November

19, 1997

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLIII No. 33

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

The Chair would like to welcome on behalf of all members

today to the galleries of the House, 30 business students from the Keyin

Technical College, Renews Campus, in the district of Ferryland. They are

accompanied by their instructors Mr. Loyola Hearn, who is a former MHA for the

district of Ferryland, Mr. Ian Abbott and Ms Lynn Tucker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

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

Transportation.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, November 17, 1997, the hon. Member

for St. John's Centre raised the matter of contracts awarded to Metal World

Incorporated by government since I became Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation. When originally discussed, I was in Toronto representing

government at a public, private partnering conference and was therefore unable

to respond. The matter was again raised yesterday in the House with respect to

the operation of blind trusts and the extent to which they, in fact, protect the

public interest.

The hon. member referred to the public record regarding

registration of companies indicating what my corporate involvement and interests

were with Metal World Incorporated. He said, and I quote, "If an individual is a

director of a company and that company does business with government and if that

individual is a minister of the government of this Province, there's a

conflict."

Mr. Speaker, as per a minute of company directors' meetings

held on August 26, 1994, I am no longer president and director of Metal World

Incorporated. On July 11, 1997, the Registry of Companies acknowledged receipt

of advice in the prescribed form of these facts. It is clear I am no longer, and

have not been since 1994, been involved in the company's operations. I wish to

table all documentation related to that change at this time.

I wish to advise Members that immediately upon my appointment

to Cabinet on August 26, 1994, I sought, under the direction of the Commissioner

for Government Members' Interests, to arrange my business and personal affairs

in such a manner as to be in full compliance with the act. In addition to

providing full disclosure, I took the added step of placing all of my business

affairs in the hands of approved trustees Jeffrey Matthews and Stephen Matthews.

I want to reiterate, as well, that I have also had no involvement in the

management of these companies in which I am 100 per cent owner, since becoming a

member of Cabinet.

Mr. Speaker, I have endeavoured to respect both the legal

intent and spirit of my blind trust arrangements and as a result I must again

affirm that business decisions taken by my trustees and other business partners

subsequent to my appointment have been, without my knowledge and without my

involvement. I have satisfied, I believe, all requirements within the context of

my blind trust arrangements.

I wish to inform the House, that I have today given

direction, also to my solicitor, to ensure that I am no longer either an officer

or a director of any company or companies in which I have controlling interests.

Mr. Speaker, the allegations of my being in a conflict of

interest are both false and malicious. While, I accept full responsibility as

one who has chosen to be in public life in the Province, I cannot accept the

aspersions that have been case upon my family.

I would ask the hon. member to apologize, not to me, but to

my family.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, in the last few days we have

heard in this House, groundless and unsubstantiated acquisitions of conflict of

interest. The acquisitions which have been made are in my view, politically

motivated. They constitute an unfair attack on a member of this House and that

member's family.

Mr. Speaker, the conflict of interests provisions in place

are designed to protect the public interests and of course this is fundamental.

However, conflict of interest provisions must also act in a way which shelter

those who serve from baseless acquisitions.

With this in mind, today I am pleased to inform the House

that I have put in place additional conflict of interest guidelines for Cabinet

ministers. These guidelines are in addition to the legislative requirements

concerning conflict of interest set out in

part 2 of the House of Assembly Act.

The Act, as administered by the Commissioner of Members' Interest, Mr. Bob

Jenkins, sets out a good framework to protect the public interest and avoid

conflicts of interest. These additional guidelines go further than the Act to

ensure there is not only, no conflict of interest but also that there is no

appearance of any such conflict. The guidelines will take effect immediately.

Ministers will have thirty days in which to fully comply with them. The

guidelines, the new additional measures, will be administered by the

Commissioner of Members' Interest to whom I have already spoken.

The additional guidelines are as follows: Ministers shall

place in a blind trust all assets, financial interest or other source of income

within the definition of private interest in

section 20 of the Act, except for

those that are an excluded private interest within the definition of

section 20

(

a) of the Act. (2), trustees for these blind trust shall be other than members

of the minister's immediate family and (3), ministers shall cease to serve as

directors or officers in a company or association as referred to in

section 20

of the Act.

For the purpose of these guidelines, blind trust shall mean:

one in which the trustee is empowered to exercise all of the rights and

privileges associated with the trust assets and make all investment decisions

concerning their management, with no direction from or controlled by the

minister who placed the assets in trust, and immediate family who shall be

excluded from acting as trustees shall include: parents, child, sibling or

spouse. I repeat, Mr. Speaker, these new guidelines shall be administered by the

Commissioner of Members' Interest. Ministers shall comply with these guidelines

promptly, certainly not later than within thirty days.

I have spoken today again to the Commissioner for Members'

Interest, Mr. Bob Jenkins, and I want to inform the House once again, today,

that all members of the Cabinet are now in full compliance with the Conflict of

Interest Code. I want to specifically say that the Minister of Works, Services

and Transportation is now, has been, and remains, in full compliance with the

code and is an honourable member of this House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I have taken these additional

measures to provide further assurance that the public interest is not only

protected but is seen to be protected. That is important. It is also important

to ensure that those who have had success in business and private life are not

discouraged from offering themselves for elected office. To create such a

circumstance would be unfair and unwise, and I believe that these additional

Conflict of Interest Guidelines make clear that the public interest is being

protected, without discouraging those who may wish to participate in public

life.

Mr. Speaker, the current Conflict of Interest Code has been

in place now since 1994, since it was introduced by Premier Clyde Wells. It has

served the Province well. Mr. Speaker, I have been assured repeatedly by the

Commissioner that all members of the Cabinet are in full compliance with that

code, but the reality is that without the additional measures that I have put in

place today, members of the Cabinet remain open to unsubstantiated allegations.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask the member who has made those

allegations exactly what I have asked in the past. If there is any substantial,

any real evidence of any wrongdoing, or any benefit, lay a charge before the

floor of the House, and in the absence of such a charge I would ask the member

to do the honourable thing, to cease this kind of attack on a member's

character, and an attack on the character of the member's family. They are not

here to defend themselves.

I would ask the House to welcome these additional measures

today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will, perhaps, adopt the unusual role and respond in part

to both statements as given this afternoon.

I feel, Mr. Speaker, that we, as an Opposition, have been

vindicated on this issue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: I say that, Mr. Speaker, because

ultimately what we were seeking were the kinds of changes and amendments, and I

would say improvements, which are being suggested by the hon. the Premier here

this afternoon.

Obviously, Mr. Speaker, we need time to review particularly

the details as they relate to the blind trust and the involvement of ministers

as directors. I have just received this release, and we will need some time to

review the details as they have been disclosed; but I say to the Premier that

this is a move in the right direction.

I say to the hon. minister, this is tough stuff. You are an

honourable man. I am sure that you and your family... These are very important

matters and issues to you, and they affect you and your family deeply. I, too,

am a family man, and this issue is very difficult - difficult for you, but I can

assure you, Minister, difficult for me to raise, but we have a job to do. We are

entrusted with the public trust. We have to raise issues if we feel and if we

suspect that the guidelines which have been put in place are not adequate to

protect the public interest.

You have been unfortunately involved in a system where the

whole regime of blind trust, Mr. Minister, was not clear, and that

unfortunately, by necessity, brought your family into it because your family

were named as the trustees. That is unfortunate, but it is hoped that the

amendments, the improvements, the changes, which are being envisaged by the hon.

the Premier will deal with this issue once and for all. It is difficult, Mr.

Minister. I share the difficulty with you, but let us hope we now have a

resolution to this issue.

I look forward to more details, Mr. Premier, to the

amendments which you have provided to this House today and, in fact, I will go a

step further. I would be obliged to work with you in making the changes which

are essential and necessary for the protection of the public interest. That is

what it is all about. That is why you are here, that is why I am here, that is

why we are all here, and I thank you for the opportunity.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Oral Questions

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are for the Premier.

Premier, your government announced on Monday a significant

new find of iron ore in Labrador. Now this government, unable to bring any good

news of its own, has consistently been out in the public acting as press

secretaries for companies throughout this Province. In this instance, the

government has been negligent in announcing news that is not news. In fact, the

Iron Ore Company of Canada, in an emergency news release late yesterday evening,

said: The company has known about this deposit since the 1960s, and it was part

of their twenty-five year mining plan.

I ask the Premier: How can you justify your government's

actions on Monday?

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

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, I was asked by the media outside

the House, was there a billion tonnes at the mineral deposit known as the Luce

Deposit. I responded as best I knew, that yes, in fact, the delineation work

that was done over the last number of years did prove up, that there was indeed

a billion tonnes of ore at this particular deposit.

I should have, Mr. Speaker, said also that this is part of

the 5.5 billion tonnes which was in the forecasted reserves and estimates of the

mining company for the last number of years. I failed to do that; that is

regrettable. I explained that publicly this morning on the radio airwaves.

But, Mr. Speaker, having said that, you will note that the

Vice-President of the company also went on to say that this is big news, this is

good news, we are going to grow this company, we are going to grow this economy,

and it does auger very well for the people of Labrador City well into the

future.

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

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So the minister says now that the media brought on the

question. You and the Member for Labrador West - and I am sure with the

Premier's knowledge, it was an orchestrated move, I say to the minister. I have

in my hands a copy of a news release that was released by IOC, in which the

company says: IOC has made no such announcement.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary. I ask him to get to

his question.

MR. SULLIVAN: Since IOC has said that no such

announcement has been made on new iron ore deposits - nor does it intend to make

one - I want to ask the Premier again: Will you tell the people of this Province

why your government is regurgitating forty-year-old news? What are your

motivations for stating falsehoods and making announcements that are simply not

true?

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

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, I just explained to the House

that this is not an announcement by the company. It is a response by me in my

capacity as Minister of Mines and Energy.

The hon. member does not go on to say that the vice-president

of operations this morning confirmed that there is a billion tonnes of ore, and

also confirmed that they are depleting the current Humphrey reserve, and again

confirmed that there would be jobs well into the future. Let me quote what he

said: "In terms of better jobs and longer term opportunities for people,

certainly this will happen because of these reserves. That is an important part

about this. We are looking forward to a newer, bigger organization that is doing

bigger in terms of sales, that is a world player, on the world stage, and this

is good for everybody in Newfoundland and Labrador."

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What nonsense the minister gets on with! The release said,

the announcements in the media were part of a 5.5 billion tonnes of reserve that

were known in the early 1960s. The minister is almost forty years behind in

announcements, forty years behind the times, I say to the minister. It is all

part of the act by the Premier to announce an agreement in principal with LIA,

when there was no such agreement. It is all a sham, I say, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary. I ask him to get to

his question.

