VOL. 2 NO. 67 PRELIMINARY UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR THE PERIOD: 3:00 P.M. - 6:00 P.M. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1983

November 29, 1983 Tape 3487 EC - 1 The House met at 3:00 p.m. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please Before we begin today, it is a pleasure indeed for me to welcome some distinguished visitors to the galleries from Abitibi-Price Incorporated: Mr. Mickey Devine, Vice-President, Newsprint Manufacturing, Region III; Mr. John Carson, General Manager, Grand Falls Division; Fern H. Duquette, General Manager, Stephenville Division; Ron D. McKelvie, Woods Manager, Grand Falls Division; from Bowater (Nfld.) Limited: D.

Wally Clark, President and General Manager John Lee, Assistant General Manager; from the Canadian Pulp and Paper Association; Howard Hart, President; Gordon Minnes, Secretary, David A. Wilson, Director of Economic and Statistical Services,and Mrs. Elinor Blanchard, Manager, Government Affairs. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear: STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear DR. COLLINS: Mr.

Speaker, I have a brief statement but I think an important one, and before I start I should say that I had expected copies would be here by now, but they will be along very, very shortly. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce today that government has agreed to provide a retail sales tax exemption for the purchase of kerosene oil used for domestic heating purposes. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! Ij

November 29, 1983 Tape 3487 EC 2 DR. COLLINS: Government recognizes there has recently been a noticeable increase in the usage of kerosene for domestic purposes. For 1983 the estimated consumption in this Province is 750,000 litres. This exemption is being intro- duced in order to make our exemption policy more equitable as it pertains to energy consumption for domestic heating purposes. The forms of energy used for domestic purposes which are currently exempt are furnace fuel, stove oil, wood and electricity. This measure is consistent with policies in place in other provinces. The exemption

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3488 MJ - 1 DR. COLLINS: is estimated to cost the Province $60,000 annually and will become effective on Friday, December 2, 1983. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, surely the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) can do better than that. As my colleague said,that is pretty heavy stuff. Mr.

Speaker, you would expect the hon. gentleman to come into this House and announce a reduction in the retail sales tax, The Board of Trade suggested it, we have suggested it, and the people in Newfoundland and Labrador want a reduction in the sales tax,yet the hon. gentleman comes in with this feeble, very pathetic statement today. MR. SIS: Are you against it? MR. NEARY: Any reduction in the retail sales tax we are in favour of it. Mr.

Speaker, if they keep on the policy, the policy of this administration of wrecking the economy of this Province,we might need a cut in kerosene oil because we will all be using kerosene oil lamps before too long. ORAL QUESTIONS MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, first of all let me say I do not know, Mr. Speaker, what I am supposed to do with this. Perhaps the member for St. John's North (Mr. Carter) can tell me what I am supposed to do with this. Do I sniff it or do I stuff it?Because if it is for turkeys, 7 59 1

November 29 3983 Tape No. 3488 MJ 2 MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out to the hon. gentleman the turkeys I would like to stuff are on that side of the House I suppose the next thing, Mr. Speaker, is we will be getting some embalming fluid from the member for Harbour Grace (Mr. Young). Mr. Speaker, I want to direct the Minister responsible for the offshore (Mr. Marshall) Could the hon. gentleman tell the House, now, today, in view of the severe storm that we had last night,if the administration are yet in a position to announce whether or not they are in favour of Winter drilling or are they still sitting on the fence on that matter? 7

November 29, 1983 Tape 3489 PK - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, the administration never sat on the fence last year, neither is it sitting on the fence this year. The fact of the matter is that we have been involved in extensive negotiations with officials of the industry, officials of the federal government, and the Petroleum Directorate with respect to Winter drilling, and there has been a great deal of discussion and ground covered with respect to it. There is going to be a meeting within the next week or ten days.

After that meeting we will be in a position to make our position on Winter drilling known for the ensuing year. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that we had our first major storm for the Winter last night, would the hon. minister tell the House if there were any incidents involving any of the rigs drilling on the Grand Banks last night in that severe storm: MR. SPEAKER: The hon. President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: I do not know whether one would call it an incident, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. gentleman seems to characterize things as he wishes to characterize them, but last night the SEDCO 710 decided to adopt a procedure which is known as 'hanging off', which was to disconnect from its drilling position, and at the period of time it appeared that one of the chains holding one of the anchors broke loose. There were still at least seven other anchors on the rig. That was the situation which occurred last night, there was a breaking of an anchor chain which was not considered to be a serious situation. The present situation is 7ç I J

November 29, 1983 Tape 3489 PK 2 MR. MARSHALL: that the rig will reconnect as soon as the weather conditions abate sufficiently. At that time they will proceed to grappel for the anchor and when they grappel for the anchor then at that time the hon. gentleman will be glad to know that the Petroleum Directorate has made arrangements,when the anchor is resecured,to see what happened. Apparently what happened was a breakage in a link and we are taking steps to see that it is examined, and to see the reason for the breakage. But I want to 75914

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3490 SD 1 MR. MARSHALL: emphasize at the time the hon. gentleman wishes to style it as an incident, and I suppose you could call it an incident as such, he is in a habit of styling things with certain imperatives that are not in accord with the facts, that what happened with respect to the incident happened within normal limits and everything is proceeding accordingly. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, the hon. gentleman may not characterize it as a serious matter,but,safety being uppermost in our minds / the safety of the people who work offshore, we consider it to be a very serious matter indeed when an anchor chair of the magnitude of the chains that hold these anchors, Mr. Speaker,break, burst in forty foot waves • We consider that to be a very serious matter indeed.

Now would the hon. gentleman inform the House in connection with SEDCO 710 if he is aware that when the rig was being brought from Japan to the Grand Banks that six out of the eight thrusters burned out,and are still burned out, and that means that there are only two thrusters on the rig that are working? Is the hon. gentleman aware of that? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr.

Speaker, we are aware of the situation with respect to the rig.and arrangements are being made in the very near future , in the relative near future, to bring the rig in for the purpose of repairing those thrusters. I should say to the hon. gentleman,when he makes the statement1 is he aware that when the rig was connected that this was the situation with respect to the rig? The hon. gentleman is only too aware that that is a rig that was cormnissioned by Petro-Canada and was put out in the Grand Banks at the period of time by his friends in Ottawa on a unilateral act. So it was going out there in 7rç / J J

November 29, 1983 Tape No 3490 SD 2 MR. MAF.SHALL: any event, So I would suggest that some of these questions that he addresses to the government he might well address to his friends in Ottawa at the same time to determine the situation. Now the fact of the matter is in the meantime,though, that Petro-Cariada is reporting regularly to the Province and I am happy to say it is complying with all provincial regulations,as I am quite sure it is complying with all federal as well. I know that that it would be quite disappointing to the hon. member. MR. NEARY: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Supplementary, the hon. Leader of the Opposition. 7596

November 29, 1983 Tape 3491 NM - 1 MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, we on this side are horrified at the attitude and the arrogance of the hon. gentleman in dealing with these matters, Mr. Speaker. These are not statements that are made by this side of the House, these are questions that are put to the hon. gentleman and the hon. gentleman should treat them as questions and not statements. Mr. Speaker, we have a right and a responsibility to ask the hon. minister questions about these matters because safety is uppermost in our mind, it may not be in the mind of the hon. gentleman.

Now would the hon. gentleman tell the House when this rig will be brought in for repairs and will the rig be brought in to Marystown or will it be sent somewhere else to have these repairs? MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I would point out to the hon. gentleman that we reply fully and completely to all his questions but we also reply to the little innuendoes that the hon. gentleman casts in connection with his questions from time to time. But the fact of the matter is we are aware of the situation with respect to the thrusters.

We have been given assurances that it does not affect the SEDCO 710 in its operations, drilling out there at the present time, and that the rig will be brought to port as soon as possible for the purpose of repairing the thrusters.

Now where it is going to be, I suppose I could say, if I wanted to to the hon. gentleman, I could say the control of where the SEDCO 710 goes, whether it goes to Halifax, or whether it goes to Ouebec City, or whether it goes to Sydney, or whether it goes to Marystown, it being a rig that is under the control of Petro-Canada, despite the way that Petro-Canada may wish to act towards this Province, the strings are being pulled, as the hon. gentleman knows, elsewhere. So I suggest the hon. gentleman might address his question elsewhere 757

November 29, 1983 Tape 3491 NM 2 MR.MARSHALL: and ask where the people who are chartering the rigs intend to put the rig. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR NEARY: I remind the hon. gentleman that I am not a Member of Parliament, I can only direct my questions to the people there opposite. And when it comes to innuendoes and snarky, nasty remarks, the hon. gentleman wrote the book, Mr. Speaker. 759a

November 29,1983 Tape No. 3492 ah-1 MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman is a master at squirting poison across this House , he is a master at it. Now, Mr. Speaker, let me ask the hon. gentleman this question in the interest of safety, protecting the lives of the people that work offshore and to protect the environment.

Would the hon. gentleman tell the House if SEDCO 710,which is drilling, I believe, on the Grand Banks for the first time in the Winter months - it only came in earlier this year - if that rig is as seaworthy as the other rigs or does the rig roll more? is there any foundation to the report that only a few days ago the rig rolled eight degrees in forty foot seas? Mr. Speaker, that would indicate to me that the people in authority should be very concerned about that particular rig, about leaving it out there in these severe Winter storms. MR.SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. President of the Council.

MR.MARSHALL: If I can say first, I will respond to the fact that the hon. gentleman can rest assured that if we have anything to do with it we will do out utmost to see that the SEDCO 710 will go to Marystown. If it goes anywhere else it will not be because of this government, Mr. Speaker. Now, Mr. Speaker, with respect to the other thing, I have risen in this House and have responded to questions by the hon. gentleman, the hon. gentleman wishes to ask questions of this nature Is there any truth to the report that? Is there any truth with respect to this or that?

He comes in and he repeats rumour before this House. Now we happen to be engaged in this Province, Mr. Speaker, in a new industry,which is the drilling offshore. We have gone 7599

November 29,1983 Tape No 3492 ah-2 MR.MARSFIALL: through a very traumatic disaster on the offshore in the Ocean Ranger disaster. MR.NEARY And you are very familiar with that, MR.MARSHALL: And I submit, Mr. Speaker, it does not do any good to the future of this industry, the confidence of the public in its security and the integrity of the operation to have the hon.gentleman asking questions of that nature. Now if the hon.gentleman has anything 7600

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3493 MJ - 1 MR. MARSHALL: specific to put to me I will respond as I have responded earlier in the Question Period But I am not going to respond to his rumours,which rumours are based on questions that he wants to ask which in effect are going to have a bad effect on the security and integrity of offshore operations. If he wants to be responsible and ask me direct auestions, I will respond to him,but in the meantime I am not responding to his rumours. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, we get a response from the hon. gentleman, 'Does not do any good.' 'It has a bad effect.' Well, Mr. Speaker, we raised these matters before the Ocean Ranger disaster and' the hon. gentleman pooh-poohed our questions and our correspondence with the hon. gentleman then and he is doing the same thing now, Mr. Speaker. We submit that our questions may have a good effect, that it may save lives, Mr. Speaker; that another disaster may be lurking on the Grand Banks and we are not trying to undermine the drilling operations - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

I would like to remind the hon. the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) that there may be other occasions when he can get into a speech and express his opinions on certain matters ,but this is the Question Period and I would request that he direct a question to some hon. minister. MR. NEARY: Well, Mr. Speaker, that is enough on that particular topic todav,because while safety is uppermost in our minds, it may not be in the hon. gentleman's. So I will change the topic for a moment if I could just catch the eye of the hon. gentleman who has 70

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3493 NJ 2 MR. NEARY: The Financial Post in front of him. MR. SINIIS: It is not the eye you want,it is the ear,is it not? PREMIER PECKFORD: Yes, Sir. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, could the hon. the Premier tell the House what the policy of his administration is on user-pay fees for doctors in this Province practicing under the medical care programme? MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECXFORD: Mr. Speaker, I think everybody is familiar with our position on the whole question of user fees and the like in the health care system. We are presently now involved in a Royal Commission on health costs and nursing home costs in 7 'U

November 29, 1983 Tape 3494 EC - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: the Province, which is holding public hearings, I think, over the next few days in the Province. But our position is pretty clear. MR. NEARY: What is your position? PREMIER PECKFORD: I am startled to find that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) is asking, after the Minister of Health (Mr. House) on I do not know how many occasions has enunciated government policy on this, that the Leader of the Opposition in this House does not know what our position is on this. Mr.

