Volume 4 PROVINCE OF NEWFOUNDLAND THIRTY-SIXTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NEWFOUNDLAND 4th. Session VERBATIM REPORT FRIDAY, APRIL 11, 1975 SPEAKER : THE HONOURABLE M. JAMES RUSSELL Number 30

April ll, 1975 The House met at 11:00 A.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. Tape 1303 (morning) MR. SPEAKER (STAGG): Order, please! Il\-1 It gives me great pleasure before opening the formal proceedings of today, to welcome to the galleries forty-three Grade XI students from Twillingate Central High School with their chaperons, Mr. Colbourne and Mr. Horwood. On behalf of all honourable members I welcome you to the galleries today and trust that your stay here will be interesting, informative and hopefully educational. REPORTS OF STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES: MR.

SPEAKER (STAGG): The Minister of Provincial Affairs and the Environment. HON. W. G. DAWE (MINISTER OF PROVINCIAL. AFFAIRS AND THE ENVIRONMENT) : I would like to table the regulations under the Credit Reporting Agencies Act, 1974. ORAL QUESTIONS: MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, now that the honourable Minister of Fisheries is back from the battlefield, I wonder if he could tell us as briefly as possible why the Province took the position that it took at the recent energy conference that they would .support British Columbia and Alberta for their increases in gasoline and heating fuel? HON. J.

CROSBIE (MINISTER OF FISHERIES): Mr. Speaker, the honourable gentleman has just made a savage attack on Prime Minister Trudeau 1because all we did was take the same position as the Government of Canada has taken, and that is to realize the fact that oil and gas prices are going to have to rise because they cannot be kept in Canada at half of what they are elsewhere in the world. There are a large number of reasons why they are going to rise in any event.

To suggest that any increase be done over a period of time - certainly not the full increase now,but over three or four years,or whatever is worked out with the producing Provinces - and that the effect be cushioned to protect the consumer as long as wr can. So, the position that the Newfoundland Government took was the 3890

April 11, 197 5 Tape 1303 (morning) same as the position taken by Prince Edward Island. It was the same as the position taken by the Government of Canada. It was the same IB-2 as the position taken by the Government of Quebec, the Liberal Government of Quebec and the Liberal Government of Prince Edward Island. It was the same as the position taken by the Government of British Columbia, and of course the Government of Alberta and Saskatchewan feel that they should get a proper return on the resources they have in their Province. In addition to which, of course, Mr.

Speaker, we are a resource rich Province that believes in the rrinciple that the Provinces should control and get the revenue from their own resources. We see no reason why oil and gas should be singled out as the only commodities in the country whose price should be controlled forever in this manner. So, those are some of the reasons, ~r. Speaker. The Prime Minister's position and Premier Moores' posi~ion are the samP positions. Now, this can all be debated, of course, in more detail, Mr. Speaker, when the estimates of the Department of Mines and Energy come before the House.

We will be pleased at that time tc debate it all in detail and to explain it all so that even the honourable gentleman can understand. In addition to that, Mr.

Speaker, the conference was very successful insofar as Newfoundland is concerned because the Government of Canada and the Governments of Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Quebec and this Province have agreed that it is necessary now to have a regional grid to carry electricity from one province to the other and that a study should be made into the remaining hydro resources in Labrador and in Quebec and in the contruction of interconnecting transmission lines between these provinces so that Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswic~ could get power from Newfoundland and Labrador and Quebec as well as Ontario,and that this whole concept should be and it is now supported by them all, and they have agreed that this study should be conducted in which all would participate.

Steps will be taken to have that carried into effect in the next month or two. Now, this is a huge step forward, Mr. Speaker, for this Province. We have, as honourable gentlemen know, a large potential for hydro-electric energy development in Labrador yet apart from Gull 3891

April 11, 1975 Tape 1303 (morning) Island, huge quantities of power that sho11ld be developed as soon as possible for the use of the Eastern half of Canada and particularly provinces IB-3 3892

April 11, 1975 Tape 1304 (Morning) PK - 1 such as Nova Scotia which are almost solely dependent on oil. And the only way these sources will ever be developed if it is a 1Dajor effort of all of the groups that I have just mentioned. So it has been agreed that studies should be commenced in all these hydro resources and to the establishment of the concept of a regional grid for the transmission of electricity,which is a huge step forward. And, from that point of view, Mr. Speaker, the conference was a great success. And as I say we have no hesitation, Mr.

Speaker, once we get to the estimates of Mines and Energy,to discuss this matter, and to point out to the honourable gentlemen the error of their ways. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I hardly got the heart to pursue this matter any further but I do want to ask the minister a supplementary question. Would the minister tell the House whether an increase in oil prices in this Province will automatically mean an increase in the electricity rates also to the consumers of this Province? lfR. CROSBIE: I understand, Mr.

Speaker, that the Board of Co11DI1issioners of Public Utilities had heard an application from Newfoundland Light and Power a few weeks ago in connection with a rate increase for Newfoundland Light and Power. And that they also approved 1as has been approved,I guess,in every province of Canada,a formula under which the rates for electricity can go up as the price of oil goes up, if the price of oil goes up. It is an automatic, It is some kind of a formula that is used so as the oil prices go up the cost of electricity goes up in proportion to the added expense that that produces on the system.

So I am not familiar with all of the details but, I think, there is such a formula under the new rates that have been approved. And that puts us in the same position as every other province of Canada. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, a further supplementary to the minister. Would the minister tell the House - or is the minister aware that the Board of Commissioners of Pullie Utilities have no jurisdiction over these hearings involving the Newfoundland Power Commission?

And is the government going to take any steps to rectify this situation so that the hearings can be hearings and the Board of Commissioners for Public ltilities not have 3893

April 11, 1975 Tape 1304 (Horning) PK - 2 their hands tied behind their backs? MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, I am not aware of what the honourable gentleman states since it is not correct. MR. NEARJ: MR. CROSBIE: jurisdiction - MR. NEARY: MR. CROSBIE: It is correct. The Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities have Over the Newfoundland Power Coilllllission. - over rate increases by Newfoundland Light and Power and the other utilities on the Island. MR. NEARY: No, no. MR.

CROSBIE: They cannot decide the question as to whether Newfoundland and Labrador Power Commission should increase the rate they charge for power to the retailers of power. That is something that the Minister of Mines and Energy said we are considering _. And it is the government's view that the Board of Commissioners of Public UtilitieJ jurisdiction should be increased in the future. Its jurisdiction now is the same as it was in 1971, and in the years before this government took power. But that position is being reviewed by government, and we believe their jurisdiction should be extended in the future.

So while they have no jurisdiction over the rates that are charged by the Power Commission to Newfoundland Light, thP.y have jurisdiction over what rates are charged by Newfoundland Light or other utilities to the customer. Well, that is being reviewed and I think they will be given an enlarged jurisdiction within the next year. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, a further sup-lementary. Would the honourable minister care to indicate whether the Premier will be in his seat today or were the fellows with the white jackets down at Torbay waiting for him when he landed to take him away? MR.

SPEAKER (STAGG): Order, please: That question is out of order, of course. MR. CROSBIE; The question is out of order, Mr. Speaker, but the Premier certainly is not. I mean he is in good form and good shape and he is conducting public business today in Montreal. And as far as I know - 3894

April 11, 1975 Tape 1304(Morning) PK - 3 HR. NEARY: No doubt! No doubt! MR. CROSBIE: will be back to the province - AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. CROSBIE : That is right, they have taken him into Waterford Valley,! think. The muttering and sputtering about all the gas pric~s! But the Premier will be back,r believe,this evening, ~fr. Speaker, and he will be here on Monday morning. MR. SPEAKER (STAGG): The Hon. Member for Labrador North. MR. M. WOODWARD: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Fisheries and Intergovernmental Affairs.

In light of the results of the Energy Conference and reports from the news media that one of our sister provinces, Alberta,is prepared or willing to get involved in the financing of the development of hydro in the Province of Newfoundland, can the minister tell the House if this means that the Lower Churchill will co11Dnence this Summer on a full scale construction basis as the result of the aid that we are getting from Alberta? MR. CROSBI E: Mr. Speaker, the position is that the Gull Island or the Lower Churchill project insofar as this government are concerned will be proceeding this year.

But as has been explained - NR. WOODWARD: with pickaxes. It started last year with a half a dozen people HR. CROSBIE: You know, the Upper Churchill,1 suppose,took about twelve years to get off the ground. It is the planning of this government that the Lower Churchill will proceed this year. MR. WOODWARD: MR. CROSBIE: MR. WOODWARD: Fair enough! Fair enough! However, before, Mr. Speaker, the final release - Inaudible. MR. SPEAKER (STAGG): Order, please! HR. CROSBIE: - before the final release 3895

April 11, 1975. Tape 1305 RH - 1 is given the government will have to be satisfied that financing can be arranged for the whole project, that the cost estimates are accurate and that they are safe and proper and prudent for this project to proceed. Now, the work is proceeding onwards and by this Fall the final project release will have to be given and by that t:lme the final decision will have to be made.

The Government of Alberta has said that they are prepared to assist this Province in developing that great project by a way of loans to the Province for the project and if that is all arranged with the Government of Alberta who would be a considerable assistance to the project to have large amounts of money - MR. WOODWARD: Is it a definite commitment from them now? MR. CROSBIE: We have a commitment that they will lend money to the project. Now, the amount of that and the total amount and how it will be done all has to be worked out and will be during this present Spring and Summer.

So, certainly that will be considerable assistance to getting this project underway and carried out. But the position still remains the same, that the government will not make a final decision until we know that everything is in order and the latest date for that to be done is, I think, September or October of 1975. In the meantime, money will be spent on the t·ork that is being carried forward so that it can be completed by 1980, if we get the final go ahead. MR. SPEAKER (Stagg) The Member for Bell Island. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, I wonder if the minister responsible for crabs in this Province, the Minister of Fisheries, Sir, could tell us if he has received any representation from the crab industry - MR. CROSBIE: Crab. MR. NEARY: Crab, yes, to find some solution to the inventories, getting rid of the inventories that they have on hand at the present time? 3896

April 11, 1975. Tape 1305 RH - 2 MR. CROSBIE: Well, Mr. Speaker, I have not received any representations from the queen crab industry because they are dealing with the government that has jurisdiction on the matter and that is the Government of Canada at Ottawa They have been dealing with the Minister of Fisheries, The Minister of State of Fisheries, Mr. LeBlanc,and the Fishery· Prices Support Board,which is the agency of the Government of Canada which deals with marketing of fish and fish producte.

They have discussed with them their inventories and disposing of their inven­ tories and as I understand it, the crab producers in this Province have disposed of a great deal of their inventory, but the prices are down, are going to be down this year. The prices on the market are certainly going to be greatly reduced and they will have to decide what price they are prepared to pay for crab if they are operating this year. But they are dealing with Mr. LeBlanc and the Fishery Prices Support Board and that is where they should be dealing. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, it looks like we are going to have plenty of crab·meat but no liquor. I wonder if the minister responsible for the Newfoundland Liquor Commission could tell us if any steps are being taken to avert a strike in the liquor stores throughout the Province? MR. DOODY: Mr. Speaker, the Treasury Board negotiating team are currently talking to the negotiators for NAPE, the union that represents the Newfoundland Liquor Commission employees. There have been negotiating now for several weeks. A conciliation officer is involved.