MR. SULLIVAN: I say again to the Premier, who does not

like to answer any bad news questions, it is my understanding that any new

discoveries must be reported to the National Securities Commission. Now, I ask

the Premier: Why is his government blatantly interfering in the operations of a

private company? I ask him: Does he realize the repercussions that such an

announcement can have on the trading of the company shares, on shareholders, on

the integrity of that company and on the hundreds of employees that are working

in Labrador City and elsewhere?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, of course, we are cognizant of

what can happen in stock exchanges and security commissions. That is why I just

clarified, as I did earlier this morning, that this 1 billion is contained in

the larger reserves of 5.5 billion, but let me quote again from the

Vice-President of the Iron Ore Company of Canada. He said: `The good news in

this story is that we are considering mining that ore body, moving that into

development.' That is the good news, that is what takes us into the future. And

the reason we are doing that, and I quote him, is that `we are going to grow

this company.'

Mr. Speaker, the company sees this as good news, the Steel

Workers Union sees this as good news, the Town of Labrador City sees this as

good news; our government sees this as good news. Why do you not make it

unanimous and the Leader of the Opposition say it is good news as well.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess it is a part of that mainland firm they brought in to

teach the Premier and Cabinet ministers how to manufacture news earlier this

year. I guess that is a part of the scheme, that is what it is all about.

The Premier yesterday was throwing the word `integrity'

around the House. Now, I ask the Premier, does he knows what integrity is? Now,

a Premier with integrity would not jeopardize the reputation of a

well-established and well-respected company, and I ask him, what is his

motivation or reason for doing it?

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

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, the Premier only answers the

difficult questions. He allows his ministers to handle the simple questions.

Mr. Speaker, let me quote again from the vice-president this

morning. Here is what he said: `The good news is the long-term security for the

people. The good news is the opportunity for growth and the good news is that we

have owners who are going to support us to do that and we believe we have the

customers for the part. Why this coalition of antis? Why this collection of

negatives? So against all the good news for Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay

South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today, Mr. Speaker, are for the Minister of

Health. My question today, Mr. Speaker, concerns Lohmes Ltd. on the West Coast

of Newfoundland and Labrador, the blatant, blatant, blatant patronage of

$500,000 that has been given to this Home to the two people who own the home,

Eileen Johnson and Judy Henderson and of course, Mr. Don Johnson.

This is one of the most blatant I guess, uses of public funds

guess it has to stop -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: Don't you worry about it, I will ask the

question when I am ready. - and what has transpired, Mr. Speaker, since this

half-a-million dollars was announced, an application to the federal government

that can leave Newfoundland, go to Ottawa and be back in forty-one days when it

takes six weeks to get your Unemployment Insurance in this Province, forty-one

days, Mr. Speaker. So my question today for the minister is: Can the minister

confirm that, as of today's date, there has still not been an application made

to the Western Health Care Board for an application to operate such a home on

the West Coast of this Province?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: You will be the next one apologizing.

MR. FRENCH: I won't be apologizing to you (inaudible)

before I do that.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

The hon. member has asked his question, I now ask him to give

the hon. minister an opportunity to reply.

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

I think the first thing that is in order to say is that we

should compliment our federal government for their expediency in responding to

the needs of the Province of Newfoundland.

The other comments, Mr. Speaker, as my colleague would know,

the role of the Department of Health, in the processing of these applications is

strictly at the application of standards in making sure that their standards are

in place. Their issues I do believe are very much related to the federal

government and I think it would be quite easy to call the Western Board to find

out if they have received an application. I, as Minister of Health, am not

involved in the application. My role as Minister of Health is to ensure that

when these buildings, when these processes are put in place, that the

appropriate standards of care are followed.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay

South, a supplementary.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have in my possession today letters from a personal care

home on the West Coast of the Province. The Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador

has copies of this correspondence in his office from a lady, whom Mr. Byrne

stood during the federal election, in this lady's home, Mr. Speaker, -

AN HON. MEMBER: Which Mr. Byrne?

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Byrne, from Ottawa, with Mr. Don Johnson

in tow by the way, with Mr. Johnson in tow and this lady distinctly said -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary; I ask him to get to

his question.

MR. FRENCH: - and this lady asked him if there was any

federal money available for homes and the answer was very clear, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FRENCH: - the answer was `no, there is no money -

MR. TULK: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader on a point of order.

MR. TULK: I think there is a Standing Order in this

Legislation which says that if you read from a letter - in any case you are not

supposed to read from letters asking questions and indeed if you do make

reference to them and indeed if you do newspapers and the like, and indeed if

you do, you are supposed to table them.

MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, I -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

To that point of order, Private Members have neither the

obligation nor the right to table documents when cited, however, I want to

remind the hon. member that Oral Questions must not be prefaced by the reading

of letters, telegrams, newspapers, extracts or

preambles of any kind. In putting

an oral question, no argument or opinion is to be offered, nor any facts stated,

except so far as may be necessary to explain the same. In answering such a

question, the minister is not to debate the matter to which it is referred.

Supplementary questions should need no

preamble.

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I don't think I was reading it, but anyway I will carry on. I

can give this to the press afterwards.

MR. J. BYRNE: (Inaudible) Minister of Education.

MR. FRENCH: That is right. That is the want-to-be leader.

I now ask the minister: Can she assure the people of the

Province that when and if Don Johnson, Eileen Johnson, Judy Henderson or Lohmes

Ltd. apply or submit an application to the Western Health Board to construct

such a home, which nobody, by the way, has proven a need for yet, will these

people have to go through the same process as every home-owner in the Province

of Newfoundland and Labrador are going through today, the people who have spent

their own money and are paying every single month? Will they have to go through

the same process as every other home-owner in this Province? Because they have

not gone through it yet.

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

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

I can assure the member that this group of people, whose

names I will not refer to, would have to go through the same process as has been

set down quite clearly in the manual where the changes were made. They will have

to go through exactly the same process.

For all I know, Mr. Speaker, there could be any number of

people in the same region who currently have applications in the system. I think

many of the ones who have either built homes in the past or are planning to

build homes will oftentimes avail, and have availed, of federal government

monies, whether it is through the Fisheries Alternative Program or any other

program. This is not a new issue, Mr. Speaker.

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

Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, I trust that the minister will

eventually have that information for the House.

It is very interesting to note again, that all these things

can transpire with no information, no plan submitted, nothing submitted, Mr.

Speaker, no needs assessment done.

I will now ask the minister: Will there have to be a needs

assessment done on this particular application before it receives final

approval? Will there have to be a needs assessment done on this particular

application by these people?

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

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

The guidelines for constructing any sort of building are

clearly outlined in the regulations that are put forward by government services

and lands. When a market plan is submitted, which was submitted, I would

imagine, to the federal government in order for them to approve it, those same

guidelines are put in place. That won't be any different in this case than it

will be for future cases.

The process, that I am sure my colleague has a copy of, is

clearly outlined. He has spoken to my department a number of times about the

issues, and we have said exactly the same thing as I am saying here: Our role in

the process, Mr. Speaker, is to ensure that the standards of care are

maintained. The other processes are clearly outlined through the various other

Thank you.

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing

Corporation's rental rate increase was put in place without proper planning or

research. As a result, the minister has now retracted and is going to do what

should have been done in the first place; he is going to review the increase

before implementing it.

I remind the minister that the gross debt service ratio that

is used by most banks in this Province is 30 per cent, the same as he has

increased the rental rate. However, in an example that I faxed to the minister,

Mr. Speaker, it shows very clearly that this 30 per cent will put this family

below the level as if they were receiving social service benefits. The 30 per

cent that is used by the banks includes utilities, heat, light and so on.

Will the minister tell the House today what his intentions

are regarding the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing rental rate increase? I ask

the minister: What is he going to do for these people who have had increases in

their rate already if the decision is reversed?

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, when an hon. member does up an

accounting - like the hon. gentleman did with a particular family -and does not

take into consideration things like the $115 heating subsidy that Newfoundland

and Labrador Housing provides to that family; when they don't take into

consideration in excess of $100 per child for the child tax allowance or credit,

does not take that into consideration; does not take into consideration the

makings and operation that is going on in that unit in regards to not only

electricity but maintenance, like I said, then I have no other choice but to

look at this - and I did look at it - and when I saw the discrepancies I told

the gentleman almost immediately in writing that he was wrong with his figures.

But then he was the one who released those figures to the media and the media

soon found out, by asking the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing if this was

correct. When they found out it was not correct, what the gentleman submitted,

they would not publish it. To be quite honest about it, Mr. Speaker, the

gentleman is so ill informed about the rent-geared to income program that I

don't even know if I should even answer his question.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. A. REID: I will say quite honestly to you that I have

reviewed it. I am going to review it over the next couple of weeks. I don't

know, at this particular point in time. I am not sure if there is going to be

any changes to it, Mr. Speaker. I will let the House know after I consult with

my Cabinet colleagues and my Caucus, those people, Mr. Speaker, who expressed

concern to me, not one concern was expressed from the other side of the House,

with the exception of one letter that I had two months ago and not one concern.

I will discuss it with those people who illustrated to the people of

Newfoundland that they were concerned about it. I will discuss it with them and

at that particular point in time I will make a public announcement on what I am

going to do in regards to the rent-geared to income.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

John's South.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I suggest to the minister it is not I that is ill informed.

He did not respond to this letter. He responded to a letter. He told the media

he did not respond to any letter. It was not that letter he responded to. I

still have not received a response to that particular letter. That particular

example that I faxed the minister, Mr. Speaker, they are well over the 30 per

cent and the banks would consider these people a high risk.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister if he is

aware of the fact that as a result of the rental rate increase that some

families, families that are considered by government as the working poor, even

taking into consideration child tax allowances, will actually have less money

after paying their rent than if they were on social assistance? What is the

minister going to do to help these families?

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, pay particular attention please

to what I am saying. There will be no family affected to the extent where their

incomes will be lower than if they were on social services. Now I don't need to

say that again but what the hon. gentleman just said is incorrect.

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

John's South.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister if he is

telling us today that in fact he will ensure that any changes in the policy will

correct the injustice to the families who are paying more and eating less than

if they were fully subsidized by the government?

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, one of the problems that I

found in addressing the rent-geared to income problem in the Province was we

found that there were a lot of senior citizens. Now, Mr. Speaker, there is no

one in Newfoundland who thinks any more about senior citizens than I do but I

will just give you an example -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. A. REID: - and I will be honest and say to you, Mr.

Speaker, that we found senior citizens living in social housing accommodations

with incomes in excess of $30,000 a year combined and we were subsidizing those

people with heat subsidies of $100 and $115 a month, plus all -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. A. REID: No, we didn't kick them out.

- plus all the other things we were doing for them. At the

same time the hon. member talks about the poor, the working class poor. When we

sat down and looked at -

AN HON. MEMBER: Someone has to talk about it.

