May 20,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLIV No. 28

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Before we begin our routine proceedings, the Chair would like

to welcome to the House today three students visiting from Jens Haven Memorial

in Nain, accompanied by three students from Bishop's College in St. John's. They

are on an Exchange Program and they are accompanied by their teachers, Mr. Wayne

Coombs of Nain and Mr. Wade Seymour of Bishop's College.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

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

Provincial Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to advise hon. members that I will

introduce for first reading today, a bill to amend the Public Tender Act. The

proposed amendment will have the effect of exempting from the Public Tender Act,

the calling of tenders for voice telephone services including both local and

long distance services.

This is a necessary and important amendment to the Public

Tender Act. It gives the Province the same flexibility currently existing in all

other jurisdictions, as other provinces have not dealt with this issue of

tendering or contracting out for telephone services.

Mr. Speaker, government has held discussions with NewTel

Communications, the current provider of these services. As a direct result of

these discussions, the Province would save approximately $1 million annually on

its telephone account. Government has been offered a rate for both long distance

and local services that is comparable to and, in many instances, lower than that

which other jurisdictions are currently paying. The proposed rate is less per

minute than the rate charged to the Nova Scotia Government by MT&T, the per

minute rate charged by New Brunswick Government by NBTel, and also the per

minute rate charged to the Prince Edward Island Government by Island Tel.

Government has received an exceptionally good and competitive

rate for both long distance and local services. Mr. Speaker, the rate for long

distance should also be viewed in light of the fact that due to the location of

our Province on the North American long distance grid, the cost of completing a

call is more expensive here. Yet, the rate offered by NewTel is still less than

the other Atlantic Provinces. The rate for local Centrex service is also

reasonable when considering the fact that the Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador has less than half the number of local calls as other provinces.

Mr. Speaker, the government has had an excellent working

relationship with NewTel. As all members know, it is a most reputable company

and a good corporate citizen. NewTel employs some 1,500 persons with an average

payroll of $43,000 per person. This equates to an annual yearly payroll of about

$80 million. NewTel Communications is a company that makes a significant

contribution to the economy in terms of wages and taxes, and it is a significant

corporate sponsor of many cultural events in the Province.

The recent merger of the four Atlantic Provinces' telephone

companies will have no negative impact on NewTel's local operations. The new

company, AtlanticCo, is solely a holding company looking after international

affairs. The local operation of NewTel and, for that matter, all other Atlantic

telephone companies, will remain the same, each keeping their own separate

identity. It is also worthy of note that the new CEO and CFO of AtlanticCo are

from the NewTel organization based in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I trust that this amendment will receive the

unanimous support of members on both sides of the House.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Before I take my place, I would like to acknowledge today

that we have in the gallery as, I guess, an indication of support hopefully for

this initiative, representatives from the NewTel organization: Frank Fagan,

Harry Connors and Jim Morgan, as well as representatives from the Board of

Trade, representatives from the Newfoundland and Labrador Manufacturers and

Export Association, as well as a number of major business corporations in the

Province.

Clearly, Mr. Speaker, this amendment to the Public Tender Act

for this specific purpose is one that, from government's perspective, we view to

be an eminently sensible thing to do, an important initiative for us to take,

and it recognizes appropriately the role of NewTel generally in our economy and

in our Province, and we believe it is roundly beneficial to all concerned.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, just a few words on this Ministerial Statement.

First of all, we also welcome to the gallery the representatives from NewTel,

the Board of Trade, and those people involved with this statement.

Last year this Administration made some major changes to the

Public Tender Act, and at that time I had some major concerns with the

amendments; but, with this, it certainly appears on the surface that this is an

acceptable and certainly an agreeable amendment proposed by the Minister of

Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

It is good to see that NewTel, a local company in the

Province - as the minister said, a good corporate citizen - it is good to see

that we will be keeping our money in the Province in dealing with NewTel, of

course, and, in the meantime, saving $1 million for the taxpayers of the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

With that I would just like to say again, I have had dealings

with NewTel over the years. I have had many calls from competitors, to my home,

trying to get me to switch to different phone companies. I am of the opinion

that we should support our local companies, the people who are creating jobs in

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, and I think we will supporting this

amendment.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to say that we look favourably upon this amendment. I

do not think it was intended that the Public Tender Act capture telephone

services just as another province. It does not, although in debate I would

certainly be interested in hearing and having a discussion about how the

Province is ensuring that we are getting the equivalent kind of rates that might

be available if it were competitive bidding at work here.

I will note that NewTel has been using some of its cash flow

and profits to develop a high-tech sector in this Province with a very great

amount of investment and training for people in this Province to get involved in

the high-tech sector. They have been recycling and reinvesting their money in

this Province and I think this particular amendment and recognition of their

role is acceptable - subject, of course, to debate and discussion about what is

a proper method of ensuring that we are, in fact, getting the best price for

this service for the taxpayers.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

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

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of privilege, the hon. the

Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today on a point of privilege. Last Friday in this

House, the Minister of Health and Community Services stood in her place with a

Ministerial Statement and attributed statements to me that were false.

The member stated that I suggested the work of a registered

nurse or a licensed practical nurse at a publicly funded facility does not

compare to that of a registered nurse or a licensed practical nurse at a private

facility.

In my statements, both inside this House and outside this

House, I did not make any reference whatsoever to the work of health care

professionals. In fact, I never even mentioned the words nurses or licensed

practical nurses.

I find it quite inappropriate and very unprofessional that

this minister would wait until I was out of the Province to attack me both

inside this House and outside this House, an attack that is unjustified, for

revealing deficiencies identified by her very own board and by independent

consultants.

Minister, as for suggestions that I apologize, I do not

intend to apologize to you or anybody because I did not make statements

regarding the quality of care provided by nurses or licensed practical nurses,

or any health care professionals for that matter.

It is unfortunate that you, Minister, would try to put your

political spin on such an important nursing home issue. If anyone should

apologize, it should be you. You should apologize to the people of Newfoundland

and Labrador for your lack of sensitivity to health care concerns, and you

should also apologize to the nurses and the nursing home boards for your failure

as a minister to address the concerns and priorities identified by your very

board that is funded and overseen by your department.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: By leave, to respond?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. member wishes to give an

(inaudible).

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think it is important to note that when I made the

statement in the House I had, on two days previous, when the member was

opposite, stood and asked him not to apologize to me but to apologize to the

staff of Hoyles-Escasoni, to the residents -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: If I may continue - not only to the

staff but to the residents of Hoyles-Escasoni and their families.

The member opposite can say what he likes, but he knows what

he said on NTV - I think it was the day of the questions here in the House -

implying that the quality of care in a private institution was higher or better

than that of those in the public.

It was obvious, because the next day on Open Line he was

back-tracking and back-peddling the whole day, and when I raised it in the House

he sat down and was as red as a beet because he knew what I said was accurate.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, if we are talking about

professionalization, and that is important, I do think he should - if I said

something implying that the quality of care was less in one organization than

another, the member opposite would be the first one on his feet and say:

Apologize! - not to me, but to the people who are providing the care and to the

residents and families who have their relatives there.

It is not bad enough that he would release a report - and it

shows the disrespect he has for the board, to release a report - that the board

never even showed to their own staff. That is another piece of it.

In this case I do not want an apology, but I know that the

staff do, I know the board does, and I know the residents would like to see it.

I also know that the residents over there feel quite

confident about the care that is being provided. While at no point - he may not

have mentioned an RN or an LPN. Who provides the care? RNs and LPNs and all the

other staff.

I say to the member: Do the right thing. Apologize!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair will take the point that the member raised under

advisement.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker,.

My questions are to the Minister of Health and Community

Services. The Canadian Blood Service selected certain sites to perform sensitive

blood tests. The testing of the Polymerase Chain Reaction or PCR technique is

being developed to detect viruses in blood donations.

Concerns have been raised about the turnaround time, and the

Canadian Blood Services recommended that testing should be performed in Canada

at the CBS centres. Halifax was selected to perform testing for the Atlantic

region.

I want to ask the minister: Who selected the centres that

will carry out this testing procedure? What rationale was arrived at in deciding

that Halifax would be the only centre in Atlantic Canada to conduct the testing?

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The CBS, the Canadian Blood -

AN HON. MEMBER: Agency.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Agency - replacing the Red Cross

Society, are the organization that makes those kinds of decisions.

As this hon. House would know, after the Krever inquiry, the

CBS was set up to deal with all of such issues, including the administration and

the monitoring of blood and blood products in this country. They are the ones

that chose the site for that particular test, the polymer test.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Opposition

House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Newfoundland is a partner, I guess, or a shareholder in the

Canadian Blood Services - one of the provinces, one of the participants.

Newfoundland and Labrador has highly skilled workers, laboratory technologist,

clinical workers and so on, to do the testing. We are once again, I say to the

minister, losing jobs to Halifax when Newfoundland and Labrador has only half as

many of those federal jobs per capita as other provinces in this country.

I want to ask the minister: What did she do to fight to see

that these jobs were put here in Newfoundland and Labrador?

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I fully agree that the staff here in this Province are highly

qualified and very skilled but, as I said perviously, since the Krever inquiry

it has been made very clear that the relationship is one of an advisory

capacity.

The CBS makes those decisions, and I am sure if the member

opposite were to look into the rationale, the rationale, from the best that I

can understand, is based on the fragility of the test and the fact that this

test has to be done in a central location because - it became the decision of

the CBS for the Atlantic region. Just like many other provinces do not have

their own site, there are only a number of sites across the country. Some of the

major cities did get a site and others did not, but that was the decision of the

CBS.

Again, Mr. Speaker, as provinces we are not interfering with

it. Nobody here is going to lose their job as a result of that. The people here

will maintain their jobs.

Again, I have met with members from NAPE - once in person and

twice with my officials - we have reassured them that these decisions are made

by the CBS and that we are not interfering in those. We always do try to attract

jobs to this Province but there comes a point when the safety of the product and

the necessary requirements to maintain that safety are foremost.

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

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister mentioned fragility as one of the factors and

concerns. Yes, I did speak with people who gave a report and they have indicated

to me as late as last night that they have not had a response back from their

letter.

I want to ask the minister: What actual research was done

prior to selecting those locations? How was it determined that Halifax was a

suitable location to carry out testing for Newfoundland and Labrador when you

said fragility is very important?

