifice and I want to thank them

sincerely for giving us the opportunity to be able to do what we do in this

House and this Province and a country as a whole.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am certainly pleased to have an opportunity to join in supporting the

resolution brought forth by the Member for Trinity North and spoken on so ably

by him and the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

I think everybody in this House, Mr. Speaker, indeed, everybody in the

Province, has relatives who have been involved as veterans either of the World

War I or World War II or the Korean War, or working in the forces today as

peacekeepers and serving their country through that means. We also have, of

course, in addition to veterans of World War I and II, people who were not in

the regular forces but served, and many lost their lives, in the Merchant

Marine. In fact, many have said that they wanted to escape the Merchant Marine

to get into the Navy because it was safer to actually be in a ship of war than

in a merchant ship during World War II.

We had the Foresters, who were remembered today by the Government House

Leader in recognizing the death of Edgar Baird who was the Superintendent of the

First Foresters Unit that went to Scotland during World War II to serve as part

of the war effort ensuring that there were sufficient pit props to keep the coal

mines in Britain going as part of World War II.

I have not had the honour and the privilege of being at Beaumont Hamel. I

know I have heard other members, including the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la

Hune, speak very eloquently about how moving an event it was for them to visit

there and I hope to share that experience one day. My father had a first cousin

who died at Beaumont Hamel. During the Second World War, my mother's brother,

my uncle, served in the RAF. We all shared the sorrow at the death of Corporal

Jamie Murphy last year, who died in Afghanistan. We do know, Mr. Speaker, that

serving in our Forces is an honour, is a duty, but often a great sacrifice for

individuals, and it is because of their sacrifice and their effort that we enjoy

the freedom, the democracy, that we experience today.

Democracy is not something that is straightforward and neat and tidy and

lined up in rows. Sometimes it is a bit raucous, as we have seen outside this

Legislature in the last few days, and sometimes even in the galleries, but that

is the democracy for which the veterans fought in the wars and are still

prepared to volunteer their service today to join in peacekeeping efforts around

the world from this Province and this country.

We can all discuss the nature of war. There have been a lot of anti-war books

written, some of them very passionate, some of them very explanatory. I don't

know if I would call The Danger Tree, written by David (inaudible), I

think his first name is -

AN HON. MEMBER: David Macfarlane.

MR. HARRIS: Pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: David Macfarlane.

MR. HARRIS: David Macfarlane - about the experience of Beaumont Hamel. It

is certainly a strong experience of what a family goes through in having their

members participate in a war effort.

Regardless of what one's views are, Mr. Speaker, we do know that a genuine

and definite sacrifice has been called upon by many people and many families in

this Province - and, before we were a Province, in this country of Newfoundland

- and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador have done their part, and in many

cases more than their part, in acting on behalf of world peace.

I will say, Mr. Speaker, since we are talking about the Canadian Year of the

Veteran, we do have a very important office in this Province run by Veterans

Affairs, called the Bureau of Pensions Advocates. There was an attempt a few

years ago to actually close that down in the Province. I just want to remind

members of that, that this was threatened a few years ago, and the actions of

some members of this House to make representations helped to change that

that service to the veterans who are still alive from World War II - I think we

have a few left from World War I - but for all those who are also served by that

office, who are veterans of the Canadian Forces, the RCMP and other services

that are provided there. I would urge hon. members to be vigilant if they hear

that is now available to veterans of this Province, to advocate on their behalf

and services to which they are entitled.

Having said that, Mr. Speaker, I know other members want to join in this

occasion to put their comments on the record, but I do wholeheartedly support

the effort by the Member for Trinity North to bring to the attention of hon.

members the Year of the Veteran and to urge all people in this Province to

acknowledge and pay tribute individually to the many veterans we have in our

midst, and to encourage young people in this Province to also remember that the

sacrifice made by others helped to create the world that we live in today.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. J. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, before I start, I just want to refer to something that the

former member had mentioned, the book called The Danger Tree by David

Macfarlane, which is one of the most touching books that I think I have ever

read on the First World War and on Newfoundland at that particular time, and the

thoughts of Confederation, and the struggles of the Goodyear family of Central

Newfoundland.