MR. A. REID: Can you protect me from that (inaudible)

over there, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. A. REID: He is bigger than I am, but I am

(inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. A. REID: I sat down and looked at it, and there were

a number of senior citizens... There are a lot of poor senior citizens as well,

and we looked at the number of senior citizens who were availing of our

properties, and at the same time trying to accommodate what this gentleman has

been talking about in his district in St. John's in trying to accommodate the

poor in social housing. We had no other choice but to look at the possibility -

and there was a possibility - that some of those people, some of those seniors

who were in those properties would possibly have to move out.

Mr. Speaker, those are the types of people who may have to

move out, but I say categorically to you, a family of two seniors making $20,000

to $30,000 a year have a much better opportunity of paying in the private market

than some poor family who clears $8,000 a year for a husband and a wife and two

kids. That is the reason why we did what we did.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South, a

supplementary.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister to answer

my question. I did not ask about seniors. I asked the minister to ensure that

any changes that were to take place in the policy would correct the injustice

and make sure that families would not be worse off by working than they would be

fully subsidized by government. Can you answer that?

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. A. REID: Yes, I will guarantee that, Mr. Speaker.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you.

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

MS S. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for

the Minister of Human Resources and Employment.

The Minister of Health, a couple of weeks ago, challenged

women to start thinking more about preventative medicine and ways to keep people

from having to fall back on the health care system. My question is for the

Minister of Human Resources and Employment. Has she taken to heart her

colleague's advice and taken a good look lately at the link between poverty,

hunger, malnutrition and disease, especially in our most vulnerable citizens,

children and seniors?

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

Employment.

MS BETTNEY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, the simple and the quickest

answer to the question is, yes, most definitely, as a minister, as a department,

and as a government, we are looking very, very closely at links between poverty

and health. And in that regard this government has initiated major reform, major

structural changes, both to the departments of the former social services, which

is now the Department of Human Resources and Employment, and the Department of

Health.

These plans are being arrived at in consultation with all of

the stakeholders, with community groups, with the anti-poverty groups, with

members of both departments in order to ensure that as we move forward with the

changes we are better able to address prevention, early intervention, and to

improve the quality of life and the health of our citizens.

This is an important subject for this government. It is one

that all members of government have taken into a high degree of consideration,

and we will be able to inform members of the House and the public, as these

plans are finalized, on the degree to which this will be implemented, and the

results that can be achieved with this in the future.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's West, a

supplementary.

MS S. OSBORNE: I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that this problem

has probably been studied to death. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to

see that they don't have enough money to buy food.

The Williams Royal Commission Report and the Patricia Canning

Report turned the spotlight on the shocking fact that 40,000 children in this

Province live below the poverty line, and many more live very close to the

poverty line. It was studied with the Williams Royal Commission; it was studied

with Patricia Canning. Are these people not to be taken seriously? The facts

were laid on the table. Is the minister pressing her colleagues in education

about the importance of taking the lead in developing a comprehensive school

lunch program for all students, in all schools, so our children are not going to

learn while they are hungry and are not at such great risk of disease?

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

Employment.

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I should say first of

all, that there is absolutely no need for me to pressure my colleague, the

Minister of Education, in this regard. The Minster of Education is as equally

aware and concerned and involved in resolving the issues of poverty and the

issues associated with it that we see evidence when we see hunger throughout

this Province that was spoken to and we are addressing that. In fact, this

government has entered into and has been instrumental in helping to foster a

public/private partnership with the school lunch foundation and with the private

sector to help address the issues of providing nutritious food for children in

schools who would not otherwise have access to that.

This is only one aspect of the action this government has

taken. We are instrumental in working as a Province throughout the country in

partnership with the federal government on the National Child Benefit Program

and through the National Child Benefit Program we will also be able to invest

back into programs for children in this Province and deal with some of the

issues that we have the highest concern of. We will be looking at the issues

that are of the highest priority and addressing our resources accordingly.

So, when the hon. member suggests that these issues are

studied to death, I would have to say to the member, that what we have to do is

develop our plans well and that is what we are doing. We have to ensure that

when -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude her answer quickly

please.

MS BETTNEY: - we address these issues, we do them in a

manner that will achieve the outcomes that all of us wish to see for children of

this Province.

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

supplementary.

MS S. OSBORNE: As I said before, you do not need to be a

rocket scientist to figure out hunger. I do not know what else we can do. On

behalf of those children, I say, `God grant me patience, but hurry'.

The Provinces food banks are reporting that they are unable

to keep up with the demand. Use of the MUN campus food bank proves that

post-secondary students are joining the swelling ranks of the hungry and

impoverished in this Province.

In the absence of an economic development strategy by her

boss the Premier, what is the Minister of Human Resources and Employment

planning to do to address the issue of hunger and malnutrition in Newfoundland

and Labrador and what will she do for people in the smaller rural centres about

to be cut off TAGS, ineligible for EI and with no local food banks to depend on?

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

Employment.

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, over the past year, there has

been a significant amount of attention paid to the fact that the Province and

the government is developing a Strategic Social Plan for this Province. This

government has initiated a major consultation process, which it is now acting on

the advice that has been provided to us, and we are developing a plan which will

integrate socio-economic development and provide us with a framework for how we

as a government will be able to address issues for this Province. The issues

that are of the highest priority to us.

So, when the member suggests that this government is not

acting on these issues, it is simply not correct. We know that there are issues

that are associated with poverty in this Province and we are working on those

issues and will continue to do so.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question Period has ended.

Petitions

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a petition, Mr. Speaker. We are expecting many of

these petitions to be returned to us to be presented in the House. The prayer of

the petition reads:

We, the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador, wish to

petition the House of Assembly regarding the rate increase at the Newfoundland

and Labrador Housing Corporation on a sliding scale from 25 per cent to 30 per

cent. We are opposed to this increase because of the hardships that may be

endured by tenants, and we therefore ask that this decision be reconsidered.

Mr. Speaker, we have signatures on this from Foxtrap, Mount

Pearl, St. John's, Pouch Cove, Airport Heights, Fermeuse, Paradise, and so on.

This is a petition to address an issue that affects people not only in St.

John's but throughout the entire Province; and it does affect seniors, and it

does affect the working poor. It does affect single parents. This is another

example to add to the long list provided to us by government, such as the

Lakeshore Homes in Gander, such as the $3 increase on prescription drugs for

social benefit recipients, such as the claw-back of the Child Tax Credit and so

on.

Mr. Speaker, this government is abusing the people of our

Province, the people most especially in the classes that are least able to

defend themselves, least able to afford the increases, and least able to fight

government because of these increases.

Mr. Speaker, we will have plenty more of these petitions to

present to the House of Assembly, and I support this petition and the people who

have signed it.

Thank you.

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

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

I rise to support the petition put forward by my colleague

from St. John's South, and to say to the Minister of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs that what we are asking for her is for the minister to treat everybody

with the same kindness and compassion with which he himself would wish to be

treated.

I noticed a few days ago when he was on the public airwaves,

he made mention of the fact that there had not been any representation from our

caucus on this particular matter. I draw to the minister's attention the fact

that he said he never heard a word from us. Well, I would say to the minister

that back in October when this matter became public knowledge, my colleague from

St. John's South and I had several discussions. As a matter of fact, the Member

for St. John's South wrote a letter to the minister on this particular issue. It

was dated 22 October.

AN HON. MEMBER: Several telephone conversations.

MR. H. HODDER: And had several telephone conversations. I

should point out that the member's letter was dated before 22 October. The reply

from the minister was dated on that particular date. Then to hear the minister

say the other day there was no representation. Here were letters signed by the

minister himself, dated in October, addressing this very issue.

I was pleased to hear the minister say that he is going to

review it. I thought it was great news. But he stands in his place today and

says, I cannot tell you if there will be any changes.

What is the point of reviewing something if you are going to

say beforehand, I am going to review it but I am going to tell you in advance

that I have no intention of changing my mind, or I may not change my mind?

Mr. Speaker, what kind of a game is being played here with

the people who are senior citizens, the people who have very low income, the

people for whom this world has not been very kind.

I say to the minister, I have a letter here from a

constituent in this area, and she is talking about the fact that she had a job

in which she was getting thirty hours a week. She got it raised up over the last

while to forty hours a week. It is a very low-paying job. Her basic question is,

`What is the benefit to me?' In fact, in the last year her rent has gone up by

$104. How can she expect to care for her family, expect to be able to put food

on their table, when she gets extra hours and then finds out, after working

diligently to try to keep body and soul together for herself and her two

children, a single mom, trying to make things better for her family and then to

find out that she now has to pay more than that, more than what the increase in

her income is away out in rent increases imposed by this government in a very

callous and a very shall we say, in a manner that is not reflective, I do not

believe, of the general trust of what Newfoundlanders and Labradorians would

expect from their government.

So I say to the hon. minister whom I just saw walk out of the

House, that tells all of Newfoundland and Labrador how serious he is about this

issue, therefore we say to the minister who is now absent from the House that,

we read into his comments the fact that his plan to re-address this issue is not

taken seriously by us on this side, and we will stand in our places and the

questions that we will ask of the minister to look for very direct responses so

that we can be assured that when he does a review, it will be done with some

compassion and some understanding for the poorest of the people in this Province

who need assistance in order that they can provide a comfortable living for

themselves and for their families.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER: It is Wednesday, and the Order of the Day I

believe is Motion, 7.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

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

I rise today to introduce a Private Members resolution to

which I gave notice on Monday past as required by the rules of the House and,

Mr. Speaker, the resolution deals with the situation that faces municipalities

in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Now, Mr. Speaker, we understand the municipalities are an

integral part of this Province; we know that we want to acknowledge the

tremendous contributions made in Newfoundland and Labrador by all of the Mayors,

by all of the councillors, by all the municipalities because they keep the

fabric of communities together and that is so important to this Province. I want

to offer congratulations to all of those elected in the September 30, election.

We are pleased that we can say that we still have people in this Province in

spite of the hardships that have been imposed on them by this government; in

spite of all the cutbacks, in spite of all of the downloading, in spite of all

the stresses that they must endure when they try to collect taxes. In spite of

the fact that they are required to increase their taxes at a time when there is

no increase in employment in their communities, we say to the minister that he

should be grateful and should be so congratulatory to all of those men and women

who are out there today who are saying we want to keep our community together to

make it vibrant, to make it strong.

But then, when you see these people who are out there

volunteering and you see the actions of the provincial government and what they

are doing to municipalities, no wonder that we have this kind of situation that

we have here today and I say to the minister, I want to quote from the

presentation made to the provincial Cabinet on the 17 December, 1996 just about

a year ago, and is under the category here in the presentation to Cabinet, it

says: Protection of the Financial Integrity of Municipalities, and I want to

read what it says in that particular document.