Speaker, I am astounded by it, I am absolutely flabbergasted that the hon. member does not know MR. NEARY: What is it? PREMIER PECKFORD: It is terrible to think of someone in this House in this position today. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, the problem is that they shift their position so often over there. I asked the hon. gentleman a specific question that required a very brief and simple answer: What is the administration's position on user fees?

And let it be recorded that the hon. gentleman did not have the courage to answer the question, Mr. Speaker. Now, what is the administration's position? Tell the House and tell the parliamentary gallery, so that they can report it to the people of this Province, what is the administration's position on user fees by doctors? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, it is quite clear. 7603

November 29, 1983 Tape 3494 EC - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: The Minister of Health (Mr. House) has made the position clear, the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) has made clear over and over again to the people of this Province our position on that. MR. NEARY: What is it? PREMIER PECKFORD: We do want to say that the whole question of health care costs are under a lot of strain these days because the federal government reduced its commitment to establish programme funding and it is going to cost us - I forget what the number was now - I think over $100 million over five years. MR. HOUSE: $30 million a year.

PREMIER PECKFORD: -?30 million a year, We are getting $30 million less from that great federal Liberal Government that the hon. gentleman supports over there; $30 million less for EPF funding. As the Minister of Health has said on many, many occasions, we agree with a health care system which is open to everybody, where there are not any fees being charged. At the present moment there are some fees being charged in the hospitals. For hospital rooms and so on in this Province, a modest fee is being chargel. We are, from a policy point of view, against any further attack upon the system, but we do point out, Mr.

Speaker, and the Minister of Finance has on a number of occasions and the Minister of Health has, that with this reduction of $30 million a year that the federal government has taken away, is subtracting from what we could 7504

ovember 29, 1983 Tape 3495 P1< - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: normally expect to receive under EPF that it is putting very strong strains on the system, And it was for that reason, because of the EPF reductions, because of the escalating costs of the health care system, a lot higher than the rate of inflation, for example, the rate of inflation right now is around 5.8 or 5.9, let us say 6 or 6.5 in Newfoundland, but I think health care costs are still going up around 11 per cent or 12 per cent. So the rate of increase in the health care system is still going up double that of inflation. So what we have decided to do, Mr.

Speaker, as a government, to look at the whole health care system,is to establish a royal commission to give all members of the community an opportunity to make proposals and to comment upon the high cost of the health care system. We are not at all inclined as a government or as an administration to move into additional fees upon the consumer in this Province, but we must find a way to be able to keep the costs in line with our ability to pay as a government and that is the approach we have taken.

We have instituted a number, as I say, of modest fees into the hospital system, for hospital rooms, but we have not gone any further because from a policy point of view this administration does not favour any movement further that way. But by the same token we have got to somehow figure out how we can arrange the health care system in a way which does not see these costs go up. Right now the hospital costs, for example, the operating cost of a new hospital will equal its capital cost in about eighteen or twenty months. The new hospital in the hon. member's district of LaPoile (Mr.

Neary), which was the first new hospital that webuilt,is going to cost - what is the capital cost of the Port aux Basques hospital, $20 million? MR. HOUSE: $11 million or $12 million. 7605

L'ovember 29, 1983 Tape 3495 PK - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: $11 million or $12 million, say $12 million. Well, eighteen months after that hospital opens it will equal its capital cost,and every eighteen months or nineteen rnths thereafter it will equal its capital cost, a tremendous cost. 7Cfl I 0u

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3496 SD - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: And the new technology that is being introduced into the health care system,because it is new,has a higher cost attached to it on the front end than other new technologies have. But we are, Mr. Speaker, as a government, wishing to address ourselves to this, this is why we have the Royal Commisssion established. We have looked at what they have done in other provinces, They have moved into user fees in Ontario, I guess they have; in Albert, I think they are about to. Those are two provinces I know of off the top of my head.

And as a poorer Province , less wealthy, if you will, than these other provinces who have introduced it , we have still resisted. I guess it is an easy temptation because from a policy point of view we do not believe it is the appropriate way to proceed with the provision of health care services to the public. But at the same time as we take that policy position,we are cognizant of the fact that costs are going up almost geometrically and it is very difficult for a Province like ours to continue to finance the system.

But we are trying and we are going to be sensitive to the recommendations that are brought in by the Royal Commission. At this point in time that is where we stand, Mr. Speaker. MR. NEARY: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Supilementary, the hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: One of the great flaws in the hon, gentlemant s character is that he flings out figures on the floor of this House irresponsibly. The hon. gentleman told us that the established programme funding is going down when in actual fact it is going up year by year and so are the equalization payments to this Province, Mr.

Speaker. The fact of the matter is that there is more money coming from Ottawa. MR. MARSHALL: A point of order, Mr, Speaker. 7 0

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3496 SD - 2 MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please! A point of order, the hon. President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman is involved in supplementary questions at the present time, but he is making a speech He asks questions , and the fact of the matter is communicated by this side of the House. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I would remind the hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary), when asking a supplementary question there should not be any need for any

preamble whatsoever in that realm to enter the realm of debate. The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, the stuff I have on my desk here, I think, is getting to me. MR. ANDREWS: The Leader of the Opposition is a walking

preamble. MR. NEARY: Is the hon. gentleman now telling us that the Province is being governed by press releases and royal commissions? The hon. gentleman just told us - we heard it yesterday, we heard it again today - that the administration have no policy. And will the hon. gentleman tell the House if these user fees that we are talking about in hospitals and imposed by doctors, direct charges to the patient, if they continue / could they bring reprisals anddeterrent penalties from the federal government? 7cn I tJU

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3497 NM - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) PREMIER PECKFORD: question, Mr. Speaker. MR. NEARY: all right. The hon. the Premier. That is a foolish It is kind of foolish PREMIER PECKFORD: The federal policy on health costs,I mean,is well known to the hon. gentleman, the Minister of Health and Welfare and what she has been saying in recent weeks, in recent months. Just let me remind the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary), we do not govern, Mr. Speaker, by commission and the like - MR. NEARY: You just do not govern period. PREMIER PECKFORD: - but, Mr.

Speaker, we intend to continue to appoint royal commissions and select committees of this House to get the widest possible representation from the people of this Province. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear PREMIER PECKFORD: This is a democracy and we are going to ensure that everybody is involved. We have a select commitee on food prices that has been travelling and having public hearings around the Province. Is the Leader of the Opposition against that? We have a Select Committee on Election Expenses that is going to report today,as I understand it.

And the Leader of the Opposition and his party have members on that that have gone around the Province and held public hearings. We have a Select Committee on the Companies Act, on the Chartered Accountants Act, the CGA, and so on, to go around and get as much input from the people as we can. The Leader of the Opposition just does not speak for all of Newfoundland and we have to do is consult the Leader of the 7309

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3497 NM 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: Opposition, Mr. Speaker, thank God. We will consult all the lobby groups, all the interest groups around the Province and then,based upon recommendations that come in from those commissions,formulate public policy that then will be announced in this House. That is the way we operate, Mr. Speaker, and we continue to do so. And no opposition from the Leader of the Opposition will deter us from continuing to appoint commissions to get the widest possible representation.

I am sorry that the Leader of the Opposition does not want this government to continue to create royal commissions and select committees and get the widest possible input from the people of this Province. We will continue to do it even though the Leader of the Opposition is against it, MR. SIMMS: He is against everything. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, another indication of one-man rule in this Province. Whatever the hon. gentleman says now,that is the law. WellI say bully for the hon. gentleman, Now, Mr.

Speaker, the hon. gentleman in his reply again showed his ignorance of how the system works. 7510

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3498 MJ - 1 MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, you would expect the elected representatives of the people to set policy. Now let me ask the hon. gentleman,resulting from the answer he gave me to my last question, if he knows the difference between a select committee of this House comprising of elected representatives of the people, if he knows the difference between that kind of a committee and a commission? MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: No, Mr. Speaker, I do not know the difference, obviously. MR. NEARY: I did not think you did.

PREMIER PECKFORD: No, I do not know the difference. and I would be very glad if sometime the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) can give an appointment so that I can go and visit him so that he can clarify the matter for me, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER: Bellevue. Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker. The hon. the member for MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker, I was going to ask the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) a question,but since the member for Grand Falls (Mr. Simms) is anxious to get going,let me ask the Minister of Culture, Recreation and Youth (Mr.

Simms),I am sure he is familiar with the problem that exists between those people who snare rabbits, like the Premier- the best one in Newfoundland,he says-and those people who hunt rabbits with dogs. Now, this is a major problem, Mr. Speaker, especially on the Avalon Peninsula, and I am sure that the minister has heard about instances of dog poisoning and so on. What does the Minister of Culture, Recreation and Youth intend to do about this problem? 71 1

November 28, 1983 Tane No, 3498 NJ 2 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the Minister of Culture, Recreation and Youth. MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Culture, Recreation and Youth intends to consider the matter, as he has been doing in recent weeks and months, and has received a number of representations from people who are as concerned about the issue as I am and in due course we will make a decision, hopefully that will alleviate some of the concerns of the people that they have expressed publically in the past. MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Bellevue. MR. CALLAN: Mr.

Speaker, let me ask the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) the question I intended to ask him. In the most recent report of the Minister of Finance, the one he read last week about the deficit situation of the Province, on Page 5 the minister says, 'As a preliminary guideline for next year's budget,government has already decided not to implement any major new programmes.' Could the minister elaborate on that? What sorts of programmes is he talking about? For example, will there not be any new paving projects next year, new water and sewer projects?

What exactly is it the minister has decided not to do next year? 7U

November 29,1983 Tape No. 3499 ah-1 MR.SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, that particular comment was meant to indicate to the House that we have sent instructions to the various departments who are now getting their estimates together for the new budget,indicating to them that we would not be entertaining the same level of new initiative that has been the usual situation in the past. Now there are ongoing programmes that will have to be serviced,obviously,and the hon. member opposite mentioned paving.

Well,paving has been going on ever since it was invented,I imagine ,and we do not regard that as a new programme. We will expect that necessary paving will take place in the future. But we have indicated to departments that because of the straiteñed finances of the Province that we would ask them not to engage in expanding their series of operation except where it is absolutely necessary for public safety and public health and these type of things. MR.CALLAN: A supplementary Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Bellevue. MR.CALLAN: Mr.

