1-!ay 31, 1976 Tape no. 3022 Paee 1 - mw The House mct Rt 2:00 P.H. }lr. ~pP<:tkor in the Che~ir. Order, pleaGe: STATEMENTS BY NINISTERS: MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Ninister of TourisT'!. HP. • Ill: CKJ\Y : }lr. Spe.'lker, recently the Auditor General in his annual report criticized my department for issuine free big game licences to some hunters P.s a re1o~ard for the submission of their big game licence returns . As these returns provide valuable data to the \Vild Life Division, this re~rard system was devised several years Rgo in the hope of increasing the number of returns submitted.

I wish to inform the House at this time that this re\~ard system will be discontinued. No free licences will be issued to co-operating hunters in the futurC'. ~Jhat I no1; propose to do 1 in the hope of eliciting returns or. reports from bir. game hunters,is to implement a penalty system for those hunters failing to submit their returns or reports.

This penalty system "ill i'rohi.hit a person from holdinr, a big game licence for the next open season for which he or she is eligihle. to hold a hfe name huniinf licence. /\s this year,party licences will be issued, and as the party licence wl.U. enable two persons to hunt on the one lic.,nce, both of thesco people will be disqualificcl from l10lding a ·licence if the lirt>nce rC'turn is not sublltitted. In other words the onus for submitting tltc return wlll rest with both members of the party. This will be l'tainta Lnc,J of all persons who fail to submit the return.

And these future ,'lpplications will be checked against these lists • and anyone whose name is not on the list ~o~ill not have his application entered in the draw for the next season in which he or she is eligible to receive a mooos10 or caribou hunting licence. I should perhaj,!s caution llunterli nm.J to submit their licence return by registereJ mail in order to ensure clelivery to the Wild Life Division. 9146

Nay 31, 107fi Tape no. 3022 Page 2 - mw PRESENTING PETITIOl{S: KR.. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Eagle River. HTl .. STr-ACi!At'l: l'lr. Speaker, I ;;ish to present a petition on behalf of the lllf residents of Fox Harbour in Southern Labrador. The prayer of the · petition is as follows: "We the undersigned being residents of St. Lewis, Fox Harbour, Labrador do hereby petition the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to construct a road around our community in the coming Summer of 1976. This proposed road is approximately three miles long.

We have made efforts before to have a road built around our community but to no avail. T!tis proposed road woulu connect both sides of the community, and enJ.ble transportation to the sclwol, fish planl, stores and water wells. !lue to the lack of a road the pcoole find it nearly impossible to get around the harbour, and as a result the children are losing school as well as the many other inconveniences caused by this problem." In talking to the prayer of the petition, Hr.

Speaker, I would like to outline that Fox Harlour is a community of something close to 400 people no\~, a very active, vigorous cmmnunity which lies approximately twelve miles across St. Lewis Eay from l1ary 1 s Harbour. The cormnunity is situated in a harbour. The major part of the community lies at the bottom of the harbour and on either side of it is a fish plant and people living at each point in fox Harbour. What• occurs is that during the Sw:uner the school children are brought to school by boat, across the harbour, and 1n the Winter the school children are brought to school by snowmobile.

Of course, in break-up and freeze-up there is a problem in getting children to and from the school, and also in communicating around the village. Another problem! that exists is that there is a fish plant there which has been built through local initiative, and the fish plant is separatel from the rest of the community, and there is no way at all for them getting to the fish plant. Nost people travel by boat. They are not asking for a paved highway. They are not asking for a gravel roau. All they are asking for is some system, some road built around the community. It is not too difficult !}14 7

May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3022 Page 3 - mw Hr. Strachan. a proulem. Tlterl' is not a great deal of rock. It is also the site of a hillside, but it is a very sloping hillside, and they feel that some road should be built around so that people could have trucks, so that people walk around the community without having to usc vessels, boats or snowmobiles. There is also a danger here in that children going back and forth to the school during the break-up :1,nd tl1c freeze-up often experience great difficulty due to bad ice conditions. And it may occur some time that some children may lose their life to and from school.

I do not think that what the residents of Fox H~rbour arc asking for is too much. They are not asking for a great deal, but they ~•ish to see something done. I should indicate that this ·petition is, '"; a result of a statement by the Minister of Transportation and Communications in which he indicated that a barge with equipment 1muld be travellinr; to the two communities of Hary's H<>rbour and Black Tickle. That barge, as I understand it, will be handling fairly small equipment. It will not be large equipment, as I understand it, and this will l>e to upgrade the roads in these t>m communities.

Possibly what is required, certainly initially for a road like this, would be larger equipment and possibly I would ask the minister to respond to thi~. lt is a real need of the people, a real need of the residents, and they wish to see something done about it, and I do not think they are asking for too much. I ask that this petition be laid upon the table of the House and referred to the department to which it relates. smm liON. HEHBERS: Hear, hear! t!R. SPEAKE?.: The hon. l1inister of Transportation and Communications. HR. }fORGAN: Hr.

Speaker, just a few words in support of the petition tabled by the hon. member for Eagle River (Hr. Strachan ) • /l.s I earlier indicated in the House of Assembly later whan the Assembly closes or recesses for the Summer recess, I intend to travel the Labrador' Coast with the han. gentleman from Eagle River (Mr. Strachan), and my friend 914~

":tv 31, J 97F ' !~ . :1'lltC:A:I!: 'i:apc no . 3'1:!2 4 - Dl"..r. frnm Nnsltnu pi. (~lr . Goudie) nne visit these smnll corrvnunitics ,,nd t<tkc ., loo!~ at tile need for i111provements in road conditions ~nd, Qf course, the nP.cd for L~proved transportrttion in general on the Lnbrador Coast . So 1 tJill only be too rleascd to visit the col11l'lun:lty of Fox !!arbour at that time anrl teka :;1 look at what can he clone this year, if anything . We have allocated funds for the rPconsttuction or the roads in Nary's llnrbour and Blnck Tickle .

Th;tt is our programme for this year as earlier outlined in the House of Assembly. But if at all possible, if there Dre any funds avnilable , t~c ~·Jill look .H some work to be carried out this year as well at 'Fox ilarbnYr. At this time I cannot indicate definitely if this \."ill be tlone . So rather t hnn indicate no\o.• I Hill say I will travel to the arc , .,.ith the hon . gentlemen and take a look at t he situation and hopefully some improven1ents 1-~ill be carried out this year . 91Hl

May 31, 1976 Tape 3023 PK - 1 MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Opposition. RON. E. M. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to say a word or two in support of the petition presented by my ftiend and colleague from Eagle River (Mr. Strachan), from the district of Eagle River, which should be call~d the Coast of Labrador, but the member represents the people of Fox Harbour and Louis Harbour and all of that part of this Province. I think their request is a very straightforward one. I think it is a very reasonable one.

They are not asking for very much in this day and age to ask for a road around the harbour, which I think is the essential substance of the prayer of this petiton. There cannot be many communities left anywhere in this Province, Hr. Speaker, that do not even have a road around the harbours. There might be one or two up in Hermitage district, Francois - I am not sure if francoia ever got its bit of road, although it was promised during the famous by-election campaign. But there are very few.

There cannot ~e a dozen communities left in all of the communities in this Province that they do not even have a road from one end of the harbour to the other. Most of them are relatively small communities, and it would not cost a lot of money to provide them with this amenity. I think it is something that the government should regard as a priority, because for the expenditure of a relatively few dollars thay can provide the citizens, the people who live in these communities with a very great amenity , relatively speaking.

And I know that the Minjster of Transportation obviously has many more demands upon his budget than he has dollars with which to satisfy those demands. And that is accepted, and that is normal, and certainly that is not his fault. But I would say to him that, you know, the relatively few dollars involved here,I would hope,could be found, particularly when we look at the amounts of money that are being spent on other projects within the Highways Department.

A very -few dollars taken off those projects would not make much difference, but a very few dollars spent to help the people of Fox Harbour and the other communities in the

May 31, 1976 Tape 3023 PK - 2 Mr. Roberts: area would make a great deal of difference. And as always, Sir, in dealin~ with the communities along the Coast of Labrador, and ,elsewhere in Labrador, I think, there is the additional reason in public policy, and that is the necessity of supporting the people of Labrador, the need to show them, to convince them by showing them that, you know, the political entity of Newfoundl~nd and Labrador does work, and that it is very much in their best interest that it does work. I would say only one thing in addition, Mr. Speaker.

The minister I am very happy to learn from him is going to visit these communities this Summer, and I think the people there will welcome him, and I know he will have a very enjoyable time. The minister has outlined quite an ambitious plan over the Summer to visit, and I think that is very commendable. I think, it is a very good use of ministerial time to visit places, to · see what is happening, and to get a first-hand look.

I woul~ hope though, and I think this is a danger that could come up, I do not think the minister will fall into it, but I would hope that the start of work in these areas 4oes not have to wait until the minister can come, because travel can be difficult, communities are widely scattered, and the minister has many demands. Such an important man has a lot of demands on his time, and I would hope that he could, you know, arrange to have the work go ahead. Surely it does not have to wait for the minister to come. The engineers will be the people on whom the minister relies , quite properl~ for his advice.

So I would hope that whatever can be done in Fox Harbour will be done this year, For that matter, _my own district along the Straits, the road along the Straits from L-'Anse au Clair to Red Bay will be started without necessarily having to wait for the minister to came. People will be delighted to see the minister whether he comes early or late, and I know that if he cannot come early they would like nothing better than to be able to be with him watching work in progress. And I would think, Sir, that is something which should very much commend itself to the minister.

It is something which I want to say because I think 9151

May 31, 1976 Tape 3023 PK - 3 Mr. Roberts ; it is relevant, because the minister, in dealing with this petition again, made mention of the fact that he has undertaken to visit these communities, and he hopes to visit them this Summer. I support the pe~ition, Sir. I think it is well presented, and its well taken. And as I say for a relatively few dollars a very great advantage will be conferred upon people who should have that advantage. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Bellevue. ------ MR. W. CALLAN: Mr.

Speaker, I beg leave to present a petition on behalf of the residents of Bellevue. Bellevue as everybody knows, of course, is the community after which the district takes its name, Bellevue meaning beautiful sight, in French. Mr. Speaker, there are - MR. SIMMONS: It should have been called after their member. MR. CALLAN: Well I think that is probably why there were so many candidates after the dist:ri.ct, it is a beautiful district, and a beautiful sight on the Isthaas of the Avalon. There are 152 names on this petit~on, Mr. Speaker. And the petition actually is one year old. Mr. James G.

Reid, the Minister of Rural Development was the person to whom this petition was addressed a year ago. Now why it was not sent to him or what happened I do not know, je ne sais pas. However they have changed the name now, and they have sent it, or it was given to me yesterday morning, as a matter of fact, at a meeting we held of the saadium Commission. The prayer says. "we the undersigned hereby make petition reRarding road paving in our area.