It says: As more and more services formerly provided by

government to municipalities are off-loaded on to the municipality itself and

causing serious erosion of the Municipal Operating Grants and other sources of

government funding, there is an increasing need to ensure that those financial

resources available to the municipalities are maximized.

Mr. Speaker, what we are saying here is that municipalities,

in their brief to government a year ago, are pleading with the government: Would

you please recognize the circumstances in which we find ourselves. They are

saying to the government: We cannot cope with the kinds of stresses that you are

putting upon us. We cannot cope with the downloading. We cannot cope with the

fact that we are required to increase the assessed value on our properties, at

the same time, when we increase the assessed value we are doing it at a time

when we know that people cannot afford to pay the taxes.

We are hearing from municipalities who have been told:

Increase your tax rate. Well, that is wonderful if there were any increase in

income for the people who have to pay the taxes, but there are no increases in

income.

So we know, Mr. Speaker, all that is happening is that the

government is saying to the municipalities: Would you please increase your

assessed value, would you increase your tax rate; but all we are doing is we are

increasing the taxes payable. All we are doing is adding to the accounts

receivable for the municipality. We are not solving any problems at all. When

you go into a community and see houses that are boarded up, you know that

someone will tell you that family has moved away. We know, therefore, the kinds

of situations that are being faced out there.

I want to go again to the annual brief to Cabinet of last

year. I want to read from page 5. It is about municipal infrastructure. I want

to read what municipalities said to the provincial Cabinet in December, almost a

year ago, and I quote from the report: `Municipal infrastructure continues to

decline in quality and state of repair. The problem may soon reach epidemic

proportions such that lack of investment in repair and replacement today will

result in enormous costs tomorrow.' It says, `... the direct relationship

between infrastructure and the quality of life enjoyed by the citizens of our

Province which, in turn, affects the ability of our Province to attract and

retain economic development initiatives required for long-term economic survival

is ignored at our peril.' So, Mr. Speaker, we say to the Minister of Municipal

and Provincial Affairs, read what municipalities said in their presentation to

Cabinet almost a year ago. They have identified some of the issues that are

confronting them on a daily basis.

When we look at the problems that are represented by

out-migration - Mr. Speaker, last night on CBC television I saw a presentation,

the series is on this particular week, about what that means for municipalities.

It is what they called the U-haul parade. In fact, it was said there that

perhaps the Premier should invest in the U-haul business as an industry because

they are all going out of the Province. We should make some U-hauls here

probably because that is one of the industries that would be very prosperous in

this Province. What a commentary! What an indictment to a government that is

supposed to be looking after Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

One person in the report last evening referred to those

people leaving Newfoundland and Labrador as economic refugees. These are

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. A gentleman who worked with Marine Atlantic

was commenting and said one night this past summer there were thirty-eight

families leaving on the ferry between Port aux Basques and North Sydney. We had

some names mentioned there, we had some communities mentioned. They are focusing

on Westport, Pacquet and communities on the Baie Verte Peninsula.

Mr. Speaker, those of us who have driven across Newfoundland

and Labrador this summer probably have not been able to make a single journey

without seeing people hauling their goods westward and that is what we are doing

to Newfoundland and Labrador. People there were saying that they have to leave,

and they say leaving is not easy. One person said: There is nothing left in

Newfoundland and Labrador for me.

So, Mr. Speaker, where is their better tomorrow? Where is the

better tomorrow for Eugene Jesso from Cape St. George? Where is the better

tomorrow for the Slaney family of St. Lawrence? Where is the better tomorrow for

Don Decker in Baie Verte? Where is the better tomorrow for the Gillinghams, for

the Bowers from Westport and Pacquet? These are the people that have real faces

and they have real emotions. They care for their families just as much as you

and I do; but, unfortunately, what we see here today, we have Newfoundlanders

and Labradorians who are being forced to move out of this Province because their

communities, where they live, have no resources.

Then we see the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs

saying that things are going to get worse, they are not going to get better, and

he is looking at new ways to be able to put additional responsibility on the

backs of municipalities. We say to the minister: The time has come for you to

reconsider the whole issue of municipal financing, work out a better

relationship and recognize the reality of what is happening in rural

Newfoundland; because we on this side of the House, I can assure you, have a

responsibility to bring this issue forward. I can assure the minister that we

will continue to do so, and we will continue to do so very aggressively and very

consistently.

Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House want to have an

opportunity this afternoon to have as many people participate in this debate as

possible. With that in mind, I will yield, I guess, to my colleague, the

Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member has fifteen minutes.

MR. A. REID: Is that all?

Mr. Speaker, I want to stand and take exception, not to all

the rigmarole that was in the - what do you call it? - private member's

resolution, but I want to take exception to the fact that the hon. member would

accuse me of having no sympathy and having no feelings for rural Newfoundland. I

would say the hon. member himself has not been outside the overpass in the last

ten years. So, I don't know where he is getting all the sympathy for rural

Newfoundland. The fact that there are only two or three members on the other

side representing rural Newfoundland out of ten of you, and he is standing

talking about rural Newfoundland - I would have thought that maybe the hon.

Member for Bonavista South would have been the right one to get up and make this

one. He should have been there. To stand here as a representative of the City of

Mount Pearl talking about what is going on in rural Newfoundland and Labrador is

almost as bad has having representatives of the City of St. John's talking about

it; almost.

We are talking about what we are trying to do to resettle

rural Newfoundland. Where are these places, Mr. Speaker? Bay Bulls, Birchy Bay,

Bonavista, Botwood, Burin, Burnt Islands, Campbellton, Cape St. George,

Carbonear, Centreville, Wareham, Trinity, Port aux Basques, Clarenville, Cox's

Cove, Gaultois, Garnish, Greenspond, Grand Le Pierre, Harbour Breton, Heart's

Content and Hermitage: Where are these places? Sandyville, Lewisporte,

L'Anse-au-Loup, Leading Tickles West, Irishtown, Summerford, Long Harbour, Mount

Arlington Heights, Main Brook, Marystown, Meadows, Norman's Cove, Placentia, Old

Perlican, Hant's Harbour, Salmon Cove, Springdale, Summerford, Trepassey,

Twillingate, Whiteway, Winterton, Winterland: Where are these places?

We put $75 million into capital works and infrastructure in

these places this year; $75 million from my department.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. A. REID: From the Department of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs. I think, if I am not mistaken - I am sure I heard in the

last month or so that we are building four or five new schools in rural

Newfoundland this year.

AN HON. MEMBER: And hospitals.

MR. A. REID: What? We are building hospitals, too? We

cannot be building hospitals and schools and spending $75 million, $100 million,

$200 million and $1 billion on rural Newfoundland, if this crowd over here are

going to resettle them all. Have a grain of sense. I wish somebody in this House

would have a grain of sense.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. A. REID: We are going to resettle them all! Yes, we

are going to move them all into Mount Pearl, if they get Southlands!

Mr. Speaker, I am poisoned with the hon. Member for Waterford

Valley standing in this House representing rural Newfoundland. Mr. Speaker, he

does not represent rural Newfoundland. He does not, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: He took Donovans Industrial Park away

from rural Newfoundland.

MR. A. REID: Donovan's Industrial Park! We make more

money than Donovan's Industrial Park when the people of Carbonear collect their

taxes. There is more money.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. A. REID: Now, Mr. Speaker, I will say this to you, I

am saying that to the hon. member, but I am not saying it to the people who live

in Mount Pearl because I was always told that Mount Pearl was the biggest

outport community in Newfoundland.

AN HON. MEMBER: Right on.

MR. A. REID: Sure, because all my cousins from Monroe and

down around Trinity Bay lived there. There are hundreds and hundreds living

there from Port de Grave, out around Bay Roberts and that area. They are in from

all over Bonavista, they are everywhere. I do not know where he comes from, he

comes from the Burin Peninsula, I think he was probably born in St. Pierre

somewhere and moved ashore. I am not sure where he comes from, but I am

certainly sure that he will not admit where he comes from.

AN HON. MEMBER: Burnt Island where the buffalo is.

MR. A. REID: Burnt Island where the buffalo is, that is

probably where it is.

I think he is from down around Marystown somewhere, but I do

not think he has admitted the fact that he is a bayman and will not admit the

fact that he is a bayman in this House.

Mr. Speaker, I want to just tell you what this government has

been doing for rural municipalities and the things that we have been doing that

are extraordinary in comparison with what the previous government did and what

we are doing and going to keep doing.

Mr. Speaker, this year past, $30.9 million was spent in

infrastructure money, $25 million was spent on capital works and $2 million was

spent on a special job creation program. I whispered that to some of you rural

members yesterday, but I also told you not to tell the crowd from St. John's or

Mount Pearl, am I correct?

AN HON. MEMBER: That is right.

MR. A. REID: Yes, okay.

So, I want to say here, that represents $75 million in

capital works. Do you know how much out of that $75 million - this is the first

time ever, `Harvey', pay attention: this is the first year ever, this is the

lowest amount that it has ever been, - out of $75 million that has to be

financed including the infrastructure by the Federal Government and the

Provincial Government, only $18 million of the total $75 million is going to

have to be paid back by the municipalities, $18 million of the $75 million. That

is the highest amount of money that municipalities got in this Province since

1949, on a ratio basis.

AN HON. MEMBER: Good.

MR. A. REID: Good, I suppose it is good! Let me tell you

what the Mayor of Mount Pearl and the Mayor of St. John's said to me recently.

It is the first time in the history of this Province, that the City of St.

John's and the City of Mount Pearl could come in to a Minister of Municipal

Affairs and say: `For every dollar, Mr. Minister, that we spend, will you match

it, fifty, fifty?'. I said `yes', and do you know what they said? `Well, that is

the first time, because up to this year we used to have to pay 100 per cent. We

had to pay 100 per cent of it and now you telling us you are going to give us

fifty.' Wonderful stuff, no problem whatsoever. This government is doing nothing

for municipalities in the Province? Nothing!

Last year, I was accused in this House and the government was

accused in this House, of reneging on their promises to fire- fighters around

the Province. Mr. Speaker, last year we put in excess of $600,000 into

fire-fighting equipment in the Province to fire-fighters.

We were also accused of reneging on providing Local Service

Districts with funds. I think just about everybody that sits in this House that

has Local Service Districts secured a fair dollar last year in Local Service

District money, including the people over on the other side. Help them? First

time in a long time. Great situation, $2 million of extra money.

We announced in the Budget last year that we were going to

have to cut, like everybody - every department had to cut, we had to cut so much

money from the Municipal Operating Grants - and, Mr. Speaker, this group on the

other side have been going around preaching this and even the Federation of

Municipalities have been preaching that we are cutting. Well, Mr. Speaker, we

are not even going to start to cut until January 1st. There is no cutting this

year. It is not going to come into effect until January 1, 1998 and listen to

this -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. A. REID: No, no and listen to this: and we are not

even going to succeed in getting all of that money back for three years. It

going to take us three years to do it.

