December

1, 1995

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLII No. 67

The House met at 9:00 a.m.

MR. SPEAKER (L. Snow): Order, please!

Statements by Ministers

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

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to take this opportunity to ask hon. members to

join me in acknowledging World AIDS Day today. The theme this year is Shared

Rights - Shared Responsibilities. Persons living with AIDS have the right to

appropriate care and support and the right to be treated with dignity and

without discrimination. Each of us has a responsibility to be well-informed

about HIV and AIDS so that we may protect ourselves and others from infection,

while lending support and understanding to individuals and families coping with

the reality of AIDS.

I am very pleased to report today that we have seen a

significant decline in the number of new HIV cases reported this year. This is a

reflection of the prevention and education initiatives carried out in the

community by various partners in the health system.

Today also gives me the opportunity to provide an update on

some of the ongoing initiatives with respect to HIV and AIDS in the Province. In

December of 1993, government announced a comprehensive HIV/AIDS strategy

directed at three key areas: prevention and education, testing and treatment,

and care and home support. Since that time the Department of Health, Community

Health Boards, other government departments, communities, advocacy groups and

health organizations have worked together to implement the recommendations of

the provincial strategy.

Various educational resources have been produced and widely

distributed. Information sessions have been given to teachers, students,

parents, peer educators, community groups as well as in various workplaces. New

curriculum has also been implemented in schools. Resources are being developed

for use in the home, the school and in the community. Community Health Boards in

each region offer HIV testing as well as pre- and post-test counselling. The

Community Health Boards are also working very closely with hospitals, health

professionals and advocacy groups in each region to ensure that appropriate

treatments and community supports are available to persons living with HIV and

AIDS and to their families.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank all individuals and

organizations for their ongoing efforts in implementing the recommendations of

the provincial strategy. I ask all hon. members to join with me in acknowledging

those efforts and offering continued support to HIV and AIDS awareness

initiatives throughout the Province. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I certainly rise to indicate that this is important, and

Shared Rights - Shared Responsibilities is a very appropriate theme. People with

HIV and AIDS have rights the same as the rest of us and we have responsibilities

to ensure that they get the proper care and the proper treatment that is needed.

Most important areas are prevention and the education process and I think we

have made tremendous strides in the past few years in that prevention and

education aspect. Back to the mid-1980s when the passing of the virus by

improperly screened blood - we all know the implications of what has arisen

since that time and I think it is important that we become more cognizant and

assist in every effort. I hope that the Department of Health will see the

importance of giving Community Health Boards the necessary funds to be able to

continue this prevention and promotion so that we can avoid the transmission of

HIV, the AIDS virus in the future.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Does he have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to join with the minister and the health critic

in the Opposition in recognizing World AIDS Day. In this Province there is a

growing awareness amongst people about the dangers of HIV infection and AIDS. It

has come into the forefront and out of the back rooms and the untalked-about

areas of society, but we do have still a continuing obligation to redouble our

efforts to provide proper support and care to those who are suffering from the

disease. The government's cutbacks in home care and home support services are a

danger, especially for people suffering from AIDS who have a great need of home

support services when the disease becomes serious. So, I ask the government to

reconsider its cutbacks in those areas as it affects people seriously.

MR. SPEAKER: Before we move on to Oral Questions, I would

like to take this opportunity to welcome to the gallery, on behalf of all

members, a group of students from Eugene Vaters Collegiate in St. John's.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Oral Questions

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

Extern.

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

My question is for the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation regarding the Bell Island ferry rate increases.

Considering the demonstration yesterday - the galleries were

full -and the demonstration today at the ferry docks, and noting the resolve of

the people of Bell Island, upon reflection, has the minister reconsidered these

unfair rate hikes?

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

Transportation.

MR. EFFORD: No, Mr. Speaker, I have not, because what I

did, as minister, was, I made a recommendation to government and government made

a decision based on reasonable fare rates for all the people who live in

isolated communities on the Island portion of the Province of Newfoundland,

where I have a responsibility as minister, to put a reasonable, fair rate in

place. In the case of Bell Island, it seems extremely hard on Bell Island, and I

understand that; I understand what the people are saying, because on the basis

from which they started to these recent increases, it was a very, very low rate

on Bell Island compared to the rates in the rest of the Province.

The minimum rate on Fogo Island was $4.75, the same on St.

Brendan's Island, but the minimum rate for a car and a passenger on Bell Island

was $1.75. So we used a base rate, based on, from the island to the mainland in

all the ferry rates, depending on the distance. But there had to be a base rate

and an extra 20 percent for the distance travelled, the nautical miles

travelled.

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

Extern, on a supplementary.

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

Mr. Minister, the Premier stated that Cabinet will review the

new rates today. Will the minister tell the House, the stand he will be taking

at that meeting? Will he be sympathetic to the concerns of Bell Islanders? Does

he now understand the impact on Bell Islanders, that these unfair and high rates

are the death-knell for Bell Island? Will he fight for a decrease in the rates

for the Bell Island ferry, and what is it going to take?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, no minister will ever tell

the House what stand he is going to take in Cabinet, so I am sure the hon.

member didn't really intend that question, because he knows it can't be answered

in that way. But what I should tell the House and I have to tell the House, is,

I haven't yet had a chance since yesterday afternoon to meet with the minister

to discuss it.

I met with a committee to explain to them exactly the basis

on which government proceeded, and I did, and I must say there are few meetings

that I have had since I have been in this office that have been more direct,

more understanding and more pleasant, and I enjoyed the meeting. They also fully

understood what government was doing; they told me that they agreed that

everybody should be treated equally, everybody in the Province, they are not

asking for a privileged position for Bell Island so, one man said -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER WELLS: That's right. One man said, treat

everybody the same, have a fixed percentage increase across the board. Then,

when I explained to him that if you had an excessively low rate first, and

others had an excessively high, a percentage increase across the board, simply

makes a bad matter worse for the person with the high rate, and continues a

privilege for the person with the low rate. They agreed and understood, but what

the individual did say to me that caused me to undertake to ask Cabinet to have

a look at it - if the members would just be quiet it would be easier for me to

explain it, because I think the member asked his question sincerely. What he did

say is: Okay, Premier, we understand that, and perhaps we have been spoiled -

now I am quoting him; those are his exact words - perhaps we have been spoiled

with these low rates but, Premier, if you are going to jump the ferry rates

generally by this much, but you jump ours on Bell Island by this much, it is

hard to take all at once. You should consider, that is the extent to which you

are treating Bell Island differently than others. You are making a massive

change all at once, even though you can make a logical argument that the change

should be made.

I said to the committee: You have made a point that requires

fair consideration. I emphasize that I cannot stop the rates tomorrow morning -

I am one person of fourteen in Cabinet; that will go - but I advised the members

of the committee that Cabinet would be meeting today and I would be bringing

their proposal to Cabinet for consideration, but I also assured them that did

not mean that it would necessarily be made, but Cabinet would be made fully

aware of the position that they made.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's East Extern on a

supplementary.

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

I would say to the Premier that all of the rationalizing in

the world does not justify this situation.

For my final supplementary I would like to go to the Minister

of Education. Mr. Minister, both Bell Island ferries this morning were tied up

at 7:30 a.m. The people are demonstrating there at this time. There are

seventy-five students at the Cabot College on Bell Island. Some have exams

today. One student in particular told me that he has to put five loonies on his

bedpost on Sunday nights for transportation to Bell Island on the ferry. He has

a signed rental lease in St. John's. For him the increased rate will cost an

extra $450 after Christmas, which he does not have. He waited five years to get

into the course. He does not have this money, Mr. Minister, and upwards of

thirty-five students at the Cabot College may have to quit. Where do you suggest

that these students get the money? Do you realize you are forcing students, with

this rate increase, to quit school? That is the reality of the situation.

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

Training.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, when a student applies to any

institution in this Province - well, in some cases, in very few cases in this

Province a student does have his own money, so that is a different cases, but

where students do not have the money, I would assume the hypothetical situation

if it is -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DECKER: Or the real situation that the hon. member is

talking about, I don't know the details of it, is a person who doesn't have the

money.

The way that works with the system, when a student is going

to an institution and you don't have the money, then you apply to one of the

best student loan systems in all the world. When you apply for that loan you - I

assume -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible)!

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I thought the hon. member asked

a question that he wanted an answer to. I didn't realize he wanted to turn this

into a shouting match. If that is the problem then I will meet with the hon.

member and give him the answer. If he could control his colleagues I will

certainly attempt to explain what (inaudible).

The point I'm making is that when a student applies for a

student loan all his expenses are taken into consideration. There is an

allowance for his food, for his board, for his books, for all the different

things. In this specific case when students applied for their student loan to go

Bell Island they allowed, and they were given credit for, the expense of getting

back and forth to college. There has been a change. The rates have gone up. The

ones who are already in the system, if there are a few weeks left, then they can

go back and have their student loan re-assessed because there are legitimate

additional expenses.

In the new year, if after Cabinet deals with this issue today

and there are some changes made, that will be reflected. If there are no changes

made, that too will be reflected. So a student puts in all his expenses, and

this would be a perfectly legitimate expense which would be considered under the

student loan. So I would tell that student that the hon. member is talking about

there is no major problem as far as that goes. The process is there to deal with

it, Mr. Speaker.

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

John's East Extern.

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

to the Minister of Education and Training. Will the Minister of Education and

Training confirm that if thirty-five students out of the seventy-five at the

Cabot College on Bell Island quit will that be the death-knell or the end of the

Cabot College on Bell Island?

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

Training.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, that is a purely hypothetical

question. I don't usually answer hypothetical questions.

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

MR. WOODFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to

the Minister of Justice. Over the last number of weeks all government

departments, as has been made public by the Minister of Finance and Treasury

Board and the Premier and other ministers opposite, have been asked to submit

proposals where they can make reductions in their department, especially to try

to make up for the $60 million shortfall within the next few months for this

fiscal year.

Four of the main areas of the minister's department,

correctional facilities in the Province, legal aid, RCMP, for example, $40

million a year, RNC some $16 million, not counting administration - that is just

salaries and benefits and so on - could the minister tell the House, in

particular, are there any reductions considered in those four specific areas?

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, I think I have probably already

said this publicly but I am delighted to repeat it in response to my hon.

friend's question. My instructions to my officials, which I assume were the same

instructions given to my colleagues, to each of their officials, were to

consider all areas of the expenditures for which I am responsible with a view to

seeing whether reductions could be made and, if so, what changes would result in

service and, as part of the process of deciding, since reductions must be made,

where we could achieve these reductions with the least possible negative impact

upon either the service or the quality of the service that is provided by the

operations for which I am responsible.

