VOL.2 PRELIMINARY UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR THE PERIOD: 3:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 23, 1980 NO. 27

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 957 DW - .l The House met at 3:00P.M. ~r. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER: (Simms) Order, please -! STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Minister of Finance. DR. J. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table a response to statements made in certain sections of the report of the Public Accounts Committee, concerning the Depart- ment of Finance, which was presented to this han. House last week. Before dealing with these specific recommendation in the report, I would like to make a few general comments on the collection of Retail Sales Tax. In the

preamble of the

section of the report, entitled "Findings", the Public Account~ Committee reveals a fundamental difference of opinion with the Department of Finance concerning the philosophy and intent underlying the Retail Sales Tax Act. The department interprets its mandate as one ~f licensing and registering vendors to collect Retail Sales Tax as agents of Government and at the same time requir- ing the Government to ensure remittance of collected taxes by performing appropriate auditing procedures and, where necessary 1 applying collection enforcement measures.

In our view, the primary purpose of the Act is not served by driving out of business those vendors who failed to remit the taxes, nor would so doing amount to a "sound business approach" using the words of the Committee. The cancellation of a vendor's licence, with or without resulting business bankruptcy, is regarded by the Department as a failure of the system, and not conducive to the primary purpose of the Act which is to raise revenue. Under the provisions of the Act, an unsuc- cessful result to the application of various established . collection procedures does leave the 2527 option of the vendor

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 957 DW - 2 DR. J. COLLINS: licence cancellatl~n. with or without recourse of the courts, but tax-gathering objectives dictate that this should be employed as a last resort rather than a first order of enforcement. By this method of perfor- mance, the Department maintains that the essential provisions and spirit of the Retail Sales Tax Act are preserved, namely maximization of revenues, impartiality and a sound business approach.

During the appearances before the Pbblic Accounts Committee, officials of the Department of Finance contended that the main reason for the increase in the percentage of Retail Sales Tax receivables to revenue over the past number of years had been an insufficient number of tax collectors. Accordingly the Committee's statement on page 10 of the report not withstanding, the Department does not agree that previous accumulations of arrears of unremitted taxes resulted from a lenient manner in treating delinquent vendors nor that established procedures of themselves, resulted in collection delays.

Statistics were presented to show that, since the establishment of regional audit offices in 1973, auditors detected tax arrears at a faster rate than the available enforcement personnel could~collect them. The accumulation of arrears was accentuated to a lesser degree by the non-write-off of uncollectable Retail Sales Taxes after 1975-76. This problem was recognized by Government and during the past year a total of 47 new positions were approved, 45 of which related to the enforcement

section of the Taxation Division of the Department. When all these 2528

.. ~ April 23, 1980 Tape NO . 958 NM - 1 DR. J. COLLINS: positions have been filled, a substantial increase L~ tax revenues, and an improved position with respect to tax receivables, are confidentally expected. I would now like to comment on the recommendations in the order listed in the report: Recommendation 1 (Page 13): The Committee recommends that the Department require that all vendors be bonded. In June 1979, the Department of Finance implemented a system of bonding all persons applying for registration certificates to operate certain types of business.

No other Provinces of Canada had initiated such a system, although we have had many enquiries from provinces who are interested in our system. we are pleased with the success of this venture, but are somewhat reluctant, at the present time, to extend the system to all vendors because the cost of acquiring the bonds may prevent some prospective small businessmen from getting started. However, extension of the system is being kept under review. Recommendation No. 2, also on page 13: The Committee recommends that more prompt procedures be developed to deal with vendors who are delinquent in their returns.

The Committee feels that the department should establish the financial position of those vendors more promptly and would be justified in withdrawing the vendor's licence in extreme circumstances until his account has been brought Qp-to-date. The Department agrees that delinquent vendors should be dealt with more promptly and we are confident that, with the recent hiring of field collectors, delinquent vendors will be dealt with on a more timely basis.

Recommendation No. 3 (Page 14): The Committee recommends that the department encourage its auditors to become more involved in the collection of outstanding taxes from the vendors they visit. The Department of Finance has always required its auditors to collect the audit assessment immediately upon completion of 2529

"· J April 23, 1980 Tape No. 958 NM- 2 DR. J. COLLINS: an audit. If the full amount could not be collected, they were instructed to prepare a complete financial position report to enable Head Office personnel to take an appropriate course of action to achieve collection. Recommendation N'o. 4 (Page 14): Tbe Committee recommends.that the department develop a system for recording settlement proposals as agreed with delinquent vendors. It also feels that such accounts should be mcnitored constantly and fizmer action tak .en when a proposal is not honoured.

The department' s present system itself for recording settlement proposal.s is considered adequate. The problem in the past has been of not having sufficient staff to follow-up all proposals. With the hiring of additional. collectors, we are confident that thiS will be done in the future.· Recommendation No. 5 (Page 14): The Committee recommends that the department should first do its search for assets of the vendor which are not encumbered before obtaining a lien on the assets. This would reduce time spent by the Department of Justice in obtaining worthless liens • .

The department agrees agrees that all un­ encumbered assets should be identified before obtaining a lien on assets. over the years, the department attempted to do this but severe difficulties were encountered because there ·were no officers in the field other than tax auditors. The problem was compounded due to the lack of a full-time search officer to search the various registries for encumbrances. Newly ap.Proved positions will enable these tasks to be discharged more adequately. 2530

April 23,1980 Tape No. 959 AH-1 DR. COLLINS: Recommendation No. 6 (Page 14): The Committee recommends that the Department secure all claims over $10,000 and that the Department of Justice be required to give the obtaining of liens some priority to ensure that the Province's interests are protected. The Department's position has been that writs be issued on all accounts, regardless of amounts, that appear to be in financial difficulty.

In addition, where large amounts are involved and the vendor can only pay immediately a relatively small amount towards liability, the Department will undertake to secure the debt by undertaking a lien on unencumbered assets. Recommendation No. 7 (Page 15) : The Committee recommends that the Department perform or request a review of the Division's organization to eliminate unnecessary administrative positions and to re-assign these staff to more productive duties. In this regard, I must point out that the breakdown of the staff complement shown on page 11 of the Committee's report is misleading.

It purports to show 56 administrative positions ' out of a total of 109 staff. However, this number includes 27 administrative positions quite unrelated to Retail Sales Tax and several others having responsibilities in areas additional to Retail Sales Tax. Recommendation No. 8 (Page 16): The Committee recommends that Sections 53 and 54 of the Retail Sales Tax Act, 1978, should be ammended to make the assessment of penalties mandatory. The Lieutenant-Governor in-Council should have discretionary powers under a special section, but these powers should only be used in exceptional circumstances.

In this way respect for the tax system will be maintained. over the years, the Department has initiated several reviews of the implementation of mandatory penalties. Generally speaking,it was felt that an interest rate of 12% per year,which is now imposed, and the imposition of penalties fordeliberate withholding of ~emittances was sufficient; also, adding penalties to already financially troubled accounts would only increase the receivables. In addition, at present a great amount of time is spent dealing with vendors' requests to waive interest, and the routine application of penalties would, without 2531

April 23,1980 Tape No. 959 AH-2 DR. COLLINS: doubt, substantially increase these requests. Nevertheless, in view of the relatively low interl;!st rate charged in comparison to current bank prime lending rates, the Department will again review the situation from the viewpoint of increasing the interest rate or implementing a system of mandatory penalties. Recommendation Nd. 9 (Page 16): The Committee recommends that the vendor ·' s commission be reinstated . A 3% commission would reimburse the vendor for a portion of the cost to collect the tax and provide an incentive for the vendor to remit taxes promptly.

The vendor ' s commission was removed in 1975 as a fiscal measure. Even though Newfoundland is the only Province not paying a vendor's commission, Federal government taxes are withheld and remitted withoUt compensation. The reinstatement of a 3% commission would reduce provincial revenues by approximately $7.5 million, resulting in a significant shortfall on current Accounts. It is generally agreed that a commission may provide an ineentive for vendors to remit promptly. This matter will continue to be reviewed each year during the budgetary process. 2532

April 23, 1980 Tape 960 EC - l DR. J. COLLINS: Recommendation No. 10 (Page 16): The Committee reCOIIIIIends that the Department sh.ould examine the possibility of collectinq Retail Sales Tax on credit sales when it is actually collected by the vendor. The Act requires th.at when an item is sold Retail Sales Tax is due and must be collected at that time. Any arranqements such as suqgested by the Committee would also lead to significant administrative difficulties.

With the introduction of a refund to vendors for taxes on uncollectable accounts, which is now in place, this matter should not be a problem in the future. Recommendation No. ll (Paqe 221 : The Committee recommends th.a.t in future all serious cases when a vendor has not r8JIIi.tted a material a1110unt of Retail Salas Tax collected to the Department be referred promptly to the Department of Justice for prosecution. this recommendation arose from a specific case docUIIIented by the Auditor General, wherein an audit in early 1977 showed a large tax arrears by a company in severe financial difficulties.

Following several successful actions in magistrates' court - that is under the provisions of the Retail Sales Tax Act itself - by the prosecutor attached to the Department of Finance, the file was referred to the Department of Justiee for possible charqes under the Criminal Code of Canada in September , 1979. I must point out that except for a case of a test nature, the Department of Justice did not undertake on a regular basis to investic;a.te cases of failinq to remit tax for possible charqe under the Criminal Code until late 1978.

Previously, all cases were prosecuted under the Retail Sales Tax Act by the prosecutor in the Department of Finance, and recently, Treasury Board has approved a second prosecutor position for the department. Since late 1978, it has been the practice for the Department of Finance reqularly to refer tax arrears cases to the Department of Justice for appropriate action under the Criminal Code where reasonable suspicion of conspiracy to defraud government exists. 2533

April 23, 1980 Tape 960 EC - 2 DR. J. COLLDlS: Reco~tion No. 12 (Paqe 23) 1 The CODmittee reco~ that the dep&rtment doc:mDent the action taken aqainst a seriously delinquent vendor and if :no action has been taken, doc:ument the reason why senior officials of the Departlllent of Justice decided it shoul.d :not be taken. The department agrees that all action againat vendors shoul.d be properly doc:umented, and a detexmined effort will be made to ensure that all major decisions are clearly annotatad in the vendo~'s files. I woul.d like to table those c0111111e11ts, Mr. Speaker. SOME HOH.

MEMBEltS: lle&l.', hear~ MR. S. NEAla': Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Silllllls) : 'l'he hon. the member for LaPoile. MR. S. ~: Mr. Spe~er, I Wlderstand a. lllelllber on this side responding to a Ministerial Statement ccul.d take abo11t half the time that the hon. gentleman took in reading his statement. I preswaa the hon •. gentleman was Jllllrely reading the stateillent for the purpose of gettinq it into the record and gettinq it reco .rded with the boys and girls, ladies, 11p over m.y head. Mr. Speaker, the Ministerial Statement sit11ation in this House see!DS to be qettinq o11t of control. 2534 .....

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 961 so - l MR. S. NEARY: My understanding of Ministerial Statements, Mr. Speaker, is that first of all they must convey information - in this case it conveyed information-but not provoke debate of any kind. well, certainly the things that the minister read out of that statement could certainly provoke a debate. But I believe, Mr.

Speaker, that the things the hen. gentleman just read from that statement,which was seven pages, took fifteen minutes of the time of this House, could have been done under the Department of Finance when we are debating the estimates and the minister's estimates are the next to be called in this House. Also, Mr. Speaker, I want to point out that the purpose of setting up a Public Accounts Committee is to )deal with the report of the Auditor General 1 so all these things again will have to be examined by the Public Accounts Committee.

The ministers,apparentl~by making these statements on the Auditor General's report are trying to circumvent the Public Acc:ounts Committee and I would submit to Your Honour that it is about time that we put a stop to this childish, foolish nonsense of ministers coming in, making foolish Ministerial statements. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear. MR. S • NEARY: In my opinion, Mr. Speaker, Ministerial Statements should involve something urgent, something of an emergency nature.