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, as the member pointed out,

it is a very fragile test and, because of the nature of the test, they were at

first considering having it done in specialized centres in the U.S.

Halifax has been chosen to be the Atlantic site for Nova

Scotia. The other sites include Vancouver, Winnipeg and Toronto. For example,

Saskatchewan and Alberta, the Calgary location, will not have test sites either.

This is more of a safety and quality control issue than it is for one of

economics. That is the rationale behind that site.

I, as minister, did not interfere in the choosing of the site

because I think one of the things that every government and territory has

learned in this country, since the Krever inquiry, is that the people who are

the experts are the best to make these decisions in terms of where those sites

should be located, for example.

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

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister made some reference to fragility. As she is well

aware, blood specimens are extremely susceptible to temperature fluctuations,

and turnaround time is very important. Here in a Province where were are

isolated, we are an Island here in this Province, we could be putting our

residents in this Province at risk.

St. John's Airport may be often fogged in. It is almost a

four-hour drive to Gander, and the only major airport in Nova Scotia is at

Halifax.

I want to ask the minister: What are the plans for the method

of transportation of those blood specimens? How are they to be transported?

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I will say it again because

I think it is important that the CBS, the Canadian -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I think it is important for this House to know

that the Canadian Blood Services is an arm's-length organization. It has been

appointed and mandated to operate the blood system in Canada by provincial and

territorial ministers.

It is the belief and understanding of all those involved that

if they are to operate the blood system and to be held accountable, because

accountability was a major issue with the Krever inquiry, that it must be

allowed to make its own decisions about quality and about safety control issues.

That is the rationale. I am not in a position as a minister

to second-guess the CBS in their decision around the sites they have chosen.

Our objective in Canada is to have an integrated blood

system. That is what we have been working on for the last three years, in fact,

as Health Ministers.

Again, I think it is important to note that they are the

group who are overseeing the safety of the blood. They are the ones who will be

deciding how these tests will get to the various sites. I know in various areas

of this country we will have to deal with issues around remoteness and

geography, and those issues will be undertaken and resolved by the CBS, the

Canadian Blood Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Opposition

House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am not disputing, Minister, that they are in Halifax and

other areas. I am just asking about here in our Province. Has the minister made

representation putting forth about our Province being isolated geographically,

the only access is by air, and with the major population in this area

(inaudible). Has she made that representation, to having one here in addition to

having the other ones here in the country, and put forth the views representing

our Province so we could not only have access to higher safety levels for our

residents but also access to work for our highly skilled people that we need

here?

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I have to reiterate again,

because I think it is of utmost importance, this is not an issue about jobs.

This is not an issue related to the economy. This is about a safety issue, and I

think it is important.

I have confidence in my staff and the appointees that we have

on the board to make representation -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I am answering the question, if the

member opposite would allow me.

I have full confidence in our appointees and in our staff in

making that representation. We have been very clear about the needs related to

Newfoundland, but I think it is most important again to reiterate that we do not

interfere with the activities of the CBS. They have been mandated to obtain and

to have quality control. They have made that decision and we have to support

that decision because they are doing it for safety reasons.

This is not about jobs, it is not about economy, and I think

it is important to note - it is very important to note - that no decision has

been made to move any existing testing services or staff from St. John's to

Halifax.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are with respect to the inequities in the

Upper Churchill contract.

We all know that the failure of the federal government to

secure a power corridor through Quebec for our hydro resulted in this

inequitable agreement. I ask the minister: What attempts are being made with his

federal counterparts to secure compensation for this federal failure?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

None at the moment.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St.

John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: In his maiden speech to this House the

former Leader of the Opposition, on March 10, 1988, and former Premier, Clyde

Wells, said: It is clearly and unquestionably unfair to Newfoundland, yet it is

justified in the national interest. If it is justified in the national interest

it is a burden which the nation ought to bare, not one which this Province alone

ought to bare.

I ask the minister: What proposals have this government

brought to the federal government - if not now, perhaps in the past - to fairly

provide compensation, and what has been their response?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am aware of one, an attempt by the previous Progressive

Conservative Administration to bring in a water rights reversion act, which was

stuck down in the Supreme Court of Canada and ruled that the approaches tried by

Premier Peckford and the group were unlawful, improper, tainted legislation.

I am not aware of any immediate proposals that this

particular government, in the Tobin Administration, has before the Government of

Canada. However, I think everybody in Newfoundland and Labrador is very pleased

to know that as a result of drawing attention to this issue again and entering

into direct negotiations with the Province of Quebec who have been the big

beneficiaries of the wealth generated by the Upper Churchill project, which is

still one of the greatest engineering marvels that was achieved in the world.

As a result of direct negotiations between Newfoundland and

Labrador and the Province of Quebec, this year alone, this year just past, we

saw, in fact, a recall of some 127 megawatts of power that was agreed to by the

Province of Quebec - even though they did not have to under the power contract -

that generated almost $30 million in additional revenues, in the year past, for

Newfoundland and Labrador.

The Premier announced just last week, Mr. Speaker, as a

result of negotiations directly between the Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador and the Province of Quebec, that we will be signing and having the

boards of the hydros ratify, within a week or so, the whole notion of a

Guaranteed Winter Availability agreement, which will generate in excess of an

additional $1 billion to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador over the life

of the Upper Churchill contract.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

My question today is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs

who is responsible for Newfoundland and Labrador Housing.

Mr. Speaker, the maintenance division of the Newfoundland and

Labrador Housing Corporation has moved from Hallett Crescent to the former

Hickman's Building Supplies building on Blackmarsh Road. I understand that they

were late in moving and there were extensive renovations and upgrading to the

new premises on Blackmarsh Road. Sources tell me that many changes were made as

the renovations were being completed, such as walls being torn down, materials

dumped, and then more walls constructed.

Can the minister inform the House how much money has been

budgeted for that project, who is doing the work, and if there are any cost

overruns or contract extensions?

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

Provincial Affairs.

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

The hon. member is accurate to the extent that NLHC

maintenance and other functions within the region have consolidated from two

sites, one from, I think, Hallett Crescent in O'Leary Industrial Park and one

from a site in Donovans Industrial Park as well. They have relocated from two

sites to one site on Blackmarsh Road. I think it is the former A.E. Hickman

Building, maybe. There are some renovations to their new location in order for

them to be accommodated there.

The bottom line is that we are doing the renovations through

the Corporation. At the end of the five-year lease tendering period, the cost of

the renovations plus the cost of the rent that we will be paying there will be

considerably less than what we would have had to pay at the other two locations

had we remained there, based on the tenders that were called.

So, it is an efficiency move. It will facilitate better

services in the region and it is more centrally located. For all the appropriate

and right reasons, Mr. Speaker, the move has been made by the Corporation.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. speaker.

Can the minister inform the House if tenders were called for

the supply of materials, such as electrical, plumbing, drywall, lumber, et

cetera, to complete the project, and if so, who was the successful bidder?

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can provide and table in the House, for the hon. member,

copies of tenders that have been called and names of successful bidders that

have been received, and we can provide you with the total cost of doing the

renovations, once I get that information together. Off the top of my head, I do

not know all the names of all the contractors, so I do not want to pontificate

on the basis of giving the illusion that I know every individual contractor. We

will get the information, we will table it in the House, and I think it will be

satisfactory for the hon. member's inquiry purposes.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Cape St. Francis.

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

Just a quick comment before I ask the question. I heard a

comment being made in the House about the minister. There is no insinuation here

with respect to his (inaudible), none whatsoever.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. J. BYRNE: I am correcting that.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get to his question.

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I have been informed that

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing has signed a lease - and you just confirmed it

- a five-year lease, without conditions included for parking, and that Housing

had to negotiate a further lease for parking. Can the minister give the details

of the lease agreement, such as the rental cost per month for the building, the

rental cost per month for parking, the term of the lease, and regarding

renovations or upgrading, will there be any further conditions once the

five-year lease is up?

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the

preamble to the question: I appreciate the hon. member

taking the time to clarify the fact that in his mind, although some of his

colleagues may have indiscriminately and with poor discretion suggested

otherwise, that there is nothing personal involved in this question.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: I appreciate the hon. member making that

very clear.

To the question of whether or not I can provide all of the

information with respect to the tenders that were called, the lease that was

entered into and any subsequent leasing arrangements that had to be undertaken:

I would be happy to get all of that together and provide it to the hon. member.

I have no difficulty with it.

I can assure the hon. member, that from government's

perspective and from all of us on this side of the House, we are not only as

interested in, but we are more determined than anybody, to ensure that what we

do on this side of the House in terms of procurement activities, whether it is

for leased space or for goods and services, is done consistent with the Public

Tender Act, done consistent with what is best for the taxpayers of the Province,

and where we have to take action, such as we have done earlier today in the

House, by advising the House that we proposed amendments to the Public Tender

Act, where we think we can do things better outside of the act, we will not

hesitate to move and do things in that direction as well. For purposes of the

question: All of the information that he requires, and more, will be provided if

he wants it.

I would suggest to the hon. member that he should probably

put all of his questions in writing to me, so that I can have the information

provided to him on a timely and in a factual basis and answer any additional

questions he might have.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. Member for

Cape St. Francis.

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

I say to the minister: I don't think it is necessary to put

them in writing, I can pick up a copy of Hansard tomorrow.

Mr. Minister, Housing was late in moving from the sites. I

would like to know how much extra was paid out in rent because of the late move.

I have heard they were as late as two months in moving to the new premises.

Also, I would like to know what the impact would be - I

understand there were some overtime issues involved with the work being done in

the premises on Blackmarsh Road and that there were a lot of extra expenses

incurred - and if, in fact, this would have an impact on the monies that would

be available for renovations, maintenance and upgrading to the regular social

housing program by Newfoundland and Labrador Housing?

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Leases that need to be extended on a month to month basis are

extended on the basis of arrangements currently in place; so there would be no

additional cost other than we would be staying where we are a little longer than

we had planned on. On the other hand, we would pick up our new lease at a point

that would not cause double rent costs, if you like.

In terms of providing him, as I said earlier, with all of

that information, I would be glad to do so.