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

supplementary.

MR. WOODFORD: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

The minister just said that all areas are being considered

within his department. Could he be specific on this particular question, and

tell the House if the Highway Patrol Division of the RCMP in the Province is one

of the considerations, one of the things he is considering for reduction,

because this particular area, highway patrol, is one of the biggest revenue

generators for the Province - last year almost $9 million, a little over $9

million projected for this year - one of the biggest revenue generators for the

Province, and the minister knows why, I guess, because sometimes it becomes a

real drag strip. In any case, would the minister be specific. There is some

speculation out there that the Highway Traffic Patrol Division of the RCMP will

be reduced or done away with.

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman has asked me

to address his question directly, and I will, but I want to put it in context.

One of the about 168 reduction option items that I have seen, my officials have

brought forward, involves change in the highway patrol system, but in saying

that I do not want to leave any false impression that it is either agreed or not

agreed, or that we have singled it out in any way.

As I said a moment or so ago, I have directed my officials to

look at all areas, so we have looked at everything from my own office, a vote

for my own office, through the police, through the courts, through the adult

correction division, through the Legal Aid system, all aspects of the operations

for which I am responsible. The other point I would make is that the $9 million

which he took from the estimates would reflect the revenues from all fines, not

simply highway fines or fines in connection with that, and let me say that we

don't operate highway enforcement or any part of the law enforcement system as a

revenue-generating operation. The fines are collected because they are imposed

by the courts because these are the penalties decided by this House or by

Parliament as being appropriate for a breach of the law.

We would be quite happy if nobody broke the law and as a

result we got no revenue, we would be quite happy to have that situation as

opposed to having a lot of people breaking the law and getting a lot of revenue.

These are not revenue-generating options, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley, on a

supplementary.

MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Speaker, I don't think the minister

would do much in this Province in regards to convincing the rest of the

Province, especially drivers on the highway that that's not a revenue generator,

and even some members in the House of Assembly.

Mr. Speaker, one of the other areas being considered and

there is some speculation in talking to some RCMP detachments around the

Province, is a possible amalgamation of certain RCMP detachments in the

Province, and under my second supplementary, with regards to the possibility of

doing away with the Highway Patrol, the RCMP division, Mr. Speaker, this would

be a very, as far as I am concerned, backward step. Along with the measures

brought in last year, by the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, it

would lower the safety standards, it would have a free for all on the

Trans-Canada; the Trans-Canada would become the longest drag strip in North

America, Mr. Speaker, so I would say to the minister, that's one particular area

he should not touch.

On the amalgamation of the RCMP detachment in the Province,

could the minister be specific on that one.

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, there have been no decisions

taken at all. There are, as I said I think from memory, 168 separate options

that I have seen. A possible amalgamation of some of the RCMP detachments is one

of them, of course it is, and if the hon. gentleman wants to, I could try to get

a list of the 167 others. We were looking literally at everything from changing

the way in which the courts operate right through the entire spectrum of the

operations.

I would say as well, I have not, lest he has picked up in his

conversations with RCMP or whomsoever, a wrong impression, I have heard no

suggestion that the Highway Patrol operations would be abandoned which seems to

be what the hon. gentleman has heard. I certainly have heard suggestions we make

changes in them and in every other activity of RCMP activity. I mean, they have

a helicopter based in Corner Brook, do they need that? They have an aircraft

based primarily in Labrador, do they need that? They have a very large and

elaborate new headquarters building here at the White Hills here in St. John's,

can we make changes there? It seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that I would be a very

imprudent minister and my colleagues would be very imprudent in managing the

public finances, if we didn't look at every possible option to see what can be

done, and that's what we are doing and it has been done with an amazing amount

of detail.

I was involved in a discussion last evening where, one option

- not an RCMP one - but an option would produce a savings of $6,300 but then the

officials pointed out we would incur an extra $6,700 on the other side of the

ledger because extra costs would be incurred if we withdrew that particular

service and so I said: Well, don't do it, it makes no sense, so we passed on to

the next item but there has been a great deal of analysis done by my officials

and all the officials -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. ROBERTS: - under the direction of the Treasury Board.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Humber Valley, on a supplementary.

MR. WOODFORD: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

Could the minister tell the House if his department has given

any consideration to the introduction of photo-radar in the Province?

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

MR. ROBERTS: I don't know what anybody in the department

may or may not have done and what the police may or may not have done, but I can

say that nobody has ever brought that suggestion to me, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A question for the Minister of Natural Resources.

Now that the Hibernia project is getting towards a wind-down

phase, could the minister indicate what the government sees as the fate of that

major fabrication site at Bull Arm?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

DR. GIBBONS: Well, Mr. Speaker, the Bull Arm site is a

great state of the art site for industrial applications and we are certainly

hoping that it will be used in the future for other activity related to the

offshore and otherwise.

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

Green Bay.

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have heard

comments or rumours I suppose or whatever, to the effect that people are in

looking at the site or have been and will be and that there are possibilities of

parts of the facility being sold piecemeal. Are there any plans, at this stage

of the game, to basically dismantle or sell in pieces the Bull Arm site or is it

the government's intention to keep it whole and intact for some considerable

time to see if it is of use in, say Terra Nova or other offshore fields?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Speaker, my colleague the Minister of

Industry, Trade and Technology is the particular minister directly responsible

for this site, the management of this site and he has a committee in place that

includes representatives of a number of other departments, including mine. We

are looking at the promotion of this site for continued usage as an industrial

site. We have not reached a decision on that yet. We have been promoting it

internationally, I am sure the hon. member himself has seen some of the glossy

brochures that have been published in news magazines internationally. We are

promoting this site as a place to do the quality of work that is presently being

done at Bull Arm. We would prefer to see it done that way and I would love to

see the Terra Nova facilities done there.

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

Green Bay.

MR. HEWLETT: So, Mr. Speaker, is the minister saying then

that at this stage of the game the government is not firm, has not made a

resolve to keep that site intact for industrial development, offshore related or

whatever? That it is indeed a possibility that site may be dismantled, sold

piecemeal to industrial users here in the Province or elsewhere in the world?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Speaker, I never said any such thing,

that we are looking at dismantling. We are promoting this site as a great state

of the art industrial site. We would like to see it continued to be used as it

is today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, I have some questions for the

Minister of Justice this morning. I will give the Minister of Finance a break

for a change - as he does his mini-budget.

I would like to ask the Minister of Justice, we are all aware

of the fiasco that has taken place over the last few years dealing with the

three health care centres, the Trans City affairs, they have become known and

the matter was dealt with by the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and was appealed

by the government. Can the minister tell us the status of that appeal? Has that

process now been completed? What was the final outcome of it?

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, my understanding is that the

appeal was argued, the oral argument took place about a month ago, near the end

of October. Their Lordships and her Ladyship, I believe Madame Justice Cameron,

was one of the panel who heard the appeal, reserved their decision and that is

not unusual. The judges of the court will file their decision when they are

ready and that is again, the normal procedure. So I have no way to know. I

believe one of the lawyers mentioned to me that the court gave some indication

they hoped to be able to file a judgement by the end of this calendar year but

we are in the hands of the court. So the process is complete, in so far as the

lawyers are concerned and the parties, we are simply awaiting a decision of the

court now.

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

Mount Pearl.

MR. WINDSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The House knows of course that the Minister of Works,

Services and Transportation was advised by the Department of Justice some time

ago not to appear before the Public Accounts Committee when subpoenaed to do so

and as a result of that of course, the work of the Public Accounts Committee has

been frustrated. Would the minister tell us: now that the matter has gone

through the court process and we are simply waiting for a decision from the

three justices of the Supreme Court and if the minister sees any impediment now

by the Minister of Transportation and his officials, should they not now appear

before the Public Accounts Committee when called?

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, as soon as the decision is

rendered - we anticipate that will be in the very near future - the concerns

that I raised, which I earlier expressed in correspondence with my hon. friend

from Mount Pearl, would be satisfied. That is not a very long time. I assume the

committee will not be meeting in the next couple of weeks, given the

schedule

the House itself will confront.

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

Mount Pearl.

MR. WINDSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is very unlikely

in fact that even if we did

schedule hearings it would be some time well into

the new year before we are able to

schedule that on the agenda. So I assume from

the ministers answer that there is no reason the committee cannot continue with

its work. Can the minister tell us, now that that matter has been resolved, can

the minister give us a final cost of what this whole affair cost? We know there

was a $3.2 million award made. We are not aware of what legal costs may have

been awarded to the defendants. Can you give us an estimate of what the

Department of Justice may have spent on salaries and other costs of the lawyers

who defended it? As well, I believe, an outside lawyer was retained to argue the

appeal for government. Can the minister give us a final cost, or will he give us

an undertaking to produce that?

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, there are a number of

questions; let me try to answer each.

First of all, members will realize that the Court of Appeal

decision is not in itself final. Either side may seek leave to appeal to the

Supreme Court of Canada, but the Court of Appeal process has come to the stage,

as I have outlined.

Secondly, there has been no award made of damages. The

decision of Judge Orsborn, at first instance, was with respect to liability, and

the parties were given leave to apply to the court to resolve the damages issues

should they not do it by resolution. Again, that is quite a normal way to deal

with such issues. There has been no resolution of the issues, and my

recollection, subject to being corrected on checking, is that they are on hold

pending the Court of Appeal's decision, because if the Court of Appeal's

decision goes one way the issue will be academic, if it goes another way it

becomes very present.

Thirdly, I cannot give the information because I do not have

it. I can try to get it, insofar as it is available, with respect to the costs.

At the trial level the matter was argued by lawyers from my civil division. We

did retain outside counsel, Mr. Hutchings from Corner Brook, and Mr. Oakley from

St. John's, who argued the matter at the appellate level.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today

are for the Minister of Social Services.

On November 23, I asked the minister questions concerning the

ratio of management employees versus non-management employees involved in youth

corrections in the Province. When the minister got around to answering me on

November 27, she stated that there were sixteen managers in comparison to 265

non-management employees at both the Whitbourne and Pleasantville centres. My

first question to the minister is: How many of those 265 non-management

employees are on the on-call list for the Whitbourne centre at the present time,

and how many non-management employees are needed on a regular twelve-hour shift

at the centre? A daily or nightly twelve-hour shift, how many non-management

people are needed?

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

MS YOUNG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am sorry that I cannot have figures available at all times

to answer all of the questions that may come forward; however, I can give him

some figures that we have. In youth care workers we have forty-five permanent

full-time, twenty-five temporary full-time, eighty-three temporary on call.