Speaker, I do not know if there are questions from the backbenches on the government side. There are a lot of people voicing opinions over there , Mr. Speaker. A supplementary , Mr. Speaker. Is the Minister of Finance (Dr.Collins) saying in this statement departments have been instructed not to seek such funding in their draft estimate requests; by that statement does the minister mean that there will not be , for example, as much money allocated in next year's budget for capital works programmes,such as water 713

November 29,1983 Tape No. 3499 ah-2 and sewer and pavement? MR.SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Minister of Finance DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is endeavouring to read into that certain things that will only come out as a result of the consideration of the budget which will be brought down early in the New Year and I would suggest that that is the time for him to get into such specifics as he is attempting to do now. I think he should just take the statement in the way it is written and in the way I have explained it.

We have made sure that the departments understand, they do1I am sure, but nevertheless we want to make it crystal clear to them , that the departments understand that the financial circumstances of the Province will not be able to take care of new programmes to the same extent it has been in more fortunate times in the past. Mr. Speaker.

I) November 29,1983 Tape 3500 PK - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I know the Question Periodhas almost expired, but I have a quickie for the Minister of Fines, Wildlife (Mr. Sims). I wonder if the hon. gentleman could tell the House, could elaborate on a statement that he made, I think it was back on June 29, when the hon. gentleman made a statement that there may be 1,100 moose-car mishaps in the Province this year. Could the hon. gentleman tell the House if his department or the administration have taken any measures - MR.

ANDREWS: How many have they got left to go? MR. NEARY: Could you ask hon. gentlemen to restrain themselves, Mr. Speaker? MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! MR. NEARY: If the hon. gentleman or the administration is taking any extraordinary steps to cut down on the number of moose-car mishaps in this Province? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Culture, Recreation and Youth. MR. SIMMS: Well, Mr.

Speaker, yes,I can tell the hon. member that we have indeed had consultations with the Department of Transportation. tjnfortunately,putting up signs at various locations around the Province is not really the answer because we are not convinced that moose will follow the directions of those signs, SO we had to look at it from a broader perspective because it is a serious problem,there is no question about that.

What we have attempted to do, in consultation with the Department of Transportation, is improve on aneducation programme which we recently begun, and placing that information in education pamphlets on the ferries and at other transportation depots around the Province. Unfortunately, 7615

November 29, 1983 Tape 3500 PK 2 MR. SIMMS: we live in a Province where these occurences do take place, and the only way we can really overcome the seriousness of the situation I think is educate the public to be more careful and cautious as they drive around the Province. But we did in fact put up more signs, The Department of Transportation , my colleague the minister tells me they have established a number of more signs, but unfortunately that really is not the only answer. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please! The time for the Question Period has expired.

PRESENTING REPORTS OF STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for St. John's North. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, I would like to present the report of the Standing Committee on Elections, Controverted Elections and Election Financing,to give it its full title. What we are tabling today is our report and a suggested possible draft bill upon which, obviously,there will have to be much more work done by the government and by this House of Assembly. 7616

November 29, 1983 Tape 3501 EC - 1 MR. CARTER: Rather than read the report itself in its entirety, I will make a few comments or I will highlight what I feel are the outstanding points. First of all, I would like to thank the members of the Committee - MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Order, p1ease The hon. the Leader of the Opposition on a point of order. MR. NEARY: For the sake of clarification more than anything else, Mr.

Speaker, 'Presenting Reports', does that mean that you just present a report and lay it on the table of the House or is a member allowed to enter into debate? And if so, Mr. Speaker, will members on this side be allowed to comment on statements made by the hon. gentleman? MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, to that point of order. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of the Council, to that point of order. MR. MARSHALL: The point of order is that one is not supposed to ask hypothetical questions of the Speaker. The situation is, Mr.

Speaker, if the hon. gentleman is rising to object to the hon. gentleman presenting the report making a comment - MR. NEARY: No, no,I am not, if he would present his report. MR. MARSHALL: I would submit to Your Honour if the hon. gentleman is rising on a point of order and objecting to it that the normal procedure in presenting reports is that there are a certain few words of explanation allowed in order to explain the content of a report. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear 71 7

November 29, 1983 Tape 3501 EC 2 MR. MARSHALL: And I am sure that is all the hon. gentleman is doing. It is not a time for debate or questions back and forth across the floor, it is a time for tabling a report, and when one tables a report, Mr. Speaker, a member or a minister is entitled to give a few words of explanation as to its content. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR. NEARY: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, to that point of order. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, let me say first of all that I am not objecting to the hon. gentleman tabling his report, as a matter of fact, I welcome the report, but the fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, that this will be a departure - MR. BAIRD: Well, sit down then. MR. NEARY: The hon. gentleman should go and try to look after his constituents in Corner Brook. The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, this would be a departure from the norm in this House. If a member tabling a report is allowed to comment on the report, to enter into debate then, Mr.

Speaker, we on this side of the House feel that we should be able to comment and answer the hon. gentleman. That has been the procedure up to now unless the hon. gentleman is taking the House on his back. The other day we saw a civil servant walk into the House. They think they own the House, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, pleaSe! The hon. the Leader of the Opposition is recognized on a point of order and is certainly not addressing his comments now to the point 7618

November 29, 1983 Tape 3501 EC - 3 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : that was originally raised by him with regard to the hon. member presenting a report. MR. NEARY: Tabling a report. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, to that point of order. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, the hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: I would just make a few comments to the point of order. The hon. the member for St. John's North (Mr. Carter) is Chairman of a Select Committee of this House - SOME EON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKEORD: - and, as Chairman, he is now tabling the report which has been completed by that Committee.

That Committee represents members from this side of the House and the opposite side of the House and, as I understand it, it is a majority report. It is a report which has the endorsement of all members of the Committee. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: So what the hon. the member for St. John's North is doing is presenting a majority report on behalf of all members of the Committee, all of whom are members from that side and members from this side who agree with him. And in tabling the report he is highlighting a number of the significant issues which all members of the Committee agree with.

So obviously, what the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) says is comment or debate is not, it is the comments and recommendations of all members of the Committee from the opposite side of the House and this side of the House, Mr. Speaker. So the Leader of the Opposition's point about debate and comment is irrelevant because it represents the comment 7019

November 29, 1983 Tape 3501 EC 4 PREMIER PECKFORD: and recommendations of all members of the Committee, that side of the House and this side of the House. MR. NEARY: Just one quick comment on that, Mr. Speaker. 72O /

November 29, 1983 Tape no. 3502 NM - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: One quick comment on what the Premier had to say, lecturing us again like a school teacher, Mr. Speaker. The fact of the matter is that the Public Accounts Committee that represents members on either side of this House has to table its report and are not permitted to comment on it,and I would submit that the same thing applies to this committee, Mr. Speaker. Tabling reports, presenting reports, means you present the report without comment. MR.

SPEAKER: Order, please To that point of order raised by the hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary), since I have occupied this Chair hon. gentlemen giving and tabling reports,as it is called,have always been allowed the courtesy of a few comments in tabling a report. With regard to the other point raised by the hon. Leader of the Opposition as to whether or not anybody on his side, so to speak ,would be allowed to express any coininents,I would assume that that can only be done by unanimous consent of the House. The hon. member for St. John's North. MR.NEARY: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Would the hon. House Leader indicate if we have unanimous consent so my colleague who is on the committee - SOME HON. MEMBERS: No. No. No way. 7621

November 29, 1983 Tape No 3502 NM - 2 MR. NEARY: Oh, they just want to have it all to themsleves. My colleague is a member of the committee, he should be allowed a few comments too. Unless they are trying to muzzle the House. PREMIER PECKFORD: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: This is highly irregular. I mean,as a number of members have already pointed out, and I have myself, the Chairman of the Committee is acting on behalf of all members of the committee. And if one is going to allow the hon. member for Bellevue (Mr.

Callan),who I think is the one to whom the hon. Leader of the opposition is referring, then all the rest of the members of the committee legitimately - are they legitimate members of the committee? The chairman and the other members from this side are just as legitimately members Of the commitee as is the member for Bellevue. So will we have all five—is it? - members of the committee now get up and make comments on the report,or is there supposed to be a chairman who is supposed to report on behalf of all the rest of the members of the committee, Mr. Speaker? This is highly irregular. MR.

NEARY: Just a quick response to that, Mr. Speaker. MR. BAIRD: (Inaudible). MR. SPEAKER: Order, please The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, before the House met this afternoon the Chairman of that Committee indicated to my colleague that he would recommend that my colleague beallowed a few brief remarks on this report also. But now the Government House Leader (Mr. Marshall) and the administration there opposite are refusing to allow that request, Mr. Speaker. So I would submit that the hon. 722

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3502 NM - 3 MR. NEARY: gentleman get on with his business of tabling the report unless my colleague is also allowed to comment. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please Again to that point of order. The hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary), I think,rose on a point of order and posed a question to the hon. President of the Council as to whether or not he would permit somebody from the Opposition side to respond. If I remember correctly the hon. the President of the Council (Mr.

Marshall) did not say that they would not permit the hon. member to my right to speak in reply to the tabling of that report. He did not indicate that he would not be allowed to speak. And if the hon. member for Bellevue (Mr. Callan) wishes to speakthen the Chair will certainly be prepared to put the question to the House for unanimous consent. The hon. member for St. John's North. tR. CARTER: Mr. Chairman, I thank all hon. members for their comments and their input into this report. I did not think it would be such a stormy one because it is after all unanimous, completely unanimous.

And what I was about to do was to thank the former members of this committee because this committee has been constituted now for something over two years. It evaporated at the call of the last election as all committees do, and was reconstituted after the election. So I would like to thank first of all, the member for Port au Port (Mr. Hodder) , and the member for Fogo (Mr. Tulk) , and the now erstwhile member for Terra Nova, Mr. Lush. I would like to thank all those gentlemen because they did put a lot of input into the report. 7o23

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3503 NJ 1. MR. CARTER: We had relativeley few public hearings and not a great deal of public interest ,but a tremendous amount of private interest and a great deal of lengthy searching debate, and quite a few lengthy telephone conversations and a lot of input from a lot of people. So the report represents at least two years of work not necessarily continuously sustained but intermittent work, and I think it will bear of scrutiny. We have twenty- nine recommendations.

Although I have provided an argument to go along with each recommendation, Iwill just comment very briefly on some of them because perhaps a further comment is usefUl. The recommendations are not necessarily presented in the order of their importance,but they are presented in the order of the Election Act itself.

We were all very heartened and helped greatly by various officials who have had a great deal to do with the ElectiOn Act, and not least of all the late Harvey Cole who sat down with me and went over clause by clause each part of the old Election Act pointing out the clauses that had been helpful to him and the clauses that he felt had been a hinderance. So the order of the recommendations has no bearing whatsoever upon thOir importance,rather it is the order in which they occurred in going through the Election Act.

I might say in beginning my remarks that perhaps we should look very carefully at the old act before we discard it. I think we have done quite well. The old act has served us very well,looking at this side of the House. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR. CARTER: So perhaps we should think very carefully before we adopt this report. The first point, Mr. Speaker, is that a permanent - 762k

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3503 MJ - 2 MR. NEARY: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Order, please! A point of order, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, this has nothing to do with the content of the report, Mr. Speaker, or tabling the report or whether he should table it or whether he should not, it has to do with the rules of the House, Mr.