In terms of whether or not this move and the expenditures

that go along with it would have an impact on what we would have to spend in

social housing programs, I would say: Yes, it will have an impact. It will have

a positive impact because we are going to be spending less money for rental

purposes over the life of the five years. To that extent, we will have more

money to apply to social housing needs.

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

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Mines and Energy, who

indicated yesterday morning on the radio that he was anticipating a proposal

from Voisey's Bay Nickel in the not too distant future, in a month or two.

Can the minister explain to the House, how VBN can actually

make a proposal to the government, because there is no mineral tax act in place

that would indicate what the royalties were and we are still under the 1994

legislation which provides a ten-year tax holiday? So, I want to ask the

minister whether he expects Voisey's Bay Nickel to offer a particular royalty,

are they going to decide what the royalty is, or is this government going to

decide what the royalty should be to the people of this Province? What is the

answer to that question?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

For about the 250th time, in this Legislature and outside, we

will give the same answer. Everybody in Newfoundland and Labrador and everybody

associated with the Voisey's Bay project, including Voisey's Bay Nickel and

Inco, understands that there will be no tax holiday with respect to the Voisey's

Bay project. That has been very clear from the very first moment that the

Voisey's Bay deposit was discovered. Everybody knows that.

The technical aspect of it, that the actual legislation has

not yet passed this Legislature, is a minor point that is not even raised in

discussions with Inco. They do not raise it as a problem because they know they

are not getting a tax holiday for ten years. They have known it from day one.

They only person who is still talking about it is the NDP member, who normally

wants to tax corporations more. Is he suggesting we should give them a ten-year

tax holiday? Because they know they are not going to get it.

If he wants to get up again on their behalf and ask for a

ten-year tax holiday for Inco, then make his position clear because they are not

asking for it. They have never asked for it. They know they are not getting it.

The only person in the world who is talking about it is the Leader of the NDP.

Maybe he should let us know that he talks about it every chance he gets maybe

because he thinks they should have it, because nobody else is even talking about

it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I note that the minister is trying to be a copycat for the

Premier. Maybe he really wants his job. He still has not answered the question.

Nobody in Newfoundland knows what the taxes and royalties are for mineral

development in Labrador because this government has not amended the legislation.

This government has not told anybody in this Province what the taxes are. If

Voisey's Bay Nickel knows, it is because the government has told them and not

the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get to his question.

MR. HARRIS: What is the royalties regime? What are the

taxes? What are the amendments that are going to be tabled in this House to the

legislation so that the people of Newfoundland can know whether we are going to

get a fair deal on this development or any other development?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There is one thing I do know: I do not want to be Mayor of

St. John's, most definitely not, never did, not going to run for the job, not

interested.

I have had the privilege of being in charge of a few things

in my life; because the speech the hon. member gave when he wanted to be mayor

was, `I would like to run something for a change', because he admitted he has

never run anything. It is obvious from the line of questioning that he is not

about to run the Government of Newfoundland with that kind of questioning.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Let me answer the question clearly again.

Everybody in the world - in the world, as we know it - understands that there is

no ten-year tax holiday with respect to the development of the Voisey's Bay

project - everybody in the world - and that includes everybody in Newfoundland

and Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The real issue here is whether this government is being run

by Inco as to what the royalties are going to be in Labrador. Everybody may well

know that they are going to have to pay royalties, but not one person has an

official word from this government as to what the royalties are going to be and

what the benefits of mineral royalties or mineral taxes for this Province are

going to be, because no changes have been made to the legislation. Unless this

government has secretly told Voisey's Bay Nickel, nobody else knows.

What are the royalties going to be? What is the royalty

regime? When is the minister going to make it public and table it in this House

and change the legislation?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have given a commitment. It was raised with respect to

questioning in the Legislature earlier this week.

When the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador receives and

analyses a proposal from Inco - because there is none today - with respect to

development of the Voisey's Bay property, and if we are convinced upon analysis

that it provides full and fair benefits for Newfoundland and Labrador, we will

describe it completely to everybody in the Province because we will be out

saying: This is good for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador for these

reasons.

If that does not exist, if there is no project proposed with

all of the considerations - taxation, royalties and so on - that meets with the

criteria that the government has established in legislation, that it provide

full and fair benefits for Newfoundland and Labrador, there will be nothing to

describe to the people of the Province.

I can guarantee you one thing: Contrary to what the hon.

member was trying to suggest last Friday in a press conference, this government

will not propose any development plan for acceptance to the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador that leaves us impoverished as a result of the

development of the Voisey's Bay nickel deposit. I think that the hon. member was

trying to make a point last Friday - I don't think he made it very well - but

the fact of the matter is, there will be tremendous benefits accruing to

Newfoundland and Labrador as the result of the development of the Voisey's Bay

nickel deposit or it will stay in the ground. A very simple position.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour

Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for

the Minister of Education. The topic today, Minister, is special needs children.

Their parents continue to be frustrated by this government's decision-making,

that in spite of a strong commitment in the Liberal Red Book to meet the

educational needs of these students, the Premier as well gave a commitment in

Gander to open up a dialogue that would lead to services being allocated on the

basis of need, as recommended by Dr. Canning in her report, rather than the

present complex formula that results in a lot of paper being pushed but not

necessarily in better services being offered to the special needs children.

Minister, why has the government not initiated a constructive

dialogue with parents of these children on the introduction of a

needs-for-service approach to the delivery of learning opportunities for these

children?

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

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, this government is as committed to

the needs of our children as anyone else in this Province, particularly those

children with special needs. It is for that very reason that we have agreed to

establish a round table in Grand Falls. That is scheduled for May 31 - for the

information of the member opposite - at which time we will be sitting down with

the stakeholders who have expressed concerns about the needs of children,

special needs, and we will have a comprehensive discussion on the way to address

the needs of children in our system.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, the Premier gave a commitment

to the introduction of a pilot program where help would be allocated on the

basis of need; this is in Gander area. In spite of letters forwarded to the

minister, the Member for Gander and senior officials of the department, seeking

information on the establishment of this pilot project, when will the government

move to introduce this pilot project that was a commitment made by the Premier

on the eve of the election?

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

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, the round table will in effect be

the second meeting that will have been held on this particular subject. In fact

my colleague, the hon. Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology, chaired a

session in Gander at which there were parents from both the Gander area and

Grand Falls area who came together to discuss the needs of children with special

needs.

Mr. Speaker, subsequent to that, we have had correspondence

as well to my colleague, the Member for Buchans-Grand Falls and to the Member

for Gander, to again discuss how we should go forward with this. This is a very

important, serious matter, one that we want to give comprehensive discussion to,

one that we want to sit down and do a thorough analysis of in terms of the

requirements of these children.

Mr. Speaker, this is not something we are taking lightly. In

fact, based on the requests that we have had and the commitment given by the

Premier during the election, we are moving forward - moving forward with the

round table again, as I say, on May 31. That will bring together all of the

stakeholders to again discuss the needs of those children, but this is not

something that is going to happen overnight. This is going to be a process that

will take some time because, again, we want to ensure that it is done right.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time for Oral Questions has elapsed.

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Special Committees

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and

Employment.

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, I hereby table the annual report

for the Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women for the fiscal year

1997-1998.

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

MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my pleasure to report that the Social Services

Committee has considered the Estimates of the following departments: Human

Resources and Employment; Education; Health and Community Services; Environment

and Labour; and Justice, and that these Estimates have been approved without

amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Notices of Motion

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

Justice.

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on

tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The City of

St. John's Act".

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

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think we will have to amend the record to show that my

colleague was more anxious than I, or at least it seems that way.

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

to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Jury Act". (Bill 17).

Thank you.

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

MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on

tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following Private Member's Resolution:

WHEREAS the safety of the travelling public must be the

number one priority of any government; and

WHEREAS the provision of services to the travelling public is

also important; and

WHEREAS the 120 jobs provided by the Whitbourne businesses

are also important to the economy of Newfoundland and Labrador; and

WHEREAS the present approved plan for the Trans-Canada

Highway through Whitbourne ensures public safety and services;

BE IT RESOLVED that this hon. House endorse the Department of

Works, Services and Transportation's plan for the Trans-Canada Highway at

Whitbourne.

We will smoke out the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne,

finally.

Answers to Questions

For which Notice has been Given

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

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I would like to provide further

detail to the answer to the question raised yesterday by the Leader of the

Opposition with respect to the government's position on the development of the

Voisey's Bay deposit, and whether or not there has been a change in position.

I would like to table, as part of this answer, some five

documents; first and foremost, clippings from The Telegram , July 30,

1998, in which Inco reports they have discovered new reserves and are encouraged

with respect to Voisey's Bay.

I would like to table as well, as a further answer, that on

August 11, 1998, in the Canadian Business

section of The Globe and Mail ,

Inco changed its mind and made a public statement that it was not feasible to do

any smelting or refining in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I will table as well, the October 19 presentation to the

environmental panel where Mr. Rowat, on behalf of the Government of Newfoundland

and Labrador, proposed a smaller mill and concentrator, on page 2 of that brief.

This was October 19, 1998 - the position that the Leader of the Opposition

yesterday and this morning was trying to describe as a flip-flop and a change in

the last few days - Mr. Rowat proposed a 133 million pound annual production,

instead of the 270 million pounds proposed for Argentia, a smaller mill and

concentrator.

A couple of weeks later, on October 31, before the same

panel, Newfoundland and Labrador's position, on page 4, demonstrated again that

even though we had recommended a smaller one, that analysis had been done that

even the company's proposal, contrary to what they said on August 11, 1998, was

viable and ranked in the lowest quartile of projects in the whole world.

Then again on February 6, during the election - in which I

guess the Leader of the Opposition was too busy promising $800 million worth of

tax cuts that he could not afford - the Premier of the Province, indicating

Newfoundland would welcome a smaller operation, half the size, for example, that

would extend the life of the Voisey's Bay mine: Tobin has insisted there will be

no mining lease without full benefits to Newfoundland and Labrador but did not

agree that the project can only go ahead with the massive

270-million-pound-a-year smelter/refinery originally proposed in 1996.

Just to make sure that the Leader of the Opposition

understands the answer to the question, and understands there has been no change

of position in the last two days by the minister on behalf of the government, I

will table these documents so they can read them and finally get their act

straight as to whether they are going to support the government in getting a

fair deal with Inco, or try to be a cheerleader for the proponent of the project

and try to suggest that we should make some kind of a different deal so that we

can get the deal now in case we might have to leave the ore in the ground for

forty, fifty, sixty, or seventy years.