And I believe, Sir, what is happening in this Bouse now is a complete abuse of the privileges of this House and it is about time the Premier put a stop to it. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. MR SPEAKER (Simms) : Are there any further statements? 2535

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 961 SD- 2 ORAL QUESTIONS MR. S. NZARY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEM::E!t (Simms) : The hon. member for LaPoile. MR. S. NZARY: Mr. Speaker, r wou16 like to ask the hon. the Premier if he is in a position to qive us a nm-down, a report or brinq us up to date on his trip to New York · and probably other places South of the border with his ento=aqe in the last couple of d~ys? MR. SPEM::ER: The han. the Premier. P~R PECKFORD: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, as han. mel!lbe ·rs know r tra ·velled to New York on the weekend to meet with two particu1ar orqanizations ,one, Mobil Oil Corporation and , two, the Power Authority of the State of New York.

Number one, the meetings with the Mobil Oil Corporation were to discuss with them the ongoing offshore exploration progral!lllle for oil an .d gas,and with the Power Authority of New York to talk to them about the study that we have ongoing jointly to determine the feasibility of the Anglo-Saxon route for the transmission of power from Labra,clor through Newfoundland and to other places in canada and the United States. Generally speaking, the meetings were very positive. r had met with Mr.

Tavoulareus, the President of Mobil Oil Corporation and a whole bunch of his people to talk about Hibernia, to talk about Ben Nevis, to talk about the onqoing exploration activity and to qet to know these people a bit better. 2536

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 962 EL - l PREMIER PECKFORD : And those meetings were,overall, very positive. The main crux of those meetings were to talk about the environmental repercussions of any production of oil and gas off our coasts, the effect upon the fishery, the fact that we were earnest and sincere and determined to ensure that our regulations applied, that there would be a whole bunch of things have to happen before any approval on the productions side would be approved by this government. And so, most of the discussions centered around the whole question of the environment and the fishery.

On the Power Authority of New York, the final report is not in yet on the study that was financed jointly by us and the Power Authority of New York, fifty-fifty, to see whether in fact it was technol09fcally feasible to build the Anglo-Saxon route, and, secondly 1 to see in f~c~, what the differential would be between transmission through some other route other than that Anglo­ Saxon route down to New York and the Anglo-Saxon route. And the final studies are not in on that yet.

And that will have to be considered - - in context with the Lower Churchill Development ~eport which is due in the next couple of montlhs. So the meetings were very positive. The Power Authority of New York, in the state of New York, I met with Governor Carey, with Mr.

John Dyson,who is the Commissioner of Energy for the state of New York and with other members of his staff on that side. • On the ~bil side,I met, as I said, with Mr; Taboulareus, the Prelllident with Mr.LaSade , who is one of the chief lieutenants of Mobil Oil Corporation with the head of exploration, worldwide with the head of marketing worldwide of the Mobil Corporation and with some of their other people. On both accounts the meetings were very cordial and very positive. We will be holding other meetings, of course,with those people over the next number of months as a follow-up 2537

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 962 EL - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: to these meetings, but I had not met with the head of the Mobil Corporation worldwide and some of his people and I thought it was important that I do so. And I wanted to follow up the meetings that I had had with Mr. Dyson here in St. John's some 1110nths ago. And overall there was a very positive, co-operative atmos­ phere prevailing.

And, thirdly,I also talked to a whole bunch of people in New York, the Business Week people, Wall Street Journal, the New York ~· Petroleum Daily and a whole bunch of other people like that about the prospects that Newfoundland and Labrador have and their interest in it. So, overall, the trip was fairly positive and I think there was a good information flow from both sides. MR. S. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : for LaPoile. MR.S. NEARY: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker: A supplemenatry, the hon. the Member Mr.

Speaker, I am rather intrigued by the activities of the hon. gentleman in the last week or so in connection with the Anglo-saxon . route and transmitting power to New York. The reason I am intrigued about it is because you would swear we were back in 1965 in this House when that is precisely the same discussion, the same ~eaor of debate and infopnation MR .. ROBERTS : Almost the same people. MR. S. NEARY: Almost the same people. It is rather intriguing.

But I want to ask the hon. gentleman now, has the government committed itself in any way, shape or form because there has been a com­ plete reversal of policy on the part of 2538

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 963 ow - 1 MR. S. NEARY: the minister,who was then Minister of Mines and Enerqy in the Moores administration, there has been . a complete reversal of policy. Government are now talkinq about exportinq the power from the Lower Churchill. How much power are we talkinq about sendinq to the Maritimes, sendinq South of the border to operate the subways, as we were so often told in this House, and opera'l!e the subways in New York and light Broadway? Are we committed to a certain amount of power? How much power will have to be exported to make it ecoftomically feasible? MR.

SPEAKER (Simms): The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: ~r. Speaker, perhaps the hon. member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) does not understand that what we are trying to do is to keep all of our options open and explore every possible alternative. One alternative happens to be the export of surplus power South, that has always been an alternative. The question is how you get that power South if, in fact, you agree that some surplus should go South. That is one alternative and so we must explore that and we a%e exploring it.

Another alternative is to use the surplus power in Labrador for industrial expansion in Labrador,and we are looking at that as well as a possible way of making the whole Lower Churchill develooment project feasible. So we have made no commitments to anybody. All we are doing is exploring every alternative. The other alternative is not on the front end to develop the Lower Churchill River at all.

It is to get access to additional cheap power now available from the Opper Churchill contract, at three and a half mils, and build transmission lines to the Island to take some of that power which is now going so cheaply to the Province of Quebec who is acting as a broker. 2539

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 963 ow - 2 PREMIER PECKFORO: Suf fice it to say, Mr. Sp eake r, in summing up,that we are trying to look at all alternatives, industrial expansion in the Province, transmission of surplus by some means ,either through Quebec or the Anglo-saxon route, that we will never sign a sixty-five year contract for three and a half mils which actually goes down after the first forty-five years. MR. S. NEARY: Speaker . MR. SPEAKER (Simms): for LaPoile. MR. S. NEARY: gentleman is going to do. A supplementary question, Mr. A supplementary, the hon. member We do not know what the hen.

We can only 1 as the hen. member for the Strait a.f Belle Isle (Mr. Roberts) said .the other day, after his administration has ended then we will be able to judge whether he did right or wrong but so far he has not done anything. It seems to me though to be rather strange that the State of New York would pay fifty/fifty on a study to have surplus power used in Labrador - New Yorkers sharing the cost-because they want the power to go into New York State 1 aot to be used in Labrador.

But there are so many questions I could ask the hen. gentleman about that , I am going to get back to the oil one because my other colleagues may want to ask a few questions. I want to ask the hen. gentleman if the matter of offshore ownership or management or control whatever - we have heard various and sundry terms used - did that come up for discussion with the Mobil people and are they concerned about that?

Are they anxious 1 for instance, to start now planning and spending money to get ready for pro­ ducing . ~he oil, to get into production, and they cannot proceed because the management question or the control question or the ownership question is not settled? Did that matter come up,and what was the hen. gentleman's position and what is Mobil's position on that particular matter? 2540

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 964 NM - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The hen. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, to answer the

preamble to the hen. member's question, perhaps the hen. member does not really understand two points, one is - and I can understand his surprise - one of the conditions for sharing the cost of the particular study on the Anglo-Saxon route, one of the conditions that I set was that there was to be no commitment by this Province to doing anything in giving power to the New York State Power Authority or to anybody else outside of this Province, and they had to agree to that condition. Now that might come as a complete surprise to the member for LaPoile (Mr.

Neary) that some government in Newfoundland can make that condition stick and still get them to share in the cost, but that is what has happened, that they have shared in the cost not knowing whether in fact they will get one single drop of water power from this Province. It was just that they are so eager to have additional power available to them in the 1990s that they are willing to put money forward without any conditions attached to it as to whether they are going to get any power or not. So there are no sweetheart deals here.

They entered into this financial arrangement for this study without knowing whether they were going to get one single kilowatt of power from this Province. Otherwise I would never have allowed them to finance it. We would have financed it ourselves. That is number one. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: Secondly, on the whole question of the ownership of the resource, the offshore, the oil and gas: The issue did come up because I raised it. The Mobil Oil people did not raise it. I raised it in the meeting and right now Mobil Oil Corporation, the position on it is that they take no position.

They are going to stay out of it completely. They are quite satisfied to work with the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador in the exploration, production, and everything else of the resource. They have no great particular bias one way or the other. So they are staying completely out of it. To this point in time the present dispute does not inhibit investment because we are still in the exploration stage. Now if at so me point in time Mobil decides, "Yes, we have a resevoir of hydro - 2541

April 23, 1980 Tape No . 964 NM- 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: carbons here that should be developed and we want to get on with it and here is one, two, three, four on the investment side of the production," then there would be some problems, obviously ,because they cannot serve two masters there. Because if they . ~ .. -.. -... did serve both ·lliasters, under the present royalty regimes which exist by the Province, the present royalty regimes that operate with the federal government, there would be no money left there for the company at a11 1and nobody would finance that kind of an operation.

You would be looking at about lOS per cent of royalty or whatever, with the company not even getting one per cent return on investment. so that would not work. So to this point in time everythi.nq is okay because we are still talking about exploration and step-out wells and to dete~e if in fact we have sufficient volumes of oil available for commercial production. To this point in time everything is okay. Obviously when we do get to that point in time, whenever that is, there could be a problem. MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : A final supplemen~. A final supplementary, 2542

April 23, 1980 MR.. SPEAKER (Simms): MR. S. NEARY: Tape 965 EC - 1 the hen. the member for LaPoile. Mr. Speaker, the hen. gentleman probAbly anticipated ~ next question in connection with oil. Is there any discussion, any COIIIIIIent from Mobil as to when they expect- I would gather from the hen. gentleman's_answer that he- just gave me that they are not sure yet whether they have a commercial find or not; that has not yet been definitely determined. But I would think they are getting very near that stage.

So have they talked .3bout, in relation to production, whea th~ anticipate the first oil could come ashore in Newfoundland, how long will it taka them - let me ask the first question. How long mere is it going to take before they are sure they have a commercial find? Will it be this year? And if so, have they indicated when the first oil would be brought ashore? How do they intend to bring it ashore? Will it be loaded at the well head by tankers or will there be a pipeline from Hibernia and the other wells into Newfoundland? How do they intend to bring the oil ashore? When will they bring it ashore?

I think the hen. gentleman has the drift of ~ question. MR. SPEAKER: 'lbe han. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, first of all, it is very difficult to say when you are going to be in a position to say it is a co111111ercial discovery, because you do not know what the step out well& are going to show. If you knew 1 if you could say that the step out wells will be similar to the original well, then you could give some time frame, but perhaps the two step out wells will be dry, and,therefore, that would extend the time to which you could determine when the commerciability of the thing was going to be.

So you cannot say definitely when. We believe in our own minds , and the best advice that - have, is that by the end of this year we would have a good idea and that a determination of the comme:rcia.l - MR. S • NEARY: Have they? PREMIER PECKFORD: aow are the step out wells so far? The step out wells so far, there are two being drilled. One is a bit more advanced than the other and we have not 2543

April 23, 1980 Tape 965 EC - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: reached the bottom of those wells. Testinq should take place on both . ?f those step out wells within the next month MR. ~: So far there _ are no indica tiona whether they are good? PREMIER PECXl'ORD: There are loqs beinq run on the111 And there is some indication that there is so- hydrocarbon within one of those two wells; the other one we do not lcnow. MR. s. NEARY: It is not as good as expected? PREMIER PECKFORD: be able to say yes or no to that. MR. W. MARSHALL: PREMIER PECXFORI;): .MR. S. NEARY: PREMIER PECKFORD: We do not know that yet.

We would not lllot dinppointinq. It is not disappointinq. . - It is not sm.thinq to get wild about either • Well, perhaps we have qotten too wild anyway. We have been lookinq for the biq elephant that does not exist on eartn,and exists somewhere els~ and it exists off Newfoundland. That is some of the stuff that one haars that is so cruy it is not · even funny. So, you lcnow, your exPectation versus what is reality is something else.