Now, at the Federation of Municipalities the other day, I was

asked, not only by the members of the Federation of Municipalities, but I was

asked by the media.

MR. H. HODDER: (Inaudible).

MR. A. REID: Let me tell you what a decrease is, Mr.

Hodder. In 1988, your Progressive Conservative - oh, I am sorry, not your

Progressive Conservative government in 1988, because you were a Liberal in 1988.

The Progressive Conservative Party of Newfoundland and Labrador in 1988, under

the hon. Brian Peckford, had a capital works program of $25 million for the

whole Province. And you know something? He had $8 million of that $25 million

spent before he even announced the $25 million.

Since 1989, on average, this government and the previous

government has never gone under $50 million a year in capital works - $50

million. Now, Mr. Speaker, if you look at the $50 million and say: Well, how

much of that $50 million did the municipalities have to pay back? -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) federal money (inaudible).

MR. A. REID: No federal money. I am not talking about

federal money. I am talking about provincial money. How much did the

municipalities have to pay back? You will find out that every year they had to

pay back about 40 per cent of what they were getting.

Now, Mr. Speaker, 40 per cent of $50 million is a heck of a

lot more than 40 per cent of $25 million. So don't tell me that we have

downloaded on municipalities in the Province because, if anything, we have

increased funding to municipalities over and over and over again.

Two million in special assistance for local service districts

and fire departments, and all the other things that certain people asked me for,

little things like the -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) outside the overpass?

MR. A. REID: I live outside the overpass, my friend.

AN HON. MEMBER: And you do not see anything downloaded.

MR. A. REID: I am not saying there is no downloading.

Yes, we have taken money away from municipalities but we have given them back

triple what we have taken away. Write it down.

Mr. Speaker, this year, in 1998, we will succeed in taking

about $6 million out of the Municipal Operating Grant. Six million dollars will

come out in 1998. Mr. Speaker, as of today - add this up - we have put $9

million into debt relief and, as the Premier has said, the $9 million -

AN HON. MEMBER: It is never enough.

MR. A. REID: No, it is not enough. Before the year is

out, or before next year is out, I am going to be looking for another $9

million. Nine and nine is eighteen. If you multiply what we are going to take

out, three times six is eighteen, you are right back to square one, aren't you?

But, on top of that, not only are we going to put $9 million in this year; we

have put $2 million into job creation - given to municipalities - we have put $2

million into special assistance, fire-fighting and into rural communities. Ask

the gentleman sitting next to you how many favours he has asked me for this

year. I have another one to go over now in a few minutes, to tell him again

about it.

The few dollars that I am able to sneak under the table to

him so that he can go out and tell his residents and his people living out in

his district: I have a few dollars for you. And do you know how I manage to do

that? Let me tell you how I manage to do it.

Corner Brook, Port aux Basques, Deer Lake, St. John's,

Labrador City - Labrador City especially - Wabush, Goose Bay, Grand Falls,

Gander, Clarenville, Carbonear, Conception Bay South, and St. John's - I said it

again - came in last year and said to me: We know you are in a dilemma. We know,

Reid, you are in a dilemma, and we know you have to find money.

Mr. Speaker, I want to tell you and everyone in this House

that one of the first people, when we made the cuts to the MOG, who came up and

said to me: Art, I know it is going to be hard on my community, but if it means

the survival of rural Newfoundland, Sir, you go ahead and do what you are doing.

And it will mean that Badger and Bay de Verde and Brent's Cove and Brigus and

Campbellton and Catalina - I will not read them all - and Cook's Harbour and

Cox's Cove and Englee and Fermeuse and Flat Rock - and Flat Rock - will have a

sizeable amount of money put into their treasury this year to help them get

along over the next two years.

Mr. Speaker, I have a whole list of communities here that got

into trouble financially in the last two or three years, four or five years.

They got into trouble, Mr. Speaker, not because of their greediness but for

wanting to provide their people in their communities with the same basic

services that are being provided from one end of the country to the other. You

cannot condemn them for that. You cannot condemn an MHA for scratching and

clawing when he is trying to get as much as he can for his district, like the

hon. member who is sitting in the Chair right now did no more than ten minutes

ago.

MR. J. BYRNE: Ten?

MR. A. REID: Ten minutes ago. I have no problems with

that but, Mr. Speaker, in order to accommodate the debt that has built up

because of the actions of MHAs over the years, because of the actions of

municipal councillors, and because the people living in the communities

themselves want good, basic services - because of such a debt, I have to put

myself and this government, we have to put ourselves on this side of the House,

in such a position where we can accommodate, at least at this particular point

in time, some help for those communities.

MR. SPEAKER (M. Penney): Order, please! Order, please!

As intriguing as the debate is that the hon. minister is

providing and as much as the Speaker is listening with all attentiveness, I must

remind him that his time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. A. REID: Give me thirty seconds.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. A. REID: I will provide my hon. colleague, the Member

for Waterford Valley with this information if he wants to see it, and you

cannot, even though you have been critical - and I appreciate the fact that you

have been critical, because I have been critical, too; I have been critical of

myself and my Cabinet with regard to what we have done over the past few years.

I do not have any problems admitting, and I say it, and I have said it in the

last five years, `Harvey', I am the only minister who has been at five

conventions, as the minister. (Inaudible). Just imagine! And with that said, Mr.

Speaker, I do not apologize to anyone because, Mr. Speaker, I do not think I

would be here today, sitting in this place as Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs, without the help of that man, right there, who got up a few

minutes ago and introduced this. Because he was the one who stood in his place

back ten, fifteen years ago and nominated me as President of the Federation of

Municipalities. So, if anybody has to take the responsibility for us downloading

on municipalities, it has to be Harvey Hodder.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to take

part in this debate so capably put

forward by my friend and colleague, the Member for Waterford Valley and

responded to by the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

The minister got up and talked about all the wonderful things

his department was doing and all the money he was spending, $75 million last

year. But the minister did not say how much money was applied for last year. How

much money, Mr. Speaker, was applied for through the 290 municipalities in this

Province? The minister also talked about three or four schools his government

was building and about to open, but he did not tell us how many schools his

government closed this year, and that, is what is happening out there, in rural

Newfoundland today.

I have a daughter who graduates in two weeks time from

Memorial University. She has her reservations made for the 26th of December, to

go to Alberta to find a job and, Mr. Speaker, that is just an indication of what

is happening out there today. Here in St. John's and in the Mount Pearl area,

when somebody decides that he is going to move, we see a: `For Rent or For Sale'

sign on the house; out in my district, Mr. Speaker, the windows are boarded up.

The windows are boarded up because there is no sale for the house, there is

nobody looking to rent that dwelling. A lot of the people are moving away in

search of jobs.

In fact, I was very surprised when I saw the number of people

come out to offer themselves for municipal government, for town councils in the

last election in September; I was very surprised, I say to the hon. minister,

because I thought the cutbacks government was bringing about would discourage

people from coming forward; but there was a good complement of people. They were

very capable people and most places had an election. So it certainly says a lot

for those people. We certainly should feel very confident that rural

Newfoundland will survive, especially when people like councillors have the hope

and the initiative and they take on the great challenge of serving their

community by being town councillors.

Recently, there was a project, thanks to the minister - who

was the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs before you, Minister? I

just do not recall who it was but just two short years ago -

AN HON. MEMBER: Bill Hogan.

MR. FITZGERALD: - just two short years ago, Mr. Speaker,

there was a little piece of road in my district in a town called Port Union,

with .3 kilometres left to be paved. The asphalt crew came in and they paved the

road and left .3 kilometres of road to be paved along by one of the main

thoroughfares in the community. At that particular time -

MR. EFFORD: I did not do any (inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: No, you did not, and that is to your

discredit, I say to the minister.

Mr. Speaker, at that particular time, the town council could

have had that roadway completed, upgraded and paved for the sum of $8,000. Eight

thousand dollars was what the contractor was willing to do the work for. The

Department of Municipal and Provincial Affairs said: No, that is it; we are not

spending any more money. They went back this year and paved the same piece of

roadway, .3 kilometres and do you know what it cost the municipality? $59,000

and the Member for Trinity North knows full well what I am talking about. It

cost the taxpayers of Port Union $59,000 this year for an $8,000 job two years

ago. Is that spending money wisely, I ask the members opposite? Is that spending

money wisely, when you go and make communities incur such debt when it could

have been done for one-quarter or one-fifth of the cost a few years before? That

is what is happening here, Mr. Speaker.

Roads in municipalities today - a few short years ago

government was giving out road component grants. You were getting $2,000 for

every kilometre of road in your community. That looked after winter maintenance,

upgrading, Mr. Speaker, and normal maintenance of those particular roadways.

Today, Mr. Speaker, Municipal and Provincial Affairs are sending out bills to

small cash-strapped communities, saying: If you want your road paved in your

communities, if you want your local road paved, it is going to cost you in

excess of $5,000 per kilometre - in excess of $5,000 a kilometre for the same

roadway that they were getting $2,000 a kilometre for a few short years before.

This is what is happening out in rural areas today.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: Down in my district, I say to the

minister, I do not know what the unemployment rate is or what the number of

people out of work is. I usually want to look at the number of people that are

employed. A lot of people do not show up on the unemployment statistics, but if

you could show the employment statistics, you would probably find out that it is

less than 25 per cent of people working in many of our communities and towns in

rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

This is not the time for this government to be bringing

hardship and downloading on those towns and communities. The money comes out of

the same pockets, I say to members opposite, whether it is fees charged by this

government, whether it is taxes that are transferred down to the municipalities

by taking away the Municipal Operating Grants or whether it is some far-fetched

scheme up in Ottawa. The money all comes from the same pockets.

Mr. Speaker, in Lethbridge in my district, there is an

elementary school. It was built back in probably 1965 or 1966. Last year they

had rats in the school, in the portable classrooms there. They put out rat bait,

and the rats got up underneath the school and died. So now they had to remove

them. The foundation of that school was so bad that nobody would crawl up

underneath the school. You know what they had to do? They had to cut holes in

the floor of the school in Lethbridge, I say to the hon. member. They had to cut

holes in the floor to get down and take up the rats that they had poisoned with

rat bait in the school in Lethbridge, because the foundation was so bad that

nobody would take a chance to crawl up underneath the school. Now, are those the

things we should be proud of? Are those the things that should change with the

reform of education? Are those the things about which the Minister of Municipal

and Provincial Affairs gets up and sticks out his chest and says: `Here are all

of the things we have done'? You should go out and look at the real world, I say

to members opposite.