Last year" -well that of course would he 1974- "'after much controversy certain sections of road from Chapel Arm to Chance Cove were paved, promising to complete the remainder in 1975. Now ve find that the road from Bellevue intersection to the Trans-Canada Highway, which is commonly referred to as Father Brown's Hill, will not be paved this year. Instead from Father Brown's 9152

May 31, 1976 Tape 3023 PK - 4 Mr. Callan: Hill to Chance Cove will be paved. We the undersigned are fed up with being overlooked by government since 1949" - they say here - "and urgently request immediate action on our behalf." MR. DOODY: Shame! MR . CALLAN: Shame! Mr. Speaker, I thoroughly support the prayer of this petition, and as the hon. Minister of Transportation and Communications is aware a contract was let for last year, but the paving was not doae last year, or last Fall,because it got too late in the Fall for paving and so on, and that contract is being honoured right now.

There is 1.6 miles of pavement running from the Trans-Canada Highwa~ at the Fair Haven Intersection where a Mr. Jack Robinson has a farm there for this fertilizer and what have you, so the pavement is running down from the TCH down to the entrance of the Bellevue Beach Park, that beautifil sight, that park. What the residents here are concerned about is that they would like to see the pavement extend around the loop, around the breed lake there over as far as the community of Bellevue. And this is why they are presenting this petition now. MR. MORGAN: How many miles is that? MR.

CALLAN: ----- I would say we are talking about a mile, possibly more, again je ne sais pas. I would say about a mile, no more than two for sure. So, Mr. Speaker, I thoroughly support the prayer of this petition, and I ask that this peti~ion be tabled and referred to the department to which it relates. MR. SPEAKER: ---- --- The hon. member for Trinity~Bay de Verde. MR. F. ROWE: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to rise on behalf of my colleagues to support the petition presented by the member for Bellevue, I was in conversation during the eatlier part of the presentation of the petition, but from what I can understand the petition comes 91:l:l

May 31, 1976 Tape 3023 PK - 5 Mr. Rowe: from the voters, the citizens of the commanity of Bellevue, and what they are looking for is the paving of the road around the loop from Bellevue to the

section that runs down from the Trans­ Canada Highw-r towards the park. And if I understood, the member can correct me, did I understand the member correctly when he suggested that contracts were let for or approved for that particular

section of the - MR. CALLAN: the park. ~ROWE: No, no, for 1.6 which has been done, to the entrance of To the entranee of the park. Well, Sir, it seems to me reasonably sensible that while the machinery is in the area that this pavement should be continued on around that particular loop. Because Bellevue is a particularly beautiful community, and many of the people who visit the park indeed wish to visit around the arm and see the other side of this community, and it will bring tourist dollars into that community if that little

section of road is done. Because the pavement is doae upon the southside of Trinity Bay, and certainly in some sections of the northside it is done and it seems quite sensible to have that little small

section 1 just in excess of a mile, paved in order to bring the tourists over to the community of Bellevue and have some of the tourist dollars expended in that particular area. And besides that, Sir, a tremendous number of people do use that particular road just to get to the other side of the Bay. 915~

Mav 31,1976 Tape 3024 IB-1 MR. ROWF.: I would submit that it would be dollars wisely spent if this small

section of road could be paved. Sir, I might also suggest to the minister 1 if I may1 in supporting the petition that in a number of cases in, for example, my own district of Trinity-Bay De Verde there are contracts left over from last year. I am happy to learn that the contractors are in there now finishing off the work that they had to terminate laet year because of weather conditions. I would suggest that while that machinery is in the area that the minister try his best to get some of these other small sections of raad _paved that requests have gone in for, to have these small sections of road paved.

They adrl up to, you know, point four miles he~e, point six miles there and instead of dragging the machinery and the contractor out of the area at this particular time then have to eome back at a later date and additional expenditure, it seems to me that money would be sav~d ff the contractor could be - I do not know what the situation would be wtth respect to calling of tenders in such a situation but it seems sensible that while the contractor is in the area that if some of those small sections of road could be paved ft would be money saved in the long run.

So, Sir, I do support the petition presented by the member for Bellevue (Mr. Callan). MR. SPEAKE'P.: The hon. Minister of Transportation and Communications. 'I"R . RGAN: ~r. Speaker, just a few words. I do find it rather amazing that the hon. member, the house leader for the Opposition, would stand in the Rouse of Assembly and request this kind of request to me as minister. Based on the fact that earlier his colleague, the member for Fortune-Hermitllge (Mr. J. Winsor) indicat"ed- MR. SDOONS: A point of ord@r, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order has been raised. MR.

SIMMONS: The minister is now clearly getting into the realm of debate, Mr. Speaker. He ~s responding to remarks made by my colleague from Trinity-Bay De Verde (Mr. Rowe) which is not really onto the prayer of the petition presented by the member for Bellevue 9155

....,___ May 31, 1976 Tape 3024 IB-2 l1R. SIMMONS: (Hr. Callan). He is getting into debate as to why my friend has said or not said something and whether or not it contradicts what another of my colleagues has said. I submit, Mr. Speaker, this is not germane to what the member for Bellevue (Mr. Callan) has presented. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Rural Development. ~- LUNDRIGAN: Mr. Speaker, on that point of order. I think the member is anticipating comments which might be made. I have heard the remarks.

The member to my knowledse has not even finished one !'lenten ce and certainly under any rules a member is allowed to be heard before a point of order should be raised. MF • SPEAKER: 1-lR. ROBERT!':: The hon. Leader of the Opposition. ¥r. Speaker, to that point of order. It is not true in parliamentary practice that every dog is entitled to his bite. And the minister is not entitled to say something if it is out of order. My colleague is quite right in raising the point of order now. Who knows what the minister was going to say? It is fair to say that nobody knows. But, ¥r.

Speaker, it is equally fair to say that the minister gave every appearance and rightly so of launching into a debate and my colleague was quite in order in raising the point because you do not have to wait, Sir, for the offense to be hefore you object to it. If that were so, Sir, the rules would be a mockery because members would break them all the time and then suffer the retroactive penalty of being called to order.

There is a rule of law that every dog is entitled to it's bite,as the late Sir Brian Dunfield used to remind all who would listen to him}but it is not, Sir, I would submit a rule that this House should follow. MR. SPEAKER : With respect to the point of order raised, the appJiicable rules are in our Standing Orders, 92 and 97. "Every member offering a petition to the House shall confine himself to the statement of the parties from whom it comes, the number of 9156

May 31, 1976 Tape 3024 IB-3 HR. SPEAKER: signatures attached to it and the material allegations it contains, and shall not take up more than five minutes. And 97, there shall be no debate on a petition. " Standing Order 92 while referring specifically to a member offering a petition mus~and in my opinion does,refer as well to what may be said by a member speaking to a petition. The bon. Minister of Transportation and Communications was, in my opinion, making a reference,which I presume will be brief but I do not know, was making a reference to a suggestion of the bon. member for Trinity­ Bay ne Verde (Mr. Rowe).

In speaking on the material allegation of the petition the bon. member for Trinity-Bay De Verde (Mr. Rowe) suRgested a certain course of action which might facilitate the minister in acceding te the request. He suggested a course of action which I think is relevant to what is petitioned for. The hon. member for Trinity-Bay De Verde did not develop a speech on that but made a suggestion. I think the hon. minister is replying to that suggestion and a brief reference to that suggestion would be in order.

A debate on it, to speak on it at length would not be but I think that a brief reference to that suggestion would not be out of order. SOME HOB_~ MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. MORGAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The hon. gentleman for Bellevue (Mr. Callan) in presenting his petition is requesting an extension or an addition to the contract now awarded in that area for the paving of one point six miles of road from the Trans-Canada Highway down to the comaunity of Bellevue, that that be extended on to include a further approximately one mile around the community of Bellevue.

In speaking in support of the petition the hon. gentleman, the house leader in the Opposition, indicated he would like to see this done in many areas around the Province where extensions to contracts could be made to add additional 9157

May 28, 1976 Tape 3024 IB-4 MR. HORGAN: mileage in smaller type communities. My point I was makin~ is that this is frowned on by the Auditor General and it is frowned by the Opposition spokesman with regards to financial matters, ~he hon. gentleman for Burgee-Bay n'Espoir (Mr. Simmons). So I am rather surprised that one of his colleagues is entirely disagreeing with him oa that point. The hon. gentleman for Bay De Verde (Mr. Rowe) indicates he would like to see this done, extensions given to contracts to have smaller projects included

whereas his colleague, the bon. member for Burgee­ Bay n'Espoir (Mr. Simmons) is totally opposed to that. 1-'R. ROWE: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. Sir, in all sincerity I do not think - and I am positive - I did not suggest whatsoever that we have extensions to existing contracts take place with respect to paving that is ongoing in the district of Trinity-Bay De Verde •. What I did say is that while the machinery is in the area money might be saved jf some additional - MR. :MORGAN: Where is the point of order? Where is the point of order? MR. ROWE: Just one second. MR • tAORGAN: No. What is the point of order?

MR. ROWE: Mr. Speaker, the point of order is that the words uttered hy myself have been misrepresented by the Minister of Transportati .on and Communications. MR. SPEAKER: Order, plea~e! Order, please! I think I should intetject here. order. It is a difference of opinion. SOME RON. ¥EMBERS: Hear, hear! There is no point of MR. ~!ORGAN : Mr. Speaker, when we are talking about extending existing contracts or when we have an asphalt plant in an area and we are doing one point six miles and we want an addition of one mile of pavement done, I think it rather ridiculous for the 9158

tlay 28, 1976 Tape 3024 IB-5 MR. MORGAN: Opposition to aak that we call tenders - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! The hon. minister will recall that in ruling that he was in order previously, that was stated because the minister would have a right to comment upon a su~gestion made by another hon. member with respect to fulfilli.ng the request of the petition. I think that the hon. minister has made that comment and that further elaboration in that area would be de~ate. The hon. ~!inister of Transportation and Communications. ~'ll .• MORGAN: ~r.

Speaker, in closing my comments on the petition every consideration will be given to the hon. gentleman's request and the residents of the area. But to call tenders for the paving of one mile of ro~d would be a very expensive type of a tender call because an asphalt plant would have to be set up for the paving of one mile of road. So the only other alternative to calling tenders for paving of one mile of road is an extension onto the existing contract already awarded in that area.

That is frowned on, as I earlier.mentioned, by the Auditor General and of course it is also a position of the Opposition that they frown on this matter as well. So extendin~ the existing paving contract in Bellevue , although it will be given consideration, the contract has been awarded, it was awarded last Fall.

And I would like to also emphasize, while speaking in support of this petition , that all contracts that were awarded last Fall and were not carried out, that these contracts will be carried out 1 if not being carried out now, carried out during this construction season both for reconstruction and paving of roads. So although the hon. gentleman's petition has much merit, an extension of the asphalt around the coiiiJilunity I feel this year it is rather doubtful at this time that there will be tenders called for that one mile and there will be an extension given on the existi.ng contract. 9159

May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3025 Page 1 - DIW MR. SPEAKER: The han. Dlember for Burgeo - Bav d'Espotr. MR, SIMMONS: I would like to rise to support the petition presented by the Dlember for Bellevue (Mr. Callan). I support only that portion of it which he presented in English, Mr. Speaker. What he had to say otherwise was far over DIY head, but what he said in English was Dlost sensible. I said, Mr. Speaker, '~at he said in English not what the Minister of Transportation said in English." What the DleDiber for Bellevue (Mr. Callan) said in English was Dlost sensible.