I would like to table the documents, Mr. Speaker.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition. The petition reads:

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland

in legislative session convened, the petition of the undersigned residents of

Newfoundland:

WHEREAS Route 235 from Birchy Cove to Bonavista has not been

upgraded since it was paved approximately twenty-five years ago; and

WHEREAS this

section of Route 235 is in such a terrible

condition that vehicles are being damaged, including the school buses serving

schools in the area, and school children are finding their daily trips over the

road very difficult;

WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to upgrade and pave the five kilometres of Route 235

from Birchy Cove to Bonavista.

Mr. Speaker, this is another one in a series of petitions

that I have continued to bring forward to the House of Assembly, to bring

forward the concerns that are being expressed to me by the residents of Birchy

Cove, Newmans Cove, Upper Amherst Cove, Middle Amherst Cove, and Lower Amherst

Cove, and asking me, as their voice in the House of Assembly, to bring forward

their concerns about the condition of this five kilometres of roadway leading

from Birchy Cove, which is the community closer to Bonavista, and Bonavista

itself.

Mr. Speaker, the parents are raising concerns because they

are concerned about the daily trips that they take over this particular roadway

to either go to work or to access government services. The students themselves

are echoing their concerns. They are signing many of the petitions. In fact, I

would suggest that there are some students' names attached to this particular

petition because they are the ones who have to travel over this stretch of

roadway at least twice a day, five days a week, in order to go to Matthew

Elementary and Discovery Collegiate in Bonavista.

In raising the issue here so many times, it was only

yesterday that the Constable who sits down where the Sergeant-at-Arms sits many

times in this House, Constable Codner, came to me and said: Roger, if I could

pave your road, I would. Here is a donation. I want to be the first one to help

you in your plight to get that road resurfaced.

He left a $5 bill in my pocket, on my table. What I will do

is, I will take the $5 bill and send it out to one of the concerned parents in

the district where they will be able to probably buy another fifteen postage

stamps, in writing the minister, to bring forward their concerns and their

suggestions.

Mr. Speaker, there are letters arriving every day at the

minister's office. There are faxes arriving every day in the minister's office.

I know there are phone calls because the parents have met on several occasions

and said: What can we do to try to have those five kilometres of road upgraded

and paved?

They talked about blocking the road, but said: No, we are not

going to do that because we do not want to divide the community. We do not want

to stop people who have a reason to go to another community and send them in

another direction.

They talked about stopping the school buses, but said: No, we

are not going to do that because the education of our children is very important

and we do not want them to lose a day of school, especially at this particular

time of the year.

So, being responsible people, they said: What we will do is,

we will send petitions to the House of Assembly. We will send letters to the

minister. We will go out on the road and hand out pamphlets to ask people if

they, themselves, would write the minister, or send this letter to the minister,

after they had occasion to drive over the road and see the condition it is in.

That is what they have done, Mr. Speaker and that is what

they are going to continue to do.

I said five kilometres of road; that is the distance between

Bonavista and Birchy Cove. The parents themselves have stated quite clearly that

if government cannot upgrade and pave the five kilometres of road, then maybe

they will upgrade and repave, recap, two-and-a-half kilometres which is the

worst

section of roadway. They are willing to put up with that. They are willing

to sacrifice their concerns for their own communities where the roads are in

terrible condition, and they are all willing to concentrate on this particular

section of road on Route 235 so that can be upgraded and paved first.

I am sure they will not be quiet about their own roads

leading through their own communities once this is complete, and I do not blame

them. I support them 100 per cent.

Mr. Speaker, if we do not maintain our roadways, and if we do

not maintain our infrastructure, then it tells us that we do not believe in

rural Newfoundland and Labrador. It tells us, Mr. Speaker, that we are going out

to those areas where they pay the same amount for insurance on their cars, they

pay the same amount of taxes, it costs them the same to license their cars, they

pay the same taxes on gasoline -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: - as residents in any other part of this

Province.

So, Mr. Speaker, I bring forward my petition, I bring forward

the concerns of the residents, and hopefully government will act.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am very pleased to present this petition on behalf of the

people listed here from the Triton-Brighton area.

To the hon. House of Assembly of Newfoundland and Labrador,

in legislative session convened, the petition of the undersigned residents of

Triton and Brighton, and their supporters;

WHEREAS programming at Brian Peckford Elementary School in

Triton is greatly restricted as a result of insufficient space; and

WHEREAS the school council has applied to the Education

Investment Corporation with our full support for a school extension for the

1999-2000 school year;

WHEREFORE your petitioners urged the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to take the action necessary to allow an extension to

the school to proceed in 1999-2000 school year; and as in duty bound, your

petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I visited the school a couple of times, and this

is a serious need for the students at that school, from K to VI. There are

special needs students in that school. Next year there will probably be a

decline of about nine students and a possibility of another six added, depending

on the people who said they are going to move into the area.

Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable, when you go into a school

such as this, a fairly decent school, when you have a classroom

fifteen-and-a-half feet by nine-and-a-half feet, where you have to teach special

needs students. Next year there will be two more special needs students added on

to that list.

Mr. Speaker, I think the government realizes the need there.

It is been supported by the council, by the school board, and by all the

professional people who attend that school to teach the programs and deliver the

support that is needed by the students in that school. I think, if something is

not done before the middle of the summer, if a commitment is not made, then this

fall these students will have to go back into the same situation or even far

worse conditions. If a commitment can be made as early as possible, than maybe

by the September opening some of the problems will be taken care off, and I hope

they will. I think the minister will recognize that. I have faith in her that

she will seriously look at the situation and seriously realize that it has to be

done. It is a special need for special students. I think, Mr. Speaker, she is

going to have to find the funds to let the school board do their work in Brian

Peckford Elementary School in Triton.

I have faith in the minister, as I say, that she will

certainly get out there. I do not know if she has seen it firsthand, but she is

aware of the situation there. I am concerned and the parents are concerned, Mr.

Speaker, and I hope that this problem will be taken care of before the beginning

of the next school year.

Thank you very much.

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

MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. speaker.

I rise to support the petition put forward by my colleague,

the Member for Windsor-Springdale. Mr. Speaker, in 1997-1998, with the

restructuring that went on in education, Brian Peckford Elementary and Harbour

View Academy combined to form a K to VI school to serve the communities of

Triton and Brighton.

Mr. Speaker, as the member has said, the school population in

this part of the Province is very stable. They had projections done which show

that the school population there will change very little over the next several

years.

Mr. Speaker, I want to bring to the House's attention the

difficulties this school is now facing. For example, this school has an

instructional area measuring nine-and-a-half feet by fifteen-and-a-half feet and

that area accommodates a Criteria C student. It is also a combination and serves

as a nurse's office and an AV storage room. Mr. Speaker, let me repeat that

because this is the difficulty that the students in this school are having. We

have a room, nine-and-a-half feet by fifteen-and-a-half feet, that serves as a

nurse's office, an AV storage room and it also serves as an instructional area

for a Criteria C student.

Mr. Speaker, this school has a resource centre library room

that measures twenty-seven feet by twenty-one feet. That room doubles as a

computer lab and presently accommodates eleven computer stations. They are also

in the process of purchasing more computers. This room also serves to provide

services to two autistic children. Mr. Speaker, this is incredible, that we

would have these special needs students accommodated in these kinds of

facilities. Their science storage room measures only nine feet by twelve feet.

Mr. Speaker, the room where the Criteria C student is housed is in the middle of

the building. It does not even have a window. This special needs child has no

access to fresh air.

Now, Mr. Speaker, we want to say to the government that this

is a genuine case. The parents have the support of the school council, they have

the support of the local communities of Brighton and Triton and they have the

support of the local school board. It is unnecessary, and it is certainly

unwise, to have school children with special needs being accommodated in such

squatty, miserable places. It shows the priority that this government has on

special needs children, when we ask their parents to have them accommodated in

their school in such small, confined spaces.

Mr. Speaker, we also bring to the government's attention that

in this school the guidance services must be delivered in various rooms when

they become available. It not only happens that the principal and teachers have

to go and ask, when will the guidance counsellor be here - because there is only

one guidance counsellor for every 1,000 students, so with 115 students you are

going to have a guidance counsellor there, on average, once every ten days or

one hour every ten hours, but that does not happen. So when the guidance

counsellor arrives there is no space for the guidance counsellor. Therefore, the

classes in the resource centre get postponed in order to accommodate

counselling. Mr. Speaker, this is not fair and equitable allocation of

educational resources. So, Mr. Speaker, this particular school, Brian Peckford

Elementary, has special needs.

As well, the public health nurse lost her space when the

Criteria C student began to use the instructional area that we referred to

earlier. So, like the guidance counsellor, when the nurse arrives someone has to

be put out of an instructional area so that these students and the nurse can

have access to suitable facilities.

Mr. Speaker, the principal's office in this school is a mere

eleven feet by nine-and-a-half feet. This is totally, totally inadequate. When

you have children in a school where the classroom for that child is -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. H. HODDER: - nine-and-a-half feet by

fifteen-and-a-half feet, we have to ask ourselves: Where are the priorities?

We, on this side, thoroughly and completely support the

petition put forward by my colleague, the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, Order 3, Concurrence Motion:

Government Services Committee, Resource Committee, and Social Services

Committee, even though it is not on the order paper. It was agreed that we will

debate this.

Mr. Speaker, I would also move that the House not adjourn at

five o'clock.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and second that the House do not

adjourn at 5:00 p.m.

All those in favour, `aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: Those against, `nay'.

Carried.

Motion 3, the hon. the Member for Humber East.

MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my pleasure to introduce the Concurrence Motion

relative to the estimates that were considered by the Department of Social

Services.

At the outset, Mr. Speaker, let me say to the members of the

committee, those members on this side of the House, the hon. the Member for

Burgeo & LaPoile, the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, and the Member for

Burin-Placentia West, and on the side opposite, the Member for St. John's South,

the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne and the Member for St. John's East, I

thank them very much for their diligence at the committee hearing. Most of the

members were present for most of the meetings, and where they could not be in

attendance because of other pressing province-wide duties, they did offer

suitable replacements.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to take a few moments to speak to

the Estimates of the Social Services Committee, because amongst the estimates

that we did consider were two departments which are probably the most

contentious or the most publicly discussed issues in the Province today, the

Department of Education and the Department of Health.