We are speaking of Lethbridge, the road through Lethbridge, a

road paved about twenty-eight or twenty-nine years ago, now they are putting

patches on top of the patches. School children are complaining, putting together

petitions to have sent to this House of Assembly, to talk about how bad their

roads are. Bus drivers are calling, complaining that they are breaking off

springs in their buses. They cannot afford to keep the buses on the road because

of the conditions of the roadway. They cannot afford to continue busing students

with the amount of money that is being put out today by the Department of

Education, to maintain the contract.

Mr. Speaker, people are leaving this Province today in

droves. People who are leaving the Province are people who are not spending

money at the local grocery store. They are not going out and buying gas, and

they are not paying taxes. It is a vicious circle in rural Newfoundland and

Labrador today. It is a vicious circle. One time when people got a job in this

Province, or even if it was outside in another Province, if we could prove we

had a job, then we would supply them with an amount of money to get from point

`a' to point `b' so they could access employment. Because, whether government

members believe it or not, Newfoundlanders want to work. Newfoundlanders do not

want hand-outs - not the people I know, not the people I talk to. They want a

job.

Many people today are accessing jobs in other provinces but

find they cannot get to that job because there is no help to take them from here

to the place where they have their job. It was all taken away, and where do we

direct them but to the Department of Human Resources and Employment because they

cannot access money anywhere else. For the most part, those people, if they

could access money to get to their place of employment, they would be more than

willing to pay it back.

I phoned the Department of Human Resources and Employment the

other day and asked for some help for an individual who had gone the full route

of looking for jobs, and went to legalized loan sharks and the world of banks,

and nobody would look at him. I called them and they said: No, no, I am sorry;

we are not a lending agency. We cannot supply him with any money to go anywhere.

But tell him to come back again next Wednesday and we will give him his $89 a

month that he is supposed to get through the Department of Human Resources and

Employment.

We hear government talking about all the wonderful things

that are there for them to go and get involved in new business ideas, new

business ventures. We see the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture going across

this Province; he is on a soapbox talking about all the opportunities involved

in aquaculture, all of the opportunities involved in the fishery. `Come in to my

office and see me.'

MR. EFFORD: What is wrong with that?

MR. FITZGERALD: There is nothing wrong with it if you are

sincere about it.

I had a call yesterday from a young gentleman in the

Government Leader's district, who had been talking with the minister's office.

He had a good idea. In fact, he had arranged funding through ACOA, he thought it

was such a good business plan, and he had access to funding from another source.

Have not heard back. Disillusion with the whole process. A young fellow

twenty-three years old and I said: I cannot believe this, I am hearing this

because this is what we are trying to stop, the brain drain leaving this

Province and if we have a twenty-three year old with a good idea and can secure

funding and not having the minister's office stepping in to help him, then there

is something wrong here.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who are you talking about?

MR. FITZGERALD: There is something wrong here. I will

talk to the minister about it after in private, I say to him, because I never

asked him if I could say his name in the House of Assembly and I will speak to

him about it privately and maybe he might be able to give me a call because he

has a good idea. Like I said he has some funding in place.

AN HON. MEMBER: Let's hear about it.

MR. FITZGERALD: No, I will talk to the minister about it,

but there are good ideas out there, Mr. Speaker, but we are not taking them from

point A to point B and if we are going to go out and train our people today,

whether it is through government funding or the self-employment program or what

have you, if we are going to go out and train them, then we have to take them a

step further then we have been taking them. It is not enough to go out and train

people to do a job if they need experience in order to access that job. We drop

them off far too quickly. We have to take them the extra step. That extra step

hopefully would encourage some employer to hire that individual and give him

some experience and I would think that we would see a lot more people working in

this Province today, Mr. Speaker.

Another uncaring act of government. A few days ago, we talked

about a postal strike; there was a threat of a postal strike in this country.

What did they do, Mr. Speaker, with all the thousands of people out there who

are depending on a government cheque? They issued the cheques, they issued them

up in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, a service that was being provided all along in

this Province right here, in Newfoundland, but the government of the day, the

cousins of the people on the other side up in Ottawa, decided they were going to

move that cheque centre, that pay centre from Newfoundland up to Dartmouth, Nova

Scotia. So, they wrote the cheques up in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia and what did

they do with them? They carried them and put them in the post office. Put them

in packaged mail so they could be held and only released on a certain date. Now,

Mr. Speaker, when pay day rolls around for me, then I want a pay cheque, I need

a pay cheque and I know what those people are going through out there in rural

Newfoundland today when they have to wait an extra week or sometimes in excess

of that, in order to access money. Those people are families; those people are

people with families like you and me. Those people are dealing with sickness.

One particular person in my district had to go and access social services. Had

to get money in order to bring her child in here to the Janeway Hospital because

somebody decided that they were going to make their cheques a week late. They

were entitled to them. They deserved them. They knew there was going to be a

postal strike, Mr. Speaker. Very uncaringly they were all stacked in groups and

put in post offices which said: do not release this until the 20th of the month.

Mr. Speaker, municipalities are probably facing the biggest

challenge that they ever faced in this Province, they are facing it today. I had

the local administrator, the regional administrator down in my district a few

short weeks ago. We went down and we met with a Town Council down in Elliston. I

think there was one new councillor re-elected, other than that it was a full

slate of new councillors and they were all very eager, they were all hyped up

about wanting to serve their community, about wanting to do something different,

to do something good. They had already lost their street lights, they do not

have sidewalks, they were fighting to try to maintain their water and their

sewer. They were very eager to do something to help their people. So, they

talked about refinancing their debt that they owed to government. I think they

owed something like $168,000, debt. Somebody compared what Newfoundland and

Labrador municipal financing was charging, compared to what they would be able

to negotiate a loan from the local bank for and they found out that they could

have a massive savings by going to the local bank, but, Mr. Speaker, what they

did not take into account: yes, you were getting your municipal operating grant

today but next year it is less 20 per cent and the next year it is less 20 per

cent and the following year it is less 20 per cent, so do not count on your

municipal operating grant that you are getting today because that is going to be

reduced by 60 per cent again over the next three years I say to members

opposite.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

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

MR. FITZGERALD: So, Mr. Speaker, I say what we are doing

is, we are going in a vicious circle in rural Newfoundland today; it is

something that I am not so sure that government is paying attention to that they

should. The Government House Leader is very much aware, I have been in his

district, I have talked to people in his district. You yourself, Mr. Speaker

represent a district in rural Newfoundland and at one time, a part of your

district was a part that I represent today. You know full-well what is happening

in rural Newfoundland and Labrador and something has to be done -

MR. EFFORD: Isn't his time up yet, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: He has had leave.

MR. FITZGERALD: - I say, Mr. Speaker, in order to create

some hope and in order to bring about some prosperity.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up and leave has been withdrawn.

MR. FITZGERALD: We are living today in an age of

electronics. We are living today, Mr. Speaker, in an age that we do not have to

be where the work is; we can take the work to the people. We do not have to have

the office building here in St. John's.

MR. EFFORD: I withdraw leave from the hon. member.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Leave has been withdrawn and the member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I am sure

that the members over here on this side will continue to put forward some good,

sensible argument.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am glad to rise today. I was waiting for my colleagues

across the House to stand and say a few words but obviously there is nobody so,

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to take some time today to speak to my colleague's

motion here, Private Members and just read one line from the last part of his

resolution: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the House of Assembly direct the

Provincial Government to restore the integrity" - that should be in capital

letters, Mr. Speaker - "of the municipal level of the government through a

cancellation of all proposed cuts to the Municipal Operating Grants and that the

Provincial Government aggressively negotiate a new municipal-provincial

financial relationship that recognizes the grave and imminent threat to the

integrity" again, " of municipal government in all parts of the Province but

more particularly in rural Newfoundland."

Mr. Speaker, as of yesterday, I started to ask some questions

on Rural Renewal and asked some questions of the minister who is now responsible

for the committee that travelled the Province on revitalization of rural

Newfoundland. There itself lies the question in this Province today that is most

pressing on anybody's mind is what is happening in rural Newfoundland. Mr.

Speaker, if you watched last night - cameras do not lie - As a matter of fact,

that particular part of the program last night hit home to me of course, because

it was in my district and, Mr. Speaker, to go a bit further, one of the

gentlemen who was spoken to, Mr. Pleaman Starkes, was my next-door neighbour

who, a month or so ago, when the shouting was done - I watched him pull out of

his driveway and wished him luck and said goodbye to him; he lived next door to

me in Baie Verte.

He was a tradesman, a well-qualified, experienced tradesman

and very well respected in his trade around the Province and as a matter of

fact, he has been all over the country, so it was not like a fellow who came out

without experience or needed to do his apprenticeship, we are talking about an

experienced journeyman tradesman in this Province at that age - I will not give

his exact age but you could see from the cameras, forty-five, forty-six years

old and with a trade and so on, a heavy-duty mechanic.

Now, Mr. Speaker, as you saw those people board that ferry

last night, there was no drama, that was not produced in Hollywood, that was the

real thing, that is what we are seeing in this Province and then, as I listened

to the minister make his remarks today and talked about being a bayman, well, I

am a bayman too, Mr. Speaker, but the way the minister went on, he was giving

everything back and everything was going to rural Newfoundland, reminded me of

the song: Thank God Santa is a Bayman like us, because he seems to be preparing

to get ready for Christmas and he is going to be giving out all of this.

One of the things he said - and he can correct me if I am

wrong - but he said: what they took away from municipalities over the last

couple of years, they gave back in triplicate. They have actually tripled what

they gave back so, really, if that is a fact, then there is no one in this

Province who is hurting; all the municipalities are in great shape because what

they took away he gave back tripled, so we are up two times, Mr. Speaker.

Now, Mr. Speaker, if you are going to try to tell me or tell

any mayor or councillor who just got elected in this Province that they got back

triple what the government took away you are going to have the biggest laugh and

uproar in any council chambers in this Province. To say that what you took away

you gave back triple. Mr. Speaker, I don't think that's the reality of it. The

reality is this, Mr. Speaker, first and foremost. Now I am a firm, firm

believer, always have been before entering this House and still am, more than

ever, convinced with the saying that says, `... as goes rural Newfoundland and

Labrador so goes this Province.' This Province was built on rural Newfoundland.

That is what it was built on, Mr. Speaker, when the small inlets of our coasts

were inhabited by people who made a living from a resource, be it forestry or

fishing, and then of course in later days, mining and so on but that is what

made Newfoundland. That is what makes Newfoundland today, in 1997, unique.

When people in Ottawa, Vancouver and Winnipeg talk about

Newfoundland and Labrador they talk about our uniqueness, about small

communities and how great a people we are. We should be all proud of that and I

know we all are in this chamber, Mr. Speaker. We brag - I know I do everywhere I

travel. I am sure all ministers and members in this House brag. You can be proud

of the unique character of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. Well, Mr. Speaker,

if we lose that through people leaving this Province then we lose the very

essences of what this Province is all about, uniqueness of small rural

Newfoundland. That is why I asked the minister responsible for the

revitalization of rural Newfoundland - before I lost time yesterday in Question

Period - why I asked a simple direct question to him. If his mandate is to

revitalize rural Newfoundland and Labrador why isn't he going out into rural

Newfoundland and Labrador? Why is he going to - in thirteen meetings on the West

Coast, Mr. Speaker, eight of the thirteen meetings were in Corner Brook and

Stephenville. Now, Mr. Speaker, nothing against Corner Brook or Stephenville, I

have been there.