I believe what the Dlember for Trinity - Bay de Verde said was not only equally sensible, but equally understandable had we all listened to hiDI. We all know the procedure for governDient contracts, and we all know that there is provision for add ons in the contract. Now we are not talking, Mr. Speaker - MR. MORGAN: Add ons in contracts? MR. SIMMONS: Yes, the Dlinister shakes his head, Well perhapa he has been reading the contract in his wrong capacity, you know. Perhaps he read it in his wrong capacity. He should pUt on his other cap, not cap, no, DIY God, Mr. Speaker, he would spoil his hairdo. MR. MORGAN: MR.

SPEAKER: MR. MORGAN: Point of order, Mr. Speaker. Point of order. The hon. gentleDian is getting involved in debate on the comments that I aade in speaking to the petition. The hon. gentleDian is totally irrelevant to the petition brought forward by the han. gentleman froDI Bellevue (Mr. Callan). MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Actually I have to adDiit that the Minister of Justice was conferring with Die on soDiething, and I did not hear. What I would suggest is that the Dlatter be left in abeyance or dropped.

Otherwise I have no recourse but to hear the tapes, and I would not think the han. gentleDIBn would regard it aa that serious, So if he will withdraw it, it will be the way to expedite Dlattera. 9160

May 31, 1976 MR. SPEAKER: MR. SIMMONS: Tape no. 3025 Page 2 - IIIW The hon. member for B•mgeo- Bay d'Espoir. Mr. Speaker, the contracts, I was talking not about the minister, Mr. Speaker. He is a person that I spend as little time talking about as I can. I was talking about the contract, Mr, Speaker, for the road, the 1.6 miles, about that, which is now under contract for paving. And if it is a normal government contract - I have not seen this contract - but if it is like the contracts ought to be, it provides for an additional per unit cost if government decides that they want 1.7 miles instead of 1.6 miles.

There is a prvvision, Mr. Speaker, in the contract for an add-on, for goverrunent to go to the contracts and say, "We would like to have .1 mile done, an extra mile", and that kind of thing. I am saying to the minister, Sir, and to the House a provision is there. The minister may not know it. That would not surprise me, but the provision is there, Mr. Speaker, if it is a normal governm.nt contract. The government can request additional, Mr. Speaker, work. Mr. Speaker, if it is a normal government contract and conforms to the financial Administration Act there is a provision in it which says MR.

MORGAN: Prior to awardjng. MR. SIMMONS: If the minister would listen, Mr. Speaker, he might learn something. I doubt it, but he might. MR. MORGAN: Negotiable prior to awarding. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, I am not talking about negotiable prior to awarding, I am talking about a normal conditional contract which says, that if the owner, in this case the government, if the owner decides that it wants additional units of work performed, then that work will be performed at the same unit coat, Mr. Speaker. MR. MORGAN: MR. SIMMONS: MR. SPF.AKER: That is nonaenae. It is not nonsense.

Order, please~ The hon. minister has had an opportunity to sp~k, his colleagues can have opportunities to apeak, if they wish, but I am now asking him not to interrupt. 9161

May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3025 Page ~ - mw MR. SIMMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want very much to get talking about my support for the petition. I can recognize that the minister is scared he may learn something, but the danger is fairly remote, Mr. Speaker, I assure him, fairly remote. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please: I must remind the bon. gentleman for Burgeo - Bay d'Espoir that he is now in the area of debate, and not speaking on the material allegation of a petition. He must confine his remarks to the material allegation of the petition or matters which are obviously and log(cally related to it. MR.

SIMMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Nothing would pleaae me more. Unlike the member for Gander,CMr. Collins), Mr. Speaker, I am for the petition. I am not in a situation of not knowing whether I am for or against international flights in St. John's, At least, I take a position on this petition . I know exactly Where I stand on the subject. The minister could learn something if he listened long enough. I am fouesquare for this petition. I would like to see, Mr. Speaker, the minister, instead of jibbering off h~re in the House, listen to what the member for Bellevue haa aaked ht.. MR.SPEAKER: Order, please!

I consider that the bon. gentleman has again gotten into the area of debate, and I must moat seriously direct him to confine his remarks to the petition, and I must also aak hon. gentleman to my left not to interrupt, SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, the prayer of the petition ia not that complicated. I do not know why we are making it so complicated. There is another mile of road a~ound the loop there. They would like to have it done. The equipment is in the area. I would bet, Mr.

Speaker, that the work could be done more inexpensively by calling into play the add on feature , which I have mentioned ,in moat government contracts. I hope it is in this one or else the government has some explaining to do. But I mean that is aemantica, Mr. Speaker. Let us find out whether 9162

May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3025 Page 4 - mw Mr. Simmons. the clause is there, and if it can be done more cheaply than by calling new tenders. That is a detail of kow it should be done. The important thing is that it would seem a fairly propitious time to get it done. The equipment is there. The need is there. The need has been theee for some time as witnessed by the fact that a petition was first circulated over a year ago, and I can see no reason why the minister cannot, at least, have a good look at it. And I think the people of Bellevue +auld have been better served today, Mr.

Speaker, had we spent and had the minister spent more time responding to the need than trying to find differences of opininn among people here on the Opposition benches. I support the petition whole-heartedly. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! ORAL QUESTIONS: MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, for once in my life, Sir, I am stymied. The Premier is absent, the Minister without Portfolio is absent, the Minister of Mines and Energy is on his way to Goose Bay to try to repair the damage that is done. My question really is a very important one, and it is for the Premier.

Where is he gone? MR. CANNING: He is right there in the corridot. MR. ROBERTS: W~ll, maybe, if I could wait a second, It is an obvious question, but it is an important one. Maybe the Minister of Justice could get the Premier in. Mr. Speaker, this is really moat irregular, but it is equally irregular of the entire front bench to be absent during question period. We did not get the Premier, but here is the House Leader. MR. SIMMONS: Nine and one-half ministers in the House, Mr. Speaker. 91fD

• May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3025 Page 5 - mw MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, then iB the absence of everybody else who counts I will direct my question to the House Leader. Today is the .31st. May, the day when the ultimate expires. Now it b true, you know, we still have eleven and one-half hours to RO before midnight, but could the Premier, now that he has returned, tell us whether r.ny answer has been received from the Government of Quebec in response to the letter which the Premier sent to the Premier of Quebec about ten days aso? And if so, Sir, what that answer is. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Premier. PREMIER MOORES: Mr.

Speaker, there has no answer been received as yet. We und~stand there is one underwav and to make anv further comment until tomorrow I t•tnk would be wrong at this time. But certainly tomorrow I will be making a statement either way. MR. ROBERTS: Well, Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. MR~EAKER: A supplementary. MR. ROBERTS: I certainly will not puruse this matter of the letter, because I agree with the Premier. If it is-enroute let us wait until we see what Quebec says to us, and then we will know. But my question, Sir, grows out of the same subject.

It is to the effect of a remark made on the CBC radio a few minutes past by Dr. Ian MacDonald, a well -known commentator on 'ubllc ~ffairs matters quoting government officials, unnamed,as saying that the government are prepared to lease territory, the Government of our Province are prepared to lease territory to the Government of Quebec. My question is not whether Dr. MacDonald is right or not 1 My question is, Sir, are the government prepared to lease to the Government of Quebec territory aa opposed to water rights in connection with hydro developments? ..-------

May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3025 Page 6 - mw MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Premier. PREMIER MOORES: The answer is an unqualified, under no circumstances, Mr. Speaker, as far as that is concerned. SOME HON. MEMIIERS: Hear, hear! 9165

M~y 31, 197~. Tape 302~, Pap.e 1 -- apb PRF.HIER ~IOORES: We stated before that our position on matters of tprri.tories or leas:lnr, of tP-rritoriP-s or rivers and so on is absolutely non-negoti.able, and that position has not changed nor will it change. HT'. ROBF.1ITS : Hear, hear! Hear, hear! HR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for 'l'willingate. liP.. S~IALUl'OOD: Vlould the Premier say that the non-negotiability in the mntter of the rivers originating in Labrador and crossing the harder and going down through Quebec, is as to the Churchill Falls?

On :Its own hottom would the Premier, would the government consider quite apart from Churchill Falls, not as part of any bargain or any price or any penalty or any reward, but just on its own basis ¥7ould hP agree - I believe I asked him this question before and I believe he gave an answer, hut in case I did not and in case he did not - would he say whether the government are open to consider a business- ] :Ike deal on 1ts own merits under which the two provinces share the pO\JPr that could he produced on those rivers~ }lR. SPEAKER: TI1e hon. the Premier. -------- PREMIER MOORES: Mr.

Speaker, there are two questions here. F:lrst of all to deal \dth the one that the hon. gentleman mentioned, "'e would he prepared to sit dm·rn with Quebec and rivers that we ;ointly share work out .inint development of them. We would he. prepared to enter into possibly, a royalty situation to use the hend 'Jaters that are i.n Labrador. But, Sir, we would not he prP-pared to do any of this without getting the 800 megawatts from the UppP-r Church lll returned at cost. "'R . SNAT.I.WOOD: Or as part of getting the eight? PREMHR MOORES: Not as part of it. ~q_N. 'E \BERS: Hear, hear! HR.

SHALU100D: --------- Or, if I may ask the Premier- so that his statement will not be misunderstood because as he put it it could be ~misunderstood and I am sure he did not mean it that way, but it (could he interpreted that way- the development on any arrangement of those rivers is in no sense or in anv way to be associated '~ith tfte development of, the purchase of power of the Churchill River? 9166

Hrty 31, 19 7(), Tape 3fl2(), l' ap.e / - -- apb l'Ttl'.''IER ' IOORES : TI1at is corrP.ct. :~n. SPTlAKF.R: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition has a supplementary. lffi. ROJlF.RTS: }lr.

Speaker, I have a question which grows ------- out of t~e Premier's answer and again for the sake of clarity, because I am sure t~e Premier wants to he as clear as can be, is it fair to say that the agreement by - that this is the government's position - that the agreement by Ouebec to allow us to purchase the 1100 megaw>~tts at reasonable terms is in effect a condition ~-------------------------precedent to anv further development or negotiations for any further development of any other hydro resources in Labrador on a 1oint basis ~~ith Hydro Quebec? MR. SPEAKJ.R: The l1on. the Premier. PHEMIER MOORES: ~lr.

Speaker, that is basically the 11uestion. _/\ It ~~as in the form of a statement by the hon. the Leader of the Opposition and his position is correct that the 800 megawatts is a precedent before ••e start negoti.ations on the many items outstanding over and above that. SOME HON. ~ffi 'MBERS : Hear, hear! MR. SHALLWOOD: Jlut not part of? PRli:HIF.R MOORES : Not part, no. I-'ll. S~ALLHOOn: Right! 'ffi. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for 1Hndsor-1luchans. / MR. F'Llr.!IT: Hr. Speaker, this question is to the Minister of Tourism.