I expect that the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans or the Member for

Windsor-Springdale would probably know about that. Anyhow, Mr. Speaker, it was a

New York Times Bestseller. It was written up in The Washington Post, the

Los Angeles Times . It wasn't just a Canadian Bestseller. It was worldwide,

and the author presently writes columns for The Globe and Mail .

Mr. Speaker, I just wish to pay tribute to our war veterans. My friend from

Trinity North, I thank him for the thoughtfulness of bringing this to the House

of Assembly, and, I guess, the federal government who has made the year 2005 a

tribute to the Year of the Veteran, and a tribute to not only our veterans but

those people who serve in our Armed Forces and people who have served in foreign

wars.

Mr. Speaker, I am a student of history and I suppose I have read more history

since I left the University than I ever did while I was there.

AN HON. MEMBER: Did you pass?

MR. J. HODDER: Did I pass? Yes, I have to tell the hon. member that I

did.

Mr. Speaker, I think that the lessons of the First World War, the Second

World War, the lessons of society at the time, are something that we should

reflect on from time to time because these were sophisticated societies that

found themselves grappling in warfare to the detriment of the young men and

women of that age.

Mr. Speaker, I was born during the Second World War and my earliest memories

are of my uncles who came from a town, which I would think was in the Member for

Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune's district, Pushthrough. One of my uncles, whose name

was Eric Caines, joined the Canadian navy as an ordinary seaman and he ended the

war as the commander of a minesweeper called the Mary Stewart . He was at

Dunkirk, and he later spent some time floating in the North Atlantic having had

the ship he served on sunk by enemy fire.

After the war the ship, Mary Stewart, was stationed in St. John, New

Brunswick. It was a pivotal point in my mother's family history, because, I

suppose, like all declining Newfoundland ports at the time, people went to

Boston to look for work, or they went to Montreal or Toronto. In this case my

Uncle Bert was the first to go, then followed by my mother's seven brothers,

then eventually my grandfather and grandmother who are buried in St. John, New

Brunswick. It was all through that event that took place because my uncle's

ship had been stationed in St. John.

Mr. Speaker, I have to say that I have great respect for veterans. I hope

that the lessons they learned will not be forgotten. I think war, the Second

World War in particular, took place because democracy was abandoned. Our country

was under threat. It felt that it should not have lost the First World War. Many

historians fell that the Second World War was just a continuation of the First

Word War. The circumstances that took place in Germany at the time should always

be remembered and should be taught, and young people should know about them.

Mr. Speaker, I personally have some memories of the sixties. I was involved

with the military and I served in Aldershot, Camp Borden and eventually at the

RC Barracks in Calgary. At that time, many of my colleagues, the people who

worked with me, were either veterans of the Korean conflict or were Second World

War veterans. As a matter of fact, the armor that we used, the Centurion tank -

the rifle that we fired was a 303. We were still using weapons of that war and

we were side by side.

I have a good friend in Port au Port West, I think in a town of Aguathuna.

His name is Richard, known as Dick Alexander. He is the Honorary Colonel of the

Royal Newfoundland Regiment at the present time. I think he has served in every

rank that there is in the Canadian Army. He was a veteran of the First World

War, a veteran of the Korean War, and presently holds the rank that I just

mentioned. One other thing: When he was just a young recruit he was involved in

the Knights of Columbus fire here in St. John's and was one of the people at

the door bringing people out. I think he was mentioned for that in a book which

has recently been published about the event. I realize the sacrifice that these

people made and the burden they carried.

I should apologize, I suppose, to the Canadian Legion in Stephenville because

I am a full member of the Legion and I am invited to their ceremony on the

eighth, but my mother is eighty-nine and has been ailing. For that day, I have

to make a choice and I will be here rather than in Stephenville.

Mr. Speaker, I have had the opportunity to visit Normandy. I guess, the

biggest impression that I had of Normandy was Omaha Beach where I went first. I

stood at a point in the graveyard near Omaha Beach and looked around, and for

360 degrees nothing could be seen but crosses. It was suddenly an eerie feeling.