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

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the Government House

Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. gentleman stood

up here in the House and asked a question as to what the rural revitalization

committee has been doing. Mr. Speaker, he got up and quoted from - and I want to

correct him on his information - he stood up and quoted a listing of what we

have done. Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to table - and give it to the hon. gentleman

so he is educated - a list of the itinerary of the rural revitalization

committee so he can see just how busy we have been. Mr. Speaker, does he want

it? Here it is. Come over and get it.

MR. SHELLEY: You lay it on the table and I can get it.

MR. TULK: Okay, we will table it, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: No point of order.

The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

MR. SHELLEY: Now, Mr. Speaker, what I seen there was

exactly what I expected, that he would waste time again just like he has been

wasting time. Out of those communities, Mr. Speaker, the West Coast always -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Oh, Mr. Speaker, where is the list that he

is going to table? He was going to table a big list of this great committee that

is travelling around the Province and how he has been out in rural Newfoundland,

Mr. Speaker. Here is the point; yesterday he had the gall to stand in the House

of Assembly and of course -

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order.

MR. SHELLEY: Oh, Mr. Speaker, that is an abuse of the

House.

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the Government House

Leader.

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

The hon. gentleman -

MR. SHELLEY: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: I am up on a point of order. Yesterday, as I

said to you, he got up here in the House and made those allegations and I have

to tell him that last week we were down in Springdale, the development

association and the Regional Economic Development Board would not even invite

the hon. gentleman to his own district meetings.

MR. SPEAKER: No point of order.

The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

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

I am glad the Speaker has control of the House, otherwise

this abuse would be going on all day. Now, Mr. Speaker, I guess we can draw an

analogy as to exactly what is happening. What the minister is doing here today

is trying to abuse the time and waste it and not get to the crux of the matter.

My point to the minister is, table it and I will pick it up, Mr. Speaker. I will

tell the minister. He got up and tried to jump in front of the parade that the

Member for Bonavista South has started by calling on George Baker to take his

TAGS committee out to the real problem. He was the one who jumped behind the

Member for Bonavista South. What he did, on a ministerial statement, is ask the

Member for Bonavista South if he could borrow his press statement from two weeks

ago, is what he did. The irony of all of this is, simply put, that what the

minister has said about the TAGS committee travelling the Province, what the

minister has said about the TAGS committee, I agree with. That is why I am

asking the minister to do the honourable thing and for his rural revitalization

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. SHELLEY: Revitalization.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Oh, I got it wrong? Every now and then I

make a mistake, but not very often.

Mr. Speaker, for the rural revitalization committee not to go

out -yes, I know there are some successful businesses they would like to speak

with, but if you want to attack the problem, you go to the problem. You do not

go jumping up and down and saying what great things are going on all the time.

Every now and then you have to ask: Where are the problems? Let me get to the

problems.

Mr. Speaker, on the top of a statement I read out yesterday

there was a little note that these are private meetings; photo ops are available

afterwards. What was it for? What was the whole purpose of revitalization? I

asked the minister today in this House, with the problems that municipal

governments are experiencing, these people are the ones that the minister should

be meeting with. That is the whole point of this.

The new councils who took the time, the volunteers in this

Province who, I am telling you, had to do a lot of soul searching and gut

wrenching to say again this year that they were going to sit down and take on

the duties of councils around this Province at probably the toughest time in our

history, I commend them today and I salute them in front of the Minister of

Development and Rural Renewal and the Minister of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs, and say we should be thanking those people for having the guts and the

integrity and the fortitude to say: I will run for council this year in these

tough times.

Now, Mr. Speaker, what we have to do is say to these people:

We are willing to deal with you directly; we are going to come out where the

problems are, and we are going to sit and discuss with you, and you are going to

help us solve the problems. That is what the government has to do, sit with

them, and make the municipalities feel a part of the solution. That is my

philosophy. In order to revive rural Newfoundland, we have to take these people

in with us on these committees and make them part of the solution, because the

solution does not lie with government. The solution lies with allowing the

people who are living in these areas to be a big part of the decision-making

process - make them a bigger part of the decision-making process so they can

solve their problems with the help of government.

That is what I am asking for; because what happened, and I

will give an example here today in the House - I have done some research on it,

and I know the minister has already done some. I will give the example of

Ireland - and the Minister of Development and Rural Renewal should know this; I

think he does. The example in Ireland we can look at is that they are taking

people from the urban centres of Ireland who are a drain on the social programs,

living in slum housing, and the government are encouraging them to go out into

the rural parts of Ireland and take up small business and so on.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: (Inaudible) a good job. The Minister of

Municipal and Provincial Affairs just came through and took care of Burlington,

and I am glad he did. I told the minister, any time he helps a community in this

Province, be it Burlington or Flat Rock, or wherever, I am delighted about it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: The groomer - I say to the minister, he does

not know the story, because the truth is that I saved him from a lot of

embarrassment.

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. SHELLEY: I say to the minister, if he knew the whole

story, I saved a lot of embarrassment.

Now, Mr. Speaker, getting back to Ireland - I know there are

a lot of interruptions there today; I must be making sense.

When I talk about Ireland, that is, in fact, true. What they

have done is give the municipalities a much stronger say in their national

government, and what they did was include them in a solution process. They have

taken people from the urban centres where they are a drain on the social

programs and they have moved them into rural Ireland. As a matter of fact, you

talk about small business here, what I believe, by the way, is that the best

solution for rural Newfoundland is small business. The people who come to all of

us every day with a great idea to employ three or four or five or six people,

maybe ten people, too many people are being turned off. They are in rural

Newfoundland today, and do you know where they end up? At the ferry in Port aux

Basques, leaving with their ideas, because they are so tired of the red tape.

Mr. Speaker, one person in King's Point, I think, summed it

up to me pretty well. He said, `I had the idea' - he was about to leave. He

said: `What I believe they should start doing simply is this. Instead of rolling

out some red tape, roll out the red carpet. Anybody who has an idea in this

Province for small-scale business, who can put three and four and five people to

work, we should get out of their way so they can go ahead and create those

jobs.'

Getting back to Ireland again, I will give you an example,

and I hope the minister is aware of this one. As far as buildings go, and so on,

I have been told by one of the ministers that in parts of Ireland now if a

person has a good, solid business idea, the government will actually build them

the building.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Well, one of your colleagues told me. A

minister will actually -

MR. TULK: I tell you what they do.

MR. SHELLEY: Go ahead.

MR. TULK: They will go out and build (inaudible) the

first two years rental (inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Yes, that it right.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Yes, well, they will actually construct a

building, too, which I say is still a good idea. But the whole point, Mr.

Speaker, is, it is easy to talk about these things in a wider sense, but the

truth is that there are some good ideas. I just had a twenty-one-year-old in my

office the other day, who had a great idea to create three jobs in a small

community. And what I have asked -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: A twenty-one-year-old, three jobs. What is

wrong with that?

MR. TULK: Why did you not (inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: I did, yes I did.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, the point is - the minister keeps

interrupting today, something must be bothering him. I do not know what the

problem is.

I believe, Mr. Speaker, my time is running out and I just

want to make this comment. Rural renewal in this Province is probably to me and

to everybody, the most important factor right now, and I still believe that if

we are going to calm the waters in this Province right now - because it is

unsettled; anyone who believes that is it smooth and everything is great, is

only kidding himself. We would like to believe that, but it is a bad mood in

this Province.

I just finished visiting, I think, twenty-six or twenty-seven

of the thirty-three communities in my district and I hope to finish the next

three or four in the next couple of weeks. Over the last couple of months you

sit down and talk to people on a wharf or in a store somewhere, and the mood is

not good. I think any rural member here will tell you the same thing.

I believe, Mr. Speaker, what they have to see in the next

short term - and this cannot be a better tomorrow attitude, this has to be in

the very near future - this Fall and next Spring, we have to see a commitment

and some concrete evidence. And I will say this: nothing settles Newfoundland

and Labrador down more, rural Newfoundland, besides the jobs part we just talked

about, than the basic necessities, pavement, water and sewer; that is what it

takes. All of us who have rural communities can tell you, if a community has

dirt roads and is carrying water and -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: We are talking what? Rural community. I do

not have a rural community?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Yes, well, I am talking about - I do not

care if I talk for everybody.

MR. TULK: Paved roads will not keep people here.

MR. SHELLEY: No, pavement on the roads will not keep

people there, I agree with the minister, but I am going to tell you one thing, a

gentleman said to me the other day: `Somebody use the line, I will be the one to

turn off the lights.' `Well,' he said, `you can turn off the lights, I am still

staying.' Those communities, depending on what happens to them, can even be, in

the future - tourists drive into these places. As a matter of fact, I had

tourist this year stop going to Westport because they thought it was all gravel

road. There are still places that are going to be beautiful. I know places now

with ten and twelve families, but they are still there and they are still

beautiful. These people are not going to leave those places, Mr. Speaker. It is

going to have to -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. SHELLEY: Time is up already, Mr. Speaker. May I have

one minute to clue up, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, just to clue up, I will say to

the -

AN HON. MEMBER: No, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SHELLEY: He has interrupted me so often, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The member does not have leave.

MR. SHELLEY: I will just clue up, because I figured I

have a minute owing me anyway.

Mr. Speaker, rural renewal needs immediate attention -

MR. TULK: No, leave. No, leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The member does not have leave.

MR. SHELLEY: - not down the road, not a better tomorrow

and that is something that we have to address in this House.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I welcome you to your new position and I will try not to make

your life too difficult in your new capacity.

I am delighted to have an opportunity to speak in this

debate. I have read, with interest, the resolution put forward by my good friend

from Waterford Valley. Certainly, there are some aspects of the resolution that

do catch my attention and I would have no difficulty in supporting, but in

general, I feel the resolution is somewhat convoluted and I would have to wonder

what the hon. member's motives are in making it as complex and as complicated as

it is. I think he is trying to communicate on too many fronts and perhaps he

might have been a little more effective had be kept the focus a little narrower.