Speaker, and Your Honour and the members are aware that what the hon. gentleman is doing is completely out of orders They are taking the place on their backs over there, they are doing what they like, they are trying to change the rules of the House, Mr. Speaker, and in the process muzzle the Opposition. Your Honour, knows that this is completely out of order, unheard of. PREMIER PECKFORD: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Look, Mr. Speaker, I do not know if the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Neary) realizes it butI mean,I consider this report and this piece of legislation on elections and election financing to be the most important piece of legislation to come before a Legislature of Newfoundland since about 1832, Mr. Speaker. This is a very significant reform and we have had the select committee and, all the Chairman is trying to do is highlight some of the important parts of the report - MR. NEARY: Okay, let us debate it. This is out of order. We do that during debate. PREMIER PECKFORD: - for the House and then move on.

The Leader of the Opposition, I do not know if he recognizes the importance of this whole thing. And surely we are willing to allow the Chairman of the committee, who is speaking unanimously for all members of the committee, a chance to say a few words and highlight a few of the points. 7U

November 29, 1983 Tape No, 3503 MJ 3 PREMIER PECKFORD: I mean, it seems to me to be awfully uncivilized not to allow the chairman of a select committee to say a few brief comments upon the most significant piece of legislation dealing with elections since 1832. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, to that point of order. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, it has nothing to do with the importance or the content of the report. It has nothing to do with that. We have to follow the rules of the House.

And if the hon. gentleman says it is the most important thing we have had since the 1800s,well,then,let us debate it, Bring it on and let us have a debate on it, if the hon. gentleman places so much priority on it. Mr. Speaker, but the trouble is what the hon. gentleman is doing now we cannot respond to it and that is wrong, Mr. Speaker. It is completely out of order and against the rules of this House. MR. CARTER: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for St. John's North to that point of order. MR.

CARTER: I hardly think it is outside the spirit of the report for me to thank the members present and past who contributed so much to the report, or to thank all the 7626

November 29,1983 Tape No.3504 ah-1 MR.CARTER: public officials and private individuals who have contributed to this report. I do not understand what kind of a game the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.Neary) is playing. It is most uncivil and indecent of him. MR.NEARY: Oh sure, do what you like. Take the House on your backs. MR.SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please To that point of order I again must repeat that it has been the practice of this House to permit hon. members when presenting reports to make a few brief comments. I would ask,however,of the hon. member for St.

John's North (Mr.Carter) that he not be too lonc in making his comments. As to whether or not an hon. member to my. right is permitted to speak I suppose we shall have to wait and find out two things, number one, if he has a desire to speak and , number two, if the House will be prepared to grant him unanimous consent. I recognize the hon. member for St. John's North. MR.CARTER: Mr. Speaker, having made my few introductory remarks, I am now into the body of the report itself. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.CARTER: So I do not see how I can be out of order. The first point, Mr.

Speaker, again not in order of importance but in the order in which it occurred in the old act - MR. NEARY: A complete abuse of the rules. MR.CARTER: Mr. Speaker, I welcome the interruption because it is helping me to gather my thoughts,but,still,I wonder how the rest of the members 7527

November 29,1983 Tape No. 3504 ah-2 MR.CARTER: of the House are reacting to it? A permanent list of voters , we feel, is both technically possible and administratively desirable. It is now technically possible because of the introduction, I suppose, within the last five years of a word processor that allows all that information to be kept on tape, fed into a computer, which is what a word processor is,and additional information to be put in and put in alphabetical order. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR.CARTER: Mr.

Speaker, there are some problems , of course SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR.CARTER: Mr.Speaker, I am quite seriously trying to go through this report piece by piece. I request the protection of the Chair if only for the sake of order and not for the sake of my protection. Because this is an absurd exercise otherwise,but it is intended to be a serious exercise. MR.NEARY: I hope the Public Accounts Committee will be allowed the same privileges. MR.CARTER: Even the Avalon Telephone Company will point out that its telephone directory is out of date by the time it is printed.

And what we are suggesting is that there will be always an upto-date voters list so that a person may be able to get on the list if they have any reason to believe they are not included. - M1(. NtAk<Y: I cannot blame His Honour for shaking his head. A complete abuse of the rules of this House. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Order, please I would remind hon. members that there is another procedure rule in this House, that when a member is speaking he does have the 7328

November 29,1983 Tape No. 3504 ah-3 MR.SPEAKER (Russell): right to be heard in silence. I would ask all hon. members to adhere to that. MR.CARTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MP..NEARY: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. MR.SPEAKER: Order, please! The hon. member of the Opposition (Mr.Neary) on a point of order. MR.NEARY: Your Honour is absolutely correct when he says that a member has the right to be heard in silence, but there are other rules, Mr. Speaker, that are not being observed at this moment in this House. And I can only appa1 to the Chair to inforce the rules of the House. The hon. gentleman is completely out of order and it has nothing to do, as 7529

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3505 SD 1 MR. NEARY: - I say, with the report; put the report on the table, we will debate it in due course. The hon. gentleman, Mr. Speaker, is presenting argument and debate at this moment and I would submit to the Chair for the third time that the hon. gentleman is completely out of order and ignoring the warnings from the Chair that he be brief in his comments. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Order, please For the third time I have to say that it has always been the custom of this House that when an hon. member is presenting a report he is allowed the courtesy of a few comments.

And it is correct I have mentioned this to the hon. member for St. John's North (Mr. Carter), and I would ask him to keep his comments brief,and I would ask him if he could confine his comments to five more minutes. The hon. member for St. John's North. MR. CARTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate your indulgence. However,I vould say that this is quite a complex report and requires a fairly detailed cornment,but I will do my very best. MR. NEARY: We will debate it in due course. MR. CARTER: As will be seen later on in the report,the number of people on the voters' list is directly tied to election financing.

The second recommendation is that permanent returing officers be appointed and we feel that this will mean that the people who are returning officers will be completely familiar with the act. In our opinion, three weeks is far too short a time for a person to be appointed as a returning officer, become familiar with the act and also administer it in addition to the many other hundreds of things that a returning officer has to do. It is a fact, of course, that many returning officers come back time and time again to each district, but this will 7330

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3505 SD - 2 MR. CARTER: regularize that procedure. Moving right along, there is also a recommendation for a proxy vote. That is to say that a person is who is unable to vote at an advance p011, or on polling day, or at a special poll,who is unavoidably absent or who is unable because of sickness or incapacity to cast his ballot may,under certain carefully restricted conditions,appoint a proxy who would be able to vote for him. Another change, an innovation, is that we are recommending that the ballot include the name and address and the party affiliation,if any, of the candidate.

This is a sharp break with our local tradition,although not a brea)S with tradition across Canada and the United States. It varies from place to place but we feel that since a person often votes for a party rather than a particular candidate that this would aid rather than hinder a democratic choice. MR. NEARY: (Inaudible) MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, this is very hard to put up with. It was amusing for a while, it was funny, but it has ceased to be funny and I would appreciate it, Mr. Speaker, if I could have the protection of the Chair from the hon. gentleman. 7331

November 29, 1983 Tape 3506 PK - 1 MR. CARTER: Those who may vote; We are suggesting, Mr. Speaker, that those qualified to vote be Canadian citizens, a citizen of the Commonwealth, or a citizen of the Republic of Ireland on the basis that these are, Canadians, British Commonwealth, and those from Ireland, are I the three people, the three founding races, if you like, of Newfoundland. And the suggestion is that it is the penrnence of residence rather than the source of residence that would be the decisive factor.

We do suggest also that landed immigrant status be considered, that is in line with the permanence of residence. Students residing outside their permanent residences going to college or trade schools or places of learning who are entitled to vote, we suggest that they be given the right to opt either to vote in the place that they are now residing or in the place in which they ordinarily reside. This will avoid a lot of confusion and, Ithink,faci1itate a democratic choice. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Order, please! The hon. Leader of the Opposition on a point of order. MR.

NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw Your Honour's attention to page 263 of Beauchesne, paragraph 857 and I will read it for the benefit of members of the House: "The Chairman of the Standing Corrinittee on Miscellaneous Prjijte Bills and Standing Orders presents the Committee's Report to the House and moves its concurrence at the eai1iest opportunity." Now, Mr. Speaker, I ask Your Honour to enforce the rules of the House. MR. CARTER: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for St. John's North to that point of order. 7U

November 29, 1983 Tape 3506 PK - 2 MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, although I do not have Beauchesrie in front of me, I notice from what the member read1and I can only go by what the member read, that that is a Standing Committee, This is the report of a Select Committee. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: As the hon. member for St. John's North (Mr.

Carter) pointed out, it relates to the Committee on Miscellaneous Private Bills and Standing Orders." You know, in case the hon. gentleman does not understand it, it is not a miscellaneous bill, this is a Select Committee of the House. Now, Mr. Speaker, the situation with respect to this is that Your Honour has made a ruling with respect to this matters Notwithstanding Your Honour's ruling from time to time,the hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) has not accepted it and got up and repeated the point of order over and over again because Your Honour's ruling was not to his satisfaction.

There is one even more important ruling in Beauchesne, Mr. Speaker, if the hon. gentleman wishes to read it, and I recommend it to him. it is on page 38, paragraph 117, and it has to do with respect to Your Honour as Speaker,as Presiding Officer of the House. "No member may question the Speaker.' Once the Speaker gives his ruling that is a ruling. Whether the hon. gentleman likes it or not or any hon. gentleman likes it or not,it is the only way that this House can function.

Now Your Honour has made a ruling with respect to this matter and that ruling is obviously to be followed by all members not the least of which and most especially is the Leader of the Opposition. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order I have to rule; that the hon. Leader of the Opposition did not raise a valid 7533

November 29, 1983 Tape 3506 P1< 3 MR. SPEAKER (Russell): point of order. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. One would wonder what the hon. gentleman is trying to prove. MR. BAIRD: Bring in the House Leader , boy. MR. CARTER: At the request of various officials, Mr. Speaker, we are recommending that the day of an election be fixed. Not necessarily the date as they do in the United States, fix a date every four years, but we are suggesting that the day of the week be fixed.

This would greatly facilitate the legistics of the running of an election, and we are suggesting, quite an arbitrary suggestion, we are suggesting that Tuesday be the day of the week unless the previous day is a holiday. The officials have pointed out to us that it is very useful if the day prior to an election is a working day so that various supplies and variouslast minute arrangements can be made. And therefore we are suggesting that the day of the week be a Tuesday, and that the election be on the fourth Tuesday after the writ is issued,.

This would mean that the period for an election could vary anywhere from twenty-two to twenty-eight days. Tuesday is a perfectly arbitrary day. It could be Wednesday or Thursday, as long as the previous day is a working day. That is the meat of that particular 7534 0

November 29, 1983 Tape 3507 EC - 1 MR. CARTER: recommendation. A very important recommendation,that the candidate or his agent have access to the list of the names of those who have voted. We feel, Mr. Speaker, that the candidate can have access to that list through an agent who is hired to sit down at the desk when the voter comes in. But the deputy returning officer is able to refuse the candidate the right to see that list of those who have voted and we feel this is unfair. If he is given one right he should be given the other.

So we are suggesting that somehow or other, and we leave it to the government to work out the details of that, that the candidate have access to the official list of those who have voted. I am skipping some of the recommendations because in each case we have put in an argument for the recommendation that we have made and we have also suggested a way that it can be done by bringing in some suggested draft legislation.

Number thirteen, we feel, is worthy of mention, that because the boundaries in an urban area are certainly not natural boundaries - usually the boundaries go up the center lines of streets - that the utility poles be made available for the display of election materials. That may seem like a simple request but it is not our right at the moment and we have always done it with the indulgence of the utility caripanies.