There is a most unusual se·t of circumstances when the strike vote was distributed and sent to the employees to be signed before the final details of an offer were made public to them. Indeed, the details of the offer could not be made private or public because they have not been finished yet. They are still negotiating. So, to the best of my knowledge, there is no strike imminent or in sight at the Liauor CommfRR1nn Rtnr~R. I would hope that there will not be. The regular collective bargaining process 3891

April 11, 1975. Tape 1305 .RH - 3 is in being -and l would hope that it will solve whatever prob.lens the~e .m:Lght be. Mk • . NF.A.RYt Mr. Speaker, . I wonder if the ~ister o·f JQtice, Sir, could tell the H~e whether or not the.re is any , foundati.on to public statenents that are being made that the crime r.ate in NewfoUJUll,and, espec;i.a:lly in the city of St. Jolm's, is on the increase and if so, what steps the minister is taldll.g to de.al with this st.tuation? MR. BICKMAN: That : ts like asking· .somebody, Mr. Speaker• when d.id you stop beatitig your wife. I can onl:r - AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudib .le. 3898

April 11, 1975 Tape No .1306 NM - 1 MR. HICKMAN: That is right. The honourable gentleman picks up a little item from a paper, obviously that has not been ~esearched, and says,crime is on the increase in the City of St. John's. SOME RON. MEMBERS: Inaudible. MR. SPEAKER (STAGG): Order, please: MR. HICKMAN: Last Fall, Mr. Speaker, there were - AN HON. MEMBER: The heading, "Then fists flew;' what about that? That was researched. MR.

HICKMAN: The honourable gentleman,I suspect,is referring to a matter that is presently before the court and I hope he does not want by making undue, unfortunate comments in this House, I hope &e is not trying to aid and abet _ the accused because stateaents like that during a trial, when a trial is in progress - MR, NEARY: That is in the paper, headlines. MR. HICKMAN: Statements intepreting, Mr.

Speaker, s~atements interpreting evidence that is presently coming out in court at a trial, these statements can very seriously prejudice a trial that is in progress, and oonfer upon certain people rights that they are not entitled to have. MR. NEARY: Do not be so foGlishJ MR. HICKMAN: Now, Mr. Speaker -foolish! You will see how foolish it is if some smart lawyer latches onto your statement here this morning. Insofar as crime is concerned, Mr. Speaker, we - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible. MR. HICKMAN: The evidence that has been submitted to me ind!cates,one, that vandalism in the St.

John's A~ea during the last twelve months has declined; number two, that the number of break and entries in the City of St. John's have increased during that period; number three,that the rate of increase of crime in the Province of Newfoundland is considerably below that of any other comparable Canadian City;_ and number four, the high number of arrests and prosecutions, successful prosecutions that have taken place and are taking place indicates that the Newfoundland Constabulary, which is th·e police force responsible for policing the City of St.

John's, are doing a very, very competent and satisfactory job in apprehending those 3899

.t April 11, 1975 Tape No. 1306 NM - 2 who run afoul of the law. I hope there is nobody half-witted enough in this House to suggest that we should station a policeman in front of every shop. The ~oliceman's responsibility is,number one, by his presence in the general area to try and deter people from co11D11itting offences,and, number two, when an offence has been collllllitted, to try and apprehend the offender. Number three, the sentences that are being imposed by the magistrates in the St. John's area at this time appear to be very appropriate.

They show some signs of compassion 1which they must, and at the same time the sentences, which vary from every case, are such as to act as a deterrent to others who may want to embark upon a regretful road to crime. AN HON. MEMBER: When are your estimates coming up? MR. HICKMAN: Oh,my estimates are all done. AN HON. MEMBER: I thought you were doin, them now. MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman, I was just wondering if the Minister of Justice, Sir, is aware that during January 1 and April 9, 1974, St.

John's Provincial Courts handled 1,390 criminal cases,and is the minister also aware that during the same period this year the courts heard 1,550 cases Not bad for an item that was not researched! MR. HICKMAN: That is right. You know there is no point, Mr. Speaker, in my trying to straighten out the honourable gentleman from Bell Island.

You know, if he did the slightest bit of research he would know that a lot of these cases, many of which are criminal in the sense that they are breaches of the criminal code, you know, impaired driving falls into that category, breaches of provincial statutes are included in that category.

An awful lot of the offences that were tried during that period were co11D11itted in 1974 and not in 1975 and the other thing is that it corroborates beyond all reasonable doubt the statement that I made in this House a few minutes ago that the Newfoundland Constabulary are doing a first class job in apprehending those who break the law in the City of St. John's as are the R.C.M.P. outside. MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Twillingate. 3:jl)Q

April 11, 1975 Tape No. 1306 NM - 3 MR. GILLETT: A question for the honourable Minister of Health, Mr. Speaker. I wonder if tbe minister would tell the Rouse whetber or not he has received recently any communication fro~ the various religious denominations in Twillingace, in the Twillingate area, to enquire into the possibility and the assistance from this government of converting the old hospital which will soon be vacated, converting it 3901

April 11, 1975 Tape 1307 (morning) to a Senior Citizens' Nursing Home or any nursing home, but usually for a Senior Citizens' Horne, if so, Mr. Speaker, what his reaction is and what assistance we can expect from this government'? MR. SPEAKER (STAGG): The honourable Minister of Health. HON. DR. A.T. ROWE (MINISTER OF HEALTH): No, Mr. Speaker, I have recieved no official communication from the ministerial association of the Twillingate area on this suhject. I am therefore not in the position to answer the question. MR. SPEAKER (STAGG): The Member for Bell Island. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, I do not know if the acting Premier or the acting, acting Premier could answer this question. But, Sir, unlike the song where raindrops keep falling on your head, out in the Sir Richard Squires Building in Corner Brook concrete keeps falling on their heads. Would the minister tell us what is causing it? Is it an earthquake? Is the building falling apart? What is the problem with the Sir Richard Squires Building in Corner Brook? Is the Premier making earth shattering statements out there or what? MR. HICKMAN: Mr. Speaker, the honourable gentleman obviously reads the papers very thoroughly.

This statement was in the paper this IB-1 morning. I certainly know nothing about it. I know that the building is a very new one. It was built at a time when the honourable gentleman from Bell Island was a mem~er of the government that built it. MR. NEARY: Perhaps that was led by the Minister of Justice. MR. HICKMAN: I am afraid it was not. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Perhaps the Minister of Fisheries. MF. HICKMAN: Nor the honourable the Minister of Fisheries. It was built by the Smallwood Administration. It reminds me something of the Duplessis Bridge. Remember the Duplessis Bridge.

The Duplessis Government was as strong and straight as the Duplessis Bridge,.And then it collapserl. MR. WOODWARD: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice is very unruly nowadays. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. WOODWARD: Yes. It is becoming like the crime wave. Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Education seeing that my colleagu~, 390L

April 11, 1975 Tape 1307 (morning) IB-2 and friend, the Member for Labrador South is not in the House today. I wonder what action he has taken with regards to t:he school in Forteau. Looking at the media last night, I understand that problem has still not been resolved. They do not have alternate classrooms to go to. The parents have refused to send their children back into the school. There have been a whole consortium of people involved with the problem and no one seems to solve it.

I wonder what action the minister is going to take or if he has taken any action to find suitable alternative classroom space for them and when do we hope to have the children back in school. HON. G. OTTENHEIMER (MINISTER OF EDUCATION): Mr. Speaker, I did not see the report on the media as was seen last night, but I certainly am familar with the situation. The government,or the Department of Education,has sent to Forteau quite a large number of people. The chief medical health officer from the Province was there. On another occasion two or three doctors from the Grenfell area were there.

We have had two or three engineers there as well. The reports that have come back have indicated that there is nothing at the school to cause people to be ill. The first suspicion was that there was something wrong with the furnace or that there were fumes from the furnace. The engineers reported that this was not in fact the case. The school was repainted and some additional cleaning work done some time ago. But, the reports that we have from both engineers and several medical people is that they cannot see any logical, scientific reason why people would become ill from being in the school.

We d:I d investigate the possibility - there are two halls in the community, a hall owned by the L.O.A., an Orange hall and a community hall. Both were examined from the point of view of alternatives, but it has been reported that Tieither is suitable for a school. There is ~o other place suitable. I mean, that is a fact about which nobody can do anything at least at the present time. Since 390:J

April 11, 1975. Tape 1308 RH - 1 all of the information that we have, medical and engineering, is that there is nothing wrong with the school and I am not a doctor, not a medical person. All I can suggest is that the cause of whatever it is on the information that I have about medical and engineering is not related to the building. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Right and the information given me is that it is not related to the school. It is theological - MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, I wonder if the Minister of Justice, Sir, could tell the House whether he has run into any flak on his new civil marriage regulations? Have there been any objections from any of the religious denominations and if so, what action the minister is taking on these objections? MR. HICKMAN: No, Mr. Speaker, I have not. I have received a - ORDERS OF THE DAY: MR. CROSBIE: Motion (1). MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, the miniater was going to add something to his - MR. HICKMAN: No. MR.NEARY: No. MR. SPEAKER: Motion (1). Committee of the Whole. On motion that the House resolve itself into Committee of the Whole. Mr.

Speaker left the Chair. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! The Minister of Fisheries. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Chairman, the resolution came before the CoDDDittee last time with the matter there seemed to be some dispute about the amount the government was asking the House to approve borrowing this year. Now, that amount, of course, might or might not be borrowed. We are asking the House for authorization to borrow and the amount that was asked for in the resolution was $275 million. Honourable gentlemen opposite protested that this is too much and the amount required in the budget to be borrowed is $203 million.

We explained that we wanted to have a cushion in case the market looked good and so on and so forth. These points were all made in 3904

April 11, 1975. Tape 1308 RH - 2 the last day. So, the government has considered the matter and we are willing to reduce it by $50 million so that we will have a cushion of some $20 million in addition to what is indicated in the resolution. In order to expedite the matter and to obviate a lot of argmnent back and forth about it, the government is willing to decrease the amount that we are asking for authority to borrow from $275 million to $225 million.

Now, that would mean, of course, we would vote against the gentlemen's amendment opposite which was to reduce it to $203 million and when that is disposed of, we will move our own amendment to change the amount to $225 million. So, I hope that that finds favour in the honourable gentle­ men opposite. MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman, obviously the minister thinks, Sir, that we should be thankful for small blessings. Well now, Sir, let me point out to the Connnittee and to the minister: It is not the amount that was in dispute. It was not the amount of money that they were asking for that we were objecting to.

Remember, Mr. Chairman, the government were asking for $75 million,to borrow $75 million, over and above what was included in the estimates brought in on March 12, about a month ago, by the Minister of Finance. It was not the amount, Sir. It was the principle. We claim that the govenunent should not be asking for one penny over and above the amount that was budgeted for a month ago on March 12 when the minister brought down his budget in this honourable House.

It is the principle, Sir, that we are objecting to, the principle of removing the responsibility for borrowing and spending money from this honourable House and putting it in the hands of the Lieutenant­ Governor in Council, putting it in the hands of the Cabinet. 3900

April 11, 1975 Tape 1309 (Morning) PK - 1 Now the minister has said that the government have decided to reduce the amount of $75 million that they were asking for, reducing it by $50 million. Well, Sir, we are still dissatisfied because,! cannot help but repeating myself, it is not the amount of money, it is the principle of the thing. We are opposed to this principle, Sir. We are a party, a group of people on this side of the House who opposed the principle of putting this kind of authority in the hands of the cabinet. We think it is too dangerous.

And now, Sir, by reducing it down by $50 million still gives the government, still gives the Minister of Finance and the administration $22 million or $23 million to play with. It is not bad, Sir, for a little bit of pocket money. It still gives the administration, Sir, a fair slush fund in case they happen to call an election. They still have a pretty fair slush fund. play with. AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. NEARY: AN HON. MEMBER: I beg your pardon? Inaudible. They have about $25 million to MR.

NEARY: And although, Mr.Chairman, we have made some pretty great inroads in convincing the administration that they were wrong in asking for this $75 million - a little bit of a victory for us. I suppose we could claim a little bit of victory, But if we voted in favour of the minister's admendment, Sir, or voted in favour of the minister's recommendation that it be reduced by $50 million, we on this side of the House will be hypocritical because we do not agree with the principle.

And the administration even though they are reducing it by $50 million are still going to get a fair slush fund in case they happen to call a provincial general election. And we have no choice, Mr. Chairman, but to vote for the amendment that was put by the Leader of the Opposition. We are still against this principle, Sir, and we will be consistent. We will vote for the amendment and we will vote for any increase over and above the amounts of money that was called for in the minister's - AN HON. MEMBER: MR. NEARY: AN HON. MEMBER: MR. NEARY: Inaudible. I beg your pardon? Vote against. Vote against.