Mr. Speaker, I find it rather perplexing that when one

considers the nature and the scope of the problems facing the Province today,

and looking at the bigger picture to see the types of comments that are

frequently coming up in this Chamber - I would say I hear the comments in the

Chamber and I did not hear them in committee. Mr. Speaker, what we are facing in

this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador is nothing short of a revolution. In

the field of education, we have gone from a student population, in 1972 or

thereabouts, of something in the order of 160,000 students, to today, in 1999,

something like 97,000 students; with a projection that by the year 2010, which

may seem a long way away, but keep in mind this is 1999, just on the eve of

2010, down to some 60,000 students. In short, in less than a quarter of a

century, we have lost about a 110,000 students in our population.

Now, anyone who would sit back and say, business as usual,

are obviously living in a different world than I am living, because, Mr.

Speaker, when you are dealing with that kind of a student decline, you are

looking at nothing short of a massive revolution in the education system.

On the one hand, Mr. Speaker, we had to build up an

infrastructure to accommodate these large numbers of students, and now we are

faced with the converse of that problem, trying to downsize to provide all

students in the Province, wherever they might be, with a quality well-rounded

education. Mr. Speaker, that is not a small challenge, that is a massive

challenge, regardless of who is in power at the time, whether it be the

government that is represented by the party on this side or by the party on the

other side.

Mr. Speaker, that there are problems in the education system

resulting from this restructuring and the redesign, should be no surprise to

anyone.

Mr. Speaker, we are into this issue of teacher allocation. It

has become very topical. It is like the flavour of the month. I get very

frustrated from time to time, because teacher allocation is a major issue, but

the issue that we need to address is the issue of a declining student

population. Whether we like it or not, with fewer students in the school system,

it follows, as surely as day follows night, that there must be and there should

be less teachers available or needed in the system.

As a member of this House, if that were the level the debate

was at in this Province, I could really sit down with my colleagues opposite and

share with them some views, and they could share with me some of their views,

but what we seem to be now doing is getting down to the very lower level of

detail, expecting this hon. House to deal with almost: Who is the janitor and

when does he show up for work? - that level of detail. I say that by comparison,

and comparison only.

The role of this House is to deal with the issues, to deal

with them at the policy level, to put in place a system that works and will work

to the betterment of the Province and to the students of this Province, and that

is what we have done. That was the whole notion of the reform process. That was

why the people of this Province, in two consecutive referendum, voted for

educational reform.

They voted for educational reform for many reasons, but one

of the major reasons was because we are faced with a change in the population of

this Province in the number of students in schools and university.

Yet, day after day I seem to feel that we are still fighting

the battle, the referendum battle. That issue has been decided. It has been

decided overwhelmingly by the population of this Province. Let's get on with our

lives. Let's get on with putting into place an educational system that meets the

needs of today and that, in fact, provides a quality well-rounded education for

all students whether they live or whether they go to school in La Scie, St.

Anthony, St. John's, Corner Brook or Gander; the same quality and the same all

around type of education. So, let's get the debate focused firmly upon the issue

at hand; let's not go revisiting old battles and old issues.

The other issue that was considered in the departments that

we looked at was the whole issue of health care. Just as I said that in the

educational system we are facing a revolution where we have fewer students in

our system and we are trying to downsize an infrastructure to meet the reality

of today, just the opposite is happening in the health care system. We are

facing an aging population.

Whether I would care to acknowledge that or not, I am part of

that aging population. Our population is getting older, the population is

requiring a greater level of care, a great stress is being placed upon the

system, and we are facing an opposite issue to one that we were facing in

education.

Whereas in education we were trying to downsize an infrastructure to

meet a lower population and a lower number of students, on the health side we

are doing the reverse. We are trying to build up the infrastructure to meet and

to take care of the needs of an aging population.

Mr. Speaker, what is happening at this point in time in the

Province is nothing short of a revolution. I firmly believe that in the years to

come, when we become much older and we are looking at the history books of the

year 2020 - for those of us who may or may not be around at that time, but

certainly our children will -

MR. TULK: 2020?

MR. MERCER: 2020.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible) will only be about sixty-five.

MR. MERCER: You will be around in 2020?

Well, some members may be sixty-five by the year 2020 but

there is one member who will much older than sixty-five.

MR. TULK: Who is that?

MR. MERCER: Well...

The point I am trying to make is that I firmly believe that

in the far distant future when the history books are written about this period

of Newfoundland's history, people will look back and say: How did they cope with

the issues that were facing them at that time? How did they face the issues of a

major downturn or a major reduction in the number of students going to school

and, at the same time, trying to build up a massive infrastructure to take care

of an aging population?

It is a very complex problem. Everyone on this side of the

House, I am sure, would acknowledge that. As I said earlier, if the level of

discussion and that the level of debate in this Chamber were directed at that

issue, and trying to look at that in a policy's perspective, I, as one member of

this House, would feel very well satisfied. I would feel that my days in this

Chamber have been well spent, but I come back to this Chamber day in and day out

and, as I say, we are dealing with issues, with the nuts and bolts.

To use examples would be to trivialize the situation but we

are dealing with nuts and bolt issues, issues which should not necessarily be

before this House. They should be before those groups: the school councils, the

principals, the school boards, the health care institutions and their boards,

people who are close to the action, who can do the micromanagement. Those who

come to this Chamber and look for solutions to these micro-problems, I suspect,

are not looking at things in the greater perspective.

The second part of that issue -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just a few more minutes to clue up. Perhaps in what I have to

say I will not be given leave for much longer.

The second part about not liking to come into this House

every day, quite apart from the micromanagement that is being perceived that we

should involved with here as a government, are the innuendos, the statements

being made that people know are not correct but they spin them in such a way

that they give an air of creditability.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MERCER: Mr. Speaker, I never point to members and I

never impute motives, but if there is a voice in the wilderness maybe it is

finding a reason for using its voice at this point in time. I do not want to be

more pointed than that.

The fact is, there are members in this Chamber who daily come

before us and make statements which they know in their heart, they know in their

soul, are not correct. They know that what they are saying is being said for

crass political purposes. It is not being said to try to advance the issues and

the agenda of the day.

I find that extremely disheartening. I would hope that all

members on both sides of the House would take the issues that are before them

and discuss them in a policy perspective, to look at the major issues facing the

Province today, and to deal with them in a positive, forthright way.

Were the members of the Opposition coming forward day in and

day out with alternate solutions, alternate approaches, I would love to sit down

with members opposite to discuss that, but I will not sit down with members who

travel this Province, go out and raise expectations, take issues which are not

real and create a certain aura of creditability around them, and then say to me,

as a member: Where were you? Why were you not sitting down with us to discuss

these issues?

Recently, when we were in Corner Brook, the members were

there and had their meetings, and that was fine. I went out the following day

and met with the students out there, and asked the students: Where are you

getting your information? What I read in the newspaper, Sir.

I read in the newspapers statements being made by members

opposite that the school program in physical education, music, or something else

is being taken out, wiped out.

When I talk to the school boards - which I did long before

the members opposite went to Corner Brook - I did not hear those statements.

There were concerns and there were issues that needed to be addressed.

It is most disheartening when the younger people in this

Province are taking their information strictly from members opposite who are

imputing motives, I would say, when they talk about downsizing and they talk

about the lack of students in the classroom.

I know the Member for Waterford Valley looks at me and

smiles, and so on and so forth. He is eager to get up. I am sure he will have

lots to say, but I would hope that what he has to say is a meaningful

contribution to the debate of how, in this Province, we are dealing with a

declining student population on the one hand and an aging population on the

other; because, while he may not be around for the year 2020 or 2030, this is

one of the most difficult periods that we will ever have gone through in our

history.

Having said that, I look forward to the comments from the

hon. members opposite. I am sure they will enlighten me on any statements which

I have made which are contrary to their perception of reality.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am forced to rise because of the comments by my colleague

across the way. I note that the member said they were not getting into

micromanaging the educational system. I tend to agree; this House is not set up

to micromanage the educational process of Newfoundland and Labrador. It should

not be an issue in this House that we should be deciding on how many teachers

should be allocated to Herdman Collegiate, or to Brian Peckford Elementary

School in Triton. However, the Minister of Education stood in her place and she

said to the Opposition: Would you please go out and bring back the examples?

What we took from that is that the Minister of Education

needed to be reminded that what we were saying about the effects of teacher cuts

indeed reflected the reality in Newfoundland and Labrador - in particular, in

rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

I note that the hon. member gave his speech and I listened to

him, but he has left the Chamber. Therefore, obviously he has no interest in

listening to my reply. I want to say to the hon. member who just spoke that we

met with, among other people, the chair of a school board, District 3, June

Alteen, in a meeting. She is also the chair of all the school boards in

Newfoundland and Labrador. This lady said certain things to us that I will

communicate to this House in the next short while. We not only met with this

lady but we met with some members of that school board, School District 3.

What was said in our meeting was that June Alteen, as chair

of the board, is very concerned with the regional disparities throughout the

Province but she is also concerned with the urban, rural difficulties that we

have in teacher allocation, and how that affects the delivery of school

programs. These are not my words. These are the words of the chair of School

District 3 with head office in Corner Brook.

The chair of that board and two members of that board

identify the disparities within their own board. We met with the representative

from Cox's Cove. That member told us of the difficulty they have in carrying out

school programs in Cox's Cove. What we have said here are the words of that

school board representative from Cox's Cove. What the Member for Humber East

rises and says is: No, that is nonsense.

What that member is doing is saying to me, as a member of

this House, that what the school board representative said from Cox's Cove is

not correct, is inadequate, and it does not reflect the reality.

I can only say to the member that our mission in going out

and meeting with the school boards, meeting with the members of the schools

boards and the chair of the school board, was to bring back to this House the

words that were said.

In my rather copious notes - and I am know for taking rather

meticulous notes - I have actual quotations here that I can use from every

single meeting that I attended in the last two weeks.