Hhen the minister l'resenterl his hig game rep,u.l at ions, these ne~·' hunting reguJ at ions for 1 Q7fi, the adequacy of the control over poaching seems to bP. adequate, or at least it is evident. My question is what control is heing exercised no•• hy the Department of Tourism to control and to stop poaching in areas of Newfoundland where poaching is prevalent'now? There are months,from May to September what control is being exercised by the Department of Tourism to control poaching of big game basically? MR. SPE!IKER: The ~on. the Hinister of Tourism. ~ffi. HICKEY: Mr.

Speaker, I do not have the figures right 9167

on to!' of my head in terms of the> nurnhf'T of vnrrlrns . l~r havr ,, nuMhcr of TIC1"!1V'Inent staff t..ftich of course :u:e nn tht> ;oh ye:>r rounrl ,nnrl do what thev can . I a!'l sure I can tell my hnnou rah l.r frirncl that th<tt i.s certainly not suffici.rnt to covl'r th:l.s ProviT'CC' one! it is nC'It the number '~e would li.l~<' to have . '"t> hnve incrP.:tsc.-1 tllCJ'I . I 1-el::leve "" !"ore than dC'Iuhled what we '':td SO'tiP thrrp or fout' ve<~rs ago .

In addition to that, dut'inp the rriMP ~>cason ,.,e hit'r tel"lpora ry •·•at'rlen.'<. !'low the numbet's escapr l'l<'. t <ln not h;wr thel'1 hut I can r.et them for tlte hon . p.entlema n. l·l'ult I ;'ll'l tdlinp him simrly, in a nut shell , is that we have a prr~1nent staff who nre on the joh all of the time, f ull -time, vc.,r t'ound, :md t1'H>n ••e hir e additional Ot' 1•bat we call tell!porary A supplementat'y . ~ t'. Spea~et' . IIR. Sl'FJ\KF.R: .. -- - -·-· · P s upplementary . ... 9 ttH~

May 31, 1976 Tape 3027 IB-1 ~. FLIGHT: ~r. Speaker, ~oes the rlepartment or the minister recognize the fact that poaching per se is more dangerous to our big game in the time of the year the season is not open, during the Summer~ This is when the poaching is going on. There is very little poaching during the hunting season. Is the department aware of that fact? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Tourism. ~Ir.KEY: Yes, ~r. Speaker, that subject,as a matter of fact, is presently under review and under discussion.

I am not prepared to agree with my hon. friend that the number of animals poached during the off season is equal hut I can certainly say to him that we know that it is substantial and substantial to the degree that it is not reflected by the difference in the numbers of staff that are in the field during both seasons. I would agree with him that there appears quite clearly a need for something to he ~one , more than is being done,during the off season or during the season when the hunti~g iF closed, that someth1ng has to be done in addition to what we are doing. The problem is, Mr. Speaker, a matter of dollars.

It is a matter of finances and it :!.s a matter of spreading the monies that we have in our budget as far as we can and at the same time derive the beat use from it. But th1s matter is under review at the present time. And the very question as raised by my hon. friend has been raised and raised by some of the field staf~ indeed, and it is now being considered. I hope that I can at some future date make a statement of policy on it. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Conception Bay South followed by the hon. member for Bellevue. ~. NOLAN: Mr.

Speaker, a question for the hon. the Premier, In newscasts and so on we have learned, and we mentioned in the House last week, that ~fr. Shaheen was in town fn one of dle lee.,~ I believe. Has the hon. the Premier met with Mr. Shaheen or his ------- -···---- - .. - offfcials regarding his alleged pos11easion, or could have availability, 916!1

~ay 31' 1976 Tape 3027 IB-2 of the monies needed to reopen Come By Chance? If he has met with him what if anything does he have to report? If he has not met with him,- has any member of his Cabinet or official met with him and if so, does he have any assurance that Nr. Shaheen is, in fact. serious and that he has got the money that he is alleged or, in fact,did say publicly on CBC that he had access to? Is there anything new in other words. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER MOORES: Mr. Speaker, there are about ten questions there. The situation was as stated by the Minister of Mines and Energy last week.

There has heen no meeting since. We met with Mr. Furmark and ¥r. Casey who outlined the general proposition as it stands right t now. But there will be no specific proposals made to the Province until such ti.me as the feasibility study has been received by Bechtel. The lender is the person who is really, you know, going to look at that study and to make their decision on it. After that has been done I would assume that ~'r.

Shaheen and his people together with a potential lender, if it goes beyo;d that stage, well then specifically be ~ettinR in touch with the Province as well as the other major entities in the refinery. MR. SPEAKEl? : A supplementary. The bon. member for Twillingate. 1-ffi. SMALLWOOD: Would the Premier say whether the Williaa Casey who accompanied Mr.

Shaheen here and who accompanied the Shaheen ~up that met with a committee of Cabinet, if that William Casey is the same man who was Under Secretary of State of the United States, head of the SEC, the Securities and Exchange Commission and president of the tln1ted States Export, Import Bank, the $25 billion llnited States Government Bank? Is it the same William Casey? MR. SPEAKF.P: The hon. the Premier. PPE¥IER MOORES: ¥r. Speaker, the answer to that is yes it is the ~ same William easey who is now also a lawyer , as I understand it , ~n Governor Carey's law firmin New York Who is being retained by Nr.

Shsheen ,as I understand it. 9170

) l"ay 31, 1976 Tape 3027 IB-3 MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member fpr Bellevue. MR. CALLAN: l"r . ~peaker, in the absence of the hon . Minister of Manpower and Industri,al Feutions, perhaps t _he Pr.emier could tell the House what the status of the severance pay or so-called severance pay for the fifty-ene or fifty-five WQi'k.ers at the Come 11y rhance on Fefinery who did not get their severa .nce pay, what is the status of that? Is it dropped? They are phoning continually and wondering all the tille what is the atatus of it right now. MR. SPEA.KE~: The hpn. the Premier. 9171

May 31, 1976 Tape 3028 PK - 1 Mr. Speaker, those employees at the refinery who were given completion bonus, severance pay, whatev~r the phraseology that ~was to be used, was paid to the employees of the Provincial '\ Refining and Newfoundland Refining,the companies that have appealed against bankfuptty but were declared in bankruptcy by the court. These employees were paid this amount.

The employees of firms that did not go bankrupt but were actually working on the site were not, The government felt eligible for this pay for the simple reason that, in that case, everytime there would be a layoff in , the Province we would be looking ,at the same sort of programmes so it was confined to the employees of the bankrupt companies and to no one else. MR. CALLAN: ------- A supplementary. A supplementary. MR. CALLAN: ----- Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if these employees have been told categorically that the case is closed, forget your severance pay; forget you were ever born' Is the case closed?

You know, in a telephone conversation of twenty minutes ago I was told that a Cabinet minister told one of the gentleman that it is coming up before Cabinet again. You know, is it closed? Is it over? Or is it coming up before Cabinet again? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Premier. PREMI~~~ORES: Mr. Speaker, I signed the letter on Friday giving that definitive position. As far as the government is concerned now the case is closed. MR. CALLAN: ------ Thank you. MR. ROBERTS: - ---- - A supplementary. MR. SPEAKER: - ---- - A supplementary.

All of this is growing out of the same subject and growjng ~out ~as of a petit~on which was presented here,! think,while the Premier in Ottawa at the First Ministers' Conference, and it is one of the allegations made in it, and I would like to have it clear. Did the Premier at an early stage in the negotiations which took place 9172

May 31, 1976 Tape 3028 PK - 2 Mr. Roberts: between the government and the Come By Chance workers, and I use that to embrace all of the people who worked there at the site without regard, all the people who work there permanently without regard to who actually was their employer at law, did the Premier make a commitment to the~e fifty-one men that they would receive the- I will ---- call it the golden handskake, so as not to use that term severance pay that would, say, cause complications - but the Premier give that assurance? And I ask because,of course,the men there understand that he did. MR. SPEAKER: The hen.

Premier. PREMIER MOORES : Mr. Speaker, no, there were two people there who were actually officials of the municipality who asked the question at that time. And certainly it would have been our desire without question to do it if it possibly could have been done. But the precedent that would have been set, Mr. Speaker, would have been such as to cause all kinds of confusion to too many other projects in the future. MR. SPKAKER: The hen. member for Terra Nova. ------ ~~ - ~LilSI~ Mr. Speaker, a question for the Minister of Education.

I wonder if the minister is aware of any difficulties experienced hy Memorial's business school to hold on to staff members? ~-·--S~AKER: The hen. Minister of Education. !JON.___¥.. HOUSE_:_ I am just aware of it to the point where the hon. gentlemen is a~rare, what I read in the papers and heard in the speech the other day. That is about the size of it. Does the hon. gentleman for Terra Nova have a supplementary? MR. LUSH: Yes. The minister alluded to the story today which suggests that the President of the University is quoted as saying that the Members of Memorial University's Business Administration 9173

May 31 ,197f> Tape 3028 PK - 3 lofr. Lush: - - - - - and Commerce are being lured away by the Provincial Government and local business with salary offers up to $15,000 or more. So I wondered if the minister was in a position to comment on this situation. And is he aware of the gravity of the situation with respect to the success of the business school? MR. SPEAKER: The hon •. Minister of Education. MR. HOUSE: I am aware of it, Mr. Speaker, but I am not prepared to comment on it now because as I say I do not know how serious the matter is, I do not know the numbers involved. And of course that particular school,

whereas the University does come under my department, is not within the Department of Education. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Eagle River. MR. I. STRACHAN: Mr. Speaker, a question for my good friend, my ~~ood hunting friend, the Minister of Tourism. And I should indicate there is no supplementary to this.

Could the minister tell us whether he has taken any position concerning the hunting of black bear 1n Labrador, because many hunters have now left and many families have now left for outside places on the last ice, and many are concerned about whether they will be charged w1th hunting black bear, and similiarly I myself, in another week, will be going for black bear meat? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Tourism. ------- HO~- _'I'_~ HICKEY: Mr.

Speaker, I can tell my friend that there will .......... , he a statement tomorrow outlining in detail the hunting season for Labrador, and there is also a comment with regards to the Island. 9174

May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3029 Page 1 - mw MR. SPEAKER: The bon. member for Windsor - Buchana. MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker, this question to the Minister of Manpower and Industrial Relations. As he knowa in a ministerial statement he gave in the Rouse he indicated that the Buchana Taak Force report would be completed and presented May 31. This is May 31; "'ould the minister advise the House as to what now :1 s the statua of that report with regards to its completion and presentation? --MR. SPEAKER: The bon. Minister of Manpower and Tin;;'d:!'u:isi'fl"fi"'Uft'IMRII'Io:I!"NMI'lt~Intbna. MR. MAYNARD: Mr.

Speaker, I know that the report is being typed and prepared at this time but whether it will be today or tomorrow that it is presented 'to government, I could not really say. MR, SPEAKER: The bon. member for Conception Bay South followed by the bon. member for Bellevue. MR. NOLAN: Mr, Speaker, in view of ·the fact that we are now up to the last of May, a question for the Minister of Municipal Affairs regarding the municipal installation or servicea that mav be installed in communities this year. I am primarily intereated obviously in Conception Bav South.