We will vote in favour of the amendment

April 11, 1975 Tape 1309 (Morning) PK - 2 and against any increase in the amounts over and above those reco11DDended by the Minister of Finance when he brought down his budget about a month ago. AN HON • MEMBER: Hear! Hear! MR. CHAIRMAN: The Hon. Member for St. John I s East. MR. W. w. MARSHALL: Mr. Chairman, I would like to have a few words with respect to this amendment and the proposed changes that have been proposed by the government. First of all,in dealing with the remarks made by the Opposition I completely and absolutely discount them.

Because it is obvious from what they have said and the way that they have led into the debate that they have neither an appreciation of what is involved in this, neither do they support it. The only thing they are worried is a slush fund for an election type of thing. AN HON. MfilffiER: Most certainly. MR. MARS11ALL: And the way that the Hon. Leader of the Opposition when he was- debating it, and the Hon.

Member for Bell IF.land when he was debating the measure showed such an absymal ignorance of the rules and regulations under the Financial Administration Act that it certainly calls very much into question their ability to ever form a government again, and perhaps even to sit in the Opposition. AN HON. MEMBER: Hear! Hear! MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Chairman, there are a few things I want to ask~ pose to the Minister of Fisheries, the Government House Leader,with respect to this proposed change. Because, I think, it is very important, Mr.

Chairman, in these measures, I think it is crucially important that all facts with respect to the borrowing in this Province be brought forth in this Legislature. It may well be as in the past couple of years when we brought in the Financial Administration Act and followed it with a loan bill as we were required to do, it may be that it might pass through the Legislature and be unnoticed, not be subjected to much debate here or much comment in the press.

But the only safeguard we have in this Province with respect to our future and our financial borrowing is the very fact that the executive arm of government has to bring_ in a bill of this nature, arid has to indicate to the general public exactly what is being borrowed and why it is being borrowed. 3907

April 11, 1975 Tape 1309 (~orning) PK - 3 And it is for that reason that I stand on my feet in the Committee and ask certai~ questions. As I read the bill there is sti).l going to be a substantial differential between the amount that has to be borrowed, that is necessary to be borrowed under existing legislation 1 ~d the amount chat is actually borrowed.

Because under the Financial Adlllinistration Act you have to get ·authority for new debt, and under the Bud.get Speec h of this Province this year, I think, it was $160 millions plus $43 millions which was to refund existing indebtedness, making the total of $203 millions that is being mooted around, and now we are bringing it down to a total of $225 million, so there is a relatively small cushion if you look ~tit that way. But the 3908

April 11, 1975 Tape No. 1310 NM - 1 resolution and indeed the

section 43 of The Financial Administration Act more or less indicates,and does indicate,that one does not need approval to refund existing indebtedness and this makes sense because Legislatures before have already passed on the indebtedness that is being refunded. People know that money spent in the past has been spent for a certain purpose and you are merely transferring one type of debt for another.

In addition this resolution to make it more certain and the bill itself says 1a sum of money and such additional sums or sums of money as may be required to renew or refund securities issued under any act of the Province.

So the question I ask the honourable the minister is whether or not we are borrowing, we are authorizing the borrowing by bringing it down to $225 million, actually an increase i>f $65 million that is unnecessary under the, unnecessary in a sense, it may be necessary but not specifically required at this tillle,or whether it is just merely the difference between $203 million and $225 million, because that is a very siginficant differential.

I would like that fact brought forth because if the Legislature wishes to vote to give the executive arm or the Cabinet this paver to borrow an extra $65 million, as the Leader of the Opposition says from time to time when he is lost for words, sobeit. The Legislature has passed upon it as the honourable Minister of Finance has indicated when he brought in the bill. But I think it should be made abundantly clear before this Co111111ittee and before the House and before the people of this Province what the borrowing represents.

As I read it, subject to correction, we are authorizing the borrowing of $160 million, $160,300,000 as I remember, as stipulated in the Budget, plus an extra $65 million. I would like that trite question per sued, As I say l if the Legislature wishes to vote for it, the Legislature votes for it . Now I would like to point out a couple of very pertinent matters with respect to this power to borrow and why it is necessary to emphasize 3909

April 11, 1975 Tape No. 1310 NM - 2 and re-emphasize over again the crucial importance of the amounts of money which this Province is going to borrow being brought forcibly to the attention of this Province. In the Budget Speech much has been made of the fact that this is a $1 billion budget, The government has indicated its pride with respect to it, and the pride is justifiable because-had the previous administration been in, or any other administration, I doubt very much whether they would have had the confidence of the financial community, or any group of people, to be able to sustain a budget of this nature.

So as I say on the one hand there is grounds for pride. But there is another aspect to it that I think has to be drawn to the attention of the public.

That in order to sustain the public services in this Province, in order to carry on government as we have carried on under very hard conditions, namely as a result of the huge,monumental debt that we inherited,because we have to, although we are not supposed to speak of it, we have to spend $60 million or $70 million a year from year one in this administration in purely and simply the financing of the previous debt and this mounts,as anyone who has got a bill payer loan from that great financial institution that advertises itself knows, if you re-finance and you have to pay on past indebtedness and to borrow from it how much it mounts up.

MR. NEARY: Never borrow money needlessly. MR. MARSHALL: That is right. And this is what this exercise is all about.

If money is available, if you borrow mere, if there is that differential between - now before I get onto that, I just want ~o emphasize this again, there is a reason for this government to be very proud of the fact it can bring in such a large spending budget but we got to look for where the money comes from and I think it is very crucial and essential that the government, that this House, that the public and that everybody awake to the fact that the public debt of this Province~in order to sustain services,is mounting.

Thankfully it is in the hands of a group of sane, sensible, rational people who can administer the affairs of the Province in a rational manner and therefore you can have confidence in it. 391.0

April 11, 1975 Tape 1311 (morning) IB-1 The fact of the matter remains, Mr. Chairman, that tbe public debt of this Province is ascending and it is a matter of concern to everybody, and I know it is a matter of concern to everybody on the government benches. Now, this particular act was brought in purely and simply because of the necessity to bring this forcibly to the attention of the people of this Province, that is the amount of the borrowing.

As we know from 1~66 to the coming in of this administration, they could borrow, the government could borrow, in a way, I SUJ)Pose, tba~ was not countenanced by any other democratic government in Western society. Perhaps they might be able to do it in Moscow or Czechoslovakia or China, I do not know. But, they could do it through sec-ret government borrowings in cabinet. They did not have to get any authorization from the legislature and they told them after the fact. Now, the reason for this measure is this. We vote. The government brings in its budget.

Its budget, it says, how much, how it is going to meet these expenditures. From revenues it is going to raise from taxes. From revenues it is going to get from the federal government and from borrowings. These are the three main sources. Now, if money is available, I think, as everyone knows, it can be spent. If you have a cushion, then it is open for the executive arm of government to have access to more money than they had budgeted for. It is entirely possible for them to spend more than their budget.

Hence, this is what happened in years gone by, in the last days of the Liberal Administration, why there was such a horrendous increase in the public debt. Every year they came back with huge amounts of supplementary supply which are expenses over and above the amount that is necessary or that had been estimated. In other words, they spent more as a result of it. So, this is the thing. If money is available, you have a cushion. If money is available, it can be spent. The second thing is this.

In order to just have the borrowings authorized up to or near to 1with a slight cushion, the amount which one budgets, it requires the civil 39J.1

April 11, 1975 Tape 1311 servants and it requires the executive arm of government to budget accurately because, for instance, if they overestimate the amount of revenues and have, in order to meet expenditures, to use monies found by means of loan, they can do so. But, if the loan is not available, they would have to come back to the House of Assembly and explain the fact that the budget was out slightly and this is IB-2 the reason. Now, the reasons can be justified. But here again it comes down to the executive arm having to come and explain why the debt has increased. So, Mr.

Chairman, I view this as being essential to the government in the future of this Province. I view it as being critical to the social and economic development of this Province. I view it as necessary so that we do not continue to spend in any manner monies of our children and our grandchildren without it being explained in the most minuetest detail, AN HONOUllABLE MEMBER: Hear! Hear! MR. MARSHAl.L: and Mr. - I "Hear! Hear!" and I keep hearing from the Opposition. I would that I had heard "Hear!

Hrar! from the Opposition when th£. gentlemen there opposite were over here and I was over on their side introducing a similar measure in the House. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Hear! Hear! AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. MARSHALL: No, at the time the honourable Leader of the Opposition was too oft to be down on his bended knee to the right of the seat whict the present Premier occupies. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible. MR.

M.ARSHALL: Oh, it is very relevant because I do not seek and I do not desire and I abhor, Mr. ~airman, any kind of support from the Opposition on this particular point because I do not like getting support from people whom I regard as having spoken with forked tongues. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Hear! Hear! MR. MARSHALL: Now, Mr. Chairman, as I have said - MR. CHAIR.11AN: Order, please! MR. NEARY: It is out of order, Sir. Make him withdraw and apologize 3912

April 11, 1975. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! Tape 1312 RH - 1 While the honourable member is speaking in the vernacular, I do detect that the phrase "speaking with forked tongue" comes within the phrases which would be prohibited under parliamentary language. I do not think it has been used before. I suggest the honourable member might rephrase his remarks, preferably withdraw. MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Your Honour. What I really mean to say 1very politely,is,they say one thing over there and they say another thing over here. This is really - MR. NEARY: The Roberts administration has not been over there yet. MR.

MARSHALL: The Roberts administration never will be. The only place the Roberts administration is going to get is outside of the - MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! MR. MARSHALL: But I do not think that is relevant either, Mr. Chairman. I am in the midst of making a speech. MR. EVANS: Joey's dog water. MR, MARSHALL: Now, as I say, the amount of this debt is extremely high, of the provincial debt, and I do not think it is a matter that we should hide and I do not think it is a matter that we should not discuss and we should not discuss very, very freely with the people of this Province.

It is not the fault of this administration. This administratfon has laboured very hard and very diligently as I have said under great odds as the result of the position that the Province I was placed ,into. It is already, as I say, it is already shown that it is more than is needed, this particular supply bill,and I am just I wondering w~ethet the House can be informed as to how much it is I because the~ the House can vote upon it. I had to say myself, Mr. Chairman, I had to say this quite candidly, that I have reservations myself about giving a government any great miiount of money more than it budgeted.

I would never entertain it with any government. In this particular case, I have I extreme conf1idence in this government itself. However, Mr. Chairman, 3913

April 11, 1975. Tape 1312 RH - 2 AN HONOURAllLE MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! MR. NEARY: Inaudible. MR. CHAIRMAN: While the honourable member is congratulating himself on being so clever in withdrawing his remarks, however, a person may not say indirectly or by contradicting what he would have said. So, the honourable member is treading on very thin ice. He may fall through. MR. MARSHALL: I do not mind, Mr. Chairman. I can see the honourable member smiling over there. So, once he keeps smiling, I do not mind . But the point of the matter is this, Mr.

Chairman, I want to make this quite clear as an individual in the backbenches, as a supporter of this government,and I want to make my position publicly known on it0 As I say I have grave reservations about giving any government this particular power and if the nature of this is to give the govenunant a large amount of money, well I will not be here when this matter comes up for voting, less it be construed if I voted against it that I am voting lack of confidence in the government.