What the chair of that board said, and what two members of

the board said, let quote the words: This government is causing school boards to

be pitted against school boards. They are causing zones to be pitted against

zones. They are causing urban areas of this Province to be pitted against rural

areas.

These are the words of the school board representatives. They

are not my words. They are their words. This government is saying: No, we do not

want to hear that.

I know why they do not want to hear it, because it is coming

from the grass roots.

We spoke as well to the school board representative of School

District 3. Let me tell you something else that was said. They said: This school

board no longer has manoeuvrability or flexibility when it comes to teacher

allocation.

That was said by the chair of that school board. That is what

the school board said. Let me quote further: We, as a school board, cannot do

further accommodation. We cannot go any further. In fact - the words here, and I

am quoting from my notes from the meeting - program offerings will be

compromised.

These are words that were said by the duly elected school

board of School District 3.

I want to go on. When the school board was asked some months

ago: What teachers do you need to deliver the courses that you are being asked

to deliver? They said they were asked - school board District 3: How many

teachers do you need to deliver the program? What School District 3 asked for

was not the current teacher allocation. The school district asked for eighteen

more teachers. Eighteen more teachers were asked for.

When they got their information back from the Minister of

Education and her department, they were cut eighteen teachers. Now the school

board asked for eighteen more teaching units. What they got back was eighteen

fewer teacher units for a gap of thirty-six teachers. That is the gap. It is a

gap of thirty-six. That is what we have here.

Herdman Collegiate, for example, will lose four teacher units

and, to quote again from the school board officials: This will severely impact

on school programming.

Last week my colleague, the Member for St. John's East, flew

back from Corner Brook last Thursday morning on the early flight, was here in

the House last Thursday afternoon, with my colleague from Harbour

Main-Whitbourne, and presented a petition to this House from parents of students

involved in Herdman Collegiate. When these parents came to our meeting, they

said: This will negatively impact on programs.

The gap here is not eighteen teacher units. The gap here is

thirty-six teaching units. In other words, they were asked what they needed and

then a few days later we heard the Member for Humber East going over and saying

at a rally: Well, you know, we are going to look at it. We are going to look at

it, that more teaching units are needed.

The question we have is: How far will we go to what the

school board wanted, which was eighteen more, and the gap between that and what

they were told they would lose, eighteen less.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. H. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I see that the Member for

Twillingate & Fogo wants to engage in the discussion.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. H. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Education

challenged the Opposition to go out and find out the information. That is what

we did. We are bringing it back. Every single word that I will say in this

debate comes directly from the elected board officials. It is not made up, it

not conjecture, it is not something that we suddenly discovered in the wee hours

of the morning. These words that I am saying here are the words of the school

boards. They are the words of the elected school boards, and it is sad indeed to

hear the Minister of Education say that the teachers put the kids up to making

these complaints; the principal put the teachers up to making these complaints.

Mr. Speaker, the principals and the teachers out there are

trying to reflect the reality. They did not put the parents or the children up

to anything. It is the parent councils that are speaking. I have many more

meticulous notes here.

In just reflecting on this one single meeting that I attended

last Wednesday, I want to say that in School District 3 comments were made like

this. In fact, I am quoting from one of the school board members who said: We

are being forced to tread water just to maintain standards. We asked for an

additional eighteen units and parents expect an enriched quality of education.

That is what we were told when we talked about educational reform.

I note as well that -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. H. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, with leave?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. H. HODDER: No leave?

MR. SPEAKER: Yes.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Okay.

The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to speak on the Estimates. I guess I am part of

a team where we have to fulfil a commitment.

I would love to be in a position where I could travel to the

different communities and promise people things they are asking for, but we on

this side of the House, and as a member of caucus, have to make regulations and

choices. Unfortunately, we do not have the finances to fulfil all the dreams and

hopes of every MHA and people across the Province.

Commitment to rural communities and rural Labrador is

something that - I am proud to say I am a part of a team that has fulfilled that

commitment. The words of a Premier who said: We will help those who have the

least.

Today I was to travel to the riding of Torngat Mountains to

officially open two new schools, a new Kindergarten to Grade XII in the

community of Hopedale, and a Kindergarten to Grade XII in the community of

Rigolet.

This is the first time that the community of Rigolet will

have a gymnasium, something that every other school in every other part of the

Province took for granted. If they never had a full size gym, they had access to

a rec centre. This government made that commitment.

I look at the little community of Postsville, that in 1996

was said to be written off. Along with the Government House Leader and five

other Cabinet ministers, we travelled into the community of Postsville. They

told us that they wanted the opportunity to run a sawmill operation themselves.

Government had tried it in the past but, because of some government red tape, it

failed.

This past winter, in the little community of Postsville, we

had twenty-five people working in the woods operation and right now we have

eight working in the mill.

With the help of the Minister of Fisheries, we went into the

community of Nain. We took our stellar plant and, from years past, we employed

twenty-five people. This past year we employed 105 people. We started a new crab

plant in the community of Makkovic.

This government is committed to making good choices, not

promises. There are times when we look through the media to see some of the

questions that have been raised by the Opposition, some of the statements they

are making. I can fully understand that they have a job to do, but I think it is

unfair when sometimes they put fear in the hearts of people in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ANDERSEN: Mr. Speaker, I noticed a member over there

who seemed to laugh.

You know, it is very easy when you travel into a community

and go into the town hall and bluff someone, but it is different when you have

to deliver. It is easy to make promises, it is easy to make accusations, but

when you have to fulfil on a limited budget, then you make choices; and this

government is making good choices.

I attended a high school graduation in the community of

Hopedale last weekend. We had ten graduates, the highest number that ever

graduated in the tiny community of Hopedale. I am told by the superintendent and

by the teachers that every student, all ten, have all their courses and every

student is going to graduate; none will have to repeat. In talking with the

students, all ten are going on to post-secondary education.

What a gigantic step for rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

What a gigantic step for the riding of Torngat Mountains that, for so many

years, from every level of government, still did not ask for their fair and full

share. I think if any member on any side of this House were to travel into my

riding and see the state of the schools and the roads that we had in the past,

they too would ask: Where is the full and fair share?

It was with great disappointment this morning that I sat and

wrote a fax to the community of Rigolet and Hopedale. I guess any member would

feel the same sadness if you had worked and lobbied and finally delivered, and

had two brand new schools that you were going to open, but because of where we

live - Mr. Speaker, what other riding is there in this Province where the

Premier or the local member would have to wait four or five days before they

could get in? That is part of our culture; that is part of our way of life. I am

proud to be a member of the government that is delivering to these communities.

I have often said that anyone who spoke for more than four or

five minutes in the House ended up saying things that they do not know what they

are talking about. I have spoken on my riding, and again I will say that it is

good news for the people in my communities - the schools for the children.

Imagine, in 1999, the first time that children in a community

will have access to a gymnasium. I think that shows the commitment of government

to our education plan. Although there may be sometimes concerns and questions

raised, I am sure that this government, through the minister and I, hopefully

will find ways to alleviate the crises and concerns that are out there.

Mr. Speaker, before I sit down, I can say to my colleagues on

this side of the House that I am proud to be a member of this government, and I

am proud to be the Member for Torngat Mountains. When I look at what we have

accomplished in the last three or four years, I think it is the first time that

anyone can honestly say to the people up there that we have gotten our fair and

full share.

Just a point: as much as sometimes we hassle and heckle each

other, I honestly believe that every member on the other side of the House as

well, if they had a chance to stand and say, they are more than glad that

finally the people in Torngat Mountains have gotten their schools.

Again, I thank all colleagues on my side for what we are

doing for rural Newfoundland and Labrador, for education, for the fishery, for

the forestry, and trying to provide a better way for the people in these

communities without causing fear.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me first of all compliment the member who just spoke, in

spite of the fact that the Government House Leader is waving me down here.

I wanted to compliment the member who just spoke because, of

all of the members who sit in this House, if a more direct, compassionate,

sincere, district-oriented man or woman... If you list all the people who have

ever served here, I think this gentleman would rank among - he would be like

Abou Ben Adam. His name might lead all the rest.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. H. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I compliment him because he

brings a great deal of sincerity, he brings a great deal of compassion, and we

on this side share in his rejoicing that the coastal communities of Labrador are

getting fair and equal access to educational resources.

We know the member works very hard. We want to say to him

that we on this side share in the rejoicing that he has shared with the House on

the fact that his communities, the communities of Coastal Labrador, are finally

getting their fair share in Confederation with Canada, and their fair share in

what we call Newfoundland and Labrador.

I want to return to my previous comments. I want to refer now

to meetings that I had in Stephenville, School District 4. I was in Stephenville

last Tuesday and met with the school board officials - not all of them, but a

fair number of them - and followed up that evening with a meeting in

Stephenville High School.

I want to first of all thank the members of the board and the

chair of the board, Mr. Garfield Randell, for accepting the invitation we

offered him to come and share with us his concerns and the board's concerns for

that school district.

I have made again, meticulous notes. I am going to say

something that might not be accepted by the other side but I can tell you, in

the meetings that I attended, these meetings were not politically focused. As a

matter of fact, in any of the meetings I attended - some of them I chaired - we

deliberately stayed away from political focus. We were not there to spread the

good news of the Progressive Conservative Party. We were not there to decry

Liberalism or to attack the New Democratic Party. We were there purely to

listen.

I would say to all hon. members, if they can go out and find

any member who was at those particular meetings - parent, child, or school board

member - and they can find people who would say that we were there spreading

Progressive Conservatism, I would have to challenge that person to show evidence

of it. The meetings were conducted in a very orderly manner. We opened up the

floor, said who we were, and said we were there to listen.

For example, the meeting in Stephenville last Tuesday. It was

held in the school board office, attended by the chair of the board, attended by

the school board members. I made some notes as to what was said. I should point

out that some members came long distances to be in Stephenville last week. The

Rev. Clayton Billard came in from LaPoile or the Rose Blanche, Burnt Island

area, Zone 4 in that board. He drove a long distance to be there last Tuesday,

to make his presentation.

Some of the things that were said last week: School District

4 had been reorganized as much as they could possibly do it. In order words, the

parents had made sacrifices by busing their children longer distances. They

said: We have done that now. We agree that children are our focus and we have

made those sacrifices. We have closed the schools that can be closed. While

there might be some minor adjustments that we can do, we are now at the end of

that road.