So - are lookinq at, say, by the end of this year, qi ven the normal kind of si tua.tion happeninq as happened other places where you qot into this kind of development, there should be some determination of whether we have a commercial find or not, number one. Number two, how the thinq is developed~ and this is why I wanted to talk to the people in Mobil, especially at the top, that Mobil - the hon. l118111ber's question is very interesting because it smacks of what I am so much opposed to. The com~ will not determine how that is developed. The people who will determine 2544

April 23,1980 Tape No. 966 AH-1 PREMIER PECKFO~: !•ow that is developed are right here in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, hear~ PREMIER PECKFORD: That is the big difference. MR. NEARY: Did you tell Mobil that? PREMIER PECKFORD: We do not ask Mobil hew it is going to be developed. We indicate to Mobil that the onus is on them to prove that the way we want to see it developed is impossible. l1R. NEARY: Did you tell them that? PREMIER PECKFORD: Oh yes, in no uncertain terms. The han. member knows me well enough for that. Surely the hon. member knows oe well enough for that.

We do not go on bended knee and ask Mobil Oil Corporation, "Now, how do you think you are going to develop this?" Not a chance!

Our whole regulations are geared in such a way as to indicate to Mobil Oil they better prove to us,unmistakabl~ through public hearings and everything else, that the way we want to see this thing developed is totally and absolutely wild and impossible because otherwise the thing gets the same way as other resource development opportunities in this Province have gone over the last hundred or hundred and twenty years, and that is not going to happen anymore ~ 0 we are going to determine how it is going to be developed. .\N HON. ; o~·m;::q: -- ~ - - - -- ~-- The government will decide whether (inaudible) PRE!1IER PECKFORD: We will determine and we will force the company to prove to ~ewfoundlanders publically and every other way that a certain thing will happen.

Now we do not know yet. The other thing that determines the kind of development that will occur is how much you have 1and to this point in time we do not know how much we have. So that is a big factor in determining the way and the kind of development that it will take, how much is there. To this point in time we do no know so therefore we have kept all our options opens and will not restrict ourselves to any particular kind of d~veloprnent until we have more information on just how large or small the oil is, in relation to the gas and in relation to other structures because,you see 1 2545 ·.~

April 23,1980 Tape No. 966 AH-2 PREMIER PECKFORD: ~- Speaker, you have to be very careful here and I do not intend for this government or for this Province to be bound into talking about the development of Hibernia,full stop. That is not only one well, that is only one structure even if it is twenty-five wells on that structure. There is Ben Nevis which has been started and there are seven or eight other structures and I am not going to be bound into determining a certain kind of development just because of Hibernia which has 444 million barrels of oil which determines a certain development .

However, when you put Ben Nevis into the picture and into the equation, one can then talk about a different kind of development which might be better for us. And,secondly,we might even have to delay the development because we might not be satisfied with the environmental controls that are being put on it to safeguard our fishery. MR. NEARY: PREMIER PECKFORD: And what about these environmental controls? The first thing that has to be determined is that the fishery must be at the most minimum risk that we can imagine before we can allow the development to go ahead in the first place. MR.

NEARY: Are you satisfied with the environmental controls? PREMIER PECKFORD: Not yet,because we do not know what we are talking about and we are still working on whether in fact there are sufficient environmental controls around to handle that kind of development. MR. NEARY: Premier PECKFORD: MR. SPEAKER (Simms): MR. WARREN: I wish I could ask some more questions. I wish I could answer you. The hon. member for Torngat Mountains. Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Justice (Mr. Ottenheimer), I wish to ask the Premier a question.

This past week I had the opportunity of visiting my district and on the way to and from my district I visited jail in Happy Valley-Goose Bay - not as a guest. PREMIER PECKFORD: MR. SPEAKER: PREMIER PECKFORD: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. A point of order. The hon. the Premier. Mr. Speaker, I just want to know because I 2546

April 23,1980 Tape No. 966 AH-3 PREMIER PECKFORD: think there is a rule around this House about hon. members sitting in this Chamber,whether in fact the hon. member spent any time there because if he did he may be disqualified from asking the question. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, hear! 2547

April 23, 1980 MR. SPEAKER: (Simms) MR. G. WARREN: .. -- Tape No. 967 SD - 1 I will . take that under advisement. The hon. member for Torngat Mountains. Mr. Speaker, I did spend some time there visiting a constituent of mine,but what the Premier should know is that there is a jail there with two cells,size eight by ten with five human beings as patients there. Now, Mr. Speaker, would the Premier advise the hon. House if he is aware of those unsanitary conditions that exist in these jails in Happy Valley - Goose Bay? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER PECKFORD: The short answer to the question is,yes, I am aware of it, the ones that exist in Happy Valley- Goose Bay. I am also very aware of the ones that exist in Botwood - MR. S. NEARY: PREMIER PEC:KFORD: MR. S. NEARY: PREMIER PECKFORD: st. George's. - in St. George's - In Bonavista. - especially in Bonavista. Bonavista is a very, very perhaps the worst, worse than Happy Valley - Goose Bay. MR. L. THOMS: Duckworth Street. PREMIER PECKFORD: The same down on Well ,yes, obviously, I am just talking about those outside of St. John's.which I am knowledgable of, too. MR. S. NEARY: PREMIER PECKFORD: St.

George's (inaudible) Assuming and implicit in the statement is that because now that I live here for five or six days of the week, I do know, obviously, about the ones in the place in which I reside. But to address the question, because I am aware of those problems, and the Minister of Justice (Mr. G. Ottenheimer) • is very aware of them 1 we are trying to develop right now, and I think the Minister of Justice within the next two or three weeks will be making a number of announcements about what we intend to do about those kinds of facilities in line with our five year plan. 2548

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 967 SD - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: we have more or less determined the way we want ~o move in the next five years as it relates to the Department of Jus:t.;ce in the five year plan. .And very much a part of it is the kind of issue that the hon. member now addresses as it relates to facilities for prisoners in Happy Valley- Goose ·Bay, Bonavista, Botwood, st. George's and all over the Province. MR. G. WARREN: MR. SPEAKER (Simms): for Torngat ·Mountains. MR. G. WARREN: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. A supplementary, the hon. member Yes, Mr.

Speaker • I understand from the Premier that he does not know there is some correspondence received probably from the RCMP and from other groups in Labrador concerning this particular jail. As you know, Mr. Speaker, prisoners are lying practically on a concrete floor,with a very thin mattress. There is a very small fan, the air does not circulate,the stench in the cell is just unbearable and here we have, just this past week, as high as eleven prisoners in these two cells. It is just unsatisfactory and it is unhealthy.

I am just wondering if the Premier will take immediate steps,not five year plan steps, immediate steps, to alleviate this problem now and give those people a human standard of living? MR. SPEJI.KER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I can not say right off the top of my head whether we can take immediate steps or not. !1ost of the prisons in the Province are blocked so it is not only a problem for Happy Valley - Goose Bay, it is a problem for everywhere else,but we will do all in our power this year to trz to alleviate that unsatisfactory situation that exists in Happy Valley - Goose Bay.

This year we will try to do something to make that a bit better. The long-term answer is not to start shifting the people around to better positions,but it is to build better facilities in the region. So that is our long-term aim. Our short term aim will be to try 2549

Ap ril 23 1 1980 Tape No. 967 so - 3 PREMIER PECKFORD: to address what the hon. member is talking about and we will try to do that in the next year. MR. G. WA!mEN: · · A final supplementary, Mr. s.pe~er. MR. sPEAKER (Simms) : member for Torngat Mountains. MR. G. W1\RREN: A final. supplementary, the hon. Yes , Mr.

Speaker 1 .Mf final supplementary is that in view of not building new foundations and new construction 1would the Premier think about all the vacant buildings that have been left ~acant by the United States Air Force in Happy Valley - Goose Bay. tn fact recoiiiDendations bave been received from various groups on some particular buildings that could be used to accommodate those prisoners. Will the Premier look in that light, or new construction? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, it varies from place to place and in Happy Valley - Goose .

Bay it will be the same way it was in the district of Stephenville, that the member for Stephenville can talk. (Mr. F. Stagg) about, because we announced just some time ago a new facility in Stephenville dealing with existing buildings but renovation of them for a female facility over there for female pr isoners to be housed there. And we would look at existing buildings in Happy Valley - Goose Bay 1 of course 1 before we sta .rt building new ones. I think the most immediate need for new !;luilding construction would he the Bonavista - Clarenville axis and · the Botwood - Grand Falls axis.

In Happy Valley - Goose Bay obviously we have to look at existing facilities. So 1number one, we will take immediate action in the next twelve months to try to alleviate the real serious situation now in Happy Valley - Goose Bay; number two, in the long term it will he to either acquire existing facilities and renovate them or build new ones,and that we intend to do. 25 50

Ap ril 23 , 1980 Tap e No. 968 NM - l MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : The hen. member for Eagle River. MR. HISCOCK: I would like to direct my question to the Minister of Transportation and Communications. The question I would like to ask is basically with regard to the condition of the roads in this Province, particularly also the deterioration because of the Winter,and also the demand for new roads and new pavement. This administration got elected on one of the slogans that we have a PC Government in Ottawa and basically we should have a PC Government in Newfoundland. While the PC Government was in Ottawa, Mr.

Clark for nine months, did the Minister of Transportation submit a new DREE agreement on roads to that government? MR. NEARY: No 1he did not. He was too lazy. MR. HISCOCK: Can you answer it now? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Transportation and COIIIIIIWlications. MR. BRETT: Mr. Speaker, the request for the DREE funds for roads went after the Conservative Government in Ottawa was defeated. MR. NEARY: In other words,you expect the Liberals to do what the Tories would not do. MR. HISCOCK: A supplementary. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. member for Eagle River. MR.

HISCOCK: Am I to understand while the Conservative Government was in Ottawa for nine months and the close co-operation that we were supposed to have 1 that no agreement was submitted to the Conservatives? And also the question- well,the question I would like to ask now, is with regard to the money that is going to be spent on road construct ion this year, is that not a carry over from money that was left over last year? MR. SPEAKER: The hen. Premier. 2551

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 968 NM - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I will respond to that because I was intimately involved in it. The DREE agreement on Coastal Labrador had roads as a part of it. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible). PREMIER PECKFORD: I am talking about roads. Is the han. member talking about roads? MR. HISCOCK: DREE roads (inaudible). PREMIER PECKFORD: Yes. But can I isolate Labrador? Are you against me isolating Labrador as one area first of all? MR. HISCOCK: PREMIER PECKFORD: fourfold. Okay? I wish you would do all.

I want to answer the question three or There are three parts to the whole question of road transportation in this Province. There is the Trans­ Labrador Highway which on its own has to be considered because it is so large. Secondly, there is a Coastal Labrador agreement through DREE which was submitted before Mr. Trudeau was defeated, after he was defeated, when Mr. Clark was elected, after Mr. Clark was defeated, and now that Mr. Trudeau is re-elected.

That has been there all that while 1 as the hon. member knows, which is a very important road transportation problem that we have in the Province, on the Straits part of Labrador. That is second. Thirdly, there is the Trans-Canada agreement which is fifty/fifty and it is in the third year of its operation right now, on a seventy-five provincial/twenty-five federal part, because that is the way we screened it as a formula. And then fourthly, there is a brand new secondary roads agreement. Okay?

So number one, on the Trans-Labrador Highway, we are still trying to fight that one in the conceptual stages of trying to get some agreeement,that the federal government will even look at it. Number two, as it relates to Labrador, the DREE agreement on Coastal Labrador contains road work there to be done. 2552

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 968 NM - 3 PREMIER PECKFORD: Thirdly, we are trying to negotiate a new Trans-Canada agreement because the ·present upgrading will not be sufficient to make that highway anyway near where it is supposed to be. Of course,we go into it with great apprehension and caution because we do not want to negotiate a fifty/fifty one again. I ehink that that was a bad deal,really,because the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador is not in the same position as New Brunswick or PEI · or Nova Scotia as it relates to road transportation. We should get better than a fifty/fifty deal.

So we are going to try to negotiate an additional TCH agreement for ongoing upgrading beyond this present third year. Fourthly, we submitted in the dying days - the han. minister might know, I do not know; I will have to look up the dates-in the dying days,perhaps,of the former federal administration under Mr. Clark, we submitted a full, new roads programme, secondary roads programme for the Province.