A vote against this would not mean lack of confidence in the govern­ ment, but as far as - AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Have the courage of your convictions. MR. MARSHALL: I have the courage of my convictions to explain right now, Mr. Chairman. AN HONOURAllLE MEMBER: Order, or~er, Mr. Chairman. MR. NEARY: (First

part inaudible) traitor and a coward and run out of the House. Stand up like a man. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! Order, please! The Member for Bell Island may feel that he is having sport at the expense of the Member for St, John's East. However, traitor and coward, these are phrases which, while they may be uttered in jest or just to interrupt the honourable member, they are completely out of order and the honourable member should know this and I suggest to the honourable

April 11 , 1975. Tape 1312 Rn - 3 member that a couple of tililes this morning I have had to bring these matters to his attention and in doing so I have had to inter~ rupt an honour.able member who is speaking and has the right to .be heard in silence. MR. MARSHALL: Do not pay any attention_, Mr. Chairman. If we could only have a little sound proof box to put hilil in occasic>nally,or anqther type of box to put him in. But anyway, Mr. Chairman, J am explaining my position, I am explaining it crystal clear.

It tnight be easy for a person just to slip out of the Hous.e and not vote at all and say later on he was not there when it voted·. But as far as I am concented, I am making my position crystal clear that I have. grave reservations about giving any government a large cushion between the amount budgeted and the amount for which it receives authority. ~ HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Rear! Rear: MR. MARSHALL; Consequently, Mr .• Chairman, I would not like these statements, as I say, to be construed as lack of support or lack of confidence in the gover:mnent. I have tmbounding confidence in the government.

H.owever • I shall, 3915

April 11, 1975 Tape 1313 (Morning) PK - 1 Mr. Chairman, very likely not be in the House if tl,e resolution is in its present form or in the form as it is contemplated. Because we must - MR. NEARY: Resign. If you do not like it resign. MR. MARSHALL: - because, Mr. Chairman, we must come to grips really with this problem.

I reject~with great respect, I reject quite directly any statements made by any person at any time that we must not talk of the nature of the public debt in this Province, because I feel that it is a subject which ou~ht to be debated and debated over and over and over again so that the people of this Province realize that the services that they are getting do not come from mannas from Heaven but they come out of the pocket of themselves, and when they are borrowing they come out of the pocket of future generations .

And the fact of the matter is that there is a limit to everybodys borrowings, and the people of this Province should be fully aware of it. And the only manner in which they are going to be aware of it is to measures such as this. So I reject, Mr. Chairman, any suggestion that ve must not talk about the public debt from any quarter whatsoever. I think it has to be debated, and it has to be debated, but I would say responsibly - AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR.

MARSHALL: - and not in the manner, not in the manner in which the Leader of the Opposition debated it the other day with Eespect to bonds, and he gets up and says something which is completely and absolutely hearsay for crass political purposes, Then and in that event that is extremely and completely irresponsible, insupportable and without any justification whatsoever. But when somebody wishes to get up and talk about our debts in a responsible manner - MR. NRARY: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order. I do not want to let that go because I am disappointed Your Honour did not pick it up.

The member was just questioning the motive, Sir, of the statements that were made by the Leader of the Opposition the other day when he spoke in this debate. And I would submit, Sir, according to ruling,after ruling, after ruling that is made in this honourable House that the member is completely out of order. And I ask Your Honour to rule it as such, and ask the minister either to rephrase or retract his statement. 3916

April 11, 1975 Tape 1313 (Morning) PK - 2 MR. MARSHALL: Ut~er nonsense, Mr. Chairman. Look -that one is not allowed to question the motives of one. I am not questioning the motives - goodness knows I wish I knew what motivated the Hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. EVANS: He would have to get a brain first to get a motive. MR. MARSHALL: I would not persume to guess it. This is a fact, of statement of my opinion that the Hon.

Leader of the Opposition made certain statements which were not founded in fact and that he had nothing to support, and he should not have brought it in unless he had something to support it, so it lies in the realm obviously of a matter of opinion. MR. SIMMONS: HON. HfilIBERS: MR. STl-ll10NS: Mr. Chairman, to the point of order. Oh, oh, oh. The Member for St. John's East in replying to a point of order raised by my colleague really evaded the point of order. The point of order relates to his statement that the Leader of the Opposition had made certain statements for crass political purposes.

Now that is assigning motives, Mr. Chairman. You can say it in whatever terms you want, that is assigning motives. It has nothing to do with the·member's opinion. He is stating forthright that he thinks that the Leader of the Opposition did something for a particular purpose. And I submit that is quite unparliamentary, and he should be asked to withdraw it. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Chairman, so that we get away from this foolish nonsense, let us put it this way. If it was impugned that I was impugning the motive of the Hon. Leader of the Opposition,I withdraw it.

But I reassert the fact that my opinion that it was done, my opinion is a statement like that has to be done, taken as for political motives if it does not follow with supporting facts. Now let us cut out the nonsense. MR. CHAIRMAN (STAGG) : Order, please~ While I must admit that I did not hear the words in their entirety. However, it does appear from the recap as given by honourable members to my right it does fall into the realm of a difference of opinion between two honourable members, and their

interpretation of what is the implication of bad motives or motives different from those 3917

April 11, 1975 Tape 1313 (Morning) PK - 3 acknowledged. Now the phrase "crass political GOtivations" or whatever, I do not think that that is an unparliamentary phrase. It is certainly not a complimentary one. AN HON. MEMBER: MR. CHAIRMAN: AN HON. MEMBER: MR. CHAIRMAN: Inaudible. Order, please! Inaudibl e. If the Chair wishes any prompting from any honourable members I will ask for it. I am attempti .ng to make a ruling on this matter. I wuld thi.nk that in this institution that if we had to rule that 3918

April 11, 1975 Tape No.1314 NM - 1 political speeches were unparliamentary then it would be very unlikely that anybody would speak at all. MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman, reluctantly, Sir, we disagree with your ruling on this side of the House and we wish to appeal your ruling. AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR.NEARY: That is not the way to do it. AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. NEARY: What is the way to do it? Mr. Chairman, we want the Speaker to come back in the Chair so we can appeal Your Honour's ruling. MR. SPEAKER (STAGG): I will have to appeal it to myself 7I guess.

In view of the fact that there has been an appeal, I will resume the Chair. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, during the Committee, Sir, on the Bill - MR. SPEAKER (STAGG): Order, please: This is a rather unprecedented procedure so I will have to invent it as I go along. The normal 'procedure is that the Chairman of Coumittees would report to the Speaker, unfortunately since I am perfoeming both functions today I will have to report to myself, so I will tell the House exactly what happened.

While I was in the Chair of Committee, I ruled on a matter, a point of order raised by the honourable Member for Bell Island, I ruled that the remarks made by the Member for St. John's East were not unparliamentary llnd my ruling was appealed and the motion now is that the ruling of the Chairman of Committees be upheld. Those in favour "aye', those opposed "nay", In my opinion the "ayes" have it. The ruling is upheld. MR. NEARY: Record the standing vote, MR. CHAIRMAN: Call in the members. Order, please!

The motion is that the ruling of the Chairman of Committees be upheld, those in favour please rise: The honourable the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the honourable the Minister of Health, the honourable the Minister of Social Services, the honourable the Minister of Provincial Affairs and Environment, the honourable the Minister of Rehabilit*tion and Recreation, the honourable the Minister of Eduaation, the honourable 3919

April ll, 1975 Tape No. 1314 NM - 2 the Minister of .Justice, the honourable the, Minister of Fisheries, the honourable the :M::l.nister of Industrial Development, the honourable the Miuister of Finance, the honourable the Minister of Forestry &'!'Id Agricul ,ture, the honourable the Minister of Rural D.evelopment, Mr. Dunphy, Mr. Marshall, Mr. !Wans • Those apposed please rise: Mr. Gillett, Mr. Woodward, Mr. Neary, . Mr, Rowe, and Mr. Simmons. HR .. . SPEAXER: . The motion 1.s carried. Ma. SIMMONS: Mr.

Speaker, I rise on a matter of privilege, on a matter affecting the privilege of the House, I cite Beauchesne 1.55 in wbich it says, "It will be useful to gtve ex~ples here of expressions which are unparliamentary and call for prompt :l,nterference, these may be clas ,sified as·',follows, number one the imputation of false - MR, SPEAKER.: Order, please! The Chair' s ruling bas gone before the House and 3920

April 11, 1975 Tape 1315 (morning) IB-1 the ru1infi has been upheld. For the benefit of honourable members all of these parliamentary or unparliamentary phrases have to be taken in the context in which they are uttered. The opinion of the House in this case is that this phrase was not unparliamentary and consequently, the Chair's ruling is upheld. MR. SI}1MONS: Mr. Speaker, I was not questioning the ruling of Mr. Speaker. I am aware of the procedure - MR. SPEAKER (STACG): If the honourable member is directing himself to another matter, then he may. MR. Sil-'l"ONS: Mr.

Speaker, I am about to outline a matter of privilege. I fail to see how Mr. Speaker can decide whether I am indeed raising a matter of privilege until I have been allowed at least briefly to outline the facts and the circumstances. MR. SPEAKER (STAGG): Maybe it was Wlfair for me to anticipate the honourable member, so he may continue. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, I am dealing essentially with the matter that was raised by my colleague in Committee except that he raised it as a point of order. I am raising the matter as a point of privilege and I submit that the Chair has not ruled on the matter of privilege.

I would like to outline it and then put a motion to the Chair. MR. SPEAKER (STAGG): Order, please! Evidently my anticipation of the honourable member's remarks was quite correct. It is quite counnon - w~ll, it is not uncommon for the Chair's rulings, either the Speaker's rulings or the Chairman's rulings, to be challenged. In this case this was done. The ordinary parliamentary procedure was proceeded with and the honourable member .1 ust cannot proceed by way of personal privilege or any other.

If he were to raise that remark, it should have been raised at the time in Committee, I would aniticpate that a similar ruling would have followed. However, the time has now gone by for that. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to rise on a matter, Sir, of the privilege of the House. Inasmuch as that Your Honour himself was placed in a very, very embarassing position,wearing two hats as Chairman of the 3921

April 11, 1975 Tape 1315 (morning) IB-2 Connnittee of the Whole and then having to return to the Chair to make a ruling on a ruling that Your Honour had already made. I would submit, Sir, that this is most unusual. I have no doubt but Your Honour did the best he could under the circumstances. But, Sir, I am going to suggest this as an alternative, that we have an assistant Chairman, an assistant Deputy Chairman of Committees. We have other honourable gentlemen, Sir, who have chaired the COIIDllittee - MR. SPEAKER (STAGG): Order, please: Order, please!

Now, the honourable gentleman is proceeding to make a speech that is entirely irrelevant. To explain one of the remarks he made, it is not really awkward for the Chairman of Committees to have to assume the Speaker's Chair. It happens quite frequently. The motion was put to the House. The honourable the Speaker did not have to rule on it himself. It was put to the House before honourable members here and the ruling of the Chairman of Committees is upheld. Now, subsequent debate is out of order and it really does not matter who is in the Chair. I am sure that that should explain the matter. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, as a matter of privilege of the House, I think that it would be better and it would appear to be much better if the assistant deputy Chairman sat is Connnittee of the Whole, left Your Honour free out in his office to have a smoke or a coffee and then Your Honour could come in and then it would at least appear to us, those of us who do not understand the legal involvement of all this, Sir, it would appear that justice is being done. MR. SPEAKER (STAGG): Order, please! Well, maybe if we could get Mr.

Lamoureux out of retirement to come down and have the Chair in Newfoundland, it would solve many of these problems. However, we get by as best we can. The honourable member knew that when he raised the point that this possible embarrass­ ment might arise where the Chairman might have to occupy two positions. It has arisen. Now, he has compounded it by arguing about it. So, I think that we are just wasting time here. On motion that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole. Mr. Speaker left the air. 3922

April 11, 1975. Tape 1316 RH - 1 MR . CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. John's East. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Chairman, with a bit of respite, perhaps I can go on in a similar vein. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: mind. (First

part inaudible) - drive him out of his MR. MARSHALL: Once I drive the honourable members opposite out of their minds, I will certainly - no, I cannot,because you got to have a mind to be driven out of,really. Mr. Chairman - AN HONOURABLE 11:EMBER: Do not be nasty now. Is that parliamentary? AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Order! MR. MARSHALL: Mr, Chainnan, I mean to be parliamentary and nice. Assistant assistant Chairman of Committees on my left, Mr. Chairman. But, Mr. Chairman, look, just in,•conclusion, I think I have made the points that I wanted to make.