I bring the analogy of one school board member. He said it is

like taking a pocket knife and whittling. If you keep on, just one little

whittle, you do not notice the loss of the wood on the stick. Over time we have

been whittling away and whittling away, and now we are left with very little of

that stick. He used the analogy because we have cut back on music, we have cut

back on art, we have cut back on physical education, and we have cut back on

what we call the extras to the essential core program to such a point that now

we have nothing else to cut, and yet that school board is asked to cut more

teachers.

Mr. Speaker, at the meetings that I attended there, the

school board members made it quite clear. They said: School reform is a good

thing. School reform is a good thing. However, Mr. Speaker, they did say that

they had some difficulties. For example, I refer back again to Rev. Clayton

Billard. He said that they had lost their music, they had lost their phys. ed.

years ago, their library now was not able to function in their local areas, and

they were concerned about the loss of these things for their children.

Rev. Billard made the point and said there is a big gap

between the services offered in his communities on the southern tip of the South

Coast and those that are offered in Stephenville or those offered in Port aux

Basques. His view point was that there should be some greater measures taken to

ensure that children have equal access. Mr. Speaker, I admit that we will never,

ever be able to ensure that a child that is living in Rose Blanche will be able

to have all the services that they can have in Stephenville, Corner Brook, St.

John's or Mount Pearl or that kind of thing. That cannot happen. But, Mr.

Speaker, we have to ask ourselves: Where are the values that we place on that

child's education and what can we do to narrow that gap so that each child can

have reasonable access?

What Rev. Billard is saying to all of us here today, through,

in this case myself, as a person who attended the meeting, is that they want to

make sure that their children in those communities are not disproportionately

and negatively impacted more than other children in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, last week, as well, we had a presentation made

to our committee from the school administrators council in Stephenville. The

school administrators council came to the meeting with a written text. That

written text outlined the changes that would happen in the Stephenville area. I

say to the House here today, that the school administrators in that area

prepared a written text which is rather lengthy, and I just wanted to name the

schools that are reflected in this document:

Stephenville Middle School, with a student population of 423

students, will have a teacher reduction of one unit in September.

Assumption High School: student population of 135 to 145,

teaching staff of 9.5 units, a teacher reduction of .25 in September,

one-quarter of a unit.

Lourdes system: loss of 2 units for September, presently has

twenty-four units, primary population of 181 and an elementary population of

St. Thomas Aquinas: student population 180, staff of 12.5

units, they will reduce by one-quarter of a unit for this September.

E.A. Butler is a necessarily existent school: a different

formula to staff the school, as we know, but they are also going to lose, I

think it is a quarter of a unit for this September.

Our Lady of Mercy Elementary School, K-VIII: staff there of

twelve now, student population of 190, a reduction of one full unit coming this

September.

St. Michael's Elementary, K-VIII: present staff of

twenty-two, student population of 125, there will be one teacher less in that

school system in September.

Stephenville Primary, K-III school: presently have a staff of

twenty-six, school population of 433, there will be a reduction of

one-and-a-half units in September.

Mr. Speaker, as you note, all of these schools mentioned here

are losing teachers.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. H. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, could I have leave to finish

up this particular part of it.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. H. HODDER: I just want to mention, as well, the

impacts.

MR. GRIMES: We wouldn't want you to get confused in what

you are saying (inaudible).

MR. H. HODDER: I doubt it, I say to the Minister of Mines

and Energy. With my meticulous and copious notes, there is no danger that I

would lose a single note or even miss a single page.

Mr. Speaker, what are the impacts in those small communities?

The notes that I have here show the impacts for every single school. I could

read all of them, but I will just read down through some of them. This is the

pattern that is emerging.

Primary students are more liked to be exposed to four or five

different teachers in one day due to a piecemeal arrangement of attempting to

fit teachers into the schedules.

Mr. Speaker, in one instance, a parent and the Chair of a

school council said that in her school, the school where her children will go in

September, they are going to have to do subject teaching in Grade II. I have

never heard tell of subject teaching in Grade II. As many as five different

teachers would be teaching a Grade II class. That is so that they can continue

to be able to offer some programs that some people might consider a little

extra, like library, music, phys. ed., and that kind of thing. We are having

primary children in Grade II being exposed to five different teachers.

Those of us who were involved in the teaching profession know

that at the Grade II level, that is not a desirable thing to have happen. I do

not disagree with subject teaching or music at a Grade II level being taught by

a professional person. That is not what we are talking about. They are talking

subject teaching for some of the core curriculum, like Language Arts and that

kind of thing. Mr. Speaker, I can only say to the hon. House, these are the

written notes that I have here presented to me by the parent council.

Mr. Speaker, point number two: Basic courses designed for low

numbers are now being taught with large groups, which defeats the purpose of

having the course in the program. In some cases we know that there are certain

courses that, by their very nature, are created for low numbers, that if you

happen to go higher than a certain number, then the course loses it's

effectiveness. There is not much point in bringing in a remedial reading

program, if you design it for ten or twelve students and now you are going to

have it, say, for twenty students at one time. That is going to happen.

It says here: Enrichment classes in courses have long since

disappeared from the schools. In a meeting of eight administrators, not one

could speak of an enrichment initiative that is taking place to address the

needs of the above average student. Mr. Speaker, I was amazed when I went to

this meeting where we had the whole Stephenville area being represented, and not

one administrator could tell me about an enrichment program for a gifted

student. Mr. Speaker, that is not right. These students, who are above average

in ability, who have special talents, should have the right to have access to

the same kinds of programs they might have if they were going to schools in St.

John's or Corner Brook or Mount Pearl or wherever.

I was quite surprised, in fact I questioned them on that

particular matter and they told me, the note is right, that enrichment programs

have all been sacrificed so that they can keep other things in the curriculum.

Point number four: Specialty areas are being impacted in most

schools. Music and physical education teachers are being required to teach in

the regular classroom. The programs of music and physical education are among

the first programs to be reduced, as evidenced in the note that I referred to

earlier. The impact on music and physical education was noted in all of the

meetings that I attended. Again I repeat to hon. members, they can put whatever

spin they want to from the other side, but every single comment that I am making

here represents either the comments of a school administrator or the comments

that are being made by the school council representatives.

Personally, can I attest to the fact of their absolute

accuracy? No, Mr. Speaker. I have never been in most of those schools. I can

only attest to the fact that these notes were presented to me, in all honesty

and all sincerity, and it is my duty, at the first opportunity, to bring them

forward to this House and share them with hon. members.

Mr. Speaker, point number six: Technology education is an

area that has brought its own problems during the past three years. The

technology has grown substantially, but we have not been able to keep pace with

the requirement to simply keeping the hardware up and running. It says, in one

school there are over sixty computers, but there is no time allocated to anyone

to handle the day-to-day problems of running three labs.

Mr. Speaker, I talked to one school principal who said to me:

If I get a problem, we have two people on the whole board to look after these

matters, and if we run into a problem, it may be weeks and weeks and weeks

before somebody will come along and correct it. So, it is a real problem.

Technology education is a fact of the school curriculum, it is a wonderful

program, and I have been a strong supporter of technology education for a long

time. I have a personal interest in that particular subject myself, but it is

only as good as the support that you have there. If you do not have the people

available to give you the support you need to correct that problems that occur

from time to time - it is wonderful to have a lot of computers, but if they are

not being supported by the computer support staff -

MR. GRIMES: (Inaudible) wrap this one up.

MS M. HODDER: I thank the minister for giving me extra

time, but if some member on the other side wishes to get up and make a comment,

I certainly can accommodate that. I will return at a later time.

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

Clair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to rise today and certainly have a few words in this

debate on Estimates and Budget. You see, not only is the social fibre of our

Province changing but our people are changing. They are changing in their

attitude towards self-reliance, their attitude towards progression, and their

attitude towards making things work for them in their communities in this

Province. I think it is important, Mr. Speaker, that we, as a government,

recognize not only the shift in economics, not only the shift in social fibre,

but also the shift in attitude. In order for us to provide good, strong and

stable leadership in this Province, we also have to be adaptable to that change

and be able to lead these people, and that is exactly what we are doing. We are

doing this in a number of ways. One of those ways is that we are reassessing the

social fibre of our particular Province. We are looking at new social strategies

and new social reform.

We have seen, Mr. Speaker, in the last two to three years, a

number of things that we have done in this Province to contribute to that

particular change. We have seen the rates for social assistance recipients

increase, and I have to say that for a number of years prior the people in my

district, on the Coast of Labrador, have always been inhibited by the rates and

benefits paid out under this particular program. But this government certainly

recognized that, they recognized that it had to be changed and they changed it.

They made the change, investing over $500,000 extra last year into this program

in order to meet the needs of people in those remote and rural areas of the

Province.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS JONES: Pardon? Which program was it? That was under

Human Resources and Employment. It was a specific program allowing for the cost

of living for families who live in isolated communities of Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, we have also changed and geared more programs

towards our young people. Our people are the visionaries of the future and they

are the people we have to encourage, promote, and inspire today in order to

carry on.

In the last year we have invested more than $7.5 million into

youth programs alone which targeted post-secondary students, students who were

coming out of colleges and universities around this Province and were looking

for a break in life and an opportunity for employment.

Well, Mr. Speaker, I saw a lot of these students in my own

district who came out of these particular programs and were able to go and find

employment in all different sectors, and it proved very beneficial for them.

They joined over 2,000 other young people in this Province who had the

opportunity to avail of these particular programs.

Mr. Speaker, we also brought in another program for our young

people which concentrated on student work and services, programs on which we, in

the last two to three weeks, have had a number of students across this Province

call us, as MHAs, and ask us: Is there funding allocated for these programs for

this year? Well, it is allocated and there will be employment for those people,

because it is very important that we take care of the youth of today in this

Province, and that we ensure that they grow up in this Province having, not only

expectation, but also being innovative, inspiring to make things happen and to

carve out a niche for themselves.

Mr. Speaker, this year we were able to introduce the

NewfoundJOBS Program which is a program that is going to help a lot of people in

this Province, in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. It is going to assist them in

order to enter or re-enter the labour force. This is very important because we

also have to realize that there are a lot of people out there,in our Province

and in our small communities, who sometimes do not have the opportunity to avail

of these programs and these services. Well, we are making it happen through

these particular programs.