So there is the Trans-Labrador Highway, the Coastal Labrador agreement already in effect, re-negotiating the TCH, which we have indicated that we want to do, and a secondary roads programme for the Province was submitted either in the dying days of ~~e Clarke Administration, perhaps two or three weeks before they fell - MR. NEARY: Came down. PREMIER PECKFORD: not knowing they were going to fall 1 or i:ll.. -~e early days of the new Trudeau Administration. MR. HISCOCK: A supplementary question. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : A final supplementary, the han. member for Eagle River. MR.

HISCOCK: That was the basis of the question that I asked, that after nine months in the dying days of the PC Administration, finally a new secondary road agreement was submitted, either submitted to the Clar> Administration or the Trudeau Administration. But basically this Province has been waiting well over nine months now, almost into a year, for a new roads agreement. 2553

April 23 , 1980 MR. SPEAKER (SIMMS) : Tllpe No. 969 The han. the Premier . OW - l PRBMIER PECKFORD: No, there had been roads put forward beforehand but we revised· what we had put in and tried to shorten it to try to ~et some agreement on it. All the hon. member has to do is leave this Chamber and go out and call up Mr. McGonegal or somebody else here in the local DREE office,or call Moncton ~r call Ottawa 1 and he could easily find out what I am saying is valid,that there has always been an ongoing standing request by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador for additional roads agreements.

I just have to look across from me for this, The hon. member for Burin - Placentia West (Mr. Hallett) knows exactly what I am talking about jast as well as I do because he was in­ volved with the Leader of the Opposition - AN HON. MEMBER: Better than you do. EREMIER PECKFORD: I would not say better. Let us just be fair. The hon. memb~r for Burin - Placentia West knows what I am talking about. There is an .ongoing standing agreement for additional roads improvements in this Province before DREE all the time. What we did was try to revise it. As a matter of fact, !-lr.

Speaker, we tried to be really fair and just isolate those particular legitimate secondary roads so that we could get quicker agreement to them. so that there would be no politics played and no accusation that we were doing something for one area more than another, that we were just putting forward legitimate secondary road requests rather than every single one. Because very often the Federal MP's will say, 'If only you would put forward this road 1 then DREE would look at it'.

So you get every Federal MP agitat ing for his own area so that you put every single· you know,the road from your house to my house gets in a DREE agreement. Well, that is crazy! There are certain 2554

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 969 ow - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: legitimate secondary roads that should be considered by DREE, there are others that we have to do totally on our own as a Province. Add we have tried to be fair in isolating the wheat from the Chaff and to really legitimately go after what we could expect to be considered by DREE as secondary roads that could justifiably be considered as part of an• ·economic strategy for the Province. MR. SPEAKER (Simms): Order, please! The time for Oral Questions has expired. PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES MR. SPEAKER: Works and Services. MR. H.

YOUNG: The hon. Minister of Public Mr. Speaker, I would like to present the annual report of the Public Service Commission for the year ending March 31st. Hon. members will note that the Public Service Commission had a very active year as indicated by the large number of citizens served, approz- imately 72,000. The committee also witnesses substantial growth in training and development activities and have given me much pleasure in presenting this report. ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Social Services. MR. T. HICKEY: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to provide some information to the member for St. Barbe (Mr. Bennett) as a result of a question yesterday in regard to the people of Parsons Pond about moving their homes. In his question he raised the point of the cost of moving in relation to a commitment made by the government. get for him. I have the information which I undertook to 2555

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 969 DW - 3 MR. T. HICKEY: The.situation is very simply this:Government: made a co ·mmitment to provide $3,000 per family to move their homes. There were twenty-three families. Most of the twenty-three could not or w.ould. not qualify for any assistance under the Social Assistance regulations. I make this point to point out that this programme of assistance was outside of the Social Assist- ance regulations altogether. It was government's wish to assist the families in their plight to move their homes, which was necessitated because of flooding.

The situation was that government made a commitment of $3,000 and in June of last year the people in question made a request for an additional Sl,SOO,which government rejected outright, because,as I pointed out 1 those were people who would not have qualified under assistance. Whilst I am not prepared to say that they were wealthy people, they were reasonably well-off and government felt that a $3,000 contribution was indeed a fair amount to provide in assisting them to move. Subsequent 2556

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 970 EL - 1 MR. T. HICKEY: to government's rejecting the $1,500 ,increase, a tender was called. And one contractor bid and his bid was $3,500. The government refused to accept that bid because,• number one, the amount was over the ..amount - or- the estimate as put ·for­ ward by the contractor was $500 over the amount, was number one.

But, not as important was the fact that the contractor attached three con­ ditions to the 1110ve: One, that he be allowed to move the houses that he chose and not all of them.r two, there was no insurance coverage to cover damages of anything of that nature and so government rejected the bid. Finally, .,st of those people have been paid the $3,000 as committed by the government and those who have not need only submit their bills to the government and they will be paid the $3,000. That is as far as government's commitment went and that is the present situation. MR.

SPEAKER (Simms) : An~further answers1 ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. SPEAKER (Simms): Today being Wednesday, Private ~ember's Day, Motion No. 4. The hen. the member for Trinity- Bay de Verde. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. MR. F. ROWE: Mr. Speaker, thank you, '!he resolution reads as follows: "Whereas the proper development of our fishery is of paramount importance to the economy of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and • the well-being of our people;and

whereas off-shore oil and gas exploration is a reality-and

whereas off-shore oil and gas I - exploitation appears to be a certainity and therefore of great importance to the economy of our Province; Therefore

be it resolved that this House fully debate both developments for the purpose of ensuring that the fishery will not be endangered by off-shore oil and gas exploration and exploit­ ation and that the renewable fishery resource and the non-renewable oil 2557

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 970 EL- 2 MR. F. ROWE: and gas resource will be developed in a stratecnr of co-.patability for the maxim'UIII benefit of out people 1 And be further resolved that a Select Committee of this House be appointed to meet throughout the Province to hear and seek advice and ~e~ndations, and to call outside experts 1 for the purpose of ensuring _ the successful co-development of the fishing and off-shore oil and gas industries and that such a Collllllittee report to the House before the end of 1980." Now, Mr.

Speaker, the real motivation behind this resolution is the quite legitimate fear by the people involved directly and indirectly with the fisheries that the exploration and production of oil and gas off our shores could quite conceivably interfere in an adverse way with out only marine renewable resource, namely the fishery. And, Sir, tlut resource 1 the fishery, should be around . long after the non­ renewable resource, namely gas and oil, is depleted. Quite frankly, Mr.

Speaker, many people are deeply concerned, if not outright scared to death, over what the exploration of oil and gas, and its ultimate production, would do to this province in the social way 1 economically 1 politically and, more importantly, what oil production might do to our fishing industry.

Now, Sir I do not want to be an alarmist or appear to be against offshore gas and oil production, but, Sir, as sure as the sun will set tonight and rise tomorrow looking out the window, I am not quite so sure of that - if we, in this province, Sir, particularly hon. members on both sides of this House, do not ensure the proper, the loqical, the planned, precautionary and con­ trolled development of our offshore oil and gas, we could end up with a phenomenal boom-bust situation with the complete annihilation of our fishery which could be, to put it in its mildest terms, catastrophic for our children, our grandchildren and generations yet unborn. 2558

APril 23, 1980 Tape No. 978 EL - 3 MR. F. ROWE; Now ; Sir, why do I say that? Because , Sir, we are now in the process of dealinq with what has been texmed as the Seven Sisters 1and they can be a thinq of beauty, Sir, or seven witches whose ugliness defies description; BUt we are dealinq with the Seven Sisters and this uqliness aspect of it is what bothers me and should be of para­ mount importance to every sinqle member here in the House of ~s~ly. Because, Sir, we have reached a point in our lonq history where our actions here in the next few months and the next few years 2559

April 23, 1980 Tape 971 EC - 1 MR. F. ROWE: respecting offshore oil and gas will determine the very nature, the very substance of this Province for decades, in fact, hundnds of years. Now, Sir, who are the seven si-sters to whom I: re.fer? Sir, these are the giant multi-nationals, namely, Gulf, Exxon, Mobil, British Petroleam, Shal.l, Chevron and Texaco. Mr. Speaker, these are amongst the largest and the most powerful corporations ·on the earth. They know absolutely no boundaries. Their interests, Sir, are global. For over fifty years, the seven sisters haw controlled tha oil markets of the world.

Sir, the seven sisters have controlled countries and, indeed, have run over countries, because, Sir, the incomes of the. seven sisters are in axcess of billions of do;l.lars. And these billions of dollars, hundreds of billions of dollars, my friend · reminds me, their incomes are in excess of hundreds of billions of dollars, which far exceeds the assets of most, if not all of the countries and the provinces within wtlich they operate.

So, Sir, the decisions that we fifty-two members make over the next few years relating to the seven sisters - in other words, oil and gas exploitation and production - can in a sense ba the salvation of this Province or it could be the exact opposite, it could lead to the complete destruction of the social, economic fabric of this Province as we know it today.

Now, Sir, without being disrespectful of hon. members, when you look at the global power and the magnitude of the seven sisters, and you look at their assets, we may well be looking at a situation where we have fifty-two mice - ananalogous situation- fifty-two mice confronting seven elephants. Now, Mr. Speaker, that is the backdrop, if you will, that is a resllllli of a situation with which we are dealing here in this Province this very day.

Now, Sir, my concern is obviously with the preserVation of the fishery, and obviously, experiences in other countries have shown that even with extensive planning and controls over 2560

April 23, 1980 Tape 971 EC - 2 MR. J!. ROWE 1 oil and qas production 1 there is the ever present danger that a renewable· ruo-urce 1 naJIII!ly, the fisheries, may be jeopardized or sacrificed for the teq>orary benefits to be qainad or derived from a rel.&tively short-term eXploitation of a. non-renewable reso-urce, nAJDely, oil.

Sir, no matter what satequards are taken now, no matter what lonq-ranqe pl.aDa are made and implemented to presarft o-ur fisheries, no ~~.a.tter what plans or sa.fequards are taken or impll!llllmted, I still fear for the fishery of this Province as a result of the aassive impac:t of a potentially major oil discovery off o-ur shores. Sir 1 there are two ma.jor questions we have to address ourselves to: nwaber one, How can the fishery be protected fro• the enviroiiiiiBnta.l and econolllic and social hazards of oil?

And mllllber two, Sir 1 How should oil and qas revenues be used to ensure the best interests of the way of life in our Province, ADd I think particularly as it rel.&tes to the fisheries? Now, Sir, let us deal with the 1-t question first. How should oil and qaa revenues be used to enaure the best interests of the fisheries in this Province? Mr .Speaker, there is the disastrous route where rapid and uncontrolled growth in oil and qas production could quite easily create an economically two strata society in this Province • in other words 1 the rich and the poor or the 'haves' and the 'boave nots'.

Now, Sir, we hil.ve rea.d. about and we ha.ve seen that in many oil rich countries of the world, - 256 1

April 23,1980 Tape No. 972 AH-1 MR.F.ROWE: when the oil runs out,the rich remain rich and the poor not only remain poor but become poorer. When the oil and gas run out there is a sort of a nightmarish scramble or rush to fill the gap with some sort of an industrial development, to fill that gap when the oil runs out. MR. HOLLETT: Make work projects. MR.F.ROWE: Right. Make work projects. Now, Mr. Speaker, we in Newfoundland haveanexcellent ace up our sleeve,namely the fisheries, which is a renewable resource. But, Sir, the fisheries can only be an ace if we use oil revenues properly.

If we do not, Sir, the fisheries will turn out to be a dismal deuce instead of an ace. The obvious answer, Mr. Speaker, is to use a considerable amount of the oil revenue for re-investment in the fishery. Now the hon. Premier-obviously this was referred to in the Throne Speech but I would like to draw distinction here between re-investment and subsidization of the fisheries. I would like here to differentiate from using oil revenues to subsidize the fisheries because in the long haul we will end up back at the starting line.

Once the oil revenues run out we can no longer subsidize that fishery and the fisheries will therefore fail. So, Sir, using oil revenues to subsidize the fisheries amounts to a form of extended welfare which will do more harm in the long run than good.