Now we are suggesting that this right be firmly .entrenched, and since their rights are already abridged by the use of traffic signs, we do not feel that this is a basic departure and we feel it would help to outline the urban districts at the time of an election. 7035

November 29, 1983 Tape 3507 EC - 2 MR. CARTER: The latter part of the report is concerned with the financing of elections and we are suggesting, Mr. Speaker, that recognized political parties be authorized to issue tax credit receipts for the provincial share of the income tax of an individual or corporation.

This would mean that a person donating money to a party would have the same advantage that they do now have if they donate to a federal party, except that they would only be able to get a tax credit for the provincial share - the only power we have over the income tax is over the provincial share of the income tax - and that the maximum contribution that may be made to a political party or candidate be $5,000 a year in an election 7536

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3508 MJ - 1 MR. CARTER: year and $1,000 in a non-election year. These are upper limits, Mr. Speaker. We do not expect that many contributions will be of this size, but we have to put some limit there. And, of course, the theme of our entire report is one of accountability rather than one of prohibition. MR. NEARY: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Order, please! The hon. the Leader of the Opposition on a point of order. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, apart from the hon. gentleman ignoring the direction of the Chair I wish to draw Your Honour's attention to page 204, paragraph 648, Presentation Of The Report To The House, in Beauchesne, "When the Speaker has called for Reports from Committees, during the Progress of routine business, the Chairman, or in his absence, a member of the committee, will rise in his place and say he has the honour to present the ............... Report of the Commitee. He hands the report to the Page, who delivers it to the Table." Now, Mr.

Speaker this is the fourth time that I have raised this matter of the rules of this House being ignored. The administration and members of it think they can take the House on their backs, they can ignore the rules of the House and, Mr. Speaker, I would like to have a ruling of whether or not this whole proceeding is in order. MR. MARSHALL: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of the Council to that point of order. MR. MARSHALL: The Speaker has already given a ruling with respect to that.

The rules of Beauchesne - so the hon. gentleman can understand, if he refers to Standing Order No. 1 he will see the rules of the Standing Orders apply and where they do not apply other rules do. Now,the rules of this House and the custom of this House, Mr. Speaker, have 7637

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3508 MJ 2 MR. MARSHALL: precedence over any other rules and customs of any other legislative jurisdiction or any other parliament,.and the custom and the practice in this House, as Your Honour has enunciated, has been the fact that the hon. member presenting a report can make some words of explanation on it. Because of the importance of this report the hon. gentleman's explanation is a little bit longer than perhaps is normal,but then.again,it is a very important report. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I draw to Your Honour's attention as well,you knowthat these are the rules and this is a ruling and we are going to have complete disorder and disruption in this House if an hon. member not accepting Your Honour's ruling is,at every available opportunity,going to get up and again present to Your Honour the same point of order that Your Honour has already ruled on. If that persists, Mr.

Speaker, and I know this will get all sorts of statements from the hon. gentleman about the majority of the House, but there is a matter of order in this House and there is a matter that all members of this House on whatever side have to protect,and if the hon. gentleman persists in flaunting Your Honour's ruling there is only one procedure that can be taken,.and I think the hon. gentleman well knows it because he has been subjected to it from time to time in his career. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the Leader of the Opposition to that point of order. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, at least I did not have a member come across and punch me in the face in this House, not yet ariywayb It happened to the hon. gentleman a few years ago,when he insulted a member's mother in this House. Now, Mr. Speaker, let me say this has nothing to do with custom or tradition7 the rules of the 738

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3508 MJ - 3 MR. NEARY: House have to be followed; the rules apply to both sides of this hon. House, the rules are not being followed. lAnd it is not the custom and tradition in this House as the hon. gentleman just told us - he is falling back on that argument now - it is not the custom or tradition to allow long-winded statements. The hon. gentleman is now almost a half an hour, over twenty minutes, Mr. Speaker, and he is allowed to plough on,and this is a blatant, inexcusable violation of the rules of this House, if I may. MR. CARTER: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER (Russell) : To that point of order, the hon. the member for St. John's North. MR. CARTER: By my rough calculation I would have been long since finished, long, long, since finished- I am not noted for speaking at length, ever,and I would have been long since finished if it had not been for the interruptions of the hon. gentleman. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! To that point of order, it has been a custom in this House of Assembly, as I said before, for the Chair to permit members when presenting reports to have a few comments and then table the report.

While the substance of the report and the importance of it tothis House may be of great importance,perhaps that is not quite the point that the Chair should consider. The Chair has,I think,been fairly lenient with the hon. the member for St. John's North (Mr. Carter) even though he has been sort of constantly interrupted by points of order and indeed has not had the opportunity to speak for a very long time on the report. However, there may come a point when the Chair has to make a ruling as to how long an hon. member can continue in presenting a report. The Chair did ask the hon. the member for St. John's -n

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3508 NJ 4 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) North if he would try to limit his comments to five minu Les and that was about fifteen minutes ago. I would ask the hon. the member for St. Johns North (Mr. Carter) if he would conclude his remarks in another minute or so. MR. CARTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 7040

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3509 SD - 1 MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, I will undertake if there are no further interruptions to conclude my remarks within a couple of minutes. I will give that solemn undertaking. But, Mr. Speaker, the interruptions have certainly been of great length.

The meat of the entire report, the nub of it, shall we say, is that government will be asked in future to help finance the running of an election, and the formula that we suggest is two dollars times the number of voters distributed to the registered parties on the basis of their standing either in the last election, or of the average of their popular vote in the last two elections, or of the average of their popular vote in the last three elections, or of their standing in the subsequent election.

Now,it would obviously be unfair to divide the public money between the two major parties in this House on the basis of the last election,because it would give the lion's share to one party and,therefore,we are bending over backwards to be fair. So that is the main point of the financing part of this report. The limit of the expenditures of a candidate be $25,000 exclusive of travelling costs: Now, that seems very, very high, but I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, that this is to provide for, say, the possibility of a by-election,where both parties expend all their efforts in one district.

There is a lot left over, there is a lot for the government still to do when they go over this report. We suggest that there should be an Electoral Commission that would review the performance of the parties and of this act after an election. And our last but not our least suggestion is that within five years of the introduction of a new act that there be a further Select Committee 71

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3509 SD - 2 MR. CARTER: appointed to review to see that what we have suggested has worked out. We are confident that it will. I would like to thank all hon. members who have had some part to play in this. And I hereby table the report and the suggested draft act of this bill. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please: I assume that the hon. member for Bellevue (Mr. Callan) is standing to say a few words. I have to ask for unanimous consent of the House for the hon, member for Bellevue. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker. MD C Tt'7\V1'D. The hon.

President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I want to point out it is not within the rules of the House, not in accordance with normal precedence, but this is of such importance that he certainly has unanimous consent from this sides I do know know whether the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) will consent to it or not. MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have unanimous consent? SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. CALLAN: members opposite. Agreed. Agreed. The hon. member for Bellevue. Thank you, Mr.

Speaker, and Speaker, whether one or two wrongs make a right or not is not important but,anyway, they have given me leave. Mr. Speaker, my remarks shall be few, I would like to say, as the Chairman has already said, that it has been a pleasure working on this Committee. I 7542

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3509 SD - 3 MR. CALLAN: have not been on it that long, about a yearI guess. The old Committee, of course, died before the last election and then it was reconstituted,or whatever the term is, after the last general election. As I said, Mr. Speaker, I have enjoyed working on this Committee. We put a fair amount of work into it, we deliberated at private meetings and we have had presentations from some groups, as the Chairman mentioned. Since there was a fair amount of comedy involved with the Chairman's remarks for various reasons, 7 )43

November 29, 1983 Tape 3510 NM 1 MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I can insert a little bit of comedy into this as well. Two members of the committee, myself and the Chairman, were in Ontario looking at other legislatures and so on in our efforts to come up with some draft legislation to improve the electoral system during election times, and I think it was when we were leaving the office of the Attorney General in Ontario, Mr.

Roy McMurtry, when the discussion go around to the number of members in the Ontario Leqislature as compared with the number of members in our Legislature - in Ontario there are 125 - and the chairman of this committee told Mr. McMurtry that in Newfoundland we have 52 members, the same number as you have in a deck of cards, but, he said, we have no jokers. Now, Mr. Speaker, I beg to disagree with that, I think in our deck of cards in this Legislature, the 52 members, that a number of the kings and queens have been taken out and a lot of jokers inserted in place of them. - Mr. Speaker, the Chairman - MR.

SIMMS: You had better watch what you say. MR. CALLAN: Most of the jokers, Mr. Speaker, are on the other side. Mr. Speaker, the Chairman referred to Recommendation Number 13, that provision be made for the use of Light and Power poles. I might say that I found that an excellent idea. I have always managed to met permission from Newfoundland Light and Power to use their poles during elections, and perhaps that partly accounts for my success 73L

November 29, 1983 Tape 3510 NM - 2 MR. CALLAN: in being able to defeat the Premier on at least two occasions, in a by-election and in the last election, more than anybody else has done in this Legislature. Because, Mr. Speaker, what I used to do was hire somebody who had experience in that field and with his spurs on he would climb the pole so that my picture and my poster was high enough above the Tory pictures that nobody could tear them down and they stayed,of course,right up until election day. MR. MATTHEWS: That is the only way you could get elected. - MR. CALLAN: Mr.

Speaker, in conclusion let me say the final Recommendation,Nuinber 29,to which the Chairman just referred says, "that there shall be another select committee chosen in five years to review this act," and it says, "To see that future problems are addressed we suggest that another select carndttee be put in place within five years after the next election." Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that I give notice now that I fully intend to be on the next committee which will be meeting following the next election,within five years. Thank you. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Justice. MR.

OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the subordinate legislation which has been filed in the Registry between May 13, 1983 and November 14, 1983. 7645

November 29, 1983 Tape 3510 NM 3 MR. CALLAN: MR. NEARY: to do things. MR. OTTENHEIMER: wish me to read all of this. MR. NEARY: to do it. Read them. Read them. That is the proper way I do not think you would That is the proper way 000 MR. NEARY: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: I wonder if the Minister of Finance could tell the House if he intends, before this session ends, to table the Auditor General's Report? MR. SPEAKER: Order, please That question could very well have been asked during the Question Period. It is not a point of order.

PRESENTING PETITIONS: MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, if at first you do not succeed try, try again. Hon. members will recall that about a week or ten days ago I attempted to present a petition in this hon. House on behalf of residents of St. Bernard's in the district of Fortune-Hermitage. Now, Mr. Speaker, I was barred from presenting the petition. I sent the Hansard to the people who were involved in circulating the petition and Mr. Speaker, much to my surprise there arrived in my office yesterday a second petition from the people in the district of Fortune-Hermitage. MR.

SIMMS: A proper one. MR. NEARY: Now, Mr. Speaker, 7UL+6

November 29, 1983 Tape 3511 PK - 1 MR. NEARY: I do not intend to depart from what the people said in their petition. The prayer may not be exactly according to Boyle, but it is a prayer, Mr. Speaker, and I will read the prayer of the petition and I believe that will be sufficient to say. A petition from the residents of St. Bernard's in the district of Fortune-Hermitage, "Once again we,the people of Road No. 13, have chosen the hon. Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Steve Neary, to present a petition to the provincial government.

We,the undersigned, demand an explanation as to what happened to the pavement for Road 13 that was listed to be paved under a provincial/municipal agreement in the paving programme of the years 1982 and 1983. We demand that Road No. 13 be paved as was agreed. "Our allegations are as follows: 1982-part of Road 13 was paved. In our area where eighteen families live, crushed stone was laid and 100 metres of pavement was taken for private roads in our community. 1983 paving programme - we were supposed to get 150 metres of pavement.