Social workers, we have one permanent full-time, two temporary full-time. With

word processing equipment operators, we have three permanent full-time, one is

currently on unpaid leave, four temporary full-time, five temporary on call,

called as when required. Nurses, two permanent full-time, one temporary on call

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS YOUNG: Well, I was giving them information.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS YOUNG: You asked for the information, and you will get

it.

Food service workers, we have three permanent full-time, one

temporary full-time, fourteen on call temporary, call as and when required, and

the total for -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS YOUNG: Cooks, we have three permanent full-time.

Utility workers, we have three permanent full-time, one temporary full-time.

Equipment operators, we have one permanent full-time. Administrative officer, we

have one permanent full-time. Laundry workers, we have one permanent full-time.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

AN HON. MEMBER: And the list goes on.

MS YOUNG: And the list goes on.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS YOUNG: Would you like more?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister to conclude her answer.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes on a

supplementary.

MR. MANNING: I congratulate the minister on having

answers for me, but the problem is that was not the question I asked. You have

the answer for the wrong question.

Mr. Speaker, at the Whitbourne Youth Centre there are

approximately fifteen managers versus forty to fifty non-management employees on

a daily twelve hour shift. That is the question I asked. I had the answer, I

say, Mr. Speaker; I wanted the minister to confirm it.

There are fifteen managers versus forty to fifty

non-management employees on a twelve-hour shift. This creates approximately a

one to three ratio, far from what the minister stated on November 27, one

manager to every sixteen point five employees. In our tough economic times I

would like to ask the minister: Does she feel having one manager versus three

employees at Whitbourne on a daily twelve-hour shift is in line with this

government's so-called fiscal responsibility?

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

MS YOUNG: I'm sort of confused over all of this, because

one minute -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible)!

MS YOUNG: At one point in time the member was advocating

that we did not have enough people out there to do a good job. Now he is asking

me to lay off people. Mr. Speaker, I just don't know what he wants. What I want

out there is a secure custody that I feel can do the job at the best price

possible.

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

Mary's - The Capes.

MR. MANNING: Mr. Speaker, my mind is made up. There is

too much top management I say. On November 27 the minister also referred me to

the ongoing study by Dr. Linda Inkpen with possible results available next

spring dealing with staffing requirements plus other topics. I would like to ask

the minister: Are you going to wait till next spring to close hospital beds? Are

you going to wait till next spring to reduce social service payments? Are you

going to wait till next spring to increase ferry rates? Then why in the hell are

you going to wait till next spring to get your house in order in Whitbourne?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MS YOUNG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I guess that he is

asking me to lay off people so we can look at it. If that is what he is asking

us we can review that but I want to make sure that we have a secure custody that

we have confidence in that is being run for the best interest of the young

people who are in our care. I'm sorry, I can't go along with the member's

suggestion that we reduce services. I think the headlines today should be that

the PCs call for lay offs in the public service.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question period has expired.

Notices of Motion

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

Treasury Board.

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

tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled

An Act To Amend The Pension

Benefits Act, Bill No. 44.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Scio - Bell

Island.

MR. WALSH: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I stand

today to present a petition on behalf of the residents of Bell Island.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible)!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WALSH: The prayer of the petition, Mr. Speaker, is:

With the proposed ferry rate increases to take effect today, December 1, will

have such a devastating affect on the community of Bell Island, and

whereas the

proposed ferry rate increase being imposed on other ferry users in other areas

of the Province is approximately 30 per cent above the current rates,

be it

resolved that the Bell Island ferry service be treated with the same percentage

of increase as other provincial ferry services in Newfoundland.

Mr. Speaker, I attempted yesterday to stand to present this

petition but at the Speaker's desire he moved to the opposite side. In the

interim the committee asked me to arrange whatever meetings I could, and by the

time I had an opportunity to speak we were all invited to - the Premier took the

time to meet with the committee and we had a chance to present our case there. I

felt personally it was more important to do that than it was to stand to present

a petition yesterday when it could have been done today. The meeting was the

most important part.

The other night I had an opportunity to attend a meeting on

Bell Island where there was some 600 strong. These people are very determined

and very concerned about what is happening to them, and what is happening to

them with respect to the ferry rates. I believe that when the analysis was done

in order to put into effect the new increases, somewhere along the way no one

had a chance to sit down and look at what was and what will be the impact on

individual people.

One of the individuals yesterday pointed out very strongly

that as of today their annual cost, after income tax, from the small amount of

disposable income that they have, will go from $250 a year in cost to $1,125 a

year in cost. An excessive amount, as far as they are concerned, and I support

them fully. Because no one should be asked to pay that kind of money today when

they are barely holding down a job that pays much more than $5 an hour. We are

also put in a situation where a single mother pointed out to us yesterday as

well in one of our meetings that her intention was to bring her children over

here tomorrow. The cost originally, or last week, would have been $6.50 to bring

them over to a Christmas party. Today it would be $18, and she just can't afford

it.

On a daily basis there are some 300 people who travel to and

from Bell Island. People who have to be to work at 8:00 a.m. arise at 4:00 a.m.

or 5:00 a.m. in order to make that run. Those who work shift work, going to work

at 8:00 a.m. and getting off at 8:00 p.m., sit in Portugal Cove for another

three hours in order to return to their homes. They do that because they want to

contribute to society, contribute to this Province, and contribute to their

families.

There is one statistic concerning Bell Island that none of us

are proud of, as Bell Islanders or any of us in this Province should be. Stats

Canada recently said that Bell Island ranks as the lowest community in Canada,

on a per capita basis has the lowest income in Canada of any community except

for a reserve. These people are determined to make a contribution to this

Province. They are doing everything they possibly can. They are working as hard

as they can, but unfortunately for most of them they are doing it on very small

wages.

Mr. Speaker, a cloud has moved in over Bell Island this week.

As Pat Craig stated publicly the other night and again in the number of meetings

that we held the other day, rather then just simply saying there is a cloud

moving over Bell Island there is a blanket that has been pulled over Bell Island

as of today. There is a darkness moving in that they have said and said publicly

very well over the last number of days, a cloud similar to the one that came

over Bell Island in 1966.

Mr. Speaker, I want to pay tribute to the users committee and

indeed the council who have tried diligently over this past week to do

everything that they possibly can to put forward a case that they believe has

the merit of asking government to look and indeed to deal with the residents of

Bell Island in a different manner than has been dealt with in other places. The

biggest problem the people of Bell Island have is that they look at the

increases that they are receiving on their fares as compared to other areas.

They are not suggesting that the fares should not go up, indeed they have done

just the opposite. They have said that they are willing to accept a fare

increase. They look at, as of today or as of yesterday, a person travelling back

and forth to Fogo Island made that run for approximately $9.50, 13 kilometres.

There is no doubt that a person going to Bell Island was doing it for $3.50 but

it was still only 5 kilometres. Today the person goes to Fogo at a cost of

$12.00. They have gone up by approximately $1.50 to $2.00. A person to Bell

Island now goes to $9.00 and they just cannot afford it. They are the only

community on a reasonable basis where the ferry service is an absolute essential

for them to meet the requirements of their families and their requirements in

work.

Mr. Speaker, collectively the council, the users committee

and myself have made a commitment to the people of Bell Island that we will do

everything in our power to effect change in these rates and that indeed, Mr.

Speaker, we will take it, if we have to, all the way to the wall. I made that

commitment to the people the other night on Bell Island and will do it again

today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia

West.

MR. TOBIN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to have a

few words and obviously support the petition, as indeed all of my colleagues

would, on behalf of the people of Bell Island.

Mr. Speaker, I find it interesting that the Member for Mount

Scio -Bell Island just recently introduced a resolution, a private members bill

in this House, that sought for the approval of this House to have consideration

given to have the gulf ferry service between Port aux Basques and North Sydney

an extension of the Trans Canada Highway. Mr. Speaker, I eagerly await, with the

same anticipation, for the Member for Mount Scio - Bell Island to bring forth a

private members resolution to have something done with that brutal attack that

has been imposed upon these people by this government in the past few days.

MR. FLIGHT: Stop playing politics with it.

MR. TOBIN: No, I am not playing politics with it. There

is no politics when a family on Bell Island cannot afford to bring their

children over to a Santa Claus parade. That is not playing politics, that is a

brutal cruel attack upon the people of Bell Island, that is what it is, I say to

the Member for Windsor - Buchans.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TOBIN: Last year the member just stated, it cost

$6.50 for a lady to bring her family over to the Santa Claus parade and this

year she cannot do it because it will cost $18.00. If that is not the Scrooge

who stole Christmas, I don't know what it is, I say to the Member for Windsor -

Buchans. Mr. Speaker, don't you worry about my blood pressure either. I hope it

doesn't get too high with the mess you have the hospitals in.

Mr. Speaker, I too have a district that represents ferry

workers in this Province - have a ferry running in this Province from South East

Bight to Petit Forte. I know what it is to have increases but when I hear

students this morning and yesterday evening standing in this gallery accusing

government, Mr. Speaker, because they are concerned with what has been inflicted

upon them. Their education is being stolen from them, being robbed, being denied

because this government has no compassion, no conscience, Mr. Speaker. They

profess nothing except brutal attacks on everyone who gets in the way in this

Province and it is time that sober, second thought, drain into this Cabinet and

into this government.

Why should the people of Bell Island be crucified by this

government? Why should they not be allowed to continue their education? A young

man here, Mr. Speaker, yesterday, was visibly upset because of what was

happening; he was being denied his right to an education because this

government, in the middle of his year, brought in extra expenses that that

gentleman could not afford.

I don't care what anyone says, what anyone in the government

states, you will never convince me, Mr. Speaker, that this is not the beginning

of the end of Bell Island, and I would suspect one of the first institutions in

this Province that we are going to see close as a result of a resettlement

program, may very well be the vocational school that is on Bell Island, because

people who now go there from this side to make up enough people to attend, will

not be able to afford to go, will not, Mr. Speaker, be able to afford to go,

that's what's taking place in this Province. The people of Bell Island, Mr.

Speaker - and I spoke to a gentleman yesterday, probably the same one the member

made reference to, the Deputy Mayor I am not sure, but I think it probably was -

who told me that the feeling on Bell Island that has hit the people is similar

to when the mines closed.