Sir, instead of subsidizing the fisheries with oil revenues what I am suggesting is this, let us identify the problems in the fishery, let us identify the needs in the fishery, let us identify ways of improving the fishery and then let us identify the solutions to these problems in the fishery~ Let us itemize the needs and recommend methods of improving the fishery and then and only then should we invest oil dollars or revenue to develop the fisheries; invest these oil revenues to develop the fishery so that the fishery in this Province will be second to none in the world and will be self-sustaining long after the last ounce of oil and the last cubic inch of gas is extracted from our shelf.

Now, Sir, what are the areas that I have referred to here in a general way? Well, Sir, we need greater and improved efficiency in productivity, that is,in the catching sector and in the processing sector. Secondly,we 2562

April 23,1980 Tape No. 972 AB -2 MR .F. ROWE : need qqality control with respect to our fishery. Thirdly, we need improved marketing techniques and finding new markets as we are finding out this year. Fourthly, we need improved facilities, wharf stages, slipways, haul-outs, marine service centers, breakwaters, ice­ breakers, large and small boats, longliners a.~d ships. Fifthly,we need the adequate infrastructure- that is,adequate roads, marine transportation sy.stems, adequate freezing and storage capacity. Sixth,we need more exPerimental technological and scientific research in this Province.

And, Sir, seventh and probably just as important, proper education as far as attitude is concerned and skills are concerned in the fishing industry.

Now, Sir, if oil revenues coulu be directed towards these areas instead of subsidizing the fisheries with l!land-Aid treatments we could build up a fishing industry or a fishery as second to none in the world which could preserve our unique way of life in this Province, give a decent income to those in the boats and those in the plants and those in the administrative se~tor of the fisheries and at the same time and most importantly, the fisheries coul .d sustain the economy of this Province long after the oil and gas is gone. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR.F.ROWE: ·MR . STAGG: M!~.F .ROWE: Hear, h.ear! Now, Mr.

Speaker, let us deal with the - (Inaudible) And I might add , Mr. Speaker, that the han. member is either taping or dictating over there which I do not think is allowed in the House. The member for Stephenville (Mr.Stagg). MR. STAGG : (Inaudible) MR.F.ROWE .: Well, I do not think it is al.lowed, Mr. Speaker. MR. NEARY: If you pick up the speaker and you can see it, that is not allowed. MR. F.ROWE: I think there has been a ruling on that 2563

April 23, 1980 Tape 973 EC- 1 MR. F. ROWE: before, Mr. Speaker, so I will just draw it to your attention and I will not " waste my time with a point of order, but if he wants to make interjections, I will lll&ke lilY counterattacks. SOME BON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MR. F. ROWE: Now, Mr. Speaker, I do not" know whether hon. members want to listen to me or not, but I am not goinq to entertain interruptions, if you will, please. MR. SPEAKER (Butt) : to proceed in silence. MR. F. ROWE: Order, please! The hon. qentleman wishes Now, Mr.

Speaker, to deal with the first question, How can the fishery be protected from the environmental and economic and social hazards of oil? In answ.rinq this question, Mr.Speaker, we have to look at four thinqs, one, tha pollution of the marine environment, two, physical conflict with the fishinq industry; third, economic pressure on the fishery from the oil industry; and fourth, the fact that the fishery is not a sinqle industry. Now, Sir, let us deal with the pollution of the marine enviroiUIIent. The effects of oil pollution are still vary poorly understood, especially in Northern waters. In my opinion, Mr.

Speaker, the oil companies , durinq their exploratory proqriiiiiiH!s , hava very successfully downplayed the complete uncertainty regarding the long-ranqe effects of oil pollution on all species of fish, fishing activity and fishing habitat. For example, Sir, what about the fouling of fishing qear and subsequent increased costs, downtime and loss of earnings? What about the tainting of fish catch and the processed products which results in loss of earnings, layoffs and subsequently in the loss of markets? Sir, what about the lethal and sublethal toxidity that petroleum can cause to the fishing habitat?

And what about lonq-term ecological repercussions? Mr. Speaker, in my opinion, the oil companies have consistently downplayed the dangers of a serious spill or blowout off our shores, especially, Sir, off Labrador where the limits of available technology have just about been reached. Then, Sir, there is the question of the physical conflict with the fisheries. In the North Sea, Mr. Speaker, 2564

April 23, 1980 Tape 973 EC- 2 MR. F. ROWE: the fishermen there have experienced problems with equi.pllll!nt and debris , ei th8r washed or thrown overboard from supply vessel:s; and, Sir, this hu resulted in loss of fishinq time and fouled nets. Also, Sir, fishinq qrounds around exploratory riqs have been closed to the fishery. Fishinq qrounds around production platforms have been closed to the fishery. Submarine PiPeline routes 1 Mr. Speaker, have been closed to the fishery and hiu:bour facilities have become polluted and overcrowded. LOokinq at the economic pressure olli. the fishery, Mr.

Speaker, the economic viability of the fishery could, in fact, be jeopardized in the short and in the lonq run, because, Sir, the much needed manpower or person power can be lured away from the fishinq boats, lured away from the fish plants and from the administrative component of the fishery to the hiqh payinq jabs on construction pr.;jects , production platforms and supply boats. Sir, consequently, at the end of the oil boom, the fishery could be a very weak economic component in our Province because it did not have the manpower to sustain it durinq the oil boom. Sir, the fourth question there ., 2565

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 974 NM - l MR. F. ROWE: is the fishery is not a single industry. Now this is a peculiar thing to look at. Sir, everyone knows that the fishery is composed of the inshore fishery, the mid-water fishery, and the deep-water fishery or various descriptive modifications of the three types of fisheries that I have just mentioned.

Sir, if the oil boom strikes we could have a situation where as a result of manpower being drawn away from the inshore ;ishery it could cause a major expansion in the deep-water or offshore fishery by the large multi-national companies investing their huge capital in great trawler fleets. And, Sir, I submit that that is not the policy neither of the federal government, nor the provincial government. It is the inshore fishery which we wish to preserve in this Province and have it co-exist with the mid-water and offshore fishery. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I know that I have about half a minute left but I need about two or three minutes to really complete my point and I would ask leave of the House if I could just complete that. MR. _NEARY: By leave. MR. SPEAKER: (Butt) Agreed. By leave. MR. F. ROWE: I thank han. members, Mr. Speaker. So, Sir, these are the main problems that we really have to address ourselves to in this particular debate. And, Sir, the time element prevents me from saying much more really about it.

It also prevents me from mentioning the steps that have been taken by the federal government and the provincial government to help prevent some of the concerns that I have mentioned relating to the possible incompatibility of the fishery and the oil and gas industry. But, Sir, let me simply end by saying, or conclude by saying, that I have not read nor seen sufficient evidence from either the provincial or the federal government, nor from industry, to convince me that all will 2566

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 974 NM- 2 MR. F. ROWE: be compatible, and all will be safe as it relates to oil and gas on the one hand, and the fishing industry off our shores on the other. Now, Sir, that is not to say that both levels of government are not concerned and they have not done anything. For example, provincially the Premier has announced the Petroleum Directorate, which I think is an excellent idea. Sections 30, 31, and 33 of the Federal Fisheries Act certainly have some control over how companies operate. And,in fact,the Federal Minister of Fisheries can stop certain oil related activities off our coast.

Well, Sir, I hope, and I sincerely hope, and I respectfully request, that hon. members opposite do not use the activities that they are going to get involved in, and the federal government are already involved in, to speak out against this particular private member's resolution, Sir, because I think it is one of the most -- ·-. important resolutions brought before the House. Because whatever decisions we make in this House over the next two or three years may well decide the future, the forseeable future of this Province and it could be disastrous or it could be good.

So, Sir, I respectfully ask for support for this particular resolution and I ask that no stone should be left unturned to ensure and assure the preservation of not only the fishery itself but of the very way of life of this Province. And, Sir, I would like to end by simply saying that I have introduced this resolution in an extremely non-partisan fashion. I have tried to address myself to the ecology, the sociology, the economy, the science, and what have you,of oil and gas production on the one hand and the fisheries on the other.

And I hope hon. members will see fit to do the same and I respectfully ask for their unanimous support. SOME HON. MEMBERS : :.IR. SPEAKER: (Butt) Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Hear, hear! The hon. the member for Bay of Islands. 2567

April 23, 1980, Tape 975, Page 2 -- apb SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. WOODROW: He p~obably thinks it is funny and prob~ly he is just telling his hon. friend and colleague he was foolish to make such a resolution. Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy (Mr. Barry) has been going over the Province and outside the Province, and so has the Premier. In fact, only recently, in New York, he has certai-nly been looking into this same matter. And to start off another committee, to my mind, would not be the right thing to do at this particular time.

I would like to say though that the hon. member referred to the multi-nationals as the seven big sisters. Now, I do not know why he called them sisters, I would prefer to call them the seven big brothers. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. WOODROW: Now, Mr. Speaker, I also noticed that the hon. member, and I agree with him on this, prepared and read very carefully most of his speech. And because of the importance of this matter that he is talking about I have prepared mine and I intend to read most of it as well. MR. NEARY: You are not allowed to read a speech in the House. MR.

WOODROW: When I get the experience of the hon. the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) I will probably be able to go on and swing on it, you know. Mr. Speaker, much has been said during this session of the House concerning the development of offshore oil and gas and the possible detrimental effects such a petroleum industry would have on our fishery and traditional way of life. In fact, this session, as all members will agree, I suppose, almost every day something has been said about the effects 2568

April 23, 1980, Tape 975, Page 1 -- apb MR. WOODROW: Mr. Speaker, I would like, at the outset of the few remarks ! have to make, to congratulate the han. the member for Trinity - Bay de Verde (Mr. F. Rowe) for bringing forth this motion or resolution. I notice, Mr. Speaker, the resolution says, "Therefore

be it resolved that this House fully debate both developments for the purpose of insuring that the fishery will not be endangered by offshore oil and gas exploration and exploitation and that the renewable fishery resource and the non-renewable . -- - oil and gas resource will be developed in a strategy of compatibility for the maximum benefits to our people." But when the Throne Speech was read, Mr. Speaker, and there was mention made of another study on the fisheries, some han. members from the opposite side of the House said the fisheries had been studied to death or words similar to that.

And also, "Be it further resolved that a Select Committee of this House be appointed to meet throughout the Province to hear and seek advice and recommendations, and to call outside experts, for the purpose of insuring the successful co-development of the fishing and offshore oil and gas industries and that such a Committee report to the House before the end of 1980". Now, I would like to ask the han. member what the Minister of Mines and Energy has been doing over the past couple of years, at least over the Dast year. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) . MR. WOODROW: Now, Mr.

Speaker, I get sick and tired of interruptions from the member for Bonavista. He should go down and look after his district. 2569

April 23, 1980, Tape 975, Page 3 -- apb MR. WOODROW: of oil and gas on our lives and especially on the fishe~. This has been a meaningf-u-l di_a~ogue and I think that every member of this hon. House and, indeed, every resident in the Province is aware of the inherent dangers and benefits 2570

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 976 so - 1 MR. L. WOODROW: related to an oil boom when full scale production comes onstream. For our Province · the challenge will be to develop the oil and gas industry for the maximum economic benefit. Now, I recently attended, Mr. Speaker, a conference on the effects of the oil and gas· on -our Province and perhaps the major thing that was brought out was this, that the development has not got to take control of us, we have to take control of the development while at the same time ensuring that the quality of life which we all treasure will not be destroyed.

Modern history has shown all too grimly that there is a price to be paid for the so-called progress and any hon. members who have visited the places where oil, in fact, has been discovered,they realize what ill-effects as well as good effects it can bring on a province or on a country. Whether it is in the field of nuclear energy, supertanker technology or development of our modern frontier areas, it is becoming apparent that the bigger and better 1 full speed ahead mentality of development poses serious questions. And, Mr.

Speaker, I would like to stop here and make this remark; I feel that the Premier and the higher echelons of the government,as well as the Cabinet, they must be awake, and I know this for a fact, many hours during the night pondering over this question because after all it is very serious. I do not suppose Newfoundland ever faced a problem more serious than we are facing at the present time. It certainly could be good and certainly it is going to bring evil things as well.