The crushed stone was laid once again; the same old routine followed7 private roads were paved and once again Road 13 was left out. But this time we have taken a stand. "The member for Fortune-Hermitage Don Stewart,was notified by phone by Mr. Banfield, Mr. Hackett and Mr. Hynes; a telephone call was made to the Minister of Municipal Affairs by Mrs. Banfield. The call was accepted by Mr. Ron Corbett, the Deputy Minister, he also returned the call to Mrs. Banfield concerning the matter. A letter and petition was also sent to Mrs. Newhook, to no avail. Did we get the answers we were looking for? Mr.

Stewart told Mr. Hackett that it was not his responsibility how the paving was handled and, yet, after the pavement was taken from Road 13 and used on private roads in St. Bernard's,he issued another $9,000 to pave 73147

November 29, 1983 Tape 3511 PE 2 MR. NEARY: 100 metres of private roads to people who had good friends in the Cabinet. "We repeat, we are not taking back any of those allegations, the proof is here to see. This is not one man's opinion. We want an explanation,why Road 13 was not paved,and we want the agreement fulfilled , 'We shall remember' Signed, on this 24th. day of May 1983 by thirty- eight residents of Road 13 and backed by 129 supporters for a total of 167 voters. Mr.

Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to present this petition, lay it on the table of the House, and ask that it be referred to the department to whichit relates. Mr. Speaker, this is the second attempt that the people have made to get their grievance aired in this House and I am happy to say that today they have succeeded. So it just goes to prove, Mr. Speaker, that persistence pays off. I congratulate the good people of St. Bernard's for exercising their democractic right.

I hope that their message, that their complaint will not fall on deaf ears and that there will be a thorough investigation into how the money was spent in St. Bernard's,and that they, indeed,will get their Road No. 13 paved as was promised and agreed to in a municipal/provincial agreement. So, Mr. Speaker, I ask the page to come and take the petition and lay it on the table of the House. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Minister of Municpal Affairs. MRS. NEWHOOK: Mr. Speaker, I do wish to respond to this petition. I did not receive a petition. I did receive a_letter from a Mr.

Russell Banfield and in that letter Mr. Banfield outlined his complaints and conditions of Road 13, He also listed in the same letter all of the people, the names of the people who lived on Road 13. 7 o+8

November 29, 1983 Tape 3511 PK - 3 MRS. NEWHOOK: We have responded to Mr. Banfield saying that we are trying to get the facts and to find out what happened. We do know that Road 13 7iSLf 9

November 29,1983 Tape No. 3512 ahl was included in the contract but we do not know for what reason Road 13 was not completed. We did also enquire about driveways being paved,and the mayor responded saying that the people who had their driveways paved paid to get them done, that it did not come out of the money approved for the roads programme under our 60/40 programme. We have responded to Mr. Banfield saying to him that we are now in touch with the contractor, we have asked the contractor for an explanation, and when we get that explanation we will be dealing with the matter.

MR.NEARY: That is a very good answer, a very good answer. That is the most sensible answer we got this day. That Hansard will be sent down to Fortune-Hermitage. ORDERS OF THE DAY On motion, that the House resolve into Committee of Supply , Mr. Speaker left the Chair. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY RESOLUTION: That It is expedient to bring in a measure further to amend The Loan and Guarantee Act,1957, the Act No. 70 of 1957, to provide for the advance of loans to and the guarantee of the repayment of bonds or debentures issued by or loans advanced to certain corporations. 73 r oO

November 29,1983 Tape No. 3512 ah-2 MR.CHAIRMAN (Aylward): Bill No. 77 we were discussing at the adjournment. The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR.NEARY: Mr.Chairman, yesterday during the debate on this bill,the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan),.who does not happen to be in his seat today,made some very irresponsible statements and they were reported in today's Evening Telegram and a very biased headline put on the report saying, 'Liberals blocking help for plants, says Morgan.1' Now, Mr.

Chairman, I was going to raise the matter today as a point of privilege but I felt that this bill would be coming up again and would give me an opportunity to tell the House, Mr. Chairman, just how this matter was misinterpreted and misconstrued. And not only misinterpreted and misconconstrued, but the statements that were made by the hon. gentleman were completely misleading and false. What the hon. gentleman said was that"Morgan said he has been told by the Liberal friends in Ottawa that the Newfoundland Liberals were opposed to the plan because Mr.

Cashin was against it." And then it goes on to say,"Richard Cashin is President of the Newfoundland Fishermen ,Food and Allied Workers' Union." First of all to that statement, Mr. Chairman, let me say it is hogwash, it is balderdash. First of all the hon. gentleman did not quote his sources. Now have we resorted in this House 70

November 29, 1983 Tape 3513 EC - 1 MR. NEARY: to making wild, irresponsible statements about friends in Ottawa Mr. Speaker, is that what we have lowered our- selves to now in this House? Will we be able to come in now and say, 'Our Tory friends in Ottawa told us this?' The hon. the Government House Leader (Mr. Marshall) talks about rumours, talks about innuendoes. Mr. Speaker, this borders on libel and slander. In fact, it is not true.

And, as I said to the House yesterday, we on this side of the House have not been asked for our opinion, neither have we voluatee'ied our opinion, neither are we aware of the position of Mr. Rihard Cashin, President of the Fishermen, Food and Allied Workers' Union, We are opposed to a principle. Now, Mr.

Chairman, let me make it abundantly clear that the Liberals are not blocking help for plants, the Liberals are trying to persuade the government to help the resource-short plants, but we happen to think that this is not the way to do it, by bringing in the Portuguese and the Spaniards and the West Germans to do it, taking jobs away from Newfoundlanders. The hon. gentleman, if he has any courage, will stand in this House and admit that he was wrong and apologize to the House, Mr.Chairman. Liberal friends in Ottawa told him that the Newfoundland Liberals were opposed to the plan because 1'lr.

Cashin was opposed to it! Let him quote his sources, Mr. Speaker. The hon. gentleman, if he was correct, let him quote his sources. No, he does not have the courage to do that, Mr. Chairman. All he wanted to do was to slander the members of the Opposition. Who? MR. NEARY: The Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan). Mr. Speaker, there is not an ounce of truth in it and I dare the hon. gentleman,who made these 752

November 29, 1983 Tape 3513 EC - 2 MR. NEARY: wild and irresponsible state- ments,to stand up in this House and quote his sources, and if he cannot quote his sources, Mr. Chairman, if he is too cowardly to do it, then we can only assume that there are no sources but it was a figment of the hon. gentleman's imagination. And I hope that The Evening Telegram will report what I am saying today and give it a good headline. MR. MORGAN: Ah, now you are in a bind MR. NEARY: Yes, I am in some bind, alright! MR. MORGAN: You are changing your policy fast now MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman, we are not changing any policy at all.

We are saying that the resource-short plants need help and need it badly, but bringing in the Portuguese is not the way to do it, Mr. Chairman, for slave labour. That is what we are opposed to. And the hon. gentleman can twist and turn and squirm all he wants like a worm, Mr. Chairman. The fact of the matter is that the hon. gentleman cannot quote sources, and if he cannot quote sources, let The Evening Telegram report that he cannot quote sources and then, Mr. Chairman, they can only come to one conclusion, that the hon. gentleman was bluffing when he made these statements. Mr.

Chairman, I do not intend to dwell on that and waste any more time of the House on it except to say that if we are going to lower the debate in this House to that sort of thing, My TorY friends in Ottawa,"My Liberal friends in Ottawa. 'MYNDP friends in Ottawa told me this,' and then quote it and have it reported as gospel without any investigation, Mr. Chairman, if we are going to lower the debate in this hon. House to that sort of thing, I would say is it any wonder that 7353

November 29, 1983 Tape 3513 EC 3 MR. NEARY: the decorum of the House is in such a mess? Now, Mr. Chairman, yesterday I was asking the hon. the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins), when the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) leapt into this debate, I was asking a few simple questions about Blue Ocean Products, and perhaps I could put it all into the one question. All I am asking the hon. gentleman is to give us some information in connection with these plants: Blue Ocean Products, W. M. Goudie Limited, Island Seafoods Limited, Port Enterprises Limited, Steelfab Limited and Whites Fisheries Limited.

Could the hon. gentleman tell us where each one of these plants is located, the number of employees of each plant, the number of weeks and months out of a year that they operated and where they get their supply of fish? Now, this is legitimate information that the Committee is entitled to have,and surely the hon. gentleman has that information with him when we are going into Committee of the Whole on this bill. So I will take my seat, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to 7a54

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3514 SD - 1 MR. NEARY: getting the information. Once we get the information,then we can go on and pass the amendment to the Loan and Guarantee Act. But certainly the Committee has a right to this information. The minister has no right to treat it lightly, withhold information. It is taxpayerst dollars, DR. COLLINS: I am not treating it lightly. You did not give me a chance yesterday. MR. NEARY: I did give the hon. gentleman a chance and the hon. gentleman thought he was going to catch this side of the House with their ten minutes used up and ram the bill through yesterday evening.

It did not work. They can try all the parliamentary tricks and little games that they want, Mr. Chairman, but the fact of the matter is that this is a money bill and we are asking legitimate questions. we had all kinds of abuse heaped on us by the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) when he leaped into the debate. I am addressing my questions to the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) who I would hope would be responsible enough to give us the answers and not have innuendoes and slurs and slander made by members of that side of the House that Liberals in Ottawa told them this or Liberals in Ottawa told them that.

It would be like me coming into the House and saying, 'The Tories up in Ottawa tell me we are pretty near an offshore agreement or'My Tory friends up in Ottawa told me the rural development agreement is about to be signed.' That would be false, inaccurate and untrue, it would be a lie. If I made statements like that, Mr. ChaIrman, it would be a lie. I cannot speak for other members, Mr. Chairman. And so I would gladly take my seat and give the hon. Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) an opportunity to give us some information on these plants.

That is all we are asking of him 7 we are not askingfor anything elaborate. All we want is 7655

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3514 SD - 2 MR. NEARY: some basic information concerning these loans and if the interest payments are up to date. I believe the hon. minister indicated yesterday that to his knowledge the government has not been called upon to meet any of the interest payments. So I would just like to hear his answers to these questions, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN (Aylward): The hon. Minister of Fisheries. MR. MORGAN: Mr. Chairman, the hon. gentleman may not like this minister to answer questions on the Fisheries, and the reason being he is very seldom asking questions on the Fisheries of this minister.

But the fact is any issue involving the Fisheries in this Province, it is my responsibility to reply to any questions and to supply all information,and that is the intention.

Now to clarify a situation that the hon. gentleman finds himself in,which is not a very pleasant situation ,where he is trying to squirm and weasel his way out as a Leader of of Party, but the fact is that the Liberal Party, the official Opposition in this Province, stood firmly and squarely opposed to any effort of this government, the Peckford administration, to get fish to resource-short plants in the last number of weeks in this Province. Now that is the issue, Mr. Chairman. MR. NEARY: A point of order, Mr. Chairman. MR. MORGAN: He cannot take it, he cannot take the heat now. MR. NEARY: A point of order, Mr.

Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, pleas& A point of order, the hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman, there is another example of a completely irresponsible statement made. Just listen to what the hon. gentleman said, that yesterday I stood firmly and squarely against any opportunity for the 756

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3514 SD - 3 MR. NEARY: administration to supply these resource-short plants. Mr. Chairman, that is completely untrue, it is irresponsible and,if the hon. gentleman continues in that tone of debate,I am afraid it is going to severely affect the decorum of this House. I cannot call the hon. gentleman a liar, Mr. Chairman, but I can say that it is not true, it is just not true. The hon. gentleman will be reported again as saying that the Opposition blocked it. But we are only seven members. They are the government, there is a Government of Canada, we do not make the decisions, Mr.

Chairman. If the administration wants to make the decision, let them go ahead and make it, Seven of us cannot block forty-four. MR. CHAIRMAN (Aylward): Order, p1ease To that point of order, I rule that there is a difference of opinion between two hon. members. The hon. Minister of Fisheries. MR. MORGAN: Mr. Chairman, I would like to have the protection of the Chair from these silly points of order, because the fact is the hon. gentleman cannot take the heat. And the situation is quite clear, A number of weeks ago in a very sincere way this administration tried to do something for the independent companies.

Yesterday the hon. gentleman was critical of the fact we were giving financial assistance to these independent companies,labelling it a 'bail out' and stopping bankruptcies and these kind of things. The fact is that what we are doing for the independent fish companies in this Province we are proud of as a government, both in financial assistance to the companies mentioned here, in this case Aqua Fisheries and Port Enterprises and Blue Ocean Products and Island Seafoods,hich are encompassed in this bill of assistance to the independent companies, the - government guaranteed loans.

Now in some cases / in fact I would say in most cases today in our Province,it is not 7fl r /

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3514 SD 4 MR. MORGAN: financial assistance these independents want it is fish, it is raw material for their plants. And what did we do a few weeks ago? We put forward a proposal to get fish to these inshore resource-short plants at a time when they have no employment, 7558

November 29, 1983 Tape 3515 PK - 1 MR. MORGAN: at a time when their plants are closed, at a time when they have high overhead in their plant operations, and they would,eventually, be hurting financially unless they can get some operations going and some raw materials be processed in the off season to the inshore. Now the hon. gentleman can try to criticize the media for the exposure in today's papers of what really the situation is that I put forward in the House yesterday. And I have to give them praise because they are doing a very adequate job of reporting the debates in this House.

And what I said yesterday I stand firmly behind today,and that is that all the groups and organizations, the independent small group, the Independent Association of Fish Producers, stand firmly and squarely behind the proposal of having foreign fishing vessels engaged to land fish for processing in their plants this time of the year, right now, until the restructuring is complete, and then have the other half of the resource-short plant allocation landed by Canadian vessels or Canadian bottoms.

The Newfoundland Government made a proposal in a sincere way backed up by the independents because the independents had a proposal on the table from Ottawa and that was sit down with the representatives of the large. trawlers, sit down with these companies and try to work out an arrangement whereby you will use Canadian vessels to catch half of the resource allocation, we used the figure 4,000 tonnes, and once you do that, then we will let you engage foreign fishing vessels to come behind and land the remaining portion of resource-short plant allocation.

But you have to put the Canadian vessels in place first and you do that by - MR. NEARY: Now you are changing your tune. MR. MORGAN: Now this was Mr. De Bane's proposal. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh IR. MORGAN: Ni. Speaker, I want protection from the Chair. MR. CHAIRMAN (Aylward): Order, please 'r r /uJ

November 29, 1983 Tape 3515 PK 2 MR. MORGAN: Mr. Chairman, this was the federal government's proposal to the companies in this Province. We told them we had reservations it would ever work. Why? Because the large trawler companies could never tell the independents how much cost per pound it would be for these plants to purchase the fish from the Canadian trawlers They could not tell them it was going to be thirty-five cents a pound, thirty- one cents a pound, twenty-nine cents a pound, or twenty-seven cents a pound or less. They could not give a cost figure.

So because of that the independent companies could not reach an agreement, thre was a stalemate with the other sector, the deepsea sector, on the cost per pound of fish for their plants.

And because of that, because of the stalemate,we said to the federal government,1we know your policy, we know your programme, Do not force the regulations of having Canadian bottoms in place first, we know that is a problem right now, Let them go ahead and put the foreign vessels in place right now , let them harvest using foreign vessels this Fall, and when the restructuring is complete, in January or February,then we could look at putting Canadian vessels in place and carry on with the programme' That was the Peckford's Administration proposal supported by the independents , supported by the Fish Trades Association, supported by everybody I know of in the industry,with the exception of one.

And I said in the House yesterday, and I say again todays Mr. Cashin could not and did not support it, because he felt that he had to take a firm position on behalf of his union membership, in this case the trawlermen, and I would say that is a pretty fair stand for a union leader to take on behaLf of his membership. But that party, the Opposition, stood firmly in the House of Assembly and condemned the Premier, because he sould not dare question the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) on the issue because he had all of the information, questioned the Premier during Question Period on two different 0 / 71'

November 29, 1983 Tape 3515 PK - 3 MR. MORGAN: days in the House of Assembly, and condemned,in the

preamble on questioning,this adminstration on using foreign vessels to catch and land it for processing in those independent plants we are talking about now. Now he can try to weasel all he wants to out of the issue, but the fact is the Liberal Party stood firmly opposedto using foreign vessels this Fall to create jobs on shore, to create jobs in our plants. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Right on! Right on MR.

MORGAN: And if he is going to now suddenly find out that it was a very untenable and a very unpopular political decision to make that is the consequences, because every single plant worker On the Northeast Coast is quite upset, because the Liberal Party stood firmly with the government in Ottawa and would not agree to our proposal, and stood with Mr. Cashin on the issue and we are losing jobs. I sat down this morning with twenty-one companies from around the Province and the Fish Trades Association. I think it was a good meeting, a good 7661

November 29, 1983 Tape 3516 NM - 1 discussion, a three hour discussion. And one of the key issues today in the fishing industry for those independent companies—they are not looking for government dollars and government handouts, they are concerned over the restructuring and what may happen which could adversely affect them; and rightly so and I recognize these concerns - but the key issue right now today is "Get us some raw material, get us some fish from the off shore. There are 10,.000 tons out there not yet caught this year, 1983.

Here we are coming on the end of November and that fish is not caught, 10,000 tons of Northern cod alone, a good resource, a good raw material, and it is allocated for these independent plants and not one pound has been caught this year. And all they are saying to the governments, they are pleading with us,"Put in place a programme that will work for this year.

Do not let that fish just go on and not be caught and suddenly someone else comes in and puts a major lobby on to grab it from us." - and I will not get involved in that side of the topic today, but I will later on, I am sure, during the next number of months. - "Give us and find us a way of gettig fish." And the hon. gentleman, again I want to say, it was very unfortunate for all of those people who wanted to go to work in the plants that he did not stand firmly and squarely behind this government and the Premier of the Province in our proposal to get fish to these inshore plants.

It is unfortunate because we are losing by it. This Province is losing employment in the fish plants at a time of the year when you need employment,and God knows we do, all the jobs-that we need,every job counts, coming into the Christmas Season 7662

November 29, 1983 Tape 3516 NM - 2 MR. MORGAN: and coming into the Winter season these jobs are indeed so important to the overall economy of our Province. Now if some of these companies we are assisting here,for example, if they were given supplies of fish last Fall from foreign effort catching and landing here for processing.in their plants,I would venture to say that if not all ,some of these independent companies here we are assisted in this bill and we did assist in government guaranteed loans, would not have had to come looking for government guaranteed loans.

They would have had a longer period of employment in their plants and less overhead to cover accordingly by a greater cash flow, a greater return, and we would not have had to assist the companies that the hon. gentleman is asking questions about. And he can try to put off by having the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins),who is quite capable of answering the questions,but the responsiblity is here on these fishing plants and why we are assisting these plants, and we are assisting Port Enterprises in Southern Harbour. Why? They found themselves in a tight squeeze,going through some rough times.

They employ 160 people. They buy from 125 inshore fishermen in the area. Why did we assist Blue Ocean Products? Because they are the mainstay of employment in Branch, in St. Bride's, in St. Mary's-The Capes, in Prqentia. They employed last year 450 seasonal employees in these plants and I understand that practically every employee qualified to receive unemployment insurance benefits. Not a big positive thing, we should not be going around touting to have fish plants merely to have workers qualify for unemployment insurance, that is the last thing you want to stand for in this Province.

We want year-round employment, 7553

November 29, 1983 Tape 3516 NM - 3 MR. MORGAN: or at leat nine to ten months of the year in our plants. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Right on MR MORGAN: But in this case they did qualify to receive unemployment insurance from working in these plants in Argentia, Branch and St. Bride's Then there is Island Seafoods, My colleague from Twillingate (Mrs. Reid) will understand the importance of assisting the company, Island Seafoods. They had a plant operatinci in Herring Neck, a plant in Change Islands he is not in the Chair now - in Mr. Speakers district, in Whales Gulch and Virgin Arm.

These are important plants on the Northeast Coast, in the Twillingater Lewisporte districts. They employed 360 plant workers and they bought fish from 300 inshore fishermen. And then White Fisheries in Sandy Cove had 180 people employed in their plant up on the Great Northern Peninsula and it is not in any of my colleag9es' 7351k

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3517 NJ - 1 MR. MORGAN: districts, it is a district of the Opposition. Who cares what district it is in? That is not the issue.

We assessed the an1ications put forward by the independent companies on their own merits, we determined they met the criteria of government to be able to qualify, we were also convinced they could be viable operations in the future - and in fact they are because some of these loan guarantees have now expired; I think White's Fishery has expired, if I recall correctly, on the date - but none of the companies we have assisted, and it is a very proud thing to be able to say, none of the total of twenty-five independent companies we have assisted in this Province to the amount of $12.5 million, and that is a lot of money put into small and medium sized independent companies, none of these comnanies have gone into receivership, none of them have gone bankruot, none of them that I know of, with the expection of one - and I will not mention that name today because it is a matter of discussion between the government and the company concerned - with the exception of one none of them will go into receivership or go into bankruptcy.

And that is a clear vindication of this government's policy in helping assist independents at a time when they found themselves in a tight squeeze or in dire straits in some cases because of circumstances beyond their control. So, Mr. Chairman, in comenting again on this bill, I want to say that as for the rest of the bill, I am sure the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) can talk about the other companies which are not involved in the fishery, but the companies involved in the fishing industry - Aqua Fisheries, Blue Ocean Products, Island Seafoods, Port Enterprises and White's Fisheries, these are the - 7fl / L

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3517 MJ 2 MR. MORGAN: companies-the other companies have nothing to do with the fishing industry. MR. CHAIRMAN (Avlward) : Order, please! Order, please! The hon. the minister's time has elapsed. MR. MORGAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. SOME HON. MEMBEFS: Hear, hear! MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman, the hon. gentleman who just took his seat said - and Hansard will confirm this - that we would not agree to the provincial goverment's proposal to get fish to these plants. Mr.

Chairman, he made statements like, 'We try to do something for the independents'and so forth'and that is the reason we made that proposal to the Government of Canda.' Now let us see what the hon. gentleman said yesterday, Mr. Chairman.

The hon. gentleman said yesterday, 'A few days ago he was condemning this government for trying to work in co-operation and agree with a proposal from Ottawa.' Yesterday he told us the proposal came from Ottawa. ' The Fisheries Minister said, 'The proposal was not initiated by the Newfoundland Government.' Now today he is telling us that it was initiated by the provincial government. He says, 'It came from the (féderalFisheries Minister (Mr. De Bane).' ' Mr.