I have also made my position, I think, abundantly clear with respect to this matter. If I have not, I certainly meant to. I want to say that with respect to this, I have heard it mooted around with respect to this procedure that we are now going through of getting authorization before you borrow, that this causes somewhat, I think it does and I think it is somewhat of a problem, not as much as it mooted to be but it certainly was one that was discussed when this amendment ~-as going through. It does cause a little bit of concern to the public servants because of the fact that it is perhaps inconvenient to them.

It is very hard for them, because they go over and they have to, particularly if they come to the end of the time when they are borrowing money and they have a possibility of getting an issue, of picking up an issue or issuing an issue, whatever they do,which is more than the amount authorized, they then have to come back to the legislature for it. I realize that that is inconvenient, but that is just too bad. That is one of the prices that we pay.

The inconvenience is one of the prices that we pay,as far as I am concerned,for effective operation of government, for effective dissemination of essential information 3923

April 11, 1975. Tape 1316 RR - 2 to the general public and for the proper carrying out of governmental functions. I also as I say,and I do not think I need to dwell on this anymore, I have dwelled on it sufficiently, I do not ascribe to the situation that we must not talk about the debt of this Province. I think on the contrary that we should be talking about it an awful lot more than we are because of the rate at which it is mounting, a rate at which it is mounting unavoidable.

People of the Province, I repeat again, can be thankful really in a way of - thankful is not the word, it sounds too pretentious really, but I think that people of the Province have confidence in the fact that they have a government who is able to manage them through difficult times such as this. In the meantime, Mr.

Chairman, in the meantime I think it is crucially essential in this time and in this day of 1975 more so than it was at any other time> it will probably ~e more so, more crucial next year and the year after, that the people of this Province know exactly not only how much is being borrowed but exactly what it is borrowing for.

I know there is the argument that all expenditures are approved before the fact when the budget is brought in,after the fact on supplementary supply, but the fact that the legislature has the right to approve subsequent expenditures through supplementary supply is only really a theoretical right because no legislature would dare, could dare because of the jeopardization of the credit of the Province,refuse to grant supplementary supply which has been validly issued by the executive arm of govermnent pursuant to a valid authorization and delegation from the Legislature itself.

So, the point is once it is spent on supplementary supply it is spent and if extra monies have to be borrowed in order to spend this money, extra monies have to be borrowed. It is not a case,and I also reject unequivocally, it is not a case of whether one does or does not have trust and faith in the government at all. It is purely and simply a matter of vital,dire necessity to the people 3924

April 11, 1975. Tape 1316 RH - 3 of this Province that they understand and that they are fully aware of the amount of the debt or the reason why the money is being borrowed and where the money is going. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 3926

April 11, 1975 Tape No. 1317 NM - 1 MR, CHAIRMAN: The honourable the Member for Hermitage. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Chairman, just a few comments before we have the question on the amendment. My colleague,as you recall, moved the amendment, my colleague the Member for White Bay North moved the amendment that we reduce the amount being requested by $70 million back to $205 million.

Perhapsto save time later I shall address myself to both matters,if permitted, the question involved in the amendment itself and the question which has been raised by the Minister of F:Lsber!es, giving notice that the government intends to introduce another amendment. I listened last week with some interest to the Minister of Fisheries when he spoke to the main motion,I believe it was 9at that particular time, the main resolution. He, like the member this morning, was accusing the Leader of the Opposition of making statements for political reasons - AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR.

SIMMONS: I wish it - I will not say it. It would be unparliamentary, Mr. Chairman. The Minister of Fisheries was accusing the Leader of the Opposition last week of doing things for political reasons. He talked about making statements calculated for the public and then we hear the Member for St. John's East do the same kind of thing this morning. Well 1I would like to come back to him in a moment, to his remarks in a moment.

First of all, having gone on for some time, the Minister of Fisheries, about how the Opposition was making statements calculated for the public consumption, not concerned about the public interest, not C, concerned at all about money matters,but only concerned with reaching the " public of Newfoundland, then the Minister himself indulged in what must be one of the less rational diatribes we have ever heard in this House, when he talked about if this bill was not passed, if this resolution was not accepted by the Committee, there would be no industrial development.

He would not put it that directly, He asked the Leader of the Opposition if he waa in favour of no industrial development, no 3926

April 11, 1975 Tape No. 1317 NM - 2 health services, no coJ1U11Unity services of ~arious kinds, that kind of diatribe. Now during this particular debate on this bill today and a few days ago, I have seen an awful lot of people politicking, Mr. Chairman, and I have just learned that it is parliamentary to assign that kind of motive to members of the Committee, The Member for St, John's East talks about how crystal clear he has made things now. Well. Mr.

Chairman, it might ~e inferred,and I am prepared to leave myself open to that possibility, it might be inferred that I am just a little slow to understand - AN HON, MEMBER: On the uptake. MR. SIMMONS: That may be it, a little slow on the uptake. But I listened pretty carefully to the Member for St. John's Eut and I tell you that one thing is not very crystal clear to me and I suggest to other members of the Committee, is where he stands overall.

I think I know where he stands on this particular issue but he got into the larger issue of his confidence in the government, so anxious to keep assuring the Committee, keep assuring the House that he has confidence in the government that one gets the feeling, one gets the feeling somehow)like Judas of Scripture,he has to keep saying, not I, to assure himself and those around him that he does have confidence in the government. Mr. Chairman, I fail to see how he can have confidence in the government. He does not agree obviously with anything the Minister of Fisheries says and quoted him at length this morning.

He does not agree with the present bill,or the government's tand on the present bill before the House. We know where he stands in terms of the way the government handles its proposal to rent office facilities. So, Mr. Chairman, I submit that the only evidence we have that the Member for St. John's East ha~ confidence in the government is his say so. On the contrary we have a whole lot of evidence that he has no confidence in the government. MR, CHAIRMAN: Order, please! The honourable member is being irrelevant. 3927

April 11, 1975 Tape No. 1317 NM - '.3 He is getting into a area of debate that has nothing to do with this particular amendment tl)at is before the House and his remarks directed to the Member for St. Jotm's East are irrelevant. MR. SIMMONS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As still a relatively new member of this House I make the mistake of thinking that the broad range that he was allowed is allowed me as well. I now understand that it is not so I shall confine myself to the 392ts

April. 11, 1Q75 Tape 1318 (morning) IR-1 MR. CHAIRMAN : Order, please! The honourable member is not going to be permitted indirectly to criticize the Chair. The inference from the honourable member's remarks is quite obvious, that one - AN HONOURABLE MEMJJER: Inaudible. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! AN HONOURABLE ME}IBER: Inaudible. MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member may speak again when the Chair is finished. The inference is that the Chair favors one group over another 1 the honourable member is given a great deal of leeway here, and this honourable member is not.

Well, that can only be interpreted as a criticism of the Chair an~ challenging the Chair's ruling which has already happened once th:ls morning and I suppose could happen again. MR. SI~ONS: No, Mr. Chairman, I do not want to challenge the Chair's ruling. I appeal to the Chair to give me the same range as has been given other members, whatever side of the House they sit on. MR. CHAIR~AN: Order, please! The honourable member's appeal falls on receptive ears but unfortunately the appeal is not necessary.

The honourable member is going to dig himself into a very deep hole if he persists in making these remarks which critici~e the Chair. Although this particular Chairman is not really too upset one way or the other because the honourable member thinks he is partisan or whatever, however, the Chair is a much more venerable institution than the person who happens to be sitting in it at the time, and remarks of this type are not going to be permitted. The honourable member makes a direct challenge each time he does this sort of thing. It cannot go unchallenged, MR. SIMMONS: Mr.

Chairman, I appreciate the fact that the Chair and the person occupying the Chair has rights which I shall try without prejudice to uphold. At the same time, I have certain rights too. One of the rights I have, Mr. Chairman, is not to have words put in 3929

April 11, 1975 Tape 1318 (morning) IB-2 my mouth. At no time did I suggest, say or infer that the Chair was partisan. I know how to do that. When I feel that, ~r. Chairman, I shall, as is my duty as a member of this House, go through the proper procedures in order to have the matter corrected. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! Now, we do eventually come to the point where an honourable member persists in irrelevance and he can be directed to discontinue speaking. The Chair has done this before on, I think, two occasions. But, it is a rather extraordinary procedure.

Now, the honourable gentleman is persisting in continuing a debate with the Chair. Now, the debate under discussion is the amendment as proposed by the Leader of the Opposition, and the honourable member is persisting in attempting to ensure that his rights are upheld. Well, the Chair will do its best to uphold the honourable gentleman's rights. But, it is not going to be chastised or is not by inference going to allow the honourable member to let it be thought that the Chair is not impartial, the obvious inference from what the honourable member is saying. MR. SIMM>NS: Mr.

Chairman, if necessary I will make it a matter of privilege. I am saying, before I proceed on to this other matter, that I have not said the Chair is partisan. If I left that impression, I want to withdraw it. That is what I tried to say a minute ago. I think that got misinterpreted, hut that is what I meant to say. I was talking, Mr. Chairman, a moment ago,about the Member for St. John's East and his stand on this particular issue, and he leaves me, as one member of this Committee, pretty, pretty puzzled on where he does stand. I believe I know where he stands on this issue.

He starts off his few remarks this morning by assuring us that he is not going to side with the Opposition members of the Committee. I see later as I listen to him why he thought to do that because the stand he takes is really a duplicate of the stand that has been taken by my colleagues on this side of the House. It is the same stand. 3930

April 11, 1975 Tape 1318 (mornini) IB-3 So, for once, whether the Member for St. John's East likes it or not, once again, 'Ir. Chairman ., he finds himself in just about total a~reement with a stand that we have taken on an issue. It is not the first time, Mr. Chairman, that that member has found himself 1n almost comple t e agreement with the Opposition on a matter. Now, I do not care, Mr. Chairman, whether that member likes it or not, but I draw some consolation from the f act that his stand coincides with our stand. 3931

April 11, 1975 Tape 1319 (Horning) PK - 1 I draw from it the consolation that despite all he says about our motives and so on, our political motives on this side of the House, I draw from it the consolation that nevertheless there is proof, the proof of a member on the other side finding himself so often duplicating our stand. 1 find in that the consolation of a proof that we are doing some of the right things on this side of the House. We are taking some of the right stands on this side of the House.

And here is another issue where we, me and my colleagues here are firmly convinced that we are taking the right stand and the only rational and proper stand that can be taken on this issue. Now I listened last week to the Minister of Finance address himself rather briefly to this subject. It does make one wonder, Mr. Chairman, who in effect is the Minister of Finance on that side of the House. He says very, very little on the subject that most intimately affects his responsibilities. But he did say a few words, give him credit where credit is due. He did say a few words last week, Mr.

Chairman, on the subject of this bill. He said at one point, he said that it had been decided the amount of $275 million- had been decided - and I believe I quote him almost exactly here, I certainly hope so -The amount of $275 million had been decided because the market might be good when and if they go to the market to get the money. They decided on $275 million because the market might be good. Mr. Chairman, without taking the minister's remarks out of context, if you follow that through to its logical conclusions you get this - if the market is good we will borrow $275 million.

So if we happen to find it is excellent let us borrow $500 million, $600 million. If it is really, really very excellent,well,why not borrow $1 billion while we are at it. There has got to be some other I reason, some other rationale,Mr. Chairman, for borrowing in that there is a good market. Should it not be related to the needs of the time? Should you not decide in part that the amount you are going to look for is the amount that is going to meet the need of that particular moment, I use moment in its broad context.