While our Province has remained somewhat aloof on the problems that have plagued the North American society for the past decade in particular, we will be forced in this decade to address these difficult questions. It will be an exciting, challenging and,by the same token,a dangerous period for our Province. OUr culture, traditional lifestyle and industries , and the very humanity and spirit of quality that still marks this Province apart from the mainstream of North American life,will be severely tested and we must be ready to tackle and control the oncoming 2571

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 976 so - 2 M.~ . L. WOODROW: oil and gas development lest it enqul.fs and swallows us as a people. I am optimistic that we will meet the great challenge ahead, that we can sei.ze the opportunity to maximize the economic benefits for our Province and maintain our· social and cu1tural fabric. Mr. Speaker, our government has indicated in clear l.angua,.e that this wil.l. and must be the case.

Our government has also committed itself to the cOntinuing revitalization of our fishing industry, recognizing that it is and wili always be the baclcbone of our economy and soc .ial: fabric providing direct employment for 30,000 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and indirect empl.oyment for another 45 , 000. our future qrowth and indeed our very existence rests fundamentall.y in the exPanding fishing industry and the planned devel.opment of our resources.

Fears have been expressed from many quarters that a full-scale oil and gas. industry wil.l. stunt our fishing industry since many of our young people will prefer the empl.oyment opportunities associated with the petroletllll industry. While this may be the case in SOUl!! instances, · 2572

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 976 SD - 1 MR. L. WOODROW: related to an oil boom when full scale production comes onstream. For our Province . ~he challenge will be to develop the oil and gas industry for the maximum economic benefit. Now, I recently attended, Mr. Speaker, a conference on the effects of the oil and gas . on Dur Province and perhaps the major thing that was brought out was this, that the development has not got to take control of us, we have to take control of the development while at the same time ensuring that the quality"of life which we all treasure will not be destroyed.

Modern history has shown all too grimly that there is a price to be paid for the so-called progress and any hon. members who have visited the places where oil, in fact, has been discovered,they realize what ill-effects as well as good effects it can bring on a province or on a country. Whether it is in the field of nuclear energy, supertanker technology or development of our modern frontier areas, it is becoming apparent that the bigger and better, full speed ahead mentality of development poses serious questions. And, Mr.

Speaker, I would like to stop here and make this remark; I feel that the Premier and the higher echelons of the governrnent,as well as the Cabinet, they must be awake, and I know this for a fact, many hours during the night pondering over this question because after all it is very serious. I do not suppose Newfoundland ever faced a problem more serious than we are facing at the present time. It certainly could be good and certainly it is going to bring evil things as well.

While our Province has remained somewhat aloof on the problems that have plagued the North American society for the past decade in particular, we will be forced in this decade to address these difficult questions. It will be an exciting, challenging and,by the same token,a dangerous period for our Province. Our culture, traditional lifestyle and industries, and the very humanity and spirit of quality that still marks this Province apart from the mainstream of North American life ,will be severely tested and we must be ready to tackle and control the oncoming 2571

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 977 EL - 1 MR. L. WOODROW: I firmly believe that our young people in rural Newfoundland will continue to participate in our fishing industry because of the healthy economic return and for the quality of life in our rural COIIIawlities With our continued support through the development of new prograJIIS and improved marketing, the fishing industry will continue to be the major social and economic component in our Province's future. Mr.

Speaker, there are a number of concerns regarding the environmental impact of offshore development and I would like to briefly mention a couple of areas that warrant our serious attention. I believe it is vitally important that we establish and enforce strict safeguards and an onshore capability to protect our marine environment in the event of an oil spill. Now, Mr. Speaker, sometimes, no matter what precautions are taken, accidents can happen.

But, I hope that we will never have something happen like happened when the Kurdistan was broken in two last year and had so many ill effects even on the coast- line of our province. But, we can only,I suppose, Mr. Speaker, do our best. We are not God almighty. Even the Titanic sank and it was said that neither God nor the Devil could sink it. I am particularly concerned with any possible tanker movement around our rugged coastline and the viability of a seabed pipeline.

I understand that the studies certainly have been and are going on about the viability of a seabed pipeline but there is no doubt about it, the great icwberqs will hi!.ve, perhi!.ps, so-- thing to say about that. These are questions that must be addressed to the fullest extent should oil and gas develop and become a reality and I am sure, Mr. Speaker, that these things are being - advice is being sought from people who know what they are talking about and I cannot see why 2573

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 977 EL - 2 MR. L. iiOODROW: we should establish another committee at the 1110111ent to do things that are already lleing done or in the process of being done. It is also vi tal that we encourage research into coun~racting the inherent dan<;er of icebergs that threaten offshore drilling and production operations. I understand, Mr. Speaker, that research is progressing on this environmental problem that again IIDlSt be addressed before any full development comes on stream. Our marine environment is a very fragile one.

In view of the recent activities in frontier exploration fer oil and gas reserves, new conce:rns and questions have been posed. It is a challenge for technology and by the same token it is a challenge for our people. Government 's actions and initiative, to date, indicate that the important challenge ahead of us will be met.

Offshore oil and gas development will proceed in a controlled , planned lllaDJler 1 and I believe this was brought out today by the hen. the Premier in answering the hon. member's questions from the district of J;>aPoile (S .Neary) 1 offshore oil and qas development will proceed in a controlled, planned ~er for the maximum benefit of our people :i:n a strategy of compatibility with the fishing industry and all other resource based industries. This must, and will, be tne case.

I will e.nd up by saying', Mr.• Speaker, that government have already taken steps to leek into all these problems and I cannot see the necessity 2574

"!!. April 23, 1980 Tape 978 EC - 1 KR. L. ~DROW: of a committee being set up to do, as I said, what is already being done or· in the process of being done. SOHE HON. MEMBERS: · KR. SPEAJCER (Butt) : SOME HON. MEMBERS z MR. S. NEARY: \ Hear, hear! ~· hon. the member for LaPoile. !lear, hear! Mr. Speaker, I want to" congratulate my colleague for raising this very, very timely matter now of whether or not fish and oil are compatible. That is really the matter that the hen. gentleman raised. He brought on a debate that we were promised by the Preaier last year.

In the last session of the House we were told by the Premier - wera going to have a full-fledged debate - a major debate, we w.re told by the Pramier, on whether or not oil and gu and fish are compatible and whathe.r or not there is a potential danger in the offshore drilling and exploration and production of oil, whether there is a potential danger that it could severely hampar the fishery in this Province. ~at is the purpose of the resolution, that is what it is all about, Mr.

Speaker, and I would suggest that members who participate in this debate should address themselves to that topic, to that question. ~e hon. member who just spoke on behalf of the government did not addrass himself to th&t question, he s.kirtad around it and did not meet the question head-on. I thought for a moment when the hon. gentleman started out - I sa.id to myself, now there is Cabinet material, there is a potential Cabinet minister. I always felt that the hon. gentleman should be in the Cabinet.

But at the end of his speech there, which he was reading, I was beginning to have grave doubts and I was losing confidence in the hon. qantleman, and now I know why he has been by-passed_, he is too wishy-washy, trying to straddle the fence all the time instead of coming right down on the side of Motherhood. You are either riqht or wronq in this matter. You do not gamble with the fishery, your most basic industry. 'lha most important ran-able resource that you have you do not gamble with. And we are gambling with the fishery right now.

I was interested today to hear the Premier say during the Oral Question Period when I asked him some questions about his trip to New York - he told me that one of the matters raised with Mobil 2575

April 23, 1980 Tape 978 EC - 2 MR. S • NEARY : was the environmental problems involved with gas and oil and the fisheey. And I presUIIle that the Premier during his trip to New York was brought up to date on the technol09Y that is available on the h.ca of this earth today to deal with an oil spill, whether it is caused by a tanker or by a broka ·n pipeline or by a blowout in a well. And, Mr.

Speaker, I want to point out to members of this House that in the two offshore deve.lopments that have taken place in the world, the one in the North Sea and the one in the Gulf ~f Mexico, both of them have had a major oil spill as the result of a blowout •. AN HON. MEMBER: Beaufort Sea. MR. S. NEARY: And in the Beaufort Sea also. But in the two ~~ajor offshore developments on the face of the earth today, both of them have had a major oil spill that has done tremendous damage to the environ~~~ent and to the coastline in the United States and in the North Sea. And I think we may as well face up to it here.

Sooner or later, Mr. Speaker, we are going to have it here in Newfoundland on the Grand Banka, which is where H.ibernia is located, right in the heart of the most prosperous fishing grounds around our coast. Sooner or later we are going to have it. And, Mr. Speaker, all the :fillll and all the propaganda - and they are out there now at it. The oil COIIIPanies are having docUIIIentaries done on all the money they have spent to protect the environ~~~eDt and to clean up oil spills.

But all the fillll and all the propaganda and all the brochures and all the do~ts that they can put out will not save us from a major oil spill on the Grand Banks, will not save the fishery. Any spill on the Grand Banks is going to do irreparable damaqe to our fishery. AN HON. MEMBER: Send them h0111e. MR. S • NEARY: No, it is not a matter of sending them home. I think the Premier put his finger on it today. I do not know whether it slipped out or not. He said, 'We may have to delay AN BON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) • MR. S • NEARY : Yes, that is right. I heard what · 2576

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 979 NM - l MR. NEARY: he said. I hang on to every word that is said regarding the offshore and the fishery. "We may have to delay," he said, "the development, the production stage of the offshore development because of the threat to our environment." And I tell you that, that is right on, Mr. Speaker. l?REMJ:Ell. PECKPORD: That: is reassu .ring. MR. NEARY: Well I do not know how reassuring it is because when the big liiOney starts to get moved around and the pressure come on- SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, sooner or later it is going to happen and I can tell this House right now that there is no technoloqy on the face of this earth that can cope with a major oil spill off the Coast of Newfoundland, no technology. There a year, or a year and a half ago, the Canaclian Coast Guard and the oil companies went down out here in Freshwater Bay and they dragge .d a few booms around with the offshore service vesseJ..l!, dragged a few booms around, th:tew a few barrels of oil in the water, and invited the press out to do a con job on them. MR. HODDER: On a calm day. MR.

NEARY: On a calm day they t?~k them out in Freshwater Bay, did their con job. That night ~h~_two television stations carried these two little tubs, hardly as big - not as big as the ferry to Bell Island, dragging booms around Freshwater Bay to show us how they clean up an oil spill. MR. HODDER: There was no wind, no swell and no ice. MR. NEARY: And there was no ice, no wind and no swell, and my han. friend said. They accomplished what they set out to do 1 they brainwashed the press. And that is so easy to do in this Province. They are so gullible.

They have been brainwashed by ~~s government, by the Premier and by the minister ·s. MR. STAGG: They are all gone. 2577

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 979 GH-2 MR. NEARY: Well, I do not care whether they are gone or not, I am here to do a job and I am going to do my job. It does not make any difference.to me if they are there or not. That is their problem. If they are not doing a job for the Newfoundland people, that is their problem, not mine. They are supposed to be the eyes and the·ears·of this House, and if they cut off their interviews and their copy at 4:30 in the afternoon that is their problem and not mine.

So I am going to carry on and do my job, because I have done a tremendous amount of research on this particuiar matter, and I am really scared and frightened at the way the media, especially, because they are the ones who convey, communicate the information to the people, the way they have been lulled into a sense of complacency over the threat, the possibility, the danger to our environment and especially to th= fishery in this Province. MR. STAGG: (Inaudible) PR jobs. MR.

NEARY: No, well, that is right, they are either looking for jobs in the public service on the government payroll or PR jobs with some of the big oil companies. That does not surprise me a bit. You do have the odd dedicated one. There are a couple of dedicated people up there, but the others, I would submit, do things in anticipation of favours they can get for themselves in the future, and I have seen it happen so often. AN HON. MEMBER: And we will not name them. MR.

NEARY: And I will not name them, no, I certainly will not name them, but you can look up in the gallery now and see who was there last year, see who was there the year before, see who has been there for the last seven or eight years, and then you can decide for yourselves who the dedicated ones are. It is tragic, Mr. Speaker. It is most unfortunate and it is tragic that the media have been lulled into a sense of complacency. They are supposed to be communicating information, and they accept things at face value. Well, I do not accept things at face value.