Mr. Speaker, whenever we engage in debate in this hon. House,

dealing with issues, particularly as they relate to rural Newfoundland, and in

this instance again, we see here reference to the fact and charges being placed

by the hon. members opposite, that somehow this government is engaged in an

out-and-out assault or attack on rural Newfoundland, that, in fact, this

government has given up on rural Newfoundland; in fact that this government

somehow feels that the future of Newfoundland does not involve in it the rural

areas of this Province. Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. It

really bothers me whenever I hear the hon. members opposite wrapping themselves

in the flag and pronouncing that they are the champions and they are the

spokespersons for the rural areas of this Province. It really intrigues me when

I see my hon. colleague, the great champion for rural Newfoundland, the Member

from Waterford Valley engaging in this initiative and speaking with such

eloquence and passion with regards to the needs of the rural areas and the rural

regions of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, all of us in this hon. House and the members

opposite - and certainly the members who sit on this side of the House - are all

too aware of the challenges that face the rural areas of the Province at this

stage in our history. In my capacity, as a rural member and also as a person who

has had a long career of involvement in dealing with rural issues and trying to

promote economic development in the rural areas of the Province, I certainly

feel that I have somewhat of an understanding as to the magnitude of the problem

that is out there.

Mr. Speaker, the difficulties with which we are confronted in

this Province today have not come about overnight. These issues or these

challenges have not just developed over the last three or four years. They have

been many years in the making. Mr. Speaker, we are also, all of us, very much

aware that there are no easy answers. We would all like to believe that there

are easy answers to the problems that are out there. It would certainly make all

of our lives a lot easier and we could all sleep a lot easier and a lot better

if we felt that today, we in this House, in this debate that we are engaging in

could arrive at a resolution that would resolve forever the difficulties that

confront the many thousands of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who are trying

to continue to carry on the existence that has been known in rural Newfoundland

for the last 500 years.

Mr. Speaker, we recognize that there are no easy answers but

that does not mean that we should throw up our hands in despair, that does not

mean that we should give up, that does not mean that we should decide that in

fact what is being said and the negativity that abounds is a philosophy that we

are prepared to subscribe to because certainly, Mr. Speaker, from my perspective

- and I feel that I speak for all of the hon. members on this side of the House

- we are committed to rural Newfoundland. We are committed to ensure that rural

Newfoundland continues to survive and prosper but just wishing it, Mr. Speaker,

is not sufficient. We have to go about trying to identify and develop

opportunities that will guarantee a future for those rural areas of the

Province.

Mr. Speaker, just speaking to some of the specifics of the

resolution that is put forward here today, one could almost conclude from

reading this resolution that we, on this side of the House, take great delight

in having to reduce supports to municipalities but, Mr. Speaker, the reality is

that there is a limited amount of money and there is a limited amount of

resources that we have available to us in this Province. It is incumbent upon

us, as the elected representatives of the people, to ensure that the resources,

limited as they are, that are available to us are used so that we derive maximum

benefits. We, all of the people of this Province, derive maximum benefits.

Governing and budgeting; really in government we are talking

large budgets but really it is no different from running your household budget.

You just can't spend money that you don't have and if you continue to do that on

an ongoing basis the day is going to come when your banker is going to ring you

up and say, `Your time is up. We are moving in. You can't look after your

finances so we are going to do it for you'. Unfortunately in this Province this

reality has become all too well known to all of us in recent years, that really

the kinds of decisions that had to be made in this country and in this Province

were decisions that were precipitated in large part and primarily by decisions

that were made many, many years ago, initiatives that were put in place many

years ago, long before most members of this House had occasion to sit in this

Chamber. However, be that as it may, it would be very easy and very simple for

us to stand in this House and just to blame people who sat here years ago for

getting us in the financial mess that we are in now. That would be an easy thing

to do, but it would not be the responsible thing to do, because we who now sit

here as the elected representatives of the people of this Province, that is not

what our constituents sent us here to do. They sent us here to represent them

and to correct the situation as we find it, and that is what this government is

endeavouring to do.

We all accept and recognize the medicine that we have all

been served up with in recent years is not the sort of thing that we would have

if we had a choice. I think, Mr. Speaker, to a person, if you talked to the

people of this Province, they would recognize and understand that the actions

that have been initiated are trying to deal in a responsible fashion with the

fiscal reality which confronts this Province at this point in time.

Mr. Speaker, if we stand in this House, if I stand here as a

representative for Port au Port, and argue for a greater cut of the pie for

municipal affairs, if I argue for reinstatement of the full municipal operating

grants, then it is only logical that this government and the Minister of

Municipal and Provincial Affairs should then say to me: Where, then, do you

suggest that the money come from? Where, then, do you suggest that we make the

cuts? Do we lay off more teachers? Do we close down more hospital beds? These

are the types of hard decisions that have to be made, because the options are

very limited. Either we reduce our spending or we engage in additional

borrowing.

As I indicated earlier, we have already borrowed ourselves

into a situation where we have placed the future of our children and future

generations of this Province in grave jeopardy - and indeed in this country -

but what we have been trying to do by bringing our financial situation under

control is trying to ensure that we will not be inflicting on future generations

a responsibility for borrowing for benefits that would, in fact, accrue to

generations living today.

Mr. Speaker, how can anyone justify that we should be able to

maintain a certain lifestyle, a certain level of service, living in the year

1997, with the realization that in order to do that and to sustain that, it will

be my children and my grandchildren who will pay the price.

Mr. Speaker, I personally cannot accept that, and I don't

feel the members of this House generally can subscribe to that sort of

philosophy. What, then, is the alternative? The alternative is very simple, and

this government has been trying to deal with this in a realistic fashion. This

government has been aggressively pursuing, on all fronts, different economic

opportunities, because what we have to do is to build the economy and grow the

economy. What we have to do in the rural areas of the Province is to work with

our people who live there, in helping them identify and develop new

opportunities for economic growth. That way we can ensure that there will be a

future for the rural areas of our Province.

Mr. Speaker, as we develop and grow our economy we will then

generate the necessary finances so that we will be able to maintain for all of

our citizens the level of service that they desire, and the level of service

that they demand.

Mr. Speaker, we must also not lose sight of the fact that the

hon. Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs has stated publicly that as

soon as the situation, the fiscal situation of this Province shows improvement,

that he will certainly be fighting hard to ensure that some of the additional

monies that will then be available, will in fact be going back to the

municipalities in the form of municipal operating grants to help them offset

some of the difficulties that they are enduring.

Mr. Speaker, no one denies that in fact, in being able to try

to get our fiscal house in order, that this is only possible through the

co-operation of all of our citizens. This is only possible because the people

who live in the various regions of the Province, and there is no doubt that the

rural areas are probably more of a challenge than the urban areas, but if we are

to make gains, if we are to see improvement, it requires the co-operation of all

of our citizens.

Mr. Speaker, personally, I have great faith in the future of

this Province. I have great faith in the future of the rural areas of the

Province. As a person who was born in rural Newfoundland and has chosen to live

in rural Newfoundland, I feel that we do have a bright future, but, Mr. Speaker,

I think as well, what we have to ensure is what we are doing now for rural

Newfoundland is providing for a whole new beginning. What we are having to do -

I look at my own area of the Province - is trying to find a reason for people to

remain. To simply say that rural Newfoundland must continue to survive, really

does not make a lot of sense unless we are prepared to sit down and try to

identify the opportunities that will allow our people to continue to work there.

We have heard reference today about out-migration. We have

heard reference today of the many thousands of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians

who are leaving to seek employment elsewhere and truly it is tragic. It is not

the sort of thing that we want to see happen but the reality is, Mr. Speaker,

that, until such time as we are able to develop and grow our economy, this trend

will continue. However, Mr. Speaker, I feel that we are moving in the right

direction. I feel that the policies that have been developed and have been

embarked upon by this government will pay dividends down the road.

I think all of us in this honourable House, working together

in terms of trying to assist the citizens of this Province in working with the

opportunities that are out there, I feel confident that we can look forward to a

bright future for everyone. In the meantime, Mr. Speaker, I have to say to my

hon. member, I recognize where he is coming from in terms of the resolution that

he has put forward but perhaps he could confine his remarks within the

resolution, narrow his focus, I might have been able to support him, but in the

light of what he has here right now, I feel it is just to convoluted and is a

scatter-gun approach and really not the sort of resolution that he should be

bringing forward. He does not do respect to himself as the Opposition House

Leader and knowing his own abilities, I am surprised that he would, at this

point in time, choose to bring this forward.

So with those remarks, Mr. Speaker, I conclude, and I do say

in conclusion, Mr. Speaker, that, it bothers me whenever I feel that my own

commitment to rural Newfoundland is brought into question.

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, I hope you are. You will never get

back (inaudible).

MR. SMITH: Just watch me. You obviously do not know much

about my area of the Province.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, all I can say is that in terms of what

we need to do out there, I feel we are making the right moves, we are putting in

place the proper policies and I think in time that we will see that these will

pay dividends.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand and support the resolution

as put forward by my colleague from Waterford Valley, and while I was upstairs,

I realized I have heard this speech from this member before. The member wraps

himself into the flag that the opposition does not have a monopoly on

championing the causes of rural Newfoundland or people in this Province and he

is right. We do not have a monopoly, Mr. Speaker, but that monopoly should be

designed for forty-eight members in this House. Any statements with respect to

government initiatives and the realities that rural Newfoundland and indeed all

of the Province and the people in the Province are facing as a result of the

times we live in, he has described accurately, no doubt, I say to the member.

I support his view about the challenges that we all face,

individually and that we face as elected members in this House in bringing

forward the views from the people of the Province. But, Mr. Speaker, what burns

me and what sets the fire and the devil in me is when I see opportunities, that

this government has full control over, slip through their fingers. Many missed

opportunities, many tradespeople in this Province have taken flight and many of

those tradespeople should have had, could have had and would have had

opportunities in the oil and gas industry had this government acted, had this

government acted with respect to the Canadian Offshore Petroleum Boards lack of

direction, lack of action with respect to enforcing the Atlantic Accord. Would

you like to see the recommendations, I say to the member for Twillingate?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: But the lack of direction and initiative.

Let's take a couple of examples, I say to the member for Port au Port and the

member for Twillingate, too.

Last spring in the House, when in question, Kenonic Controls

of Calgary, another company from outside the Province were doing work on the

offshore, on the Hibernia platform, were bringing in excess of 150

instrumentation and journeymen electricians into the Province. Clearly, the

union representing electricians, the IBEW, met with Cabinet representatives,

clearly showed an outline to the fullest extent that was necessary, that the

qualifications that that company were asking for existed in this Province. That

there were journeymen and journeywomen in that field who were not only

qualified, who not only had the technical expertise required, but were available

for work. What action happened? None that could have been, should have been and

would have been 150 extra people working in this Province had government taken

action.

Now, the member knows and I am sure he could not disagree

with the assertion that I am making today. Last spring in this House, I asked

the Minister of Education on five separate occasion, `Is the minister preparing

a list, a skills qualifications list for the upcoming offshore activity', for

two purposes, (1) to identify what skills existed in this Province, so that

those who had skills would get the jobs and (2