Mr. Speaker, renewable resource is one thing or a

non-renewable resource is another. What we have, are people who live on Bell

Island, who chose to live on Bell Island as they do on Fogo Island, as they do

on St. Brendan's or Long Island or South East Bight, they are Newfoundlanders

with rights and nobody, nobody, Mr. Speaker, should be allowed to steal that

right; nobody should be allowed to keep the people of Bell Island from their

right to have an education, from a right to live on the ground that their

fathers -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. TOBIN: - their forefathers, Mr. Speaker, slaved to

develop.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member's time is up.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, in conclusion -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. TOBIN: - I would ask the minister to immediately

change that and do something decent for a change.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Transportation.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, what would be the beginning of

the end of Bell Island and the end of Newfoundland and Labrador-

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: What would be the beginning of the end of

Bell Island and Newfoundland and Labrador, is if this government made the same

type of decisions as the former administration. That would be the beginning of

the end of Bell Island. We are faced with a very difficult decision-making time

considering our financial situation.

Each and every minister in this government has the same thing

facing him.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: I would like, as a minister, to be able to

provide free transportation for every citizen living in every isolated community

in this Province; unfortunately, it is financially impossible. We spend an

excess of $12 million annually in operating the ferry systems; we take in even

less than 7 per cent return and even with the increases we will still subsidize

it around 80 per cent, 82 per cent or 83 per cent of the cost of operation.

We understand the feelings and we understand the financial

situation of all the people living in isolated communities; we don't do it by

choice, the same as when the Minister of Health will have to make some major

financial decisions and the Minister of Education and the Minister of Municipal

and Provincial Affairs, it is not something we want to make, but we have to make

some hard decisions for the best interest of the people living in Newfoundland

and Labrador, otherwise, Mr. Speaker, we will be continually making decisions

that will put the Province further in debt and there would be no future for

anybody living in this Province of ours.

So I have a responsibility to try to make the right decisions

for the best interest of all people, putting the least amount of burden on the

people using the services that are being provided to them.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: I do not know. I don't have any magic

answers, and if somebody has another answer... The member opposite just gave me

his enthusiastic speech. If he can make one suggestion where we would find that

money to answer all the questions to our financial problems, I am willing to

listen.

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

Extern.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased again today to stand in my place

and present a petition, the same petition that I presented yesterday, the same

petition the member -

AN HON. MEMBER: Mr. Speaker, he cannot present the same

petition.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. J. BYRNE: Not the same petition, the same type of

petition.

This petition is here, the one I presented yesterday - it is

the same type. Don't try to be smart, I say to the -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HEWLETT: One hundred and sixteen extra names.

MR. J. BYRNE: One hundred and sixteen names on it; the

one yesterday had ninety-nine names, the same type of petition, the same

petition as the Member for Mount Scio - Bell Island presented this morning.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier stood in his place this morning and

answered a question that I addressed to the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation, trying to muzzle the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation again. And he was trying to rationalize the ferry rate increases

on Bell Island, those drastic increases to the people of Bell Island. He could

not justify it. All the rationalizing in the world cannot make something like

that right.

He mentioned that the committee from Bell Island met with him

yesterday - after he was forced to meet with them - and that the committee was

quite reasonable; the words he used were `quite reasonable'. The only problem

here is that the government is not being reasonable. The committee was expecting

an increase of possibly 30 per cent. That is not too bad, I suppose. In a time

of cutbacks, a time of salary freezes, a time of people being laid off, a 30 per

cent increase, I think, is more than reasonable, but what this government is

coming up with is anywhere from 150 per cent to 400 per cent, rate increases,

different rates in Newfoundland and Labrador.

The public yesterday, there was a group of people out here

yesterday, maybe 300 to 400 people, and they were here from 1:30 p.m. to 5:00

p.m. or 6:00 p.m. There were a few people who came out -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: It is right here.

There were a few people yesterday, at 4:25 p.m. -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: If you want to speak, take your time and

get up and speak to the petition.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. J. BYRNE: Can you muzzle that man over there, Mr.

Speaker?

At 4:25 p.m. yesterday, people left this lobby, went outside

to have a smoke, and they had orders from on high not to re-admit those people

in here - the doors locked again to the public of this Province, just the same

as the doors were locked to the people with disabilities a few weeks ago. Is

that, or is it not, intimidation? That is the tactic of this government,

downright intimidation.

The Premier yesterday left here, went out, and ignored the

public out there who wanted to speak with him. He went out and passed right by

them, ignored them, but worse than that - I will tell you now the contempt that

man has for his own caucus members. The Member for Mount Scio - Bell Island

asked that man, asked the Premier of this Province, to come and speak to the

people from Bell Island yesterday. Did he? No, he did not. He refused the

request of the Member for Mount Scio - Bell Island and passed right by the

public and went on the elevator and up to the eighth floor - that is the

contempt.

MR. REID: When did they meet earlier?

MR. J. BYRNE: He met the committee, but the public were

out there. There were 200 or 300 people. If he were on the campaign trail, he

wouldn't turn down the opportunity to meet 200 or 300 people, I say to the

Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. J. BYRNE: That, to me, demonstrates the arrogance of

that Premier and the arrogance of this government. They are not listening to the

public. The people of Bell Island cannot afford those increases. When is that

going to sink in?

We have students here in the gallery again this morning, and

MR. SHELLEY: They should be in school.

MR. J. BYRNE: They should be in school. They were here

yesterday and they probably should have been in school. I agree with the Member

for Baie Verte - White Bay. They are here trying to support themselves and help

support the people of Bell Island.

I have to say something here now that just popped into my

mind when we talk about the students. The Premier yesterday met, from what I can

gather, with a Democracy class when all of this was going on and the public were

out there. Now, what a joke, Mr. Speaker! If there were anyone to meet with the

Premier, whose tactics are: My way or no way, do as I say, nothing else -

nothing else matters to the Premier of this Province. He says now, he is going

to bring it up in Cabinet today and he is going to try to be reasonable. The

only reasonable thing that can come out of that meeting today is if these rates

are rolled back to no more than a 30 per cent increase, that some of the other

islands are receiving.

The Minister of Works, Services and Transportation talks

about other islands in this Province, but he didn't mention the number of daily

commuters, Mr. Speaker, who travel on the ferry back and forth to Bell Island

versus those other islands, the numbers of people who come back and forth to go

to schools, to go and do their grocery shopping, to go to work every day. We

have people coming over here from that island, who are probably making the

minimum wage, and if you are going to take anywhere from $1,000 to $1,500 from

someone who is earning probably $10,000 or $15,000 a year, that is just not

right. It is way out of whack, and there is nothing the Premier can say -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. J. BYRNE: - there is nothing the Minister of Works,

Services and Transportation can say to rationalize that, or to justify it. In

closing, Mr. Speaker, I would again request them to reduce that rate increase to

no more than 30 per cent.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Scio - Bell

Island.

MR. WALSH: Mr. Speaker, I stand in support of the

petition presented this morning by my hon. colleague, the Member for St. John's

East Extern. I reiterate what I said in my earlier comments. The devastation

that is going to hit Bell Island effective this morning is more than the people

of Bell Island can handle and more than they deserve. I repeat again, that a

cloud has been hauled over Bell Island this morning, no different from what was

hauled over Bell Island in 1966.

There was a reference here this morning in terms of the fact

that there are students in the gallery. My heart goes out to those students who

yesterday paid $5 a week in order to complete their education, and today face

$25-plus per week. They can't afford it. In mid-stream to get caught with that

kind of a hit is more than they can handle.

Mr. Speaker, also when we talk in terms of students, the

number of students who come from Bell Island on a regular basis in terms of

using the buses to come over to take advantage of the things that are here,

whether it is the Arts and Culture Centre, or skating, or to participate and

view the museums and everything here - the schools can no longer afford to pay

the rates that they will now have to face.

The people of Bell Island are having the most difficulty with

the fact that no matter how you equate the increases, no matter how you look at

the way the increases were calculated, the bottom line is, at the end of the

day, the other people living on other islands in Newfoundland went up on an

average of 30 per cent. The people of Bell Island have seen increases from 157

per cent to over 400 per cent. They just can't afford it. In support of the

petition and in support of the people of Bell Island, we collectively have to do

what we can to ensure that those rates are brought back to within a reasonable

rate that the people themselves can agree with and can live with. Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

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

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

I want to support the petition presented by my colleague, the

Member for St. John's East Extern. It is a very serious matter, as was

demonstrated yesterday and again today by the people of Bell Island. They are

very determined in their resolve and their spirit to have government reverse its

decision with the increase in ferry rates.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I don't know if members or ministers

realize that what we are talking about here is really the lifeline to Bell

Island when we are talking about its ferry service. That is what we are talking

about. Every day, people commute - as the Member for St. John's East Extern and

other members have said this morning - to work, for education, for health care,

for sports and recreation. That is what we are talking about here. We are

talking about the demise of a community, a community that has been in existence

for decades, and worked hard and contributed to the economy of this Province

when other communities in this Province were not as fortunate to have a resource

and to contribute to the provincial economy as Bell Island was capable of doing

because of its resource and because of the hard work of its people. Now, that is

what we are talking about here.

Times have changed. Bell Island is not quite as fortunate

today, but so what? Bell Islanders have paid their dues throughout the years in

contributing to the provincial economy and they are not asking for anything

special here, Mr. Speaker, they are asking to be treated fairly. They are asking

to be treated fairly by this government, by this Premier, by this Minister of

Works, Services and Transportation.

Do the ministers of this government realize what they are

doing to that community today? Do they realize they are affecting their

educational system their schools? Do they realize that it is going to impact on

their arena and their sports programs and minor hockey, that their teams won't

be able to afford to come over here for competition and other teams will not be

able to afford to go back, Mr. Speaker? Do they realize what the impact of that

is going to mean on their arena? Do they realize what it is going to mean to the

business community, what's left of it on Bell Island, or do they realize

anything?

The real question that the people of Bell Island and other

people in this Province are asking today is: Does this government realize or do

they care about people? That's what they are asking, Mr. Speaker, they are not

asking for anything special. They are asking to be treated fairly so that they

can pursue education, so that they can maintain their employment and as a

speaker said yesterday and today, many of those people who commute daily to go

to work are not making ministers' salaries, they are not making MHAs' salaries,

they are not making doctors' salaries, they are making just enough to stay alive

and to keep food on the table, Mr. Speaker, and if they are going to be expected

to pay this increase, they are not going to be able to afford to commute to go

to work, that's the problem.