We then went and looked at where the British had landed and where the Canadians

had landed at Sword and Juno. It is hard to believe that - we often look at

veterans now - these people were eighteen, nineteen and twenty.

I once went to Twillingate, it was quite awhile ago, and there was a museum

there. I do not know if it is still there or not. It was probably twenty years

ago. At the entrance of the museum there were pictures of the - they were not

called the Cadet Corps at that time but it was a military corps similar to the

cadets before Confederation. It was before the First World War. At the back of

the museum were the pictures of many of the same people but they were there in

memorandum. It was just a shock to see all these children who had sacrificed

their lives at that particular time.

The veterans are getting older and there are fewer of them. They deserve our

praise and they deserve our recognition. I think we have to help to see that

they are remembered and we need to thank them for what they have accomplished;

and not only the veterans, but the people who serve in our armed forces now.

There are Canadian soldiers, at the moment, in Afghanistan. They are probably in

Iraq. There were Canadians in Vietnam, there were Canadians at Cyprus and we -

AN HON. MEMBER: Jamie Murphy.

MR. J. HODDER: Yes, and Jamie Murphy, one of our own native sons who

recently - well, we all know the story.

Mr. Speaker, I had the advantage one time of visiting NORAD, the warning

centre which is under Cheyenne Mountain near Denver, Colorado. A lot of people

do not realize it, but we co-operate with the Americans all the time. At that

particular facility, which is a Star Wars like facility, the Deputy Commander is

always a Canadian and it was a Canadian who showed me around. You could see the

screens - this was during the cold war, of course - and where the missiles would

take off and where the satellite shots were and all that sort of thing. You went

in through a great steel door where all the buildings inside the mountain were

on springs and you suddenly realized that this is Ground Zero. You do not feel

like being there. We have soldiers who are serving in these places, and they

still are.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair regrets to interrupt the hon. gentleman and colleague in his

presentation but I do believe there is an agreement of a ten-minute time limit.

By leave, I am sure members would permit the hon. gentleman to continue his

presentation.

MR. J. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I will just clue up and say that, this is the

Year of the Veteran,

it is our opportunity not only to renew our commitment to remember the

sacrifices of our Canadian veterans, but to pay tribute to them. I am very

pleased to be able to stand here today and do this.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

Being an associate member of the Bay Roberts Royal Canadian Legion, it gives

me honour today to be able to stand and pass a few words with regard to the year

2005, Year of the Veteran, and to say that I thank the Member for Trinity North

for providing this private member's motion so that we can take this

opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, when we look at what we are referencing here, the veterans, no

more fitting is the freedom that we enjoy inside the walls of this Chamber. What

a tribute to the many sons and daughters who enlisted during World War I, World

War II, and the Korean Conflict, and many of them paid the ultimate sacrifice by

giving their lives. We remember those war heroes, and I can speak first-hand

from within my district and surrounding area, and I am sure the same can be said

throughout the Province, the work that is done by town councils and various

organizations and citizens so that their memory will be kept alive.

I speak personally, from this past Sunday, when I had the opportunity to join

the Minister of Municipal Affairs, representing the government, the Member for

Harbour Main-Whitbourne, the Minister of Education, and my colleague from the

District of Bellevue, to take

part in the sixtieth anniversary of the Battle of

the Atlantic.

Mr. Speaker, during that day of events, there was a tremendous parade which

took in all the Legions from District 2. They were from Blaketown, Carbonear,

Harbour Grace, Upper Island Cove, Spaniard's Bay, Bay Roberts and Brigus, and

they were represented. I would say there were approximately 600 or 700 people

there to take

part in that parade and to say thank you to those who served.

Like I said, this event was sponsored by District 2 for that area and I guess

it was co-sponsored by the Town of Spaniard's Bay and the Corporal Matthew

Brazil Royal Canadian Legion in Spaniard's Bay.

Mr. Speaker, even though the number of veterans we refer to - and I know they

are dwindling each and every year - it was so good and heartwarming to see them

on parade or being driven to the site.

I would like to mention two gentlemen from my district: Mr. Gordon Young of

Spaniard's Bay - I don't know if he has left yet or not, but probably has -

who has gone over to Holland to take

part in the VE celebrations over the next

few days; and another gentleman, Mr. Joseph Miller of Bay Roberts, who will be

attending the ceremonies at Beaumont Hamel.