I went to the Coast Guard after that demonstration out in Freshwater Bay. I could hardly believe it. "Is that all we have?" I said to myself. "Is that all we have to protect our fishery and to protect the coast of Newfoundland, the bird life, the seals and the fish against an oil spill on the Grand Banks? Is that all we have?" And I 2578

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 979 GH-3 MR . NEARY: asked the Coast Guard and I found out that is all we have. That is supposed to be the latest technology available on the face of this earth, and the oil companies will respond - every time I have raised the . matter, they will come back and say, "Oh, we have spent millions of dollars, we have ptirchased the latest and the best ~chnology available on the face of the earth". In my opinion, Mr.· Speaker, 2579

April 23,1980 Tape No. 980 AH-1 MR. NEARY: that is not good enough and that is why today, I believe, the Premier reacted to my question when he said, "We _may have to postpone the production of oil on the Grand B.llnks until the environmental problem is solved." Is that what the hon. gentleman said today when I put the question to the hon. the Premier about his visit to New York when he told us.that one of the Priority items in these discussions with Mobil was the environmental problems involved with the production of oil and the exploration that is going on off our coast? Mr.

Speaker, a few years back, I believe it was back in 1976,this government entered into an agreement with the Government of Canada - the hon. gentleman will remember the Gillespie formula,and that is the only reason the oil companies are out there right now, because the Government of Canada and the Province were able to agree that certain technical matters involved in the offshore drilling and exploration, technical matters such as the environment would be jointly-the responsibility would be jointly shared by the provincial government and by the Govermn .ent of Canada. And that is why, Mr.

Speaker, that is why the oil companies came back and started drilling again. It was not what this government did/ it was what the Government of Canada did in co-operation with this government that got the oil companies back drilling again. And the environmental matter was one of the technical matters that is now being shared jointly by the provincial government and by the Government of Canada. And I say that is a good thing,although they managed to suck the Coast Guard in t00 ,the oi~ companies did.

The oil companies took all this technology that they are talking about, a few little booms and a few little offshore tubs and they turned it over to the Coast Guard. They said to the Coast Guard" would ~ou accept the responsibility of looking after this for us? Look after it for us and in the event of an oil spill will you see that it is put in the water and so forth?" And the Coast Guard said yes they would and they are, they have it stored over on the Southside. 2580

April 23,1980 MR. HODDER: MR. NEARY: Tape No. 980 AH-2 A waste of the taxpayer's money. A waste of the taxpayer's money, that is right. The oil companies, Mr. Speaker, in my opinion,should,right at this very moment,be compelled . to set up a fund in case there is an oil spill or an accident on the Grand Banks or off Labrador,wherever they are drilling, set up a fund the same as they have been forced to do everywhere ;ise they have gone. But even at that, Mr.

Speaker, even if they set up a fund, which I think they should have, a liablility fund, but even if they set that up and we do have a spill it is not going to compensate for the damage that it will do. It might help but it will not compensate.For instance, we could have. our fishery damaged forever.And that certainly is a very frightening thought but it could happen. So the real questionthat arises now, Mr. Speaker, is,oil and gas and the fishery, can they be compatible? That is the question. And I am not sure after the answers the Premier gave today whether they are or not.

And I think it is incumbent upon that gentleman - he has been down to New York, he only came back last night on the plane. He had his entourage with him. He had Mr. Cabot Martin who is now refusing to go on television. He is now refusing. He had an invitation to go on Here and Now and turned it down. Thank God the message has finally gotten through, that he is not the policy maker, and he had to turn it down. He was told to stay off the air, keep his physog ~nd his puss off the televisions, stay off the air. The Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) was down in New York. Mr.

Victor Young was called back off his holidays. It was so urgent and he was so badly needed he was called from Florida, basking in the sun down there. The President of Newfoundland Hydro was called back from his holidays and told to be in New York. "Get in New York because we have urgent and important matters to discuss:' Now I hope the hon. gentleman will get into this debate and tell us - I do not know who else was there - the Minister of Finance (Dr.Collins)- 2581

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 981 DW - 1 MR. S. NEARY: Oh, Mr. Petten was there, of course, the gentleman who writes all of the press releases, the propagand~.· Dr. Goebbels of the eighth floor, the propagandist, he was there, he had to travel down to New York at public expense, for what purpose? For wh-at p.urpose was he down there? AN HON. MEMBER: MR. S. NEARY: Or to put it - Who? Dr. Goebbels, Petten, the fellow who used to be over with CN. MR. L. THOMS: were stocked. MR. S. NEARY: suitcases, I suppose. He had to make sure all the rooms Well, somebody had to carry the Well, for what other reason would he be thece?

He had no reason. It would have been far better for the Premier had he taken another member of this House. Instead of taking Mr. Cabot Martin and Mr. Petten and Mr. Young, who was on holidays and summoned back to New York, instead take three members of the House of Assembly down. Wa are the~policy makers and we are the people who have to make decisions whether, in our opinion these develop­ ments shauld take place and go ahead and whether or not the fishery and ~oil and gas are compatible. Mr.

Speaker, I have been a whole year now, I have been a whole year trying to get a trip out to one of these oil drilling rigs to see what is going on out there. I have been in the Gulf of Mexico. I had no problem at all to get on an oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico but I am having all kinds of problems getting aboard an oil rig here on the Grand Banks - MR. F. STAGG: MR. S. NEARY: They do not know you down there. well, I hope after today they will get to know me because my hen. friend made an excellent suggestinn the other day.

We are the,people who have to make the decisions on these developments, on these matters and we 2582

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 981 DW - 2 MR.S. NEARY: are complete ignoramuses. We know nothing about it. The Prem~er may know about it because he is travelling around all the time. But we have to take our advice and we have to get our information from public servants and we do not know whether they are right or wronq and half the time it is just news releases they are putting out and that is not good enough when we are talking about such vital matters, such important matters.

I think the whole House of Assembiy, all the members should be taken out aboard of these rigs to see what is going on, to see how that poor fellow fell overboard or jumped~overboard the other day and was drowned - What happened in that particular instance? - to see if they are safe, to see if the Government of Canada is carrying out their part of the bargain to'inspect and see that the environmental regulations are carried out. Mr. Speaker, these are very, very serious matters,matters that are very vital to this Province.

And I am glad my hon. friend brought this reso- lution into this House because as hon. members know, and they as well face it, and it is not my - I have been trying to find out about the movement of icebergs. I got a little booklet one day somebody sent me from, I believe it was the university, where they went out and put a few cables around these big icebergs and they felt that if they could shift them a· fraction of an inch from the time they started in the North until they got down to the oil rig on the Grand Bank - or a pipeline whateYer it is - that they could have them off their course.

I do not know whether it has been successful or not, not enough research has been done on it. And here you have these big oil drilling rigs right in iceberg: • alley AN HON. MEMBER: Not so. Not so . 2583

Ap ril 23. 1980 Ta?e No . 981 DW - 3 MR. s. NEARY: Yes, they are. Well, they are right in iceberg alley and the technology to protect the fishery, to pio~~ct the environment is not available, it is not available and r do not care what the oil companies say. The oil companies can retort by saying, 'Well,we have spent millions of dollars to get the latest technology and passed it over to the Coast Guard. That is no answer, Sir. r want a de~inite answer out of their mouths.

The Premier must have got it when he was in New York. 'Can you guarantee us that if we have an oil spill, whether it be from a pipeline or a tanker or a blow-out in a well, can you ~ope with it?' That is the question we want answered. It is not 'Well, we have all of the latest technology.' That is not the answer, we want a simple yes or no. And if the answer is no then the hen. the Premier better get up and elaborate 2584

April 23, 1980, Tape 982, Page 1 -- apb MR. NEARY: and expand on his answer that he gave me today in this House. Will it be necessary? Wi11 we be forced? Will we have any choice but to postpone or delay the production of oil out here on the Grand Banks? Otherwise, Mr. Speaker, -if-- we just go ahead, gamble, take chances, then we are placing the fishing industry, our most basic industry, our only real renewable resource in this Province in jeopardy. ·And I believe it is incumbent now on the Premier to get into this debate, support my hon. friend's resolution.

Because the spokesman for the government side, the member for Bay of Islands (Mr. Woodrow), did not say, I do not think he did, whether or not he was going to support this resolution or whether he was going to vote against it. It is a good resolution. I hope members on both sides of the House will vote for it. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER(Baird): The hon. the member for Placentia. MR. PATTERSON: Mr. Speaker, this resolution started out on a very high plane and I would have hoped it would have continued along in that trend.

But now that personalities have been dragged in, the Premier's press secretary, a very able man, a very competent man, we are very fortunate to have a man of his ability today in Newfoundland, also Mr. Martin, a very bright young man. And it seems to me I am beginning to detect that there is a rift in the Liberal Party on that side. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MR. PATTERSON: Not so much a rift in the Liberal Party among themselves, but with their counterparts in Ottawa. 2585

April 23, 1980, Tape 982, Page 2 -- apb SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. STAGG: AN HON. MEMBER: MR. PATTERSON: Oh, yes. Let her go, 'Bill'. (Inaudible) • You will get it all if you will just wait. I am talking about a rift between the federal Liberals and the Liberals here in Newfoundland. It is only very, very recently that the Liberals opposite - now, the younger lads, I am not referring to the younger lads who came in in 1975, but to the retreads - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. PATTERSON: - held over from the other regime. All of a sudden, since the Tories came to power, they are very conscious of pollution.

But they were the very boys who destroyed the countryside in Newfoundland, they were the very boys who ordered an asphalt plant into Deer Lake when the council - MR. THOMS: MR. PATTERSON: Have we made a (inaudible). You were excluded from this. - when the council opposed it. When the council decided they objected to an asphalt plant they were advised to put it in. You have pollution on the land as well as on the sea. The roads across Newfoundland contracts were let to their friends without tenders and the sides of the roads were destroyed and vegetation destroyed.

Now, if you gentlemen opposite want to go in opposition to your counterparts in Ottawa, I think that you should stand in your places now and condemn the Department of Transport for thinking about removing the Placentia Bay Marine Centre. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. PATTERSON: I am sure the hon. member for Burin - Placentia West (Mr. Hollett) will. MR. F.B.ROWE: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. 2586

April 23, 1980, Tape 982, Page 3 -- apb MR. SPEAKER(Baird): A point of order. MR . F.B.ROWE: Mr. Speaker, I believe the resolution has .~omething to do with the fishing industry and the compatibility of the fishing industry with the oil and · gas industry. The hon. member for Placentia_ . (Mr. Patterson) so far has spoken about an asphalt plant in Deer Lake, he is talking about transportation down in his particular district, and talking about rifts within the Liberal Party, all of which are completely irrelevant to the particular resolution under consideration and I would ask Mr.

Speaker if he could remind the hon. member presently speaking of the rule of relevance and become relevant to this particular resolution. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: To that point of order, To the point of order, the Mr.

Speaker, the hon. the member for Placentia is trying to make a point and he has not totally made the point although I think most hen. members here understand what the hen. member for Placentia is coming to, that there are hen. gentlemen opposite who, when in different circumstances, pursued a marine policy, a fisheries policy, and an overall policy which was not 25 87

April 23, 1980 Tape 983 EC - l PREMIER PECKFORD; in the beat interest of this Province, and this is how he is tryinq to relate it to this particular resolution. Aa we have see.a. in previous resolutions ~n the last number of Wednesdays hera, that is allowed, that there has been a. fa.ir UIQunt of latitude allowed hoD.. members in the debate of these kinds of resolutions. AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear! PliEM:IER PECKFORD: And the hon. the member for Placentia (Mr. W.

Patterson) is tryinq to make the point that hon. mellilers opposite in tryinq to pursue a fisheries policy should remember that they ha~e been vary inconsistent in other like policies. And this is the kind of point he is tryinq to make and relate it to this overall fisheries resolution. So it is not irrelevant, it is very 1 very releyant, because it shows the consistency or l.&ck thereof of certain policies that hon. gentlemen opposite have pursued over the years • HR. F. KlWE: MR. SPEAKER (BaUd) : Bay de Verde. MR. F. KlWE: Mr. Speaker.

Tne hon. the member for Trinity - The fact that the hon. the member for Placentia. has failed to make his point should be no excuse to let him off the hook from the point of view of relevancy. If we have to spend twenty minutes waiting for him to make his point and he fails to make his point and he is irrelevant in doing so, he should be ruled as beinq irrelevant. SOME HON. MEMBERS : AN HON. MEMBER: MR. SPEAKER: MR. PATTERSON; Oh, oh! He can say whatever he wants to because (inaudible) Order, please! To the point of order. I notice the hon. gentleman from Trinity - Bay de Verde has points as well as curves. MR.

SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. F.~ I will show you a curve in a minute, my son! MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order. I would suqqest that this is a difference of opinion. I 'WOuld ask the hon. the member for Placentia to continue. 2588

April 23, 1980 Tape 983 EC - 2 SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. W. PATTERSON: I: do !lOt knew 1 Mr. Speaker 1 if the non. the -.bar -for Trinity -~Bay de Verde (Mr. F. Rowe) was in this House when the ERCO plant was set up without any environmental safeguards. MR. F. ROWE: I: was wh.at? MR. W. PATTERSON: Were yo~ in this House? Were yo~ a member of this Leqislature then? MR. F. ROWE: (I:naudible) -? The answer is no. MR. W. PATTERSON : No. Yo~ were in this House possibly when the eo- By Chance refinery was set gp in Placentia. Bay? SOME BON. MEMBERS: Ohl oh! MR. F.

ROWE: I: would ask the non. member 1a queatio ~ If a Select CoSiittee 'IA!re set up at that time, wo~d that not have been advisable? MR. PATTERSON 1 If you wo~d let - get to that. The point that I am. trvinq to make here is this 1 and it is very straiqhtforward1 Presently the federal Department of Transport in Ottawa are considerinq phasinq out the Arqentia Manaqement Centre. that controls all ships qoinq into Placentia Bay 1 all the ships qoinq into Burin - and ships are connected with the fishery in this partic~ar case. We have ships qoing up there hauling phosphorus, so they are concerned with phosphorus.

And we are going to have the Atlantic Shippinq in and out there with freight. We have the fisherman of Placentia Bay crisscrossing the bay. They do not go on a ninety deqree anqle 1 they go on about a forty-five. As a result 1 they are in the ships' lanes for possibly an hour and a half. Now , are you people going to protest to the Department of Transport and object, to tel~ t!tem that they sho~d not take out this? MR. THOMS: (I:naudible) do not have to protest to anybody. MR. W.

PATTERSON 1 But you were the very same people over there who supported it when they took the satellite station out of Cwslett a couple of years aqo. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! l'IR •. 'DIOMS : I: was not here then (inaudible) i.1R. W. PATTERSON: The Liberals in Ottawa did it. The party did it. Do not try to alienate yourself. Do not try to isolate yourself 2589

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 983 MB - 3 MR. W. PATTERSON: from the Liberal .Party 1 from the Liberal Party in ottawa because you are part and- parcel of that administration. And that was the ildministration that pulled the satellite station out of Cuslett. Now they have the unmitigated gall to go ahead ;md try and steal the one out of Argentia. And I h&te to think what will happen 1:o the ships going into Burin. I hate to think what is going to happen up in JJrf hon. f:z::iend' s district if this is allowed to happen.

And I am sure he will work hard against it and if necessary he will walk over here and fight it with us. SOME RON. MEMBERS : AN HON. MEMBER: MR. W. PATTERSON: Hear, hearJ (inaudible) We are not looking for recruits • And I am going to tell you we are going to be very selective, You will make your application ;md you will wait in line. MR. L. THOMS: No, I am not a coward. MR. W. PATTERSON: I did not call you a coward. But if you do not stand up ;md oppose the decision of the Department of Transport I will have a name for you. MR. L. THOMS : I will oppose anybody. I will oppose you. MR. W.

PATTERSON: ~at is what is going on presently so I would advise you to get in touch with your counterparts in Ottawa ;md tell them what is happening in Argentia. They will do ,as sure as night must follow day, they will steal that out like they went down and cut the towers down in Cuslett-and shi.fted them out to Port aux Basques. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR. W. PATTERSON:: We are working on that yes. And who was in ottawa when that happened,Minister of Tr;msport 1 but your Leader. He can brief you on it. He can tell you the cunning ways they go about doing things when it comes to Newfoundland. 2590

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 984 EL - 1 MR. W. PATTERSON: Newfoundland is the only province in Canada where they have decided to cut back. The hon. the member for Bay de Verde (F. Rowe) says that has nothing to do with fishery. Take a dragger going into Burin or draggers going up to Placentia and they collide with a phosphorous ship, what is going to happen then? CN boats going in there. During the Liberal administration 1 when that refinery was there, fifty-two tankers went up that bay without pilots.

They just ~ulled in off Argentia, because it was not a compulsory pilotage area, waved to the base there and went on up. And they knew about that - I wrote them about it. we have the facts and figures on how many ships went, how many thousand tons of oil they carried. so these are the things you have to be concerned with with the fishery. Whether the fish and oil can go together, well cod liver oil and fish, that seems to be working - SOME HON. MEBMERS : MR. W. PATTERSON: the blue bottle. MR. STIRLING: Oh, oh. It works well ·here in Newfoundland, (Inaudible) are you happy with the oil development? MR. W.

PJ.TTERSON: I am quite happy with the oil develop- ment. Quite happy with the oil development. There is not a man .are ' concerned for the enYironment here under proper management - MR. THOMS: You do not know any more about it than any of the rest of us who have (inaudible) to be here. MR. W. PJ.TTERSON: But, we have to get control of it. If we have not got control of it, if we have some fellow up in Ottawa making the decisions - MR. ROBERTS: (In~udible) really controlled. MR. W. PATTERSON: -we have got to have that. The owner- ship and the control must rest here with the Province of Newfoundland.

SOME HON • MEMBERS : Hear, hear. MR. STIRLING: Be sure yo u say that once a day. 2591

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 984 RA-2 HR. W. PATTERSON: I will say that and before the oil question jurisdiction is settled that place over there will be as empty as a morgue after a funeral. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. W. PATTERSON: They will be all over there. Because you are going to destroy yourselves if you do not take a stand on this very important issue, this very, very important issue. I am very concerned over the oil and I am very concerned over the fish but I think that we have the necessary regulations to control that. Now there are things that can happen.

We could have a blowout like they had down there in Mexico. That would be very difficult to handle but are we going to hide away and go back two or three hundred years just because of this or because of that? We have to look down the road and we have to do the planning. MR. THOMS: MR. PATTERSON: If it is going to destroy the fisheries, yes. If it is going - but who knows that? YoL know, if you get in a plane tonight to go to Australia you are figuring you are going to get to Australia. MR. STIRLING: What information do you have that we do not have? MR. PATTERSON: What kind of information? MR.

STIRLING: All this environmental (inaudible) or do you take the word of the Premier? MR. PATTERSON: I do respect the Premier's word and I congratulate him for the regulations he brought in while he was Minister of Mines and Energy - MR. STIRLING: A previous administration. That does not count, under a previous administration. MR. PATTERSON: So there is no comparison with the past and the present of what your former clique did. MR. STIRLING: MR. PATTERSON: SOME HON. MEMBERS: 1-'.R. PATTERSON: So do you have any information that we do not have? I do not know what you know. Hear, hear! I do not know.

It is like Oliver Goldsmith said, 'And still they gazed/And still the wonder grew/That one small head/Could 2592

April 2 3, 1980 Tape No. 984 RA - 3 MR. PATTERSON: carry all he knew.' I do not know what you know.I do not think you know a thing my son. SOME HON • MEMBERS : Rear, hear! MR. STIRLING: Tell us what you know • ~ell us what you know. In the elected time that you have left tell us what you know about the offshore oil. MR. PATTERSON: Could this. happen in Placentia Bay? Look at this. ASk yourself that question. A'lll liON. IIDIBER~ MR. PATTERSON: (inaudible) No, it is not I will bring it over to you. I will enlarge it for you.

The answer - when you come over to sit with me I will just pass it to you so I will not have to enlarge it. MR. THOMS : I will be 1:1ere. MR. PATTERSON: The answer many people fear is that it could if and when the Come by Chance oil refinery resumes production and huge tankers again begin to ply Placentia Bay. Pictured here is the crippled supertanker Atlantic Empress burning of Tobago in the Caribbean following high seas collision with another supertanker the Aegean Captain.

They carried millions of barrels of naphtha anc' light crude which caused widespread ocean pollution • Twenty-seven men were lost in the collision. So that is why we have to be very careful in what we are doing~I stated it here a few weeks ago in the Rouse but we have a federal «nvironmental Assessment Act now, we also have ' a provincial Assessment Act and I think the staff are very competent people but that does not necessarily ensure that you are not going to an oil spill.

So I · cannot support that bill, I cannot support this motion here insofar as a sellect committee is concerned because it is not needed because we have all kinds of regulations. We are going to study the thing. Eirst and foremost we are going to control it, we are going to own it and then we are going to make the regulations. SOME HON • MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. PATTERSON: And we are going to control the development. This is not a giveaway, it is not a Santa Clause, 2593

April 23, 1980 MR. PATTERSON : ~~ MR. STIRLING : MR. PATTERSON Tape ~o. 984 RA- 4 this is bard business, this is business­ Why can you not support this ? Why are you afraid to debate it? One fellow wants to know why I am afraid and the other fellow - do I show any siqns of fear ? SOME BON. MEMBERS: MR. STIRLI .RG: M.<l.. PM"l'ERSON: Hear, hearl Ycu will not aqree on a select committee - Because we do not need a select committee. 259 4

April 23, 1980 Tape No. 985 GH-1 MR. PATTERSON: We have a Federal Environmental Assessment office open here in St. John's, I believe. These are professionals. Too long we have listened and sought and accepted advice from people who were not professionals here in Newfoundland. MR. WARREN: You are still doing it. MR. PATTERSON: We are not doing it. We are knowingly not doing it. We are not running off like a hangman with a black hood over the head calling in this fellow and that fellow. We are not doing that, my son. Any proposals that come to this government are very carefully assessed. MR.

STIRLING: Have you read what your environmental professionals said about the Environmental Act? MR. PATTERSON: Well, there are so many environmentalists, you have them in Europe, you have them in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, all over the world. MR. STIRLING: MR. PATTERSON: MR. STIRLING: MR. PATTERSON: MR. STIRLING: MR. PATTERSON: MR. STIRLING: MR. PATTERSON: MR. STIRLING: MR. PATTERSON: MR. STIRLING: MR. PATTERSON: --- ... - AN HON. MEMBER: MR. PATTERSON: PREMIER PECKFORD: -·- .. -.. . - - MR. SPEAKER: (Baird) PREMIER PECKFORD: No, no, the ones on the government payroll. I do not know which ones.

Have you read what they said? Yes. Ask the minister. Yes, and I have great faith in what they said. You have read what they said? Great faith. They said the minister has too much authority. Oh, no, no, no, that is only an opinion. That is their opinion. Not at all, no, no, no. Is that a professional opinion? Oh, no, no, no. Point of order, point of order, Mr. Speaker. Point of' order. This is really sort of getting out of hand, and I do not think the han. members apposite really mean it, but I do not know if it is because the hon. member from Placentia (Mr. Patterson) is 2595

.1\pril 23, 1980 Tape No. 985 GH-2 PREMIER PECKFORD: being provocative or not but I would like to hear the han. member from Placentia (~lr. Patterson) in silence. I would ask the han. membere, especially from Bonavista North (Mr. Stirling) and Grand Bank (Mr. Thoms) to participate in this debate in the way that the rules permi~ After the han. member for Placentia is finishecrhis speech, we would love to hear, and I will be very, very silent, what the member from Grand Bank has to say and what the member for Bonavista North has to say.

But while the member for Placentia has the floor, let him speak in silence, let him be heard in silence, so that we can get on with this very, very interesting and important debate. MR. STIRLING: MR. SPEAKER: (Baird) PREMIER PECKFORD: MR. STIRLING: MR. SPEAKER: MR. STIRLING: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker. The han. the member for Bonavista North. There cannot be two points of order at - To the point of order. To the point of order. Speaking on the point of order raised by the Premier.

You see the pattern for this debate was set by the member, who was being very provocative, and as soon as we start asking questions that embarrass the Premier he wants to change the rules, so to say, "Well, we cannot have that back and forth across, now we should hear in silence". Well, the pattern has to be set by the Premier, and he was the