Many of them are not going to be able to afford to commute to

go to work if they are going to be in a net loss situation, so what's that going

to do to the government's bottom line, Mr. Speaker? It is going to increase the

financial burden on this very Province. How can you attack people who want to be

productive, who want to go to work? And then you will hear people saying one of

these days, that half the problem with Newfoundlanders is they don't want to go

to work anyway, when you have a government that's willing today to take a

decision and impose hardship on those people that will deter them from coming to

work, Mr. Speaker. That's what we are facing here. We are talking about really

cutting the umbilical cord of the people of Bell Island, it's their only

lifeline, the ferry. And to hear the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation and other ministers compare them to other services, we are not

talking apples and apples, Mr. Speaker, we are talking two different situations.

Most of these people commute daily; they don't commute once a

week or every two weeks or once a month, or once every three months, they have

to commute daily, and it is a tremendous expense on them. And put it to any of

us in this House, I say to members, if you look at the situation, if our

benefits and wages weren't increased as much as their ferry rates are increased,

we would be screeching blue murder in this House of Assembly. We would screech

blue murder, we wouldn't tolerate it, and it is the same effect, Mr. Speaker,

and the sooner this government realizes it the better.

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend those who have presented the

petitions, commend those who have supported the petitions, commend the people of

Bell Island, I say, for standing up for what is yours - your rights. I tell you,

we need to see more of it in this Province. Because that's what has happened to

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians today, their backs have been broken, because

they have been continuously put down by this Administration, pushed into the

ground. But I think what we saw yesterday and today is going to be a spark, a

trigger point for the people of this Province, that they are not going to take

any more from this Administration when they try to ram things down their

throats. They are going to stand up for what's theirs and what's their rights,

Mr. Speaker.

Before I conclude, Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say what

I observed here this morning between the behaviour of the Minister of Works,

Services and Transportation and the Premier. In my view -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. W. MATTHEWS: - today, the Premier came very close to

announcing a staggered rate increase. He would stagger it over a period of time.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: In concluding, Mr. Speaker, in the final

analysis, these people will pay the increase they have been asked to pay today,

but it will be stretched over a period of time, it will be staggered. And my

other prediction, Mr. Speaker - if I could be inside the Cabinet room this

morning, I would find that the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation is

very strongly going to oppose that, because what he has done, he feels is right,

and he is not willing to exercise any flexibility whatsoever.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Orders of the Day

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, as we announced yesterday, we

will be asking the House to resolve itself into Committee of the Whole. Before I

do, since I won't be here at noon when we adjourn, I anticipate, let me say that

on Monday, we shall do two things. If we haven't finished the Committee stages

that are here today, we will carry on with them. By my count, there are sixteen

or seventeen Committee stages to be looked at today. If we don't finish those

today we will go back on them on Monday, and if we should get through them today

or Monday, we will do with Order 29, the Executive Council Act. That will be the

next substantive second reading.

The other point I will make is that the House will not be

asked to sit on Monday evening. I understand some members have a commitment for

Monday evening. Well, we will do what we can to accommodate them. The House will

not sit beyond 5:00 p.m. on Monday evening. But given the fact that we have only

three weeks left before Christmas, members would be well-advised, I think, to

anticipate we may have to sit a few late evenings. It depends on how members

approach it. I don't want to sit late evenings. If can do our work without late

sittings, then we shall not have late sittings, but if we do need late sittings,

we shall have to do them. As Mr. Mackenzie King once said, if I may paraphrase,

`late sittings if necessary but not necessarily late sittings.'

With that said, Mr. Speaker, would you please move the House

into Committee?

On motion, that the House resolve itself into Committee of

the Whole, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

MR. CHAIRMAN (Penney): Order, please!

Is it the understanding of the Chair that we are now going to

Bill No. 9?

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Chairman, we will start, please, with

Order No. 3 and let's take her as she comes.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order No. 3, Bill No. 9, "An Act To Amend

The Hospital And Nursing Home Association Act."

The hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The bill is dealing basically with a name change but I think

a lot of other implications and important things need to be addressed in terms

of health care in this Province. We have an ailing health care system in the

Province.

MR. L. MATTHEWS: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Well, if nothing were ailing and there were

no sick, we wouldn't need a health care system, would we? So it must be ailing.

Isn't that the reason for a health care system because something ails people?

What ails the minister today? Does he think we have Utopia out there in the

Province? We have people waiting for months and months trying to get

appointments. We have people on stretchers in the emergency departments, we have

closing down and laying off of hospital front-line employees and the minister

thinks we have a grandiose health care system in the Province. What world is the

minister living in? You could go and come back in an hours time and I still

could be talking about the problems in our health care system.

We have a minister whose department announced back in June a

consolidation of hospitals here in the city by 1998. Now, we have a change in

agenda again. The financial stress we are in - we are asked to come up with $27

million out of $60 million in health care cuts. I don't think that is

appropriate. That is almost 50 per cent of the cuts that are coming out of the

Department of Health, 50 per cent almost. Forty-five percent of the cuts are

being asked to come out of the Department of Health in the $60 million smoke and

mirrors Budget that we were given last Spring. And just to get to that, we took

money on the ferry service - the South Coast, we gobbled it up and used that, it

is not there anymore. They haven't done a very good job of managing it. The

government goes out and spends $26 million in Special Warrants and then comes

back and looks for $27 million from health care. Well, that $27 million and the

$26 million in Special Warrants would take care of what they are looking for in

health care.

We have been told, and I am looking forward to hearing this

month, in the very near future - the minister stated back earlier this year, and

in the House, I believe, in October - if not certainly in the public record, I

do have information in my office regarding it - he said that by the end of this

year, by this Fall, we should have the plan. I think the minister said, we

should have the plan in December for the reorganization of health care here in

St. John's. The minister indicated that we were going to consolidate the Janeway

Hospital - he made reference - he said we are going to share operating room

space, we are going to share diagnostic equipment, we are going to throw kids in

with adults in health care, and I don't think that is acceptable, because this

Province was a signatory, along with the Federal Government, and agreed with the

United Nations, the principle of first call, that kids shall have the first call

or the rights on resources and so on used in health care. I think it was very

important.

We have waiting lists. Take cardiac surgery, for example. I

have spoken with a dozen people in the last month who are waiting for up to a

year, in some instances, for elective cardiac surgery, and in this Province you

will never obtain elective cardiac surgery until you become urgent. When you

become urgent, or an emergency case, it is then you get the surgery. Then it is

too late. In fact, cardiologists will tell you, and people in the particular

specialty area, that once a person waits for six months to get cardiac surgery,

his chance of returning to work again is almost nil. Nobody gets back to work

after waiting six months. His problem has deteriorated so much that he can never

go back and lead a productive working life again.

I think we have to start looking at, and putting more

emphasis on, prevention and promotion. It is very important that we have

prevention and promotion take the lead. We will never be able to deal with every

single problem in our health care system. We cannot get enough dollars to deal

with every health problem the way we would like to, but we can get enough

dollars for prevention, and it is the prevention and promotion and education

aspects that are very important. That is why I hope that in the minister's next

year's budget, we will see a substantial increase in Community Health Boards

allocation in the budget, one that will enable these boards to go out and

promote the most important and cost-efficient thing within our health care

system, and that is prevention.

We need intervention processes. We have seen it in children's

mental health - and I asked the minister here in the House with reference to the

number of child psychiatrists, with 500 people on a waiting list to be assessed,

and other people waiting for treatment processes for mental health. If we had

better intervention systems, education within the school system, better

structures within our social services system or the health system generally, we

wouldn't be having all those problems with emotionally disturbed kids who need

the attention of specialists in the field today. So I think it is important that

we look at the most cost-efficient methods of dealing with our problems, and the

most cost-efficient method in dealing with any problem, whatever department we

are dealing with, is prevention, whether it be dealing with highway accidents,

or dealing with problems of sickness, illness. In any specific department,

whether it be Works, Services and Transportation, road maintenance or whatever,

the most effective method in any area is the prevention aspect, and it applies

no more appropriately than it would in health care. The old adage is, `An ounce

of prevention is worth a pound of cure', and that is what we need to do today.

That is why I am looking forward, I say to the minister, when the Budget comes

down in March, to seeing those Community Health Boards out there being given

some monies to work with so we can accelerate the prevention and promotion

programs.

What we have seen in the past few years is reductions. I have

outlined it personally, myself, a rare occasion, and I think it is important,

and that is part of what Community Health Boards do. Their job is to get out and

encourage proper lifestyles, proper nutrition, they have health fairs promoting

public awareness, to have them better informed. I know today many people are

better informed about health care and what they should be doing, and there has

been a tremendous increase over the past ten or fifteen years, but as I said

before - the minister probably wasn't paying attention - we will never get

enough dollars in our system to look after every single illness that is out

there when we want to. There is not enough money possible to do it. So what do

we do? We allocate resources to prevent it so we don't have as many problems out

there.

As with machinery, it works the same way. The human body in

our system is a machine that needs to be maintained and looked after.

AN HON. MEMBER: My knees.

MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, the Minister of Employment and Labour

Relations' knees, for instance. I said to him, I'm not sure he is going to get

another term out of those knees. I'm not sure whether he can do the

door-knocking for another few weeks. I don't think so. He will need to have a

different strategy in his next campaign. He will have to go to a more

centralized location and get on the telephone. He is pretty good at that. That

might be more effective. I'm not sure if that is going to be good for his mental

health either. He might need some medical attention. Maybe he might just quit

and use the prevention process which might be more effective and it might get

the result.

But I say to the minister again before I conclude, that in

the allocation of the Budget when it comes down in March, 1996, we want to see

more money in the community health budgets. We have set up Community Health

Boards around this Province. Some are in full mode, others are in the

transitional stage, but we must have the transfer of funds. Because if we keep

pumping every single dollar into acute care and more efficient acute care, or

taking dollars out of health care, as we did this year, we are never going to

get the prevention-promotion aspect.

By the way, we took money out of health care this year. There

is $13 million less in this Province this year being spent on health in the

Health budget than there was last year. The Budget shows an increase of about

$13 million, but they took the Enriched Needs Program from Social Services and

put it into Health, and there is $20 million being used there. We are spending

fewer dollars allocated to health care in this Province than we did last year

when other budgets have increased and expenditures in this Province have gone

up.

We have not given the proportionate amount. Health care has

become a smaller chunk of the Budget, not by a big margin, but it is reduced,

which means there are shifting priorities in the government. They put less

dollars into health. So let's see next year that we come back and put more into

the Community Health Boards where we can carry out that prevention and promotion

aspect on a more efficient basis.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Chair has recognized the Minister of

Health.

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Does somebody else want to speak?