Mr. Speaker, many of those young men and women, not only throughout my

district but throughout the Province, enrolled at a very early age. I don't

know if anyone saw the play that is put off at Trinity each and every year - it

is called No Man's Land , and I am sure you are familiar with it - but I

happened to see it just a couple of weeks ago at the arts centre in Carbonear. I

challenge each and every person in this Province to get out and see it, and see

how those young people - some of them even lied about their age so that they

could go overseas to help liberate other countries as well as to see that their

own country was kept free.

Mr. Speaker, what stories we hear from the war brides who returned to this

Province to be called home, when they tell about the terrible situations that

they were placed in when they lived in those various countries.

Mr. Speaker, I know it is the same in every district but I believe that the

schools in Port de Grave District have a tremendous relationship with the Royal

Canadian Legions, and in particular in Spaniard's Bay, the Holy Redeemer

school. They have a wonderful relationship where they work back and forth with

the school and the Legion, and throughout the year all events that take place

are being sponsored by the Royal Canadian Legion. Ascension Collegiate, again,

they put off one wonderful display at the school on Remembrance Day.

Mr. Speaker, when the call went out, whether it was the First World War or

the Second World War, those men and women did not know where they were going.

They knew they were going overseas, but what was to face them, they never knew

what was going to happen. We have read this in history, in the First World War,

Admiral of the Fleet, Mr. Earle Beatty; he named the Newfoundland and

Labradorians. He said, they are the best small-boat men in the great fleet.

Mr. Speaker, when we come to the Second World War, Prime Minister Winston

Churchill asked: Where are the Newfoundlanders? The same can be said today, Mr.

Speaker. They showed great pride in their Province, and their country at that

time, and I can assure you that it continues today.

We are very blessed, Mr. Speaker, in this Province, to have a young gentleman

by the name of Rick Hillier - I think I have his title right - Chief of Staff

for the Canadian Armed Forces in Canada, a gentleman who has gone a long way -

AN HON. MEMBER: From Campbellton.

MR. BUTLER: From Campbellton, I understand, my hon. colleague tells me.

AN HON. MEMBER: Lewisporte.

MR. BUTLER: Lewisporte?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. BUTLER: Lewisporte District. No problem saying that, sir.

Like I said, those young men and women, when they went overseas, and in

particular those who paid the supreme sacrifice, they did not do this very

lightly. They fought for democracy not only in other countries, so that we could

enjoy the same here in Newfoundland and Labrador and later on in Canada. Their

memory has to be preserved. The veterans who are still with us, each and every

Newfoundlander, as the motion states, should get out, hunt them out, say hello

to them, and express our feelings for what they have done.

Mr. Speaker, I know, in a private member's motion, probably I should not

make suggestions, but if the government and the Cabinet were ever to look at

anything in the future to relive and keep going the memory of those veterans, I

have a gentleman in my district - and I am going to put this to the Minister of

Municipal and Provincial Affairs, because I know how much he thinks about the

veterans and what they did - I have a gentleman in my district who has a picture

of every war memorial in this Province, Mr. Bill Tetford, and a lot of them are

falling to the point of repair. Many places do not have Legions.

MR. J. BYRNE: I have already talked with him.

MR. BUTLER: Wonderful, he has already spoken to the gentleman about it,

so I will leave that alone and hopefully we will get wonderful things from that

conversation.

Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I just want to say that it was a privilege to be

able to say a few words on behalf of our veterans, and that, when the time

comes, whether it is in July or whether it is in November or any time throughout

the year in any event that is being sponsored through the Royal Canadian

Legions, I think we have to stand shoulder to shoulder with them and just say

thank you to them.

Once again, Mr. Speaker, like we always say: Lest we forget.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DENINE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today it is a real pleasure to stand in this House and speak to this motion,

as was eloquently stated by all the members of this House. They all had their

own little twists and their own little stories and their own feelings about what

this motion is all about.