De Bane's policy, and we agreed with it,because we wanted to see a programme of using foreign vessels for temporary periods like they have always done.' Now today the hon. gentleman,on a slippery slope, Mr. Chairman, now gets up and tells us that it was the provincial government who took the initiative and said to Ottawa would you please let the foreigners catch the fish first and we will talk Canadian bottoms after. And we do not know where that proposal lies right now, Mr. Chairman. But 7oo6

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3517 MJ - 3 MR. NEARY: let it be recorded that the hon. gentleman does not know what kind of a policy he is stating. Yesterday he told us one thing, today he is contradicting himself and telling us something different. Now, Mr. Chairman, let me get it on the record again1 just in case somebody within hearing distance of my words will misunderstand - MR. MORGAN: You are going to change your colicy. The calls are corning in today. I know all about them. MR. NEARY: If the hon. gentleman only knew, Mr. Chairman. MR. MORGAN: The calls are corning in to your office today.

The pressure is on you. (ianqe you mind now. MR. NEARY: No. Mr. Chairman, what proposal are we talking about? Let me clarify: We are talking about a proposal from this adrninstration to let the foreigners come in, catch the fish, take jobs away from Newfoundlanders who are walking the streets hopelessly looking for work. That is the proposal we are talking about. MR. MORGAN: No. We are putting fish in our own plants. MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman, the key issue here is foreigners catching the fish. We are all for it, it is a motherhood issue to supply the resource-short plants with fish. Now, Mr.

Chairman, let me say that these lists of guarantees that we have before us, when these plants went in business there was no talk of foreigners catching fish. They went in and no doubt they did a feasibility study. MR. MORGAN: Where have you been! MR. CHAIRMAN (Aylward) : Order, please! Order, please! /007

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3517 NJ 4 MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman, no doubt these companies did a feasibility study when they established their businesses they were not depending on foreigners, 7665

November 29,1983 Tape No. 3518 ah-1 MR. NEARY: buying fish from foreigners, they figured they could survive on the inshore fishery, Now, Mr. Chairman, a few years later they find they cannot survive on the amount of fish that they are getting, and that is the crux of the matter. And now the hon. gentleman tells us that they are clamouring for the foreigners to catch their fish for them. What does the hon.member for Grand Bank (Mr.Matthews) have to say about that, where draggermen and trawlermen are walking the streets looking for work?

Does he agree with letting the foreigners come in and take the jobs away from them? Does the member for Burin-Placentia (Mr. Tobin)? MR.TO3I[N: That is not what we are talking about now. MR.NEARY: That is not what we are talking about? Mr. Chairman, we have the catching capability in Canada to catch that fish, and to allow foreigners to come in for cheap labour would deny Newfoundlanders an opportunity for jobs.

The hon.gentleman knows that and,if he does not,his constituents know itDown in Burin-Placentia West they know it,and wherever you have draggermen and trawlermen and unemployed Newfoundlanders and Labradorians they know it. Mr. Chairman, our hearts and our sympathy go out to the plant workers who only get a few weeks or a few months out of a year in these resource-short plants our hearts go out to them. But is the answer bringing the foreigners in to catch the fish? Does the hon. member for Grand Bank think that is the answer? MR.MATTHEWS: What is the answer? 769

November 29,1983 Tape No. 3518 ah-2 MR.NEARY: Mr. Chairman, it is not my place to tell the hon. gentleman what the answer is. But I am very concerned about the foreigners, about the provincial government's proposal to bring in the foreigners and allow them to catch the fish. And the hon. gentleman can call it a one-shot deal, but it will take a miracle to close the door once it is opened up, Mr. Chairman, and that is our concern.

And the hon. gentleman can twist our words any way he wants and have them reported in biased headlines and what have you, but the fact of the matter is , let me repeat, that our hearts and our sympathy go out to the resource-short plant owners , to the people who work in the plants, but , Mr. cbainran, we are not going to allow foreigners to come inside of our 200 mile limit through the backdoor to take jobs away from Newfouridlanders who are hopelessly walking the streets looking for employment. That is the issue, Mr.

Chairman, that is the proposal, the hon.gentleman is talking1 He gets up and makes a general statement that somebody is against or somebody is for supplying the resource-short plants. The key issue is letting the foreigners do it, And I cannot help but look at the strained look on members' faces there opposite every time the hon. gentleman raises the issue,because it is not a very popular issue, Mr. Chairman, in this Province. No wonder the hon. gentleman is smarting under the - MR.MORGAN: They are losing 3,000-odd jobs in fish plants because of your policy. MR.NEARY: Mr.

Chairman, when these plants were established they did not look to the foreigners to catch their fish. They felt they could survive and thrive on the fish that was available to them in the area. Now the minister is trying to use them as a scapegoat to 7670

November 29,1983 Tape No. 3518 ah-3 MR.NEARY: justify his proposal to the çovernment of Canada to allow the foreigners to catch the fish and deny Newfoundlanders, hundreds and probably thousands of Newfoundlanders employment. MR.SIMMS: Why were you not out for the opening of the school in Port aux Basques? MR.NEARY: A beautiful school,beautiful. SIMMS: How come you were not there last night? MR.NEARY: I could not go because of the House, Mr. Chairman. I know the hon. gentleman is anxious to get her closed up. Mr. Chairman, I hope we will hear no more about this. MR.MORGAN: Oh, you are going to hear more yet.

MR.NEiRY: The hon. gentleman gave us one story yesterday and a different story now today. And now he has watered it down, The minister is saying squirming now and watering it down by saying1 7071

November 29, 1983 Tape 3519 EC 1 MR. NEARY: Wel1, first the proposal was to let Canadian bottoms catch the fish and foreigners afte' but now this afternoon he is telling us that the proposal of the administration was let the foreigners catch first and then the Canadian bottoms later. Mr. Chairman, is it any wonder that the plant workers and the fishermen and the fish plant operators in this Province have no confidence in the hon. gentlemen? MR MOP(N Yogi will never run in Port aux Easques again You know you are wrong. MR. NEARY: Mr.Chairman, it has nothing to do with politics.

Do they have a leader over there at all to ask the hon. gentleman to restrain himself? Mr. Chairman, I want to come back again to the questions I put to the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) . This bill is being piloted through this House by the Minister of Finance, and as long as the hon. the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) keeps leaping into the fray and making a fool of himself, Mr. Chairman, to protect ourselves from biased headlines in the papers, we have to respond. MR. MORGAN: I will have more to say in this debate yet. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Chairman, let me make one thing abundantly clear to the hon. gentleman, that I have taken a position, and I guarantee you that that minister or nobody else on that side is going to frighten me or stampede me into going against my principles. MR. MORGAN: You changed today. See those calls coming in. - - MR. NEARY: The hon. gentleman can get up and rant and rave all he wants, he is not going to scare us. 7672

November 29, 1983 Tape 3519 EC - 2 MR. NEARY: The fact of the matter is that the principle of allowing foreigners to catch our fish is wrong, Mr. Chairman. Let me get back to the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) . We have seven items left on this bill, seven companies that were assisted by the government: Blue Ocean Products for $500,000, W. M. Goudie for $100,000, Island Seafoods for $300,000, Port Enterprises $150,000 - MR. CHAIRMAN (Aylward): Order, please! The hon. member's time has elapsed. MR. NEARY: Yes. I will have to come back at him again. MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries. MR.

MORGAN: Mr. Chairman, I guess it is very pertinent that this debate on Fisheries is going on under this bill because at this present time in the House of Commons, I understand, in the next five minutes, there will be a major debate on the restructuring bill, the last day before the House of Commons, where we will have two members of Parliament from Newfoundland taking some very irresponsible actions - and I have to say it, I said it outside the House and I will say it inside the House as well - where the member for Trinity - Conception (Mr. Rooney) says he is going to vote against the bill.

Despite all his employees at Charleston, Catalina, Port Union, Bonavista, he is going to vote against the bill today, he says publicly. Mr. Rompkey is trying to scuttle the bill. Maybe he is getting even with the Prime Minister and his party who took him away from the position of a Cabinet minister, who really did show him 7073

November 29, 1983 Tape 3519 EC 3 MR. MORGAN: up in his inabilities to do a job in the Cabinet post and took his job away from him. Maybe he is getting evens I do not know what it is, but he is trying to scuttle the bill by proposing an amendment which would really, in fact and in essence, violate the agreement worked out between the two levels of government. If Mr. Rompkey's amendment is passed it will mean a violation of the agreement already signed between the two levels of government, and that is irresponsible. It is totally irresponsible.

It is fine to be parochial once in a while about your own constituency and your own problems, but Mr. Rompkey is trying to scuttle the people in Grand Bank and in Burin and in Gaultois and Ramea and Burgeo and on around the coast, Trepassey and Fermeuse and Bonavista and Catalina, trying to scuttle them. For what purpose? Because he wants to protect his own little political hide in St. Anthony. And that is irresponsible, that is totally irresponsible And I understand from this morning's statement, maybe Mr.

Rompkey is going to do that, try - to stop the bill from going through the House of Commons today by proposing silly amendments, which he himself is aware of, 11± the Premier sat down with him,no longer than a few days ago ,and explained to him what the bill encompasses on Northern Fisheries Corporation. It will be looked after. It is in the agreement. St. Anthony will be opening next Spring, it is part of the restructuring. There is no problem with St. Anthony. So why is Mr. Rompkey trying to scuttle the restructuring bill?

My only assumption is it is the fact that he wants to get even with his colleagues in Ottawa, get even with them for being removed from the Cabinet portfolio for Newfoundland. That is the only thing I can see. And as to Mr. Rooney's objectives, I just do not know. 7674

November 29, 1983 Tape 3519 EC - 4 MR. MORGAN: But, as I said, it is very pertinent that this debate is going on here because at - the same time it is going on in Ottawa. And some of the concerns I heard when I held 7675

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3520 lB-i meetings in Ottawa with the various members of Parliament from all sides - from the small party, the NDP Party, I met with them; and from our own party and from the governing party, including a number of ministers - that they were hearing views and opinions from the independents throughout Atlantic Canada, mostly from Nova Scotia and New Brunswick and P.E.I. moreso than from Newfoundland, because Newfoundland is the only Province with a formalized government assistance programme for the independents, in this case, what we are talking about here today, a financial assistance programme of government guaranteed loans.

So, the concern did not have the same level as what was expressed by the independents of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. DR. COLLINS: Question! Question! MR. MORGAN: Mr. Chairman, the hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) is now going to leave the House because he - MR. NEARY: No, I am not going to leave. MR. MORGAN: All right.

The hon. gentleman is going to have to recognize the fact - and he has been around the House of Assembly much longer than I have, maybe I have been here half the period of time that he has leen here but he has got to understand that he has got to sometimes live with wrong decisions that his party would make, and he made the wrong decision on this one issue. I want to clarify for Hansard and for the record to make sure he understands, I will liave to tell him in baby talk, I guess, so he will understand it.

But he does not want to understand or he just cannot understand, one of the two I would hope it is the first, he does not want to understand. Because 7676

November 29, 1983 Tape No. 3520 IB-2 MR. MORGAN: Mr. De Bane and the Government of Canada put forward the policy of using foreign vessels. It did not come from here, it did not come from anybody within the Province1 it came from the federal level of government as a policy document of using foreign vessels and Canadian vessels, half and half,in the resource-short plants programme. That was not invented by anyone here. It was a policy programme and a policy position documented and forwarded to all the groups concerned,including the governments,that the foreign vessels would be used to harv