We know that to do the whole shore, of course, would cost a lot of money, and I am talking in terms of maybe $100 million or more, but a start has to be made, in view of the fact that we have raw sewage in some places just off the main road, not to speak of some communities. There is a health hazard there, a bomb that is ready to explode, and would the minister now comment on one-reports in recent n~w~paper_repo!ts, and what if anything he or the government is prepared to do this year in this regard? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. MR. PECKFORD: Mr.

Speaker, I am hopeful that before this week is out I will be in a position to contact the municipal authorities throughout the Province indicating what work will be undertaken this year. 9175

May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3029 Page 2 - mw MR. SPEAKER: Tb.e bMl. -bar for .lkillavue. MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the acting Minister of Recreation.

In view of the fact that ERCO haa pledged an additional $25,000 to the stadium at Whitbourne, which is badly "/1 needed by the way, $70,000 is needed, because of the small provincial grant, not small when you consider a half a million dollars, but not adequate under the present cost, in view of the fact that ERCO has pledged an additional $25,000 towards the Whitbourne stadium, if there is no stadium going to be built at Placentia or in the Placentia area this year, could the acting minister tell the House and pos6ibly provide ar table a letter to that effect so that I or somebody else could go to ERCO and say 1 "There is no stadium going in Placentia, we would like your other $25,000 which we badly need? 1 Could the minister tell us whether or not there is a stadium going to be built in Placentia?

And could I have samething on paper) this year? -------MR. SPEAKER: The hon. minister. What I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, that at the moment I cannot say whether l can give anything on paper to table, but I would certainly look into the whole thing and find out the answer and give the answer to the hon. member in the Houae thia week, during the period for replying to questions previously asked. MR. CALLAN: Thank you. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. ROBERTS: My question, Sir, is to the Premier, Mr.

Speaker, it grows out yet another instance where the termination of Employment ~ Act may or may not be helpful. I think it may be. But has the Premier given consideration or have the government given consideration or are they giving consideration to proclaiming the Termination of Employment Act so that the approximately 150 employees who are pftin out of non-appropriated funns and work '"jth the American Forces at Goose Air Base would get the benefits of that act? I ask that because, Sir, as the House knows, these employees have been given their notices, 9176

i --) May 31' 1976 Tape no. 3029 Page 3 - mw Mr. Roberts. I understand. I do not know whether they have been given formal notice or not, but they have been given an indication that a notice is coming, and that they are not to get any severance pay or any benefits at all. And I understand that the law of Newfoundland and Labrador will be followed by the Government of the United States, and if the law requires that severance pay be paid, then severance pay will be paid. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Premier. PREMIER MOORES: Mr. Speaker, I understand that act was proclaimed ten days to two weeks ago. MR. ROBERTS: Maybe.

Have the \,azettes been out? MR. DOODY: Yes. PREMIER MOORES: Yes. MR. DOODY: Spectial l,RZettes? MR. ROBERTS: Ah, well, we did not get the \,azette. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. member for Conception Bav South. MR. NOLAN: Mr. Speaker, I wanted to ask a question of the Minister of Justice, but I notice he went out to get the Premier and now he has disappeared. So perhaps I could address the remarks PREMIER MOORES: I will go and get him. MR. NOLAN: Okay, fine. MR.

NOLAN: - perhap~ I could address the question then to the acting or the House Leader, and that is in reference to the fact that I believe a new fire hall is to open in St. John's. I think it is on O'Leary Avenue. The question,in fact,is :

(1) When is it soing to open?

(2) How many people will they be employing when it does open? It is as simple as that. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. minister. MR. WELLS: The answers to these, of course, the Minister of Justice would have to supply from the officials of his department. I will get the minister to do that and give the answer later this week in the House. 9177

~lay 31, 1976 Tape no. 3029 Page 4 - mw M,R. SP:EAJU:R: The hon •. Leader of the Oppo·sition. MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, a question for the Premier, dthough he may ask his colleague, the Minister of Manpower to answer, but according to the fact that the termination of Employment Act has now been proclaimed can the Premier tell us whether the government have looked into the case, and ~hether tne provisions of thjs Act will, l benefit the 115 '®ipproprutJf!lillployees ~t the American Air Force Base at The bon. Pri!!Die.r. ,. 9178

-r - ( --1- / May 31, 1976 Tape 3030 IB-1 PREMIER }IOOP..ES: Mr. Speaker, I do not know the answer to the question. I do not know if the ~inister of ¥anpower and Industrial Relations does. If he does, he can give the answer. If not, we will find out the information for the Leader of the Opposition. MR. ROBERTS: Well, the minister wants to say something. MR. SP!AKER : The hon. Minister of Manpower and Industrial Relations. MR. 1-<AYNARD: ¥r. Speaker, we are looking at the problem or the situation now to see whether or not it does apply.

As I understand it,legally the law does not apply to these employees beeause they have worked for s foreign government,so to speak. We will certainly apply it if it is applicable to them. If not, then we will ask the American authorities to abide by the laws of Newfoundland. l'!P. ROBF.RTS: A supplementary. ¥r. Speaker, would the minister look into the aspect of whether they apply or not because the status of forces agreement,! am advised,between the NATO countries to which) of course,the Government of the United States are a party, does say that local legislation is a determining factor.

If the minister will look into it, as I am sure he will, will he undertake to make an early statement in the House as to the result of that investigation? is a p,reat deal of interest in the Goose Bay area,obviously. t<P. 'AYNARP: Yes ,I will. HR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Burgeo-Bay n'Espoir. There ¥R. SIMMONS: }lr. Speaker, I have a question for the president of Treasury Board. I wonder would he indicate whether Treasury Board has been notified of the result of the general service bargaiD.:f .ng unit vote on the povernment's offer? l'!P • .§_PEAKER: The hon. 1-<inister of Finance. MR.

DOODY: To my knowledge there has been no notice or no message from NAPE on the result of the vote officially. I do know that just a few minutes ago I was handed a letter from the hon. ¥inister of 1-<anpower, to whom the notice is addressed 1 to the effect that the general service people ~rill be in a legal position to take strike action on June 7, 1976. 9179 ;

1·1ay 31, 1976 Tape 3030 IB-2 Mil. DOODY: llut this is the standard notice which has to precede any str:f _ke and it is certainly not a notice of strike or an intention of strike or whatnot. It is simply the formality, Sir, through which they go. They are servinr, notice th~t they can strike should they so desire. Now what the result of the ballot :'-s - and I understand the returns are coming in today.

I would assume by this time that they have been tabulated and that the executive of the assoc:'-ation are ar.mre • But Treasury Board up to the time that I left there around two o'clock had not received any notification that I am aware of. MR. SIMMONS: A supplementary. Is the minister in a position to indicate what the next step is as far as government is concerned. Is there a meet:ln~ in the offin~ with the general service unit or what :Is the next step in terms of efforts to avert the strike or to come to a settlement with the union? ~-~OnY~ ¥r.

Speaker, in the first instance, as I said, we have not received notice that a strike will take place. We have received not:'-ce that the union 1•1il 1 be in a J egal position to take str:lke act:lon. As to what government's actions will he to avert the possibility of such a strike, it is as it has been for the past several weeks, that we are willinR and preparerl to sit down at any time to talk with,and preferably tomorrot>', to tal'k with the negotiating committee of NAPE, of the general service

section of NAPE. We have made it quite clear on many occasions that the four per cent goverament position that is on the table :Is not the final position, that there is more money available. The t1~enty-one per cent position of KAPE which was the last offer or last proposal from them is certainly unacceptable. It :Is way outside the AIB guidelines to which this government is a si~ator and a party and one which we cannot possibly accede to even tf we were in a financial position to do so. So we are quite will :lnf! ancl preparen to go hi~her than four per cent.

Obv:tously l>1e cannot go anywhere cJose to the twenty-one per cent. I would 1ma~ine that the ne~otiators for NAPE are in a position now to come hack to us. The strike vote is in I understand. We have not received, 9180

May 31, 1976 Tape 3030 IB-3 MR. DOODY: as I said, formal notification to the effect of what the ballot is, now. We have received, as I told you, a notice of the legal position. We 11re willing to sit down tomorrow, ton:l.ght, anytime that is convenient for the unionJand discues a poFition that is somewhere within the ~uidelines of the AlB and, you know, we are willing to do so. We have sail so many times. MR. SIMMONS: A supplementary. The minister has probably answered this part of the question. All right. Well, ju•t for clarification.

Has the minister or someone representing the government side of the negotiating unit, has someone indicated in recent clays - let me eay it another way - liS a result of the strike vote has someone from government indicated a willingness, indicated to the union, a willingness to sit down again and have further meetings. Has there -been something transmitted to the union since the vote was received, you know, a formlll invitation to meet at a certain time or a general indication that government is prepared to meet in the near future? MR. SPRAKER: The hon. ~inister of Finance. MR. noonY: I do not think so.

Not to my knowledge. The position that I just outlined to the hon. member and to the House is as it has been during the past several weeks. The position has not changed because of the count of the strike vote. As I say I do not legally or officially know what the count of the strike vote was. But our position is today as it was a week or two weeks ago. We are prepared, willing and anxious to sit down and put more money on the table. But we have got to get closer together than we are now before it will be· meaningful. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Concept:l.on Bay South. MR.

NOL~~: A question for the hon. the Premier, Mr. Speaker. Last Fall in this House I asked a question concerning what plans mi~ht be available from the government for addit:l.onal office space for government workers and so on. The !lremier at that time indicated - and it is listed in Hansard - that they were looking at 9181

1-'ay :n, 1976 Tape 3030 IJ\-4 ~- NOLAN: it. In fact he even suggested that they might have a committee here in this Rouse take a look at it so you would not get involved in the shemozzle you had before. Now, what I am asking the Premier, Mr. Speaker, is,one, what is the current situation; two, apparently he has found reason not to appoint the committee he suggested, so where do we go from herer l-IP. SPEAKE P : The bon. the Premier. --1 PRE}!IE'R 1-'00P-ES: The position remains the same, Mr. Speaker.

Once ll' again the desirability is there to have it but it is a matter of dollars and cents at this point in time and which way we are going to p:o about it. ~. SPEAKER: The time has expired. ORnERS OF THE DAY: On motion of the bon.

Minister of Municipal Affairs and Rousing, a bill, ''An Act To Amend The Local Govermrent Act, 1972," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. (Bill No. 78) On motion of the hon. 1-'inister of Health, a bill, "An Act To Amend The 'Hospital Inoiurance (Agreeaent) Act," read a first ti.me, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. (Bill No. 77) On motion of the hon. l'finister of Finance, a bill, "An Act To Amend 'J'he Tobacco Tax Act," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. (Bill No, 79) l'lotton second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Newfoundland Anc:l Labrador Amateur Sports Federation Act, 1972." (lliJl No. 23) MP.