Because I was going to -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. CHAIRMAN: If the Chair could ask for guidance before

- if the minister would take his seat for one moment. Is there an agreement by

all hon. members that we speak for a maximum of ten minutes in debate.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. CHAIRMAN: Per clause? Members can speak as often as

they wish anyway at this stage, but for a maximum of ten minutes?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. CHAIRMAN: It must be pointed out as well, that when

some hon. member asked whether if the minister speaks he closes the debate, that

doesn't happen at this stage.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) clause 1 (inaudible).

MR. CHAIRMAN: We are at clause 1, yes.

The hon. the Minister of Education and Training.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I'm not sure what agreement the

hon. member worked out with our House Leader so I'm prepared to accept the hon.

member's word that you did agree on ten and ten. If there is a misunderstanding

we will deal with it when the House Leader gets back. But I have no reason to

question the hon. member's word, so, if the deal is made we will stick by it.

MR. CHAIRMAN: It is the understanding of the Chair that

during this stage of debate it will be ten and ten.

The Chair has recognized the hon. the Minister of Health.

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Mr. Chairman, I was intending to close

debate, but if somebody else wants to speak on the bill, then I am prepared to

defer.

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

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Mr. Chairman, I understood that the

minister was rising to speak to clause 1.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I know that, but I'm just trying to get

the situation cleared up now so we can make some progress. If no one rises on a

particular clause, then it will be carried and we will go to the next clause.

MR. CHAIRMAN: That is correct.

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Hospital And Nursing Home

Association Act." (Bill No. 9)

Motion, that the Committee report having passed the bill

without amendment, carried.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order 4, Bill No. 2, "An Act To Amend The

Social Workers Association Act." That is the understanding of the Chair that we

are going down in the order that is listed on the Order Paper. Very well.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, I know that the minister is not

here but I will have a few words on it.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia

West.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding that this

bill is

an act whereby government employees who have been practising social work

for at least two years and have paid the required fee for registration of social

workers and to practice social work in the Province - It is my understanding

what that means, what it does, is that it gives the right to social workers who

are in that situation but who are not government employees to be able to buy

into the registered social work program, that is my understanding of it. That

being the case, Mr. Chairman, we have stated our position to say that practising

social work in this Province these days is not very easy and it is becoming more

and more difficult as the days go on. Social workers in this Province, Mr.

Chairman, are operating today under a tremendous amount of stress and stress has

been applied even more because of the proposed cutbacks that this government is

trying to implement.

There are many positions in the public service today - social

workers in the public service today that are of a temporary nature, that are

temporary positions. Mr. Chairman, I only hope that if government decides to put

the axe to temporary positions in this Province that the social workers in this

Province are not included. It is also difficult today to realize the thinking

and the logic of government in terms of the closing out of various social work

offices in this Province. I am convinced, whenever the Minister of Finance makes

his announcement in this House that we are going to see drastic changes in how

social services are delivered. I would be surprised if we don't see offices in

this Province close. The Minister of Social Services is coming now, Mr.

Chairman.

AN HON. MEMBER: Better for John to speak to us, he

doesn't know what he is talking about.

MR. TOBIN: I would say to the Minister of Works, Services

and Transportation that I probably do know more about it but what I recognized

here this morning, in what my friend from Grand Bank said when he spoke to the

resolution, is that the Premier thought he knew more about the situation on Bell

Island then the minister did as well because he certainly has jumped over the

minister's head, no doubt about that. He went to the wall yesterday, the

minister did, and this morning, Mr. Chairman, the Premier told the House before

he told the minister.

Mr. Chairman, I would say to the Minister of Social Services

that she be very careful in terms of what the Minister of Finance is going to do

to her department, that she be very cautious, that she not be allowed to

bulldoze social work offices in this Province to the ground, that temporary

social workers in this Province, if they are not going to be made permanent,

then for heaven's sake don't lay them off, I would say to the minister. Because

the people of this Province, and with this marvellous, as the Premier said, UI

program that is about to be announced, with this marvellous program that we are

going to see, as the Premier said on CBC radio yesterday morning, I would say

that what we are going to see is a marvellous group of people having to line up

at social services' offices that never lined up there before.

Marvellous, he said. I would say to the Minister of Social

Services that she should be very careful when she is participating around the

Cabinet table in these Budget cuts that she look to the future, that she look to

what Mr. Axworthy is going to do to this Province this afternoon. The people of

this Province I would suspect will not consider the UI system as marvellous.

They will not share the Premier's vision, they will not share his dreams and

aspirations, to see the UI system in this Province gutted. It will not be

marvellous.

Every Newfoundlander should become aware of what the Premier

of this Province said regarding the slashing and chopping and cutting and

poisoning of the UI program in this Province by his federal Liberal buddies, as

only Liberals could do it. Do everything they sat for in the red book, and then

gut it afterwards. I don't know. The senior Minister of Employment and Labour

Relations is leaving, is going through the door.

AN HON. MEMBER: I will be (inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: You will. The Premier doesn't send the

Minister of Employment and Labour Relations anywhere without having the senior

minister with him.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Yes he is.

AN HON. MEMBER: He certainly is.

MR. TOBIN: Very senior minister.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: What's that? Mr. Chairman, I would suspect

that if you were to judge him with the Minister of Justice he would be

considered good. But if you were to judge him with the Minister of Social

Services you wouldn't consider him good.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) member.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, I would say to the Minister of

Justice that I will retract my statement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, for a moment I thought I was

back in my district.

I would say to the Minister of Social Services that she

should be very careful as to this Axworthy vision for Canadians, and in

particular Newfoundlanders. Because everything that I've heard, and everything

that I've seen - and I know that yesterday evening all of the head human

resources people were brought in and programmed, or briefed, on what the cuts

were. I know that. I have a fair idea of what is coming. If what I've been told

is coming down there it is going to have very serious implications for her

department. Really serious.

Because there are people today who are working on the minimum

wage in this Province and who get very small UI. They are talking about a $300

million job creation program that the human resources officers are now going

around this Province going to councils and other groups and asking: Can you come

up with some ideas that we can create jobs? But you will have absolutely nothing

to do with approving them. That will be done by the federal member of

parliament. If the federal member of parliament has the same amount and shares

the same fairness and balance in allocating this funding as he did in his input

into the infrastructure program, then we are in for big trouble.

There are going to be a lot of people in this Province having

to line up at the welfare office one of these days, having to line up for social

assistance which is not what they have ever dreamed of. Do you go in and feel,

Mr. Chairman, betrayed by a Liberal Party, by a party that's supposed to be

moderate, considerate, a party that is supposed to be the centre of the road but

I would suggest that what we have in Ottawa today, is the most Conservative

Party, the most righteous party that we have ever seen in the history of this

Province.

I also had the opportunity last night to watch Faceoff. I

don't know if any members opposite watched Faceoff last night but George Baker

was on and another Liberal member from Mississauga, and if anybody in this

Province, if anybody in this country watched that last night, they would have to

ask today: What is the philosophy of the Liberal Party? What do they stand for?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: What's that?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, I stand for fair and just

treatment of all citizens in this Province, that's what I stand for, I say to

the Member for St. John's West, fair and just -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Centre, St. John's Centre, yes Mr. Chairman.

Well, yes, I was going to say the Member for St. John's West but he doesn't know

much about fares but at that stage in the game, I was going to refer to the

Member for St. John's South, so I apologize to the Member for St. John's West.

Mr. Chairman, the Member for St. John's South, the Minister

of Employment and Labour Relations, who, every day knows nothing; well I am

going to tell you what I think is a sad reflection, when he has to sit down with

his caucus and be briefed on what's in this program, not being briefed before,

when he got to be a member of the caucus that is briefed in total, Mr. Chairman,

there is something serious happening here. We see the Minister of Works,

Services and Transportation today being undermined by the Premier and the

Minister of Employment and Labour Relations was briefed about what's coming down

tomorrow in front of the entire caucus by the Premier of this Province, Mr.

Chairman, asking questions, didn't know what was going on. That's my

understanding of it, but I would say to the Minister of Social Services, that

she not close any offices in this Province and that she not lay off any social

workers in this Province, because when that comes home to roost, it is going to

hit and hit in a big way.

It is going to take a competent minister to be able to deal

with these cutbacks. She is going to have to answer questions in this House as

it relates to how it is going to affect her department and she is not going to

be able to do that by standing up and saying that I will take the situation

under advisement. She is going to have to do it by being able to demonstrate her

authority as a Minister of Social Services and as a member of Cabinet. She is

going to have to do it, Mr. Chairman, by being able to stand up in Cabinet to

the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board and to others and make sure that the

social workers in this Province receive more support not less, and there is only

one way to do that and that is to tell the Premier and the Minister of Finance

and Treasury Board that you are not going to have cuts to your staff in this

Province because if you do, if you do, the people who depend on the Department

of Social Services are going to be in big, big trouble.

It will not, I emphasize again, Mr. Chairman, it will not be

a marvellous program and I don't know how the Member for Port au Port or how the

Member for St. George's or the Member for Port de Grave or any other member can

go out and tell the people that this program -

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

MR. TOBIN: - that Axworthy (inaudible) is a marvellous

program.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. TOBIN: By leave, Mr. Chairman?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, I would say to

the minister that if this -

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. member has not received leave.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I just want to speak briefly on this bill in Committee stage.

The changes that are being made are acceptable, Mr. Chairman, because they

grandfather in people who worked in non-governmental agencies as social workers,

similar, and treating them the same as people who worked for government as

social workers, giving them an opportunity to be a member of the Social Work

Association and to be, from the public's point of view, regulated by them for

purposes of discipline, continuing education, and the other requirements of

being a member of a professional association, so I support the changes.

I had some concerns the last time about the wording of the

amendment, and how it would come into effect in terms of timing because of the

retroactive nature of it, but I have been satisfied, through discussions with

the Clerk, with legal officers of the House, that the

interpretation of the

legislation would be satisfactory. So I do support the change and the amendment

to the Social Workers Act. What it will do is, for the first time, it will place

all social workers in this Province in an association, a professional

association controlled by themselves, one of the self-governing professions. I

think it is a very significant step for the professionalization of social work

in this Province, and it is one that is long overdue, I say to hon. members and

to the minister.

We see continuously problems arising as a result of a

practice of social work that has been, in the past, haphazard, perhaps a lack of

vigilance in some cases, a lack of proper procedures in others, a lack of

follow-up on problems that are raised with the Department of Social Services,

with the minister, with officials of the department on some occasions, and not

only in this Province, but in other provinces throughout Canada. There has been

a growing awareness of the devastation that can be caused to individuals and to

families, and to children in particular, by a social work system that doesn't

address their needs.