Should not need dictate to the minister and his colleagues in cabinet.what decision to arrive at when it comes to massive government borrowings? And,Mr. Chairman, should not one other 393l

April 11, 1975 Tape 1319 (Morning) PK - 2 factor affect the government's decision - this document right here? Am I to understand correctly that this is in an affect a request, a set of recononendations from the Lieutenant-Governor in Council as to what their projected expenditures ought to be this year? Or are they saying, _well, this is within . $75 million or $100 million? Is that what they are saying? I understand this to be a fairly firm, and I would hope a well thought-out set of recononendations from cabinet as to what they project to be their expenditures for the forthcoming year.

And I would also understand that it contains a proposal, a set of proposals as to how government intends to raise these amounts of money, this amount by taxation, this amount by borrowing and so on. Mr. Chairman, these fairly elementary assumptions are the case, that this is what the government intends to expend,not $100 million less, not $leO million or $200 million more, but this is what the government honestly and rationally proposed to expend, number one. And two, this document also contains their proposals for how they intend to raise that amount of money.

I can only come to the conclusion that, one, the minister and his officials have done their homework well. They stand by this document. I can only come to that conclusion or the only other possible conclusion, they have riot done their homework and they are covering all their bets in this bill. And they are saying, oh, we might be out by $50 million, 75 million bucks here. AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. SIMMONS: So let us cover all our bets. Let us just be sure just in case. Mr.

Chairman, I discounted the Minister of Finance's reason for borrowing the amount of $275 million, and the same arguments can apply to the $225 million of which the Minister of Fisheries has given notice this morning. I discount the reason given by the Minister of Finance that the reason they went for $275 million,or now a little later on $225 million,is that the market might be good. We have 3933

April 11, 1975 Tape 1320 (morning) got to have better reasons for borrowing money than the reason, the presumed reason that there is no trouble to get it. If that is the only reason, why stop at $275 million? Why not borrow unlimited amounts of money? I submit, Mr. Chairman, that the reasons are different from thia all together and have nothing to do with the ability of the market to accommodate that kind of request. That is not the reason at all. The reason is the one that the Member for St. John's East came up with a good expression for, the cushion. It is the cushion.

I share his feeling, his concern, about what can happen when the cushion is there. He said it very well, Mr. Chairman, the old story that if it is there there is more of a tendency to spend it. Had I said that first, Mr. Chairman, one could assign to it all kinds of suspicions as to whether I was suggesting out loud that perhaps the fellows in government were less than honest for that kind of thing. I did not say it first. The member for St. John's East - MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! Order, please!

I hope the honourable member is not going to pursue that line of debate, that the honourable member may not say indirectly or by inference or any other way what he cannot say directly. IB-1 MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Chairman, I said if I had said it first that motives might have been assigned to me. Mr. Chairman, you can be assured that if I feel that the government's motives in this matter are less than honest I would say so in a very direct way. So, a moment ago I did not infer that.

When I want to say it, I shall say it and either take the consequences or withdraw it if it is ruled unparliamentary at that particular time. What I was saying a moment ago is that I did not make the initial statement on this matter, that statement about if there is a cushion then it is available to the executive branch of government and the tendancy is there to spend it. I believe that in essence is what the Member for St. John's East said. I am saying I was not the first person to say that. I endorse that statement, but he said it first, and it is significant, Mr. Chairman, that it was he, a fonner 3934

April 11, 1975 Tape 1320 (morning) member of cabinet, who said that particular statement because he is not now a member in Opposition who has had no access to the kinds of things, no access to the knowledge, to a knowledge of the kinds of things that go on in cabinet. It is not a person who sits here and can only guess or try and find out, and very often second-hand, some information about what really goes on. Now, it is not that kind of a person sayi.ng it, Mr. Chairman. It is rather a person who sat in the inner councils of government and who knows the way this cabinet operates. I say to the Committee, Mr.

Chairman, we should place double or triple, if you like, weight on the statement that has been made because it was made by the Member for St. John's East. I wonder if he is really trying to tip us off on something. I wonder if he is really trying to say, Mr. Chairman - _MR. ~AFSHALL: A point of order, Mr. Chairman. We have gone through this before that. The Opposition will agree with the tenet that it is incorrect to ascribe motives to an individual. '1R. SIMMONS: No, that is okay. IB-2 MR. MAR'>llALl.: Now, you know, the honourable member is really ascribing motives to the words which I say.

In other words, he is saying for the reasons what I say. I think he is really getting on the track if he is not directly on it, Mr. Chairman, of motives. I thought I explained myself quite clearly. I do not really need the assistance of anyone to explain the import of my words. I think I put them forth quite adequately. m. SI'Ml'!ONS: Mr. Chairman, I believe the honourable Member for St. East has risen on a point of order. I did not hear him say it directly, but I believe he was. If he was, Mr.

Chairman, I submit that this is no point of order, but it is a difference of opinion between me and he on this particular point. I am dealing at some lenRth with some of the comments he made. If at such time as I say something which would assign motives, I think at that particular point it is time for somebody to bring me to order if indeed the assignment of motive ia unparliamentary at that point. 3935

April 11, 1975 Tape No, 1321 NM - 1 MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, honourable gentlemen have thrown it into the Chair's lap again and the question of motives has come up for some discussion here this morning and I did make a ruling earlier, a person speaking about policial motives,and that is the only ruling that was made. There are many motives in this world, many motivations, some of which are unparliamentary when used in the House and that is the only ruling that was made and honourable gentlemen may attempt to, but the Chair is not going to be bound to accept any type of adjective placed before the word motive.

And I trust that will be berne in mind by honourable members as they speak. MR. SIMMONS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

If I may persue, I was referring a moment ago to the statement made by the Member for St, John's East to the effect that if a government has a cushion, a cushion of money over and above what is projected in the Budget, and that aaount is available to the executive branch of government, then the tendency is there to spend it, more of a tendency than if you do not have the money, I think that is a fairly, almost an axiomatic statement which applies in our own private lives too, you tend to spend more if it is available or appears to be available to you. I was saying, Mr.

Chairman, that I read more significance into it and I am distressed that the Member for St, John's East thinks that I am assigning motives to him because that was not the intention and luckily he is in the Committee right now and can obviously have the opportunity, when I am through, of correcting any misimpressiona that I might have left concerning the matter. But what I want to say, Mr.

Chairman, is that he and I,in terms of our relationship to the present administration, are somewhat different by comparison in that I have never been a member of the present administration and so that if I -.ake these kinds of statements then - MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! The honourable member seems to have a 3930

April 11, 1975 Tape No. 1321 NM - 2 the ability to force the Chair to intervene quite frequently, which is not done by choice, but the honourable is being irrelevant to the amendment as proposed by the Leader of the Opposition. Now if there is a difference of opinion between the honourable member and the Member for St. John's East, that is one matter.

That is maybe unfortunate, I know it is a fact, but it is irrelevant to this debate on the amendment as proposed by the honourable the Leader of the Opposition, And I brought this to the honourable member's attention on a number of occasions but each time he appears to want to get back into the argument with the Member for St, John's East. It may be, it may be that earlier in the debate, the member for St. John's East may have had slipped in a few things that were irrelevant, that happens sometimes but it does not,unfortunately, give unlimited licence to reply in kind.

It is quite often that honourable members make irrelevant comments but unfortunately for other honourable members who wish to reply in detail, equally irrelevantly, when the Chair rules on it it has no choice but to persist in that type of ruling. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Chairman, once again 1 was not seeking to question your ruling, I was talking about the cushion, the amount between the $203 million in the Budget and the $275 million in the bill and I think that is what the subject is all about. Now, Mr.

Chairman, that is what I have been trying to address myself to and in so doing I have been referring to certain remarks by the Member for St. John's East, I did not understand Mr. Chairman's ruling to be that I could not mention the member, If that is the ruling I shall refrain from mentioning him but I was referring to the cushion. the term that he used, the cushion I understanrl it to be in this case, the cushion between $203 million and $275 million, and that is what we are trying to address ourselves to.

My colleague, the Leader of the Opposition, has introduced an amendment which would reduce that cushion by $70 million and I am trying, struggling, Mr. Chairman, to be relevant, I assure you. And in listening to the Member for St. John's East, 1 take particular advice from what he said 393'/

April 11, 1975 Tape No, 13n NM - 3 in regard to this cushion because be knows whereof he speaks insofar as the way this government deals in money matters and I say to membe-r:s of the Committee that it is important that all of us hear loud and clear what the Member for St. John's East has said on this matter. Mr. Chairman, it is difficult to persue this matter without referring to the Member for St. J ohn's Eas t because he was the person who had spoken last and I made many of 111¥ notes around him. I had hoped that we would be able to get together on this one . lie did say he supported us and 3938

April 11, 1975 Tape 1322 (morning) l"y colleague from Bell Island made the mistake of saying "Hear! Hear!" ' and suddenly I learned that the l"ember for St. John's East did not even want our support. Well, I would hope, Mr. Chairman, that would operate differently in this Committee. I had hoped that we would decide each issue on its merits. If there are people on that side of the House who support the Opposition amendment or,equally,if there are members on this side of the House who do not support the amendment, I would hope that we could be men about it.

I would hope that we could stand for what wr believe in and vote and let the chips fall where they may. I know that "is what I intend to do, Mr, Chairman, on this particular amendment. I cannot get worked up that some people who may be voting for this amendment, may at the same time violently disagree with me on many other matters. I think that is very irrelevant, very irrelevant. I disagree with the l"ember for St. John's East on many matters, but I am delighted that on this particular one we are going to be standing together. But, of course, perhaps, Mr.

Chairman, the difference is that we do not,or I do not in this particular instance exhibit or demonstrate very visably such venom for him as he does for us and for what we stand for. Mr. Chairman, I believe the amendment that was submitted by my colleague, the Member for White Bay North, deserves the support of every member of this Committee. I would hope that it could be supported unanimously. I gather from the Minister of Fisheries that will not be the case.

Let me in conclusion 1 then, just say that we will or I will vote for the amendment introduced by the Leader of the Opposition because it serves the intent we wanted to achieve, to bring back the amount of money within $1 million or $2 million of the amount that was projected in this budget as being needed through borrowing. I take the minister's word that if $203 million was what they wanted, $2113 million was l·hat they should get if they can give ample reason. We will decide that as we go through the estimates. IB-1 So, the Leader of the Opposition's amendment was really completely 3939

April 11, 1975 Tape 1322 (morning) IB-2 in step with what was requested in the budget, give or take a million dollars, but the Leader of the Opposition rounded it off at $205 million on the argument that when you go to the market you normally go and look for amounts in round figures, Perhaps $205 million might be better than $203 million but that is for people who have been involved in the market and those sums to say, and I have not been. I will vote for the amendment for that reason, Mr.

Chai.rman, and if the Minister of Fisheries or one of his colleagues introduces the other amendment, if it provides for anything over and above $205 million in borrowings, I will personally vote against that amendment for the reasons I have stated. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Hear! Hear! HON. V, EARLE (MINISTER OF FINANCE): Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to get into any long argument or discussion on this. The honourable Member for Hermitage on the other side said that I was a person of few words and did not comment very lengthly on things 1because for the simple reason, Mr.

Chairman, I credit members with the intelligence to be able to sort out the facts for themFelves and see what we are getting at. I would just like to refer simply to this matter once and for all,I hope. The reason that the $275 million figure was arrived at, as I explained earlier, was that there was a $65 million carry-over from this year which was not used, but it was automatically cut out when last year's allocation was cancelled. So, there is a $65 million balance not used. That amount was added on to the $203 million which we are supposed to borrow to give us, as members have called it, a cushion.

Now, it is only a question for the House to decide whether they want a cushion or how large a cushion is to be or how small a cushion is to be, We, in the Department of Finance, felt that the cushion of $275 million or an extra $75 million was required. The House may differ with us on that. The Member for Hermitage stated, well, when you say $275 million, why should it not be $400 million or $500 million. 3940

April 11, 1975 Tape 1322 (morning) What he seems to fail to understand is that this government has brought back into this House the control of what we borrow. When we state $275 million, it is $275 million, not $400 million, not $500 million. We are asking the House 3941 IB-3

2'_ April 11, 1975. Tape 1323 RH - 1 for that authority. If they do not feel like giving us $275 million, that is it, but the fact still remains that it is the House's authority to borrow whatever the sum may be. Now, I am rather amazed that, on the question of supplementary supply, it went through this House,a total of $135 million on supplementary and interim supply,with no disucssion and no argument whatever. If supplementary supply had been debated, it would have shown that these additional amounts were required for the legitimate operations of the government and they were all well advised and well required.