SPEAKER: The hon. l'linister of Justice. MR. HICKI-'AN: Mr. Speaker, this is purely a formality. The ~ government is in receipt of a resolution passed by the Newfoundland and Labrador Amateur Sports Federation asking that the naae of the federation be changed from the Newfoundland and Labrador Amateur Sports Federation to Sport Newfoundland which seems to be the in thing now. In order to accomplish the request of this resolution this bill is necessary because it is a statutory body incorporated under the Act of 1q72. T move second readinr.. !}182

May 31, 1976 Tape 3031 PK - 1 MR. Sl'EAKER: The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. ROBERTS: - -- - - - Mr. Speaker, I do not in any way object to the Amateur Sports Federation requesting a change in their name, I mean, that is certainly their right, and were it not for the fact that they incorporated by special statute of the Province they would not even need to come here.

If a private individual can change his name by following The Change of Name Act a company in~orporated under !he Companies Act, the various types of companies under that Act ., can change its name by following the steps set forth in the Companies Acts, and special resolutions, and filing notices with the Registrar of Companies. But the Sports Federation because they have their corporate existence under the authority of

an Act of this Legislature need our consent to change their name. Well I for one am certainly willing to go along with that, and I know I speak for my colleagues. The only problem that I have, Sir, and it may seem minor but I do not think it is minor, is that, we are changing the name of the Federation,as far as I can see , from

an Act to Amend The Newfoundland and Labrador Amateur Sports Federation,which is what it now is , to Sports Newfoundland, and I think it should be called Sports Newfoundland and Labrador. SOME RON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. ROBERTS : For all that, Sir, by Act of this House that remains on the Statute Books, it is the law of this land insofar as this House can make it so. It has been on the bools I would think since about the mid 1960's. My friend from Twillingate ~Mr. Smallwood) was the Premier when it was brought in, and I thought it was a wise move then, and I think it is a wise move now.

And in view of the fact that this government have not asked the House to amend or to repeal that bill, nor has it been amended and repealed and in view of the fact that the government stated policy on any number of occasions has been that they will stick by that policy then I am going to suggest to hon. gentlemen opposite that when this 9183

May 31 ,1976 Tape 3031 PK - 2 Mr. Roberts: bill comes to Committee, the requisite notices, or I am sorry, the requisite amendaents should be made. Now I would go further, Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that this bill, in a sense, the House is serving as an accessory to the Federation as it now is, and I say that in a kindly sense, we are facilitating their wishes.

I would think what we should do is give this bill second reading and then let it stand until the responsible minister, I am not sure whether it is the Minister of Justice or the Acting Minister of Rehabilitation and Recreation,but whoever is responsible can consult with the Sports Federation. I know tt is a little cumbersome,perhaps,to say Newfoundland and Labrador, and perhaps in the modern era we do not want to be all that cumbersome.

But I think that in view of that fact the stated policy of this House and of this Province is to call it the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, it would be a very great step back. I am prepared to support the bill, Mr. Speaker, but I would ask one of the ministers, the Minister of Justice or the Minister of Recreation, whoever it is to speak on this matter, if they would accept my suggestion. I am sure the Sports Federation is, its a matter merely of - Mr. Bill Gillies is their President - getting in touch with Mr.

Gillies and his executive and saying that the feeling of the House, and I think it w&uld be the feeling of the House, that it should be Sports Newfoundland and Labrador, and in that case the amendments can be moved in Committee, because I do not think they would derogate in any way from the principle of this bill, the principle of the bill being to change the corporate name of the body. Well I am prepared to support it. All we are doing is helping a federation, and I am all for that.

But I do think, Sir, it should reflact what I know to be the legal name of this Province, and what I believe to be the correct name of this Province, namely, Newfoundland and Labrador. MR. SPEAKeR: debate. If the hon. minister speaks now he closes the 918~

May 31, 1976 Tape 3031 PK - 3 MR. RICKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I will certainly on behalf of government undertake to - MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker- MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR.~OBERTS: My colleague from Stephenville (Mr.McNeil) would like to say a word on it, would the minister yield? MR. RICKMAN: Yes. MR. ROBERTS: I mean,! think the minister was overly hasty to his feet in his capacitv. MR. RICKMAN: No, no I just thought you were the spokesman for your side. MR. ROBERTS: My nollaague not being used to the rough and tumble as yet, Sir, perhaps was not quite as hasty as he should have been. MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. member for Stephenville. MR. W. MCNEIL: Mr. Speaker, I would like to support the bill changing the name to Sports Newfoundland, but it should be as the Leader of the Opposition pointed out~Newfoundland and Labrador. Although there is a n.me change here, the Department of Recreation plays a very great part because the Amateur Sports Federation combines all the sports governing bodies in the Province, and they are the voiue to the Department of Recreation. Over the past years I have personally witnessed a kind of decline in the Department of Recreation.

Fer example, there are numerous positions open in the West Coast Training Centre. We had an assistant co-ordinator of training position that was supposed to be filled about a year ago, and this has not been filled. There are several other positions and with the coming Newfoundland Summer Games and the Canada Games there seems to be very little momentum in that department to fill permanent positions, so that we do not have them for just one or two years but continue to make that department grow, because recreation definitely is a part of our culture. .MR.

SPEAKER: If the hon. minister speaks now he closes the debate. The hon. Minister of Justice. 9185

May 31 ,1976 Tape 3031 PK - 4 'MR. RICKMAN: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of government I undertake that between now and the time this matter comes before Committee to once again consult with the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of , Sports, to indicate to them the suggestion of the apparent consensus of the House that they should now have the handle of Sports Newfoundland and Labrador. But for the re_cord, may I say it has been my understanding that there is no such an animal as the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. There is a Province of Newfoundland.

There is legislation on the books referring to the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, but the Province is one and indivisible from Cape Chidley to Cape Spear, and it is the Province of Newfoundland. MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, before the minister finishes could I ask him a question arising out of his remarks? MR. RICKMAN: 'MR. ROBERTS: Sure. The BNA Act gives the government, the legislature, I am sorry, of a province the power to change anything having to do with the constitution of that province except the office of Lieutenant-Governor. I think I am quoting it verbatim.

My question is therefore can this Legislature change the name of the Province? We know what the name of the government is, the act says that. Can we change the name of the Province by act? MR. HICKRKN: Mr. Speaker, anything I say on that will be totally without prejudice. I have been under the impression, and I have heard it stated in Ottawa very clearl~ that you cannot change the name of the Province simply by

an act of a provincial legislature. Mll. ._ll..Q_B~ MR • SPEAKER: I cannot see why not, it is a matter of interest. Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a second time? Those in favour "Aye", contrary ''Nay", carried. On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Newfoundland and Labrador Amateur Sports Federation Act, 1972", read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House on tomorrow. Motion second reading of a Bill, "An Act To Amend The Companies Act" (Bill No. 53) . 9186

May 31, 1976 Tape 3031 PK - 5 MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Justice. ------ - MR. HICKMAN: Mr. Speaker, the explanatory note sets forth very clearly what this bill is designed to do. The Companies Act provides that all companies shall file a share list each year. March 31 as I recall it is the date for the filing of share lists. Many companies do not do that, and when that occurs the Registrar in time after serving appropriate notice, and then subsequently advertising it in the Gazette, the Newfoundland Gazette , will delist the company.

On occasion a company quite often >where the registered office is probably in St. John's and the company is not aware of these notices having been served on it, finds that it is not in the best interest of the company for them to be delisted and they are anxious to continue carrying on business. The procedure now is that an application is made to a judge of the Supreme Court and the Court invariably as a ·matter of course orders that the company once again be listed and bring up to date the filing of share lists. The Registrar of Companies Mr.

Gerald Tessier, Q.C. has done a magnificent job of bringing companies or having companies bring their share lists up to date, partic~larly in the last twelve months, and delisting those who are in arrears. But it is found that two things are necessary in order to put some teeth into that section. One is that if a company comes back,or a group wants to be listed again,they must serve notice upon the Registrar and upon the Attorney General 9187

May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3032 Page 1 - mw Mr. Hickman. before applying to the court, and that if the court orders that the company once again be listed, the company seeki~g to be listed again, will be compelled to pay a fee to the registrat of $250. This would ha.e two desirable effects, one is that it would cover the Crown on any expenses that it has i~curred in the de­ listing and secondly and probably more important, it would provide or implore the officers of the companies to be a bit more careful in meeting the deadline and filing returns, or at least in responding to the notices.

That is the principle of the Bill, and I move second reading. MR. SPEAKER: The han. Leader of the Opposition. MR~R~: Mr. Speaker, we are quite prepared to support the bill. It is really not a very major step forward, but it is a minor one, and I think a worth-while one. The minister has explained it. I do not need to add anything to what the minister has said. Let me say simply that this bill grows out of some controversy which · erupted last Summer between the minister and a number of other members of the House.

And I think it is a good thing because the - I will not say the administration of the Companies Act had become lax in this Province, because it would be unfair and improper to censor the Registrar of Companies who I think is doing an admirable job. I think perhaps we are in better shape in the Companies Act sense than we have ever been in this country before, and that is a good thing. It is very importance because, of course, almost all of the cammerical life of this Province now is carried out by corporations, ~artnerships or sole proprietorsnips are very few in number.

And leaving aside the professions 1 where we are not allowed as lawyers to incorporate or doctors are not allowed to incorporate, although they are in Alberta interestingly enough. It is a very interesting law. A friend of mine is now David R. Haig Limited, and has a contract - R. Haig Limited, which is owned by my friend and his wife, has a contract with a l.w firm, Burnet Duckwoth a very big law firm in Calgary, 9188

May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3032 Page 2 - mw Mr. Roberts. whereby they sell Mr. Haig's legal services to that firm for a certain agreed percentage or a certain agreed remuneration, and that is how they get around the professional ethical point of, you know, a lawyer being responsible for his actions, and hia opinions, his acts , And yet we have the Income Tax Act requirement, which is the big reason why the Alberta Law Society, whatever they are called in Alberta, pushed so hard to allow their members to become incorporated. All incorporations are individual.

I gather just about every lawyer in Alberta now is - you know, if we were in Alberta, we would have T. Alec Hickman Ltd.and Robert Wells Ltd. and Edward Roberts Ltd., and, you know, whoever else is learned in the law and wish to practice it. MR. PECKFORD: Get off the comedy act, you know. Lowly plebian people. MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, I reazlie that the Minister of Municipal Affairs is lowly and plebian,but I would hope not to have to bring that out, because it would embarrass him and embarrass everybody. I am merely pointing out, Mr. Speaker - MR. SIMMONS: He is proud. MR.

ROBERTS: I know the minister is proud, Sir, but if only he had something in which he should be proud life would be very different. So I am merely making a point, Sir, on the Companies Act, a very important amendment which his colleague, the Minister of Justice has brought before the House. And the point I want to make is that companies are important, and that our companies' legislation is basically unaltered, and it is not a new point, but it is worth repeating, basically unaltered from about 120 years ago. I think it is basically the English Companies Act of 1859 which is still in effect in this jurisdiction.