The Province of British Columbia, in a recent report in the

last number of days, has only underlined the fact that this is not a problem

solely in this Province, it is a problem of which throughout the country

inadequacies in a social services field give rise to serious and often tragic

consequences for individuals. The case in British Columbia of a young boy who

was killed by a parent, and the concerns that the government agencies did not

put the child first, arising out of a whole history of what happened in British

Columbia, it is not a -

This is one thing I say to the minister: When we raise

problems about social services, and about the adequacy of the social services

system, it is not necessarily a criticism of the minister or of the government.

Sometimes these problems are systemic and they are endemic to the system. When

we criticize the government, though, we criticize the government for the

response when these problems are raised, and what do they do, and what do they

not do. That is when the government is criticized, not because the problems

exist, because sometimes they were there long before the current minister was in

power. But we do have very serious circumstances, and the further

professionalization of social work and social work practice in this Province by

this bill is a very welcome move.

We have seen only in the last twenty years a degree in social

work at this University. In the early 1970s, the Bachelor of Social Work was

brought in. Prior to that, the training was at the BA level with a major in

social work. We now have a Ph.D. program in social work at Memorial University,

so we have gone, in twenty years, or twenty-five years, I guess, from having a

BSW program, and we had an MSW program, and now we have a doctoral program in

social work at Memorial University. So, there have been great strides in the

last twenty-five years in the professionalization of social work.

MR. CRANE: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: The Member for Harbour Grace is glad to see

it, and so am I.

We see in this legislation that all people who have been in

the practice of social work in permanent positions are now brought under the

umbrella of the Newfoundland Association of Social Workers who, in addition to

having them recognized as registered social workers, would also have control in

the sense of professional discipline procedures, complaints procedures,

continuing education procedures, and other factors that give the professional -

and ethical standards are being developed, standards of practice, and various

other professional development activities that can only improve the quality of

social work service in this Province.

As the previous speaker has said, we have a great need in

this Province, and we are going to have a greater need, with the impact of the

UI changes which are going to impact on this Province in a tremendous and

devastating way. The minister is going to have her hands full when the increases

in social assistance caseload is going to increase. When the social problems

that result from lower income families starts to have an impact on families and

children, the minister is going to have her hands full.

I would be a lot happier, Mr. Chairman, if this government,

instead of welcoming these changes, were fighting against them and insisting

that the problem must not be downloaded to the Province, downloaded to the

individual families, downloaded to the Minister of Social Services, and instead,

they should be fighting for an economic system that recognizes the need and the

right of every family and every person to have a job and have an opportunity in

this very wealthy country.

I would rather see that than have to be saying that the

Minister of Social Services is going to have her hands full. Because the

problems that are being created are problems that are not necessary, any more

than it is necessary for this government to be further pushing down the people

of Bell Island by forcing up their costs of getting to work, of getting to

school, of getting an education, of improving their lot. That is the kind of

country we need to have, with something that is building people up, not shoving

them down and pushing them into the ground.

Mr. Chairman, in the meantime, this legislation is positive.

I support it, I support the changes, and I would commend its passage.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am pleased today to stand and say a few words on Bill No.

2, "An Act To Amend The Social Workers Association Act".

We agree with what is coming forward in this act which gives

the right to social workers who are not within government, and who are employed

for at least two years as social workers in the Province, and who pay the

necessary fees, to be part of the Social Workers Association. We don't see any

problem with the piece of legislation that is being brought forward. It creates

equitable standards for all social workers throughout the Province and gives

everybody a fair chance at being employed.

As the Member for St. John's East and the Member for Burin -

Placentia West touched on a few moments ago, and I would like to just reiterate

some of their statements but make my own comments on them, what is going to

happen in this Province over the next couple of years in relation to social

services, I think, demands that we look at social services maybe in a different

light.

Because with the downturn in our fishery and the economic

problems throughout our Province now, one can see an increase in the number of

people who are turning to social assistance. I have several cases in my own

district in which people are turning to social assistance for the first time in

their lives. It is very unsettling to go into a home where a gentleman who has

been involved with the fishing industry, or some other industry in the Province,

to see that the opportunities for work, the opportunities for employment to make

a living for himself and his family are not there in a lot of cases any more,

and that, through no fault of his own, he has to turn and try to get some

assistance from social services.

I say to the minister, when she is reviewing the offices

throughout the Province, as she talked about earlier here in the House, she

should take the advice of a former Minister of Social Services, my colleague,

the Member for Burin - Placentia West, and not close offices in this Province

and cause further hardship and pain to the people who are turning to social

assistance now. I think, if ever there was a necessity to increase the level of

social assistance in this Province, the time is now, due to the fact of the

massive changes that are evolving because of the economic strife in which we

find ourselves.

Some time later today there are going to be some major

changes to the UI system in this Province and in this country. Some time around

1:00 p.m. today, I believe, the announcement is going to be made by Minister

Axworthy in Ottawa that I believe will send shock waves across this Province,

not only in my district of St. Mary's -The Capes, but indeed, throughout the

Province. The changes that are forthcoming to the UI system will not only send

shock waves, Mr. Chairman, but will cause immense hardship and immense suffering

to many, many people who are finding themselves, in this Province now, on the

brink.

We have found that the increases that are forthcoming in UI

are going to increase the number of weeks that a person will need to be able to

qualify for UI and it will decrease the amount of time a person can draw.

Therefore, the end result will be, Mr. Chairman, that a lot of people who are

not on social services assistance will have to turn to Social Services, in a lot

of cases, for the first time in their lives, due to the lack of employment

opportunities that they are seeking, Mr. Chairman - not only due to the

closedown of the fishery or the problems that we face in the fishery, but indeed

that we face in the whole economy as it relates to work. I believe that these

people will go to social assistance to find that we have a lower level of what

has been available in the past and that this government is not taking the

problems that we have and the people who are turning to social assistance as

seriously as I think they should be doing.

We are in tough economic times, and as many ministers stand

in their places and say, we have some tough decisions to make. I agree 100 per

cent that there are problems with some overspending in different parts of

government that can be brought under control. Indeed, there is a problem when a

man and wife with two children are finding that their fridge is empty, Christmas

is coming on and they don't have things for Christmas to give to their children.

These people, through no fault of their own, have no opportunity to find work in

this Province. I say, the responsibility for that rests, not completely with the

members opposite, but indeed, the members opposite and the Government of

Newfoundland who now play a major role in the economic crisis in which many

families and many individuals are finding themselves in this Province.

Mr. Chairman, I was out in my district just a few short weeks

ago and I was talking to some people out there, teachers, as a matter of fact. I

attended a graduation there, during which time I had the opportunity to discuss

some problems with the teachers. A major concern that the teachers brought to my

attention at that graduation was the fact that there seems to be some social

problems and some problems that are being brought forward into the classroom by

students. I think, according to what the teachers are saying, the problems that

they see with some students in the classroom now are based on the economic

problems that their parents are finding themselves in back at home. I think that

this goes - as we have heard time and time again, the stress that is being

placed on parents in the Province, the financial stress, is now affecting the

children who are going to school every day and looking across at a desk in the

next aisle, where another student has a new pair of sneakers, another student

has a new coat or another student has something that that child knows in his own

heart and soul, he may never have. And this, Mr. Chairman, has to play on a

child's mind as much as it plays on the parent's mind. It must be causing some

irreparable damage, I say to members opposite, and indeed, to members on my own

side.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: I am talking about social services, Mr.

Chairman. I am talking about the problems that we are facing in this Province

due to the cold, callous attitude of this government with respect to social

services and the problems that they are causing to the people of this Province.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) is irrelevant.

MR. MANNING: I say, what is relevant, Mr. Chairman, is

definitely not the Minister of Education when it comes to debates on problems

that we are facing in this Province. I would say that if the minister were

paying attention, he would answer his calls from Roddickton, calls that I am

receiving from his district.

Mr. Chairman, I bring forward the concerns of people of, not

only my district, but indeed, the people of the Province, as it relates to the

many people in this Province who, through no fault of their own, have to turn to

Social Services. Many are finding the door shut, Mr. Chairman, because of the

problems that we are facing with fiscal restraint. Many are finding that their

needs are not being satisfied as it relates to social services, and I believe

that we have an important role here, we have a role to play, this government has

a role to play, in providing more social workers at this present time. More

social workers should be going into the field to address the concerns that we

have, not as they relate only to social assistance, as we talk about here in the

bill, increasing the opportunity for social workers to find employment. I say

that we need more social workers in this Province, and we need more social

workers out in the field, dealing with not only financial situations, but indeed

dealing with the problems that people are finding within their lives.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: I say to the Minister of Employment,

shouting out `we need more money', don't mumble under your breath. Talk out loud

if you are going to make a comment. Yes, we need more money. We could have used

the $10 million that you wasted on trying to privatize Newfoundland Hydro, I say

to the minister. We could have put that in there. We could have used the $21

million or $22 million that you gave away on a Trans-City deal, and the Minister

of Education was well part of that clique that gave away the $20 million to $30

million on the Trans-City deal, I say to the minister. There is money available

for the people who are turning to social assistance in this Province, but this

government refuses to put it in that bag. They intend to spread it around to

their buddies and friends everywhere else.

I fully admit, I say to the Minister of Education, that there

was waste on this side also, but the time has come when I think all of us should

start to realize that the time for waste and the time for throwing around

millions of dollars to unnecessary causes such as the Trans-City deal, such as

Hydro, such as Sprung, I say to the Minister of Education - such as Sprung - I

have no problem admitting that, but the time has come in this Province now, if

there ever was a time before, for people to start realizing that people are

turning to social assistance for the first time in their lives, and they are

getting a cold, callous, uncaring attitude from this government. That is the

problem that we have in this Province.

I say that the UI changes that are going to be announced in

the next few hours in this country are going to cause major problems in this

Province, and the Premier gets up and says he cannot do anything about it. I

realize that the Premier may not be able to do anything about it, but he

certainly can fight it, and he can certainly get up and let himself be heard,

and the effect that the UI changes are going to have on this Province. Do you

know what the UI changes are going to do? They are going to put more people on

social services. They are going to have more people going to the social services

offices in this Province. They are going to have more people looking for social

assistance to get through these tough time.

DR. KITCHEN: A point of order, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre

on a point of order.

DR. KITCHEN: I was under the impression that we were

dealing with Bill 2, "An Act To Amend The Social Workers Association Act". Now,

the member opposite has been talking about unemployment insurance and everything

in the world. Is there some way that he can be made to speak in a relevant

manner on this bill?