I am going to try to put my perspective, how I feel about this motion. It

says, to seek out and to thank all the veterans in their communities, and thank

them for what they have done; not only what they have done during the war, for

which we are certainly very, very thankful, but also when all the veterans who

came back and the community services that they were involved with. We have to

thank them for the numerous events that they have participated in.

Mr. Speaker, this hon. House is because of the veterans who went to war and

did this for the freedom of democracy. Out here in the foyer of Confederation

Building, if you take the time to go out, stand around and look, you will see

all the flags of different Legions of Newfoundland and Labrador. Each one of

those flags, Mr. Speaker, represents a significant number of individuals from

those branches throughout our Province who gave their lives and gave sacrifices

to go for freedom of today. That is very inspiring. Sometimes we walk by, but

just take the time, the next time you are in Confederation Building, just to

look around and to see the flags. That is a real dedication to say thank you to

our veterans.

Mr. Speaker, when I was young - some people say that was quite a time ago,

but it wasn't that long ago. I can remember very vividly, I was in the Boy

Scouts and at the War Memorial in St. John's our job on July 1 was to go to

lay a wreath at the War Memorial. Mr. Speaker, I remember that so plain because

what happened was, there would be family members there who laid wreaths on

behalf of their son or daughter, their uncle, aunt or whatever the case may be,

who was in the War in respect for them. We had to lay the wreaths when there was

no one there to lay the wreaths for them. I can remember people - we read the

names, this is so-and-so. I can remember as a Boy Scout we would talk amongst

each other and say: I wonder what that person was like. Who was this person? Mr.

Speaker, we probably will never know. There are names that escape me now because

I never could remember all the names that I laid the wreath for. But, I tell

you, as a young person and a person of that Scout troop, the people I talk to

today can still remember the fact that they had the pleasure and the honour to

lay a wreath on behalf of that individual. That was very significant, Mr.

Speaker, for me.

When I think back on it, I can remember this lady who came up and said: Will

you lay this wreath on behalf of my son? I can just remember her eyes and just

how she felt about it. I can remember - I went up and laid it and when I came

back she said thank you. You always remember those special occasions, those

times that are memorable and those times that you will never forget.

There are a couple of other things I want to mention, Mr. Speaker, the

schools. When November 11 rolls around - and you and I have participated in a

number of them in our districts, and I am sure all other hon. members have done

the same. I go there and the veterans are there to be the honoured guests. I

will tell you, they say the young people have forgotten, they have not, because

the teachers and the students in the schools have put on a display that is

second to none. There is organization and there is respect. To each and every

veteran that I speak to at the schools during and after the celebrations, they

say: My God, wasn't that just beautiful. The young people do remember. The

young people do respect and the young people will never forget. They are moved

by that experience, very moved. I think that when you look back on it - all you

have to do is listen to the music of the people, the plays that they put on and

the fact of how thankful they are of the peace that we have in our communities,

in our Province, in our country and in the world because of the veterans and the

sacrifices that they have paid - the ones who have passed on and the ones who

are still alive today. To thank them is such an easy two words to say: thank

you, but look at all the benefits and the rewards that we have reaped from what

they have done for us.

Mr. Speaker, I know this is not a hard sell because I have listened to all

the other hon. members speak and they all spoke from the heart. They all spoke

with sincerity and respect. So when you look around different communities in

Newfoundland and Labrador, I am sure all residents of Newfoundland and Labrador

will go out and take this resolution and say to each veteran they meet: Thank

you for the work that you have done. Thank you for the sacrifices, and thank you

for the peace and tranquility that we have here today.

Mr. Speaker, on Saturday night both you and I will be at a banquet in Mount

Pearl. I cannot wait to be there because the veterans will be there. We are

there to celebrate their contribution and to remember the people that have gone

before them - the people that will not be able to attend, but will be attending

there in spirit. That is what we are going to celebrate and that is what we are

going to give thanks for. As the hon. Member for the District of Port de Grave

said: Lest we forget. Let's not forget that and let's always remember it.

There is one little story - and I do not want to go over time because I know

there are people who may want to wrap up. When I was on the tour of Europe - and

I was telling my hon. colleague from Trinity North. I was on a tour of Europe,

and the bus tour stopped outside a graveyar