It must be the only jurisdiction in the English speaking or the English common law world where the major piece of commerical legislation, the Companies Act, has not been sianificantly updated and significantly improved . The Ontario, you know, and moat 9189

May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3032 Page 3 - mw Mr. Roberts. of the Canadian juriadictinBs have new acts. England herself has gone way beyond our Companies Act. There are many areas in the Companies Act that are open to, I think, improvement. Thia whole question of preferred shares, the whole question of the sort of information which must be submitted each year, the whole question of dealing in shares, whether they be preferred or common, any number of areas in our Companies Act, I think, are badly outdated conceptually and should be updated. Now I know that the minister has asked his friend and former colleague, Mr.

Leo Barry, a lawyer practiaing here in town, a very able lawyer, a much better lawyer than a politician, but asked Mr. Leo D, Barry, I believe, to look into the Companies Act. Arid I want to know when.Mr. Barry will be making some sort of report, and when we may hope to see some action? Because what we need in this Province is a new Companies Act. There may be some areas of the present one which could be retained and perhaps there are some which should be retained. But it is not good enough to say that

an act which was drawn up in England, I believe, in 1859 - if I am not mistaken, I think it is one of Lord Thrings many fine pieces of draftsmanship as was the BNA Act, and other statutes of the time, a very great draftsman-- but, Sir, what was adequate 120 years ago, I do not think is adequate today.

And the Companies Act may not seem important, Sir., it is only one of several hundred statutes we have in this Province, but it is the act under which there are incorporated the bodies, the corporate bodies that do, I suppose - what? - ninety-nine per cent of the commercial transactions of this Province are done under our Companies Act. Some very large companies indeed are incorporated under our law, and they are governed by it. And I support the amendment.

I think it is a tidying up of an area that has been shown to be a little weak, and an improvement, well and good, But in so doing I would again urge upon the minister the necessity of 91~0

May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3032 Page 4- mw Mr. Rober t a. a complete revamping of the act and I would ask him when we might expect some report from Mr. Barry, and where we go from there? MR. SPEAKER: If the bon. minister speaks now be closes the debate. The bon. Minister of Justice. MR. HICKMAN: In reply to the question of the bon. Leader of the Opposition, I am hoping, and I emphasize it ia a hope, that we will have a report from Mr. Leo Barrv on his views and recommendations with respect to a new Companies Act before the end of this Summer.

But I will not chastise him if we do not receive it by then, because it is a massive job. This HOuse will recall that two or three years ago there was some money voted ~o my department to undertake the work at that time, and after a diligent inquiry I was unable to find anyone who would take on that work, who had the expertise in company law. I then turned to one of the law schools to see if I could get a professor of company law only to find that he had been retained.

I think it was by the Province of Nova Scotia to do the same thing, and he estimated that that would be a three year Summer job, three Summers for him. There have been a lot of major amendments to the Companiea Act of Newfoundland since it first became law in this jurisdiction. Mav I also point out that there are many features of the present Companies Act which, in my opinion, will be moat likely retained, And some provinces have found now that in their anxiety to repeal Companies Acts : - mainly because I think that they were too simple - have found that now they have made them too burdensome.

Two years ago the British Columbia legislature brought in a new Companies Act which was supposed to be the last word, a great socialist philosophy, covered every loophole, and last year at a meeting of the Attorneys General the then incumbent, Mr. Alec MacDonald said that he had recommended to bia colleasqes that they repeal it, because it was a great source of income for lawyers and chartered accountants but nobody else in the Province could understand it. 9191

.1. May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3032 Page 5 - mw Mr. Hickman. Ontario legislation may be more appropriate, What we have asked Mr. Barry to do after he makes his preliminary proposal is then also to seek some input from, say, the Newfoundland Federation of Labour, the Board of Trade, anyone else who feels that there should be amen~ments to the Companies Act. On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Companies Act," read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House on tomorrow. Motion second reading of a bill, "An Act To Repeal The Newfoundland Agricultural Marketing Act." (Bill No. 13) ' MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Forestry and Agriculture. MR. ROUSSEAU: This is merely

an act to repeal the Ne~foundland Agricultural Marketing Act which has now been replaced by the National Products Marketing Act, 1973. It is just a matter of cnnfusion to have two acts relating to basically the same situation in the Province. As the Premier announced on Friday they have appointed Mr. Gerry Malone, who is the new chairman of the Natural Products Marketing Act, and it is our intention to appoint the whole board, and have that group. of course. work much more closely with the farming community in the Province. So it is merely a shopkeeping act.

If any of the members would like to raise any questions about marketing. I am certainly prepared to answer any when I conclude. But I might say that we have been working with the farmers across the Province in respect to marketing. The Natural Products Marketing Act gives power to the Province to appoint the marketing boards under it. and the only marketing board we have now is the Newfoundland Egg Marketing Board. but the minister is empowered 9192

May 31, 1976 Tape 3033 IB-1 MR. ROUSSEAU: to appoint any board, any marketing board that he deems desirable. As I say we are talking to the farmers across the Province now about various commodity marketing boards. MR. SPF.AKF.R: The hon. member forSt, George's. MRS. MCISAAC: I would like to say a couple of words on the marketin~ . Act. I am quite happy that the government is taking some initiative in setting up a marketing agency in the Province for farmers. Fa~ers in my area have been having some difficulty in the past few years in marketing their vegetables. In fact,in the last few years,in the district of St.

George's at least, thousands of sacks of potatoes had to be dumped because of poor market conditions. I am happy that something will be done. I hope something suitable will be worked out with the farmers whereby their potatoes and other vegetables can be purchased and possibly marketed so as to prevent the loss that they been experiencing over the years. MR. ROBERTS: We need a root crop marketih2 board. The hon. }'inister of Forestry and Agriculture. tiRo. ROUSSEAU: Just one more sentence at the end. Just one mrre sentence to conclude, Mr. Speaker. My principal feeling - MR.

NOLAN: Are you winding up this now or what? MF. ROUSSEAU: ·Yes. Would you like to say something~ Go ahead. MR • SPEAKER: Order, please! Before recognizing the hon. member for Conception Bay South, on second readings I think the nrocedure is quite clear. When the minister stands the Speaker says, "If the hon. minister speaks now, he closes the debate." Anybody wishing to speak should get up. I do not think the minister should speak until he is then recognized because that gives an opportunity for someone to get up . The hon. member for Conception Bay South. MR.

NOLAN: Yes~well)I only rise on a matter of enquiry really because,while the explanatory note says the Agricultural Marketing Act has been superseded by the Natural Products Marketing Act and so on to avoid possible confusion, I am not sure to what degree. I suppose

May 31, 1976 Tape 3033 IB-2 MR. NOLAN: the minister has consulted with farmers and so on throughout the Province before preparation of this bill to bring it before the House. I merely rise to ascertain whether or not he has done that. Secondly, what their presentations have been in this regard. I assume for the most part the · feedback he must have gotten would be in agreement with

an act to repeal the act. Let us be honest about it, it is not something that has received front page headlines or anything like that in the last few days. I am just wondering to what degree,in fact,the majority of the farmers are protected in this regard because as we all know it is easier to talk about this now and have the necessary input. Once the thing is done, it is done and it is all very well to say it can be changed next year or the year after but it is not as simple as that as we all know from past experience. So I would certainly like to hear the minister comment on that. t.<F.

SPEAKER: If the bon. minister speaks now he closes the debate. The hon. ~inister of Forestry and Agriculture. ~-'ROUSSEAU: First of all for the bon. member for Cop.cePtion_Ba" · South (Mr. Nolan), the Agricultural ~arketing Act previously was only one that really covered agricultural products. The new Natural Products ¥arketing Act will cover lumber and anything associated with that type of industry where that was not previously covered and merely commodities really under agriculture.

The new Natural Products Marketing Board has a much wider range of things that can be included under a marketing board in the Province, For example, lumber and things of that nature which could not be included as a marketing commodity under the Agricultural Marketing Act. So really it is an attempt for us to be able to include at the minister's and the government's discretion, more commodit:l.es under the Natural Products Harketing Act rather than just the Agricultural Products Marketing Act. By natural products do you mean oil? 9194

May 31, 1976 Tape 3033 IB-3 1-'R. ROUSSEAll: No, those associated with agriculture and those associated with the ground and agriculture and forestry, really, as lumber. We may decide that lumber should have a board and that could be done under the Natural Products Marketing Act. It could not be done under the Agricultural Products Marketing Act. We have just enlarged the Act really to cover many more of our natural resources associated with Forestry and Agriculture and Crown lands. Also for the hon. member for St. George's, we are certainly interested in the concept of marketing.

It is my feeling,and I base :It on the proposition that a farmer can farm but if he has to spend half hls time or too 111uch of his time going from door to door selling his product, then he is going to have some troubles in increasing his yield. I have been told by various farmers across the Province - I met with quite a few groups now over the past few months - that they could increase their yield auywbere from two to five fold if they could .1ust farm and not have to worry about marketing their products too. Some of the older farmers, of course, as I am sure the hon. member for St.

George's is aware,have traditional markets. They do not have it as ~:lfficult as the youn~er people coming in. But for the younger peoplP coming in to break those markets is very difficult. So we have talked to the farmers. We have had them all into St. John's, one representative from each area. We have worked with them in the department and with Farm Products. We have come up with a working paper that I have approved, they have approved and now· we have a working group on it.

I have made a commitment to them that there will be no marketing board ·set up until there is a plebiscite amongst the farmers to find out if indeed this is what they want and if indeed it is an - if they want a commoditY marketing board then government will give it very serious consideration on the basis of their wishes and working in conjunction with government and with the nepartment of Agriculture and w:l th the Farm Products group.

On motion a bill, "An Act To Repeal The N~wfoundland Agricultural Yarketing Act," read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House tomorrow. (Bill No. 13) 9195

~•ay 31, 1976 Tape 3033 IB-4 Motion second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Crown Lands Act." (Bill No. 21) ~m. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Forestry and Agriculture. MR. ROUSSEAU: Nr. Speaker, this Act is read in conjunction with, although 21 is the Act we are talking about now, No. 20 as well. I am very interested in this Act. I think it is something that is very helpful. It is probably a minor bill in some peoples' minds but in some other peoples' minds I am sure there are major provisions in ft.

I might name some of the more minor things in it: the Crown Lands Registry did not have the same hours as the civil service in the bu11dfng 1 so the hours of opening which are now set by statute, at nine-thirty to one o'clock and two thirty to four thirty would be altered to coincide l~ith the normal business day. That is merely an assistance to the people who had to deal with Crown lands, !lnd the more and more people who are now dealing with them. MR • ROBERTS : Did you say those hours are set by statute? MR. ROUSSEAU: Yes they are now. Nine-thirty to one and two-thirty to four-thirty ·.

What we are doing now - MR. ROBF.RTS: Changed from one-thirty to six, is it? MR. ROUSSEAU: Yes. Now we are amending them so thl!-t we have the same sort of hours. Because if somebody comes into town early and they have to wait until nine-thirty or they do not get in uatil four-thirty, it is only a minor thinr, but it is a convenience to the public who deal wf.th the division. Also the question of illegal occupancy; persons convicted of unlawful possession of Crown lands will be liable to a fine or imprisonment or both.