I want to tell you a story about one individual. It is a lady

who lives in a community in my district - and she is certainly a role model for

many around this Province - an individual who was on social assistance for a

number of years, but because of the programs that we were able to bring in in

the last two years she has moved off social assistance, she has started her own

business in a small community, and she is earning a living for herself. I think,

Mr. Speaker, that is what these programs are all about; people becoming self

reliant. It is people looking after themselves in their own communities.

When you can move people off the social assistance program,

and move women in our communities into their own businesses or into job

opportunities, because the money, the assistance and the programs are there to

allow them to do it, I think that is absolutely remarkable. We are going to

continue to do that, because those initiatives have been successful and we have

seen them work.

One of the other things, Mr. Speaker, that we did was bring

in the family resource centre projects. When this particular concept was first,

I guess, talked about or discussed there were a lot of people in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador who felt they would not reap the benefits of the

family resource project, they would not feel the services in their communities

because they were so far removed from the larger centres in our Province. Well,

that has not happened.

Under this particular program, for the first time ever, we

are going to have centres in rural Newfoundland and Labrador that are going to

deliver these services to families and to children, and, Mr. Speaker, four of

these are in my own district. With one main centre and three satellite centres

we are going to be able to develop and deliver programs for families, for

children, and for youth that we have not had the resources and the opportunity

to do so before.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to add that under this program it is

a locally driven initiative. It is the people in the community, whether it be

the social workers, the concerned citizens' committees or the ordinary people

who deal with youth groups and so on, who are actually making the guidelines and

the terms under which these centres will be developed. Every region will take

this initiative and they will adapt it to what is needed in their particular

communities.

Mr. Speaker, this is the kind of thing we are doing to build

and re-access the social basis of our economy. As we all know, in order for us

to have good economic and stable development in this Province, we also need to

have a strong social foundation. We achieved that, Mr. Speaker, by investing

into our weakest areas in investing into our weakest people. That is what this

government has been doing. We have done it through the regular assistance, we

have done it through additional living allowances, we have done it through youth

programs and initiatives, we have done it through opportunities for people with

disabilities, we have done it through the family resource centre programs, we

have done it through the NewfoundJOBS Program, we have done it through the

student worker programs, and, Mr. Speaker, it just goes on and on and on. In

order for us to achieve and strive for maximum economic benefit, we have to be

able to, first of all, stabilize the social foundation of this Province; and

that is exactly what we are doing.

None of us has eluded to the fact that we have suffered some

very challenging times since 1992. I can tell you first-hand, that I have seen

it in my district. Since 1992 I have seen the face of entire communities change

with the cod moratorium, and I know how important it is to build the social

foundation out of a lot of these rural communities. Mr. Speaker, not only were

they devastated when the fishery closed, a lot of them had given up hope for

anything in the future.

It is our job, as a government, Mr. Speaker, to instill hope

back into these people, to allow them to rebuild their communities, to allow

them to carry on in this Province and earn opportunity for themselves and that

is exactly what we are doing.

Mr. Speaker, when I was in the House a few days ago I heard

one of the members who got up basically alluded to the fact that a lot of

out-migration taking place in this Province was due to the fact that we were

buying back licences from people who were in the fishery, and I took great

exception to that.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who was that?

MS JONES: The Member for Lewisporte, I think it was.

I took great exception to that, Mr. Speaker, because I was

one of the people from this House and one of the people in this Province who

fought very, very hard to earn early retirement benefits for our fisherpeople.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: We felt, Mr. Speaker, that they more than

deserved these benefits; they had worked very hard in this industry in our

Province. We all know the difficultly it was and how harsh it was to earn a

living in this industry. We really felt that they deserved it, and believe me,

if there could have been more given to them, they would have gotten more.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) fifty-five, remember.

MS JONES: Yes. If we could have put more people on this

program, Mr. Speaker, we would have put them on this program, because we believe

that they truly, truly deserved it, and we certainly do not see it as being a

contributing factor to the future economic development of this particular

Province, because it certainly is not. Anyone who can make that assumption, or

certainly allude to that particular fact, is missing the entire point of what we

have done for the fisherpeople in terms of allowing them to have an early

retirement program or a buy-back program.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak for a few moments on some

of the things that have been taking place in my district in particular.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MS JONES: By leave, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MS JONES: Nobody seems to mind.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about a couple of

the things that are happening in my district in particular. Most of you already

know that one of the largest developments we are going to see in highway

construction in this Province in the next couple of years is going to occur in

Labrador.

It was certainly a dream come true, definitely, when the

Trans-Labrador Highway was announced for the communities from Red Bay to

Cartwright along the Southeast Coast of Labrador. For twenty-odd years the

people in those communities have been lobbying day in and day out, year in and

year out, through every particular avenue that they had available to them in

order to see this development come to fruition.

Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago I had the distinct honour, in

the community where I grew up, in the gymnasium in which I graduated, to stand

and tell the people of these communities that finally, twenty years later, you

are going to have a highway development. I can tell you it was a feeling that I

would say you seldom ever feel in political life.

When you look out in a room of 400 or 500 people, and you

watch them with tears in their eyes over the excitement and happiness to have

achieved this particular point that they are at, it is something, I am going to

tell you, that is worth being in this particular business for.

MR. REID: They do not want to hear it over there it; not

one of them.

MS JONES: Well, they could learn something if they pay

attention. They could learn that not everything comes easy. Some things you have

to work awfully hard for.

I am going to tell you, this one particular development that

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS JONES: I am hoping.

This is one particular development, Mr. Speaker, that is not

only going to contribute to the economic impacts in those particular

communities, but it is going to contribute to the economic impacts in this

entire Province.

The first tender, Mr. Speaker, closed just a couple of days

ago, the first of six tenders on this particular development with over eight

companies from around this Province competing for work on those sections of

road.

Mr. Speaker, this is going to be an economic boost for all

people in this Province. It is not only going to provide the necessary

transportation link for these communities in order to ensure the survival and

sustainability of their industries and their communities, but it is also going

to contribute economically to this Province as a whole. It is going to

contribute to the construction industry in a way that we have not seen for some

time.

Mr. Speaker, this year we will proceed with six particular

contracts on this

section of road. We will cover anywhere from 100 to 150

kilometres of road in this particular period of time. It will provide tremendous

economic benefits for the people in those communities. Already we have

advertised something like forty-eight positions just through the department

alone for employment in that particular area.

I cannot stress enough the actual significance that this

particular development is going to have in my particular district. We are

looking much further ahead. We see the Trans-Labrador Highway as a stepping

stone in linking the communities along the Southeast Coast of Labrador. But we

are going to take transportation initiatives a whole lot further in this

Province and in Labrador in particular. Mr. Speaker, I talk of the other

sections of road, that hopefully some day we will link all of Labrador, making

us a fully united territory in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, as many have heard me say, time and time again,

I also look forward to the day when we will link Newfoundland and Labrador as

one Province, building the tunnel across the Strait of Belle Isle.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: It is definitely the vision for future

transportation needs in this Province, by far. It is one that has been discussed

and talked about for some time, but never to the point of seriousness. I think

we have to look at it as a Province at this particular time in our history.

When we have the development of the Lower Churchill that

hopefully will move ahead on

schedule by 2001 or 2002, whatever the

schedule is

right now, when we look at a development like that and the possibility that we

could bring this transmission line from Labrador right across the Island, under

the Strait of Belle Isle, Mr. Speaker, leave no doubt that we also have to look

at the future transportation of linking this entire Province, because it is and

must be considered in order to ensure the long-term benefit of our Province as a

part of Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to conclude my remarks because I am

sure there are many people in this House who have many points that they want to

make today, but before I do, I just want to talk a little bit about technology.

Information technology is a growing sector in rural Newfoundland and Labrador,

surprisingly. I say surprisingly because most people would look at the IT sector

as being a more urban dominated industry, but, Mr. Speaker, you know it is not.

What we have seen is wireless telecommunications launched in this country. Where

has it been launched? In our Province, in remote communities of Labrador, in

Happy Valley-Goose Bay, in Nain and in Forteau. We have some of the most

sophisticated technology that has ever been used in this country to date.

Mr. Speaker, we are enabling people in rural communities

across this Province to not only use vocal telecommunications, but visual as

well; whereby they can sit in Toronto, or in Massachusetts and in Nain and

discuss the Voisey's Bay project through telecommunications. You can sit in

Forteau and you can do business with any part of this world because the

technology is there to enable us to do it.

I think the IT sector is one of fastest growing industries

that we have in rural Newfoundland and Labrador right now. I can tell you that

just last year alone there was $309,000 committed to a three-year information

technology development initiative in my particular district to service the five

Labrador zones. This project, Mr. Speaker, although it has a minimal staff

requirement, services a lot of people in the health care sector, in the

education sector, in the business development sector, and it is allowing us in

rural areas of Newfoundland and Labrador to be competitive in a very global

market. I think that is a tremendous benefit, one that we have attained with a

great deal of success, I might add.

Last year, Mr. Speaker, through negotiations and lobby with

Industry Canada and the Department of Industry, Trade and Technology, we were

able to put eleven new (inaudible), in excess of $200,000, on the Coast of

Labrador. Where did we put it? We put it into the schools, so that our children

in the school system could avail of this technology, as well as the people in

the community.

You know, Mr. Speaker, every one of those sites were staffed

last year. They had full-time staff. They were providing services to x number of

businesses in the communities, and they were allowing students in schools to

access courses through distant education programs and so on.

I am very proud to say that there was students across my

district who did a lot of courses through distance ed. last year, not because

they had to, but because they wanted to; especially in physics and chemistry and

those programs. They did fairly well. They were graded, I guess, in terms of how

everybody in the Province was doing. They did a tremendous job.

I know that I have probably gone on a little bit long, but I

have been assured that what I am saying is making a tremendous amount of sense.

That is why I think it is important that before I sit down I should touch on the

tourism sector just a little bit.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, my district, in the last two years

running, and I know this year it is not going to be any different, we have been

the leaders in tourism growth in this Province, growing at 20 to 25 per cent

annually.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: I can tell you, without a doubt - I am going to

tell you something, when you do what I have had to do this week, you