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR. SULLIVAN: To the point of order, Mr. Chairman, I

think it is quite relevant. The number of social workers in this Province, I

think, is very relevant to the unemployment rate and how many people are out

there unemployed and need assistance. It is very relevant, I say to the Member

for St. John's Centre, and we need -

AN HON. MEMBER: You are talking about a bill.

MR. SULLIVAN: It is a bill, and it is giving the right to

people who practice social work in this Province to become registered. If they

practice social work, it does not have to be under the authority of this

government. So we need social workers, and at the rate government is going, and

UI rates, we are going to need more. I think it is very relevant.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

To that point of order, I have listened to the comments and

the debate by the hon. Member for St. Mary's - The Capes. My understanding of

the situation, is that he is tying his comments into the social services network

within the Province, and we are debating a bill on the registration of social

workers, which is sort of a general application of social services in this

Province, so there is no point of order. If the member is irrelevant, I will

remind him so.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I certainly do not want to be wasting the time of the House.

I stand here to present a very serious situation that is evolving in this

Province. I stand here to bring to this House the facts. I say, with all

sincerity to the Member for St. John's Centre, there is a serious issue

evolving. He may not see it, he may not realize it, but I do. I deal with it

every day in my district. I deal with a problem of social services; I deal with

a problem of lack of social workers. That is in my district, but I also realize

it is not only in my district that there is a lack of social workers. There is a

lack of social workers in every district in this Province, and we stand up and

in all sincerity we ask the minister to look at increasing the number of social

workers in this Province, and the first thing they come back and say is that

they have no dollars. There is a problem here, because there are plenty of

dollars for everything else, I say in all sincerity.

We support Bill No. 2 in giving the opportunity for people

who are outside government to partake in the Social Workers Association. At the

same time we put forward the concerns of people that have been raised not only

to me but I'm sure to other members in this House on both sides about the lack

of social workers that we have in this Province. The lack of social workers is

something that should be addressed by this minister. It is something that should

be addressed by this government. Because the tough economic times that we are

facing in the our Province now -

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. MANNING: - are causing major problems, and I say in

all sincerity that the minister should look at increasing the amount of social

workers. Find the money. There is money everywhere else. In conclusion I say,

Mr. Chairman, that the fate of the people who are turning to social assistance

in this Province rests with the Minister of Social Services and -

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! Order, please!

MR. MANNING: - this cold, callous government.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MS YOUNG: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. CHAIRMAN: No, we are in Committee.

MS YOUNG: I've listened to a lot of the comments made by

hon. members and I certainly appreciate some of the concerns that have been

raised. Some of the questions were very relevant to the amendment we are passing

on the Social Workers Association Act. However, others I sort of wonder if they

would have been better put to another time period in the House.

I'm very pleased with the cooperation that we've been

receiving from the School of Social Work at the University. We have a very good

working relationship with that facility. We have quite a number of social

workers who come out of that degree program who work within our Province and I'm

very pleased with the calibre of the work that they are performing in my

department.

I've had the opportunity to travel to some parts of the

Island and indeed to Labrador to meet with people in the district offices. I'm

very impressed with the work that I see going on and the valuable contribution

that social workers make to our Province. They are the people I guess who see

people in various degrees of dependability on our social programs. They are

indeed well capable of handling these concerns and issues that have been raised.

I was in Hopedale last winter and met with a young social

worker there. He was very much involved with all of the activities within the

community, not just during working hours, but he interacted very well with the

community. In conjunction with the RCMP and the Department of Health they were

able to help the woman from the Torngat Mountains Inuit Association organize to

the point where they opened a women's crisis centre. That indeed was very

impressive. Because this was work that had gone on, a lot of it, outside of the

hours. So not only do social workers work with government or with the employer,

but they contribute a lot to the well-being of our communities in Newfoundland.

There were comments made from members opposite about the high

number of people who will be seeking assistance from my department due to the

numbers coming off the TAGS program. I noted last year when we had about 1,300

people come off that program it was about one-fifth of the whole group who did

come to the Department of Social Services. So the numbers that we were getting

were highly inflated. Therefore I'm sort of concerned that we are placing too

much emphasis on the numbers that will come over again. I am very optimistic

that some of these people will have obtained training and skills that they will

be able to seek employment in other fields. Some of them indeed may even be

creating their own businesses.

With regard to closing district offices, we have looked at

three offices in the past year or so and it worked very well. In my own

district, the office in Glovertown had two people working at two FAOs. These

people moved then a short distance up the highway and down into Gambo office. I

understand that that has not created a considerable amount of inconvenience to

people.

We feel that by consolidating that office with the Gambo

office it provided an opportunity to provide better service to the number of

clients because there were times when the office was actually closed out. If one

person was sick and the other person happened to be on the road, there was

nobody open, the office would have to be closed. So there were issues like that.

As well, it was an opportunity for people to draw strength from each other with

regard to some of the issues that they are facing and I have to agree with you,

that being a social worker is not an easy task. It is not an easy task in the

best of times. While we do go through some turbulent times in this Province I

think that over the years, not just in the situation we find ourselves today but

over the years, the work of the social workers has been under-rated. I don't

think we have ever put the kind of emphasis on the contribution that they have

given to the Province.

I want to say as well that there has been good cooperation

between the RNC and the RCMP with my department when we are investigating child

sexual abuse cases. So that was a major step forward. The RCMP, RNC and social

workers and child welfare are all trained at the same time when they are

investigating the child sexual abuse cases to cause the least amount of stress

to the child and the family.

People talk about, on the other side, regarding the cold,

callous attitude of this government toward the people who are availing of social

services and doors being shut to them and so forth and so on. I take exception

to that. I am a rural member and when I go to the post office in my community I

meet with people who are availing of social services. I meet people from all

walks of life. In a rural community when there is a social event you meet with

all classes of people; you meet with the professionals, you meet with the

unemployed, you meet with the people who are availing of social services, you

meet people who have no income, you meet with the seniors, you meet with the

disabled and you meet with the youth. Through these interactions in my community

I am able to have a better feel for what these people are experiencing. When I

have to make decisions for my department I am able to put a face to the people

who would be affected by any changes that we make and I am able to make sound

judgements.

We are living in a time when we have to be accountable. We

have to be accountable for the dollars that we spend. The time has past when we

can bow to political pressure to do this program or to do that in the Province.

We cannot do that any more. The money is not there. We realize that we just

cannot go out and borrow. I will put it simplistically for anybody who wants to

talk about it and I say look, if you are managing a household budget you cannot

spend what you don't have. If you have to borrow you cannot borrow only what you

can pay back and that is how we are with our government today.

AN HON. MEMBER: Speaking of borrowing, that is where I

have to go now.

MS YOUNG: I have borrowed my friend to death, he has to

leave.

I just want to say that I do indeed appreciate all of the

work and the contribution that social workers make to our Province -

MS COWAN: And they sure do.

MS YOUNG: - and they certainly do. My friend from

Conception Bay South has covered a large part of the island, heard a lot of

presentations and she too can attest to the valuable contribution they make.

So I am very pleased that our government has decided to amend

the Social Workers Association Act to include these people who are outside of

government and that they will enjoy the same privileges as social workers who

are employed by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. Again, I thank all

members for their contribution and I think our friend from the district of

Ferryland is also going to add a few words.

Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

If the minister really wants me to say it, I will just drag

myself to say a few words on this.

I do agree that a person who is not just a government

employee, a person who is practising social work here in this Province and who

pays registration should be able to be a member and practice here in the

Province. I think that is important. I think there is a great need for social

workers in this Province and we just look at our Province and the progression

over the past several years to see an increased need and if government is not

going to put people out in the field and employ them, they shouldn't be limited

by their process so, I have to support this piece of legislation here and when

we look back as some of the ministers said and I will address that first of all.

The minister indicated that information that was mentioned

earlier wasn't accurate actually. She said about 20 per cent of people, let's

say, who dropped off NCARP programs or TAGS program and so on or, other programs

go on social assistance. Well, I say to the minister, the projections now, the

projections and this is with Stats Canada, HRD and Labour actually, just to look

at the impact. In fact, what she is saying is higher than the projection that

came out last spring, and I just say to the minister, a few of these points.

When the increase, the qualifying period for UI this past

year, and when they reduced the duration periods if you remember with the

formula based on unemployment area up to a maximum really in a city of

thirty-two weeks, twenty-four plus eight weeks if you are in a low unemployment

area, based on each per cent increase, it affected the weeks you can draw. Now,

these were based on case assumptions that 10 per cent of those who are unable to

establish a UI claim, go on social assistance, 10 per cent. It was also based on

10 per cent of UI claim exhaustees who go on social assistance.

If 20 per cent of the people have to avail of social

assistance out of the 6,000 or 7,000 who are going to be dropped from a TAGS

program in May, that's alarming. That's double beyond what the estimates would

have been before and when you just look at the progression in this Province over

the past while, if we look back

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: 20 per cent, that's what the minister said,

Hansard would show that.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: That's correct, one-fifth, and I would say

those figures are upwards of a 100 per cent increase from the projections

through HRD and Labour, from the figures that I have, that I obtained last

spring on a projection of impacts.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: No, no. The impacts by the latest UI

changes how they were going to affect, in other words, a person who would have

gone on UI or whose claim is going to run out now, within that fifty-two week

period -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Yes. Well, I will tell you why you don't

have as many, I will give some reasons. If 20 per cent is doubled the

projections - and you can go back to the Department of Labour and HRD and get

their projections from last spring which I did obtain and look at, and if we are

going to have 20 per cent of 7,000 who are going to be dropped off the TAGS

program because in May of this year, says the minister and in budgeting

purposes, in May of this year, we are going to have the largest number of people

being dropped off this program at any one point in the five years of that

program, except that after five years they all finish and there will not be as

many left as those who are going to drop off in May I say to the minister. There

is going to be roughly 6,000 or 7,000 because many people who didn't get the

benefits for two years, like the duration that they could stay on was less than

two years, everybody had been given a two-year period even if your credits only

came up to 100 weeks or 80 weeks or 70 weeks, we are going to have a massive

drop off in May.

Now looking at social services budgets in the past, we have

grossly underscored the amount of money that is needed in the social service

department. Twenty million dollars more, you are budgeting this year than last

year. Last year there was a net cost of about $179 million if I remember

correctly, and about $198-something $199 this year, so we are looking at a $20

million difference and just look at the progression and the tie-in between

unemployment, employment and social assistance.

Back in 1988, we had 195,000 people in the workforce, it