This is the only condition under which this government will borrow supplementary supply, not for political purposes or any other matter which the honourable member on the other seems to think. That matter was not debated at the time. So, there is not evidence produced as to why supplementary supply was required but our record on supplementary supply has been a very good one indeed, and it will continue to be so. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. EARLE: Now, what is the money required for. I think the honourable Member for St. John's East asked what is the money required for.

The $203 million in the budget is detailed in the estimates exactly. There has never been presented to this Rouse a clearer or more concise budget if people want to take the trouble to read. Every item of expenditure is spelled out there and the $203 million is completely accounted for to the last cent and what we want it for. Now, of course in that $203 million there is provision for $24 million approximately of debt retirement and debt servicing. This is part of the $203 million and that is part of our expenditure. The honourable Member for St. John's East asked that question. I just wanted to clarify that.

In listening to the honourable Member for St. Jolm's East, I think he has a much clearer understanding of the budget and of our requirements than most other members of the House. He has •asked some very pertinent questions and I wanted to take the opportunity to point 3942

April 11, 1975. Tape 1323 RH - 2 out to him that this retirement of debt and servicing of the debt, of course is included in the $203 million. He did also make another remark which he said monies are required for the unhampered develop­ ment of the Province which is really the case. The fact is that we may need money at short notice, such as this year.

In the current year just passed we had this balance of $65 million on the books but our people were actually in the markets, both European and American and could have borrowed more money than that but the restrictions of the act would not allow them to borrow more money than $65 million. So, that went by default. It was cancelled out when this new loan bill was brought in. The fact may well occur in twelve months time that our people will be in the markets and wish to borrow possibly $100 million at that time.

Now, that does not mean to say,as was the case this year, that if they borrowed or were given permission to borrow $100 million at the end of next year, that would be spent in the current year. It could not be spent under the estimates unless you brought in an outrageous supplementary supply which I do not think the House would go along with, That $100 million could not be spent. It was not to be spent this year if we had borrowed it. But that is borrowing in advance for the following year to take advantage of market conditions, and this is what we are asking for.

Now, the House seems to feel and I think that our side have agreed that if it goes to the $225 million that that will be sufficient. I feel it is barely sufficient and the House may well need to come back at some later date and ask for an increase, but be that as it may, I am quite prepared to say if the House is agreeable to the $225 million that we will accept that and vote on it. MR. CHAIRMAN: '"'04·· ;J ~ .J Is the Committee ready for the question on the amendment?

April 11, 1975, Tape 1324, Page 1 -- apb Those in favour of the amendnient "aye". Those opposed "nay". In my opinion, the "nays" have it. AN HON. MEMBER: Divide, MR. _CHAIRMAN: Noted,on division. The honourable the Minister of Fisheries. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Chairman, I will move an amendment that the amount of $275 million be deleted and replaced by $225 million in the Resolution and in the bill. MR. NEA!!.l On a point of order, Sir. Before the minister puts his amendment, the members on this side asked to divide the House. Can we do that in Committee? MR. CHAIRMAN: You do not divide in Committee. MR. NEARY: I see.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Noted, on division. HR. !_EARY: Okay, Sir. All right. I learned something new today. MR. CHAIRMAN: Is the C0111111ittee ready for the question? Those in favour "aye". Those opposed "nay". In my opinion the "ayes" have it. MR. NEARY: Look: Would not vote. ----- MR. CHAIRMAN: Noted, on division. MR,_ MURPHY: (Inaudible) MR. CHAIRMAN: Noted, on division. MR._!EARY: Long or short? On motion resolution, carried. On motion Resolution as amended carried. On motion that the Collllllittee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again, Mr. Speaker returned to the Chair. MR •• CHAIRMAN (Nearv): Mr.

Speaker, the Committee of the Whole have considered the matters to them referred and have passed a certain Resolution and recoanended that a bill be introduced to give effect to the same. MR. SPEAKER: The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole reports that they have considered the matters to them referred, have adopted 3944

April 11, 1975, Tape 1325, Pagel - •pb a certain Resolution and have recommended that a bill be introduced to give effect t .o the same. On motion report received and adopted. On 100tion, a bill, "An Act To Authorize The Raising Qf Money By W:ay Of Loan By The Ptovince." read a first, second and third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. MR. ~P~R: Is it a~ed that we now call it one o'clock? AN HON. MEMBER: It is agt:eed. MR:._ SPEAKER: It now being 1:00 p.m. I do leave the Chair IDltil 3:00 p.m. this afternoon. '"194· . .:, .. ~

April 11, 1975 The House resumed at 3:00 P.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. Tape 1326 (afternoon) MR. SPEAKER (STAGG): Order, please! On motion that the House resolve itself into Committee of Supply. Mr. Speaker left the Chair. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1209-01. Head 1209-01, page 81. MR, NEARY: Head 1209-01, grants to the Newfoundland Farm Products Corporation, $1,500,000. I presume, Mr. Chairman, that this is the heading under which falls the abattoir down at Pleasantville. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Oui. MR. NEARY: Ah, oui. Take my candy out, Sir. IB-1 Mr.

Chairman, for some time past I think it has been realized that there is a great need in this part of the Province for a new abattoir. The old abattoir down here at Pleasantville, Sir, which was a building that was taken over by the Province when the Americans withdrew from Fort Pepperrell is unable to handle the production in Newfoundland at the present time. Now, I am sorry I was not here last night. I was over on Bell Island last evening attending a meeting of that part of the new District of Harbour Main-Bell Island electing the executive for that part of the district. So, I do not know if this matter came up.

The minister's name came up, by the way, the Minister of Industrial Development, the junior Member for Harbour Main, I spoke very kindly about the honourable minister, Sir. ~ost people did not know who he was. I had to tell them that I thought he was a fine fellow. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible, Ml., NEARY: What happened to Joey, by the way. Get him up so I can get inspired. I can get fired up when I see him. There you go. That is better.

Mr, Chairman, I do not know whether this matter of a new abattoir came up or not, but, Sir, I would submit that because of the nwnber of hogs - I am not looking at the honouable gentlemen when I am talking about hogs. AN HONOURABLE "MEMBER: Inaudible, 3946

April 11, 1 g75 Tape 1326 (afternoon) MR. NEARY: Well, we are talking about, not chicken - what do they call these? _j.N HONOURABLE MEr-iBER: Broilers. MR. NEARY: Broilers - the number of broilers that are being produced now in this part of the Province, Sir 1 the farmers tell me that the abattoir down at Pleasantville is unable to handle the production. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. NEARY: No, the farmer - well, maybe the farmers should build a new one, Sir. I do not know. Maybe the minister is right.

But if they do build a new one they are going to need tremendous financial involvement on the pert of the Province. Rut this hes developed into a very serious problem, Sir, for the broiler operators and for the hog raisers in this part of the Province. l Now, I understand the situation out on the West Coast has been alleviated somewhat thanks to Mr. Callahan and his very farsighted policy. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. NEARY: I beg your pardon? AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. NEARY: Trying to help out who? AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! MR. NEARY: No, Sir - Mr.

Chairman, I am putting in a word for nobody. I am putting in a word for the farmers. They cannot expand, Sir, and there can be no new operations started up until such time as the government faces up to this problem of building a new abattoir in the Eastern

section of this Province. The minister agrees with me and I am sure there are farmers, producers, over in the minister's own district, down around Whitbourne. Every one of these gentlemen whom I have spoken to over the last two or three years tell me that they cannot expand and no new applicants can be considered because they have a quota. They are on the quota system down here at the abatto:l _r, and they can only actually bring in their boilers and bring in their hogs in turn. They have to almost queue up. It is 394'1 Ill-2

April 11, 1975 Tape 1326 (afternoon) a desperate problem, Sir. I would like for the minister to let us have his views on whether or not the government intends in the foreseeable future IB-3 3948

April 11, 1975 Tape 1327 (Afternoon) PK - 1 to build a new abattoir? Are they waiting for the farmers to make their move? If so, how far are the government prepared to go in financing this abattoir? It is very, very important , Sir. And unless something is done about it I am afraid there is going to have to be a drastic cutback in the industry, Sir, in the broiler industry and in the hog raising industry. And a lot of the farmers are going to be discouraged because they are frustrated now. And I think the minister is aware of this.

So I would like to get the minister's views on whether or not the government are to proceed in the foreseeable future with the establishment of a completely new modern abattoir in this part of Newfoundland, in the Eastern section? MR. COLLINS: Kt, Chairman, with regard to the Farm P,roducts operation in Pleasant"i'ille,some of the things which the honourable member refers to are true. The building and the equipment is such that it is not condudive to efficient processing. It makes it difficult to reap the full benefits from the broilers and the hogs which are processed there.

This government are well aware of that. We have had a consultant. The consultant report is in,incidentially 1now. We have had a consultant lool at it to tell us what needs to be done and what the projected costs are. And I do not know the cost figure at this particular time because the report just came in recently. We have also had the Federal Department of Agriculture take a look at it for us because they do have some expertise in this particular field.

And they have been kind enough to do three or four commodity studies for us, and this is one of the studies which they agreed to do for us for nothing, incidentially. Those two reports are now in the hands of the Farm Products Corporation, and the officials of the department. And,in due course, recommendations will be made to my colleagues and what will happen I am not prepared to say at this time, of course, but we are aware of what needs to be done down there. The honourable member mentions the abattoir, and my friend and colleague from St.

John's East Extern just mentioned the problems which we have at the Swine Breeding Station, which is a follow over from the past administration,! might say, where this pond, the name of the 3949

April 11, 1975 Tape 1327 (Afternoon) Pk - 2 pond evades me now, but there is a serious pollution problem out there. This government were forced, not forced but agreed last year to provide some facilities for the Sunshine Camp people whose boys were going there sw:tmming and found that they had to give up that particular area because of the fact that it was polluted. I think we spent in the order of $80,000 last year, if my memory serves me correctly,to provide alternate facilities for them.

But I do know there is a pollution problem in that area still which has been there for a good many years and which we are going to have to deal with. Last evening before we finished the honourable Member for Hermitage raised some questions about what was happening on the West Coast. And I might say that under the Farm Products Corporation we operate the Pleasantville complex,which is the main complex. We also operate the new complex now at Corner Brook. The Corporation activity over there is confined to purchasing~ processing and marketing of hogs and broiler chicken and fowl.

And just recently we arranged, made some money available, and arranged with a group of farmers over there, dairy farmers,whereby we are providing a

section of that building to them to enable them to be able ~o process their dairy products, their milk. There is two reasons for this, Number one, is that the Processing facility which was at Stephenville was burned in February. and some of the farmers tell us that that was a little bit distant for the farmers around Pasadena, Midlands and Corner Brook generally. So those farmers are now going into an operation in the new complex at Corner Brook, and we wish them every success,of course,and we know that will be successful and will go a long way in solving the needs of the citizens of Comer Brook and the general urban area in terms of being able to 3950

April 11, 1975. Tape 1328 RH - I provide them with fresh liquid milk. We also operate a facility at Doyles, the small slaughter house which is registered under the Provincial Department of Health. It is not involved in the pur­ chasing or marketing but it is confined only to the slaughtering of animals. We also operate a building at Robinsons. I have some figures here somewhere. The cost of those operations, the operating cost or the projection for this year at St. John's is $1,080,000. At Corner Brook it is $350,000. At Doyles it is $8,000; Robinsons, which I just mentioned, $17,000.

At Bishop's Falls,which is in my own district,the projected cost there this year is about $30,000. That is a fairly major operation as well; Comfort Cove, a slaughter house; Lethbridge, a vegetable storage really, let us say vegetable processing,but . it is storage essentially. Winterland, the Winterland Agricultural Society occupies a portion of that particular building. In Clarenville and Harbour Grace we have a facility as well. I might say for the information of the Committee that in 1974 there were 21,377 hogs slaughtered.

There were 1,152,000 broilers slaughtered, that is not the right term, slaughtered - processed; 164,000 fowl; very few cattle because we are not into the beef cattle bu•iness in any big way in Newfoundland but there were 350 head of cattle slaughtered and 100 of different other animals. The forecast for 1975 in terms of hog is 26,000 and we are forecasting 1,600,000 broilers to be slaughtered this year. I might also say, Sir, that in 1974 in all of those facilities there were 4 million pounds of vegetables processed and we are looking forward to processing 4.5 million pounds this year.

The working capital provided on current accounts by the Department of Forestry and Agriculture to Newfoundland Farm Products Corporation in 1974 is $1,310,000. Now, this year we are projecting $1,500,000. The number of employees~incidentally,last year was 125. With the coming on stresm of the operation in Corner Brook plus one or two other areas where we are improving the services, we are projecting seventy-five to have 3951

April 11, 1975. Tape 1328 RR - 2 150 people on staff in those particular places. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, the honourable minister seemed hell bent, Sir, on giving out these very boring, tedious statistics that have obviously been prepared by his officials in case he was questioned in the House. The question I put to the minister, Sir, was about the abattoir down at Pleasantville and then the minister had to get up and make a long winded oration releasing all these statistics hoping the newsmen up in the press gallery would pick them up and give them a bit of mileage. MR. COLLINS: I understand - MR.

NEARY: Well, Sir, I was not impressed. I was not impressed. I would like to hear the minister - figures, that was one of my very weak subjects in school, Sir, was mathematics. MR. COLLINS: MR. MURPHY: MR. NEARY: That was not the only one. As Minister of Welfare too. Is that so? Is that so? We will find out the next time around. But, Sir, what I want to know from the minister, the minister could have said Newfoundland is now self-supporting in pork or now self-supporting in broilers, now self-supporting in milk, eggs, dairy cattle.

That is the kind of a statement I would like to hear the minister make, not throw out a blUlch of statistics that do not mean a thing. Sir, the minister muttered something under his breath about pollution down at the Swine Breeding station down there off the Portugal Cove Road near Winsor Lake, down near Winsor Heights. I do not know what the minister was driving at. Is it the intention of the govermnent to close down this Swine Breeding station? The minister sort of said, well, this is something we inherited from the former Liberal administration,as if that was something bad. MR. COLLINS: (First

part inaudible) Liberal administration. MR. NEARY: Yes, the minister did, Sir. Go and get the tapes and play the tapes back. The minister sort of muttered as if this was something bad. But, Sir, there would be no hog industry in Newfoundland 395:c

April 11, 1975. Tape 1328 today but for that Swime Breeding station down off the Portugal Cove Road. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible. RH - 3 MR. NEARY: Well, we could have went up in the minister's back yard. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: '"95 ·, ,.) .. J Inaudible.

April 11, 1975 Tape 1329 (Afternoon) PK - 1 AN HON. MEMBER: •••• city water supply. MR. NEARY: Right across from the city water supply. If there is one subject - AN HON. MEMBER: Ineudible. MR. NEARY: If there is one topic that the senior Member for Harbour Main is familiar with, Sir, is hog breeding. He is an expert on it. AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman, I remember in this honourable House the former Premier of this Province, Mr.

Smallwood, during the estimates of the Department of Agriculture - Mines, Resources and Agriculture it was at the time- there were two things that used to intrigue me about Mr. Smallwood. AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. NEARY': First of all, Sir, - AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. NEARY: No. First of all, he was a walking encyclopaedia on manure - on manure. HON MEMBERS: Inaudible. MR. NEARY': Members may laugh at that, Sir, but I remember Mr. Smallwood and my honouzable friend the Minister of Fisheries will remember - AN HON.; MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. NEARY: - when Mr.

Smallwood would stand in this House to speak about the various kinds of manure,you could hear a pin drop in the House it was so interes _ting . MR. MURPHY: And you had to hold your nose. MR. NEARY: It was so interesting, Sir. Mt. MURPHY: It was so realistic. MR. NEARY: No it was - MR. MURPHY: Inaudible. MR. NEARY: It was so interesting, Mr. Chairman. And the other thing that Mr. Smallwood was an expert on was that Swine Breeding Station down at - and my honourable friend was here and heard the discussion. And I was often intrigued about Mr. Smallwood's description of the pigs, of the operation - AN HON.

MEMBER: Inaudible. 3954

April 11, 1975 Tape 1329 (Afternoon) MR. NEARY: When you went down as a visitor. MR. MURPHY: I thought he was a movie actor one day when he was describing the slim ••••• MR. NEARY: MR. DOODY: MR. NEARY : I remember one time - recruiting candidates. No, I remember AN HON. ~!EMBER : Inaudible. PK - 2 MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman, I remember one time in this honourable House - HON. MEMBERS : Inaudible. MR , NEARY: night. I feel kind of shellshocked after that meeting last Mr.

Chairman, the,honourable Premier,! remember,he was so fascinated with this operation, and so proud of this Swine Breeding Station down there off the Portugal Cove Road that every year it was an annual event in this House when the honourable Premier would invite members of the House to come down to inspect - AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. NEARY: - invite the members down to inspect that Swine Breeding operation. And I remember the Premier said you would have to dress up in oilskins and put on your jumper - HR . }1URPHY: And you would have to have a bath before you go down. MR.

NEARY: - and you would have to take a shower before you go in there, put on your long hip rubbers. And I remember he used to say even members o·f the Opposition, my honourable friend was there at the time,would be welcome to come down providing they would assure the honourable Premier that he would not contaiminate the hogs, the swines. MR. HICKEY: I was wondering where all the contamination went, Now we know. MR.

NEARY: Now we hear, Sir, now we hear,just to get on a serious note for a moment - I do not know whether I am interpreting the minister-' s remarks correctly or not, But is it the intention now of the government to close down that Swine Breeding Station? AN HON. MEMBER: No. 3955

April 11, 1975 Tape 1329 (Afternoon) PK - 3 MR. NEARY: Are they going to carry on? Have we reached the stage yetl have we yet reached the stage in Newfoundland where the government can get out of this business and leave it up to the private producers, the private operators? Will the government have to stay in­ to this business? Do they have any intention? Because as my honourable and dear and lovable friend, the Member for St. John's East Extern, the Minister - MR. HICKEY: Who said that? MR. NEARY: - for Japanese Affairs - as the minister said, Sir, it is near the city water supply.

And so does the government intend to relocate this operation? What future is i~ store for this operation down here off the Portugal Cove Road, the Swine Breeding Station? Perhaps the minister in three minutes could give us the answer. HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible. MR. COLLINS: Mr. Chairman, I also had the experience of listening to - MR. MURPHY: Mr. Smallwood. MR. COLLINS: - O,L.F. talking about - he is looking at you all of the time,you know. His hair did not stand on his head yet,but I suspect if it is left on that desk long enough his - AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR.

COLLINS: hair will stand on his head looking at the honourable member. AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. COLLINS: But I would like to inform the Committee that not only do we not have any intention of closing that particular facility out, we are doing a fair amount of work down there, a lot of work in fact, in terms of improving the breed of the ,pig. And I might inform the Committee ~ and I am sure they will be proud to hear this,that we are receiving inquiries from just about all over the world, from all over the States, from Cuba and other places where they are interested in obtaining some of our small pigs, MR.

NEARY: Inaudible. MR. COLLINS: because they are a 3956

April 11, 1975 Tape No. 1330 NM - 1 very healthy variety, species of pigs, Probably one of the most healthiest species in the world today and of course I have got to give a lot of credit for that to the man I succeeded, my good friend and colleague, now the Minister of Manpower and Industrial Relations. With regard to the pollution in that particular area, as I said there is a problem, we are aware of it. The Department of the Environment have had a study done which was received yesterday\! believe. My honourable friend agrees.

I think it was yesterday and government is looking at that to see whether it is necessary in order to clear up the mess in that particular pond. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Chainnan, a few questions I would like to raise on the ~arm Products Corporation before we move on, and a few comments I would like to make. First of all I would like to refer to the facility at Pleasantville. I missed the first ten minutes of the Co11D11ittee this afternoon so the minister may well have already given information respecting the facility at Pleasantville .

I understand that it is quite an obsolete plant, quite an inefficient plant in many respects and indeed may well be quite an inefficient operation at Pleasantville 1 an operation on which it is my understanding that the government is losing a bundle of money in terms of operating.

I am wondering if the minister could indicate to the Committee . whether his officials have looked at this in terms of cost, in terms of the unit cost per unit of production, whether you are talking about broilers or hogs or whatever, I am wondering if the minister's department has determined exactly what kind of money they are losing on this operation. It is my understanding, and I stand to be corrected, it is my understanding that they are losing, Mr. Chairman, a bundle of money on the Pleasantville operation.

If that is the case, I am wondering if there are proposal& to rectify this situation, to make the plant more efficient, to modernize it, or to bring it near to capacity in terms of produc~ion. 395'/

April 11, 1975 Tape No. 1330 NM - 2 While I am on the subject, I ought perhaps to refer also to the Corner Brook facility, which is a much newer and more modern operation, because I want to raise some of the same kinds of questions as they relate to the Corner Brook facility too. First I will talk about the operating side and raise the questions such as I have raised in respect of Pleasantville .

Is it true that the Corner Brook operation is losing even a larger bundle of money than is the Pleasantville operation1 Is it true that the Corner Brook facility is operating at less than half capacity, substantially less than half capacity at the present moment? I understand the capacity of the Corner Brook plant is about 10,000 broilers per day. They can actually take, receive, and slaughter and prepare for market, package, 10,000 broilers a day, that is the capacity of the facility at Corner Brook 1I am told.

I also understand that there are at this moment just two suppliers, two produeers of broilers providing broilers to the Corner Brook facility. One,I believe~produces about, or has a capacity for about 30,000 to 32,000 broilers and the other -the first is in the Pynn's Brook area, the second in the Howley area, has a capacity for about 10,000 broilers. I would like that question answered as to how near capacity the plant is operating and if the suggestions I have made are correct, that it is operating at far less than half capacity. Now, Mr. Chairman, I ask that question for two reasons.

One for the obvious reason that at some point we must relate cost to production. We must at some point be able to justify the amounts of money that we are spending on the continued operation of a facility such as this. Now, Mr. Chairman, if 3958

April 11, l«HS Tape 1331 (afternoon) this situation of operating at less than half capacity is strictly an interim measurel if in six months or a year the minister can assure us that present plans will take up the slack, will see to it that the plant is ~perating near to full production, well, of course, that would be an understandable situation.

If, on the other hand, the government is proceeding from month to month _and year to year without any real hope of bringing the Corner Rrook operation nearer to full capacity, then I believe the minister has to answer to the Committee as to why or how he can justify a continuing loss in respect of the Corner Brook operation. That is the first reason I asked the question. The second, Mr. Chairman - AN HONOURABLE 1'1EMBER: Do you want it to close down? MR. sn~ONS: No, Mr. Chairman. The minister interjects, do I want it to close down. No, I have not suggested that.

I have asked him what the plans for the facility are. Will the government say that it intends to operate indefinitely at less than half capacity? I say that would not be the approach. i say what government ought to do, if he is looking for suggestions, is make it somewhat easier for people who want to get into broader production, to get into it. I know, Mr. Chairman, from three good sources, that persons on the West Coast who have been wanting to get into broader production have met with nothing but frustration from the government on this matter. There are three or four issues.

One is the cost of land in the area. I am told that because of the government's failure to intercede in this matter that one would-he producer or producer - I am not sure which - would-be producer, I p;uess - one would-be producer is presently paying about $600 per acre on the West Coa