In addition the magistrate or judge would be empowered to order the removal of structures unlawfully erected on f:rown land. The next one is the one that I think is significant, Mr. Speaker. Up to now you had to have a claim of sixty years against the Crown to apply for the right to that land. MR . ROBERTS : No, to acquire possession. 9196

May 31, 197fi Tape 3033 IB-5 To acquire possession of the land. We have had some problems with people and as J said one time in a speech I made here in the House of Assembly a piece of paper or a document being a lease or a grant for a person to a p:l.ece of land is very important to them. What we would like to do now, Mr.

Speaker, is to reduce the amount of time from sixty years to twenty years and give those people who have had what we call squatters rights, as defined, the right to that land, ~et this backlog of people off the list of people looking for the land and not accept any adverse possession after January 1, 1977. In other worrls after January 1, 1977 if somebody has had twenty years of proven rights on that land, during twenty years, we wHl give them possession of the land. If they have not had it prior to January 1, 1977 then they will have to go through the normal procedure of application throup:h Crown I.and.

It is an attempt on government's part to clear up the problems that people have in acquiring the land. We think it is a very straightfoTWard step and we think it is a very 1mportant step for those people who have it. So those people who can now claim their right up to twenty years - twenty years will give it to them or aore but not after January 1, 1977. And those who have not had it for twenty years will have then to go through the normal Crown Land application for their land.

To reduce from s1xty years to twenty years - just a note I have here just in case I forgot any part of it - the possessory titles, the purpose of this proposed amendment, is twofold. Number one, to provide that no period of adverse possession of Crown Land after January 1, 1977 would count towards the acquisition of a title against the Crown. In other words, Crown Land would be protected against cla:l .ms of squatters r:lghts based on adverse possession subsequent to that date. Number two, 9197

May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3034 Page 1 - mw Mr. Rousseau. to reduce from sixty years to twenty years the period of time for the acquisition of title to Crown land by adverse possesion. To make provision whereby the Crown may issue grants to persons Who can show advert possesion for twenty years prior to January 1, 1977. The issue of any such grant, which would require Cabinet approval and be subject to any necessary qualifications, is intended to provide a mebhod of confirming possessory titles in appropriate instances.

It would not be a substitute for, and would not prevent the application to the court under the Quieting of Titles Act by a person claiming title to or an interest in Crown lands. With respect to such applications, however, an a.andment to the Quieting of Titles Act is also proposed, and that is the one I mentioned which is coming under the name, I think, of the hen. Minister of Justice, MR. SPEAKER 01r. Young): The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. ROBERTS: Well, Mr.

Speaker, if I might say a few words with reference to the bill now before the House, Let me first of all thank the minister for his usual clear and straightforward and, I think, fairly complete explanation, · This is a very technical matter, and I think he has explained it in an admirable way. All though, I would say is that there is a place for him in our coalition when it comes just as there is in all the other coalitions. MR. DOODY: He is evervbodv's choice. MR. ROBERTS: The Minister of Finance has put his finser on it a~ain as he so often does, Sir.

The Minister of Fores~ry and Agriculture is everybody's choice for a coalition. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. ROBERTS: Indeed, Sir, no coalition, I think it is fair to say, would be complete without the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture. Mr. Speaker, to carry on with the principle of the bill, let me -Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman 'from Bellevue (Mr. Callan) - was it the gentleman from Bellevue who was making noises? - he might 9198

May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3034 Page 2 - mw Mr. Roberts. either have the courage to say them in debate or have the good grace to keep himself quiet, if in fact it was the gentleman from Bellevue CMr. Callan) that I heard. And when he talks about coalition, Sir, if he finds that unhappy, I would remind him that he is part of the coalition, and indeed will probably be the only beneficiary of it. Mr. Speaker, let me deal first with

Section 4 which repeals Sectinn 136 of the present act. I think it is somewhat ridiculous to require, by statute, that office hours be kept at certain hours. That is obviously an antique~dated, and an outmoded concept of law. I do think though there is something to be said, and I would bring this to the minister's attention, and ask him if he would look into it1 that perhaps we might require that the Crowns Lands office or registry be open for certain hours. Perhaps we could say the general civil service hours. And I say that because, Mr.

Speaker, there was a reason that was put in the law originally, and I suspect that the reason it was put in the Crown Lands Act was to ensure that there were certain minimum periods during which there would be access by the public to the Crown Lands registry. It is a minor point, but it is one which, I think, the minister might want to look into, although he may wish to let it stand over, because at some point surely we are going to get a major revision of the Crown Lands Act, which I think is now a piece of statute law that is no longer adequately serving the people of this Province, Mr.

Speaker, the other change the minister asked us to approve is a very major one, and it is - I suppose it is fair to use the word in this context - a revolutionary one. What the minister is proposing in non-technical language, if I follow him correctly, is that after this bill passes, no longer · will a citizen of this Province be able to acquire title on Crown land with squatters' riRhta. There are some exceptions, but - MR. ROUSSEAU: After Januarv 1.1Q77. 9199

May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3034 Page 3 - IIIW MR. ROBERTS: After Januarh 1, 1977. _ Well not quite that, no, no. The January 1, 1977, Mr. Speaker, as r · raad the bill,! would say to the minister ~ refers only to the period of time when the period ends. I will come back to that. But let me just point out it is quite a major change in principle. We have always in this country. as long as there has been an administration of any sort that could issue some sort of title to land - and I do not know what the earliest land titles are.

It was not until about 1816 that lawful settlement could be carried out in Newfoundland with the exception of the original colonies granted in - well, back to James and Charles, the Stuart Kings, Lord Calvert's colony at Ferryland, the Guy colony, or the Bristol Company colony at Cupids and these other corporate bodies.But I would suspect that the oldest land titles we have in this Province go back to about 1820. I understand that the title to the Virgins Waters Estate goes back to about that time, a grant from the Crown. I understand there are several others that can be traced back. MR.

WELLS: All titles a~e presumed to be from the Crown. MR. ROBERTS': Well the Minister without PortfGlio, who, of ' course, is very learned in the law reminds me that all titles are presumed to be from the Crown. Well it is so. I mean the obverse of that is the other statement that all land that is not owned by anybody els~ is owned by the Crown. We havv long ,ago come to the point in this Province where, you know, titles have been dealt with for a sufficiently long period that, you know, we do have good titles to almost all the land in this Province.

Although interestingly enough there are areas in this Province where people are unable to prove title of any sort, and I am not just talking about areas in Conception Bay or areas we have in many parts of the country where title has passed by will or by intestacy upon death and heirs and possible legatees or possible heirs and legatees have gone off to the Boston States and there is the devil's own time in trying to get a clear title. I have a problem in my own area, the Straits of Labrador, on the Labrador side, the 9200

May 31, 1976 Tape 3034 Page 4 - mw Mr. Roberts. Strait of Belle Isle, where these people are having great difficulty in establishing a title, and it has come up in a round­ about way. They are trying to get the benefit of the programme CMHC formerly had 1 and our own Housing Corporation now has,of getting the $500 or $600 homeowners' grant, and our own Housing Corporation very sensibly accepts what amounts to a squatter's title. Indeed, it does not even require a legal squatter's title. It it just, you know, some affidavits, and some evidence that there is some title. CMHC unfortunately are being far stickier.

They are asking for the sort of title that the Prudential Insurance Company would ask before making out $1 million mortgage to a building in the centre of downtown Toronto. They are being being quite unreasonable. And I have just, within the past few days. written to Mr. William Theron the president of CMHC to protest this since I have been unable to get any action at any lessor level. But put that aside. Let me come back to the major point that we are making a very revolutionary change in the principles under which land can be ~cquired by citizens of this Province. I guess it probably had to come.

I guess in the days of property becoming so very valuable, of property becoming quite limited, you kDaw, we are fast running out of land in this Province, particularly on the Island and particularly the desirable land. There is lots of rock and lots of barrens, but desirable land is getting very hard to come by, particularly land for agricultural purposes, or land for cottages, recreational purposes or land near our major urban areas, St. John's, Corner Brook, Gande~, Grand Falls, Stephenville. Very hard to come by.

And I guess it is doing the right and proper thing to end the squatter's title, but still it is a signifiuant moment. If this bill becomes law no longer will a man be able to go and set himself up in some harbour and over the period of time of adverse possession. open,notorious 1 hostile, exclusive, · whatever the tests are in law, acquire a good title. There is 9201

May 31, 1976 Tape no. 3054 Page 5 - mw Mr. Roberts. an exception.-! think it is a wise one- that people who have been there since 1957, who have been in continuous open and hostile possession of a piece of land since 1957 can acquire a title and can follow through the procedure and have their title confirmed. That is a good one. I think it is a fair one, because, you know, the other requirement to acquire it at present is sixty years, and that would mean that anybody would have to be there since 1917 and so certainly the minister has given fair notice.

Anybody who is now in possession and has been there for at least twenty years may acquire a title. A person who has been there for less than twenty years cannot acquire a title by possessory grant. They can apply for a title, apply for a lease, apply for a grant, according to the other terms of the act. So it is a significant step forward, Mr. Speaker. I guess it is a good step forward. I am certainly prepared, speaking for my colleagues, to say we will support it. I know of no argument against it, but it is a ~evolutionary change, and it would mean, in effect, the end of an ara.

It is the end of, I guess, the squatter's rights against Crown lands, against the Crown, where the la•t vestiges of the complete and almost anarchic individualism, which marked, 9202

May 31, 1976 Tape 3035 ~K - 1 Mr. Robe·rts: you know, so much of the history of this Province, and marked so much of the development of British Law. Because as the notes tell us, the Act itself says, "Squatters rights exist only in common law." I think the · only statute law we have referring to it would be The Limitation Act which is the one that confirms private titles after twenty years. So, sobeit,Sir, it is the end of an era. It is probably a good thing. We will certainly support the minister's request that this bill be passed by the House.

I would hope, and I will close on this note, Sir, that the minister in closing the debate,whenever that comes,would tell us a little about the improvements in the administration of crown land. Because, Mr. Speaker, if there is one area of government administration that causes more problems and difficulties to the ordinary people of this Province than any other. it must be crown lands, and I do not say that to criticize the staff or the procedures.

I am not sure that the length of time it now takes to get a piece of land can be cut down very much, unless we are prepared to give up asking, seeking views from a number of the other departments involved, and I think that would be wrong. I think it would be wrong just to issue a title to a piece of crown land and then discover that the Tourist Department had valid objections or the Health Department or the Highways Department or any of the other departments that must- I think it was seventeen. I counted them up at one stage when Mr. Bill Callahan and Mr.

Adian Maloney and,! think, were a Committee of Cabinet, and looked at it, and at that stage there were seventeen sets of separate, and quite necessary and proper controls, and any application for crown land had to be looked at in the light of all of those controls, and that took some time. But even so, Mr. Speaker, it infuriates people to deal with Crown Lands. The minister I know gets a lot of complaints, every member of the House gets them, and I get my skate. Almost every single person who has ever dealt with Crown Lands ends up cursing the day 9203

May 31 ,1976 Tape 3035 PK - 2 Mr ._ R.£_berts: they ever had to send in their form. And I know the minister has made some iaprovements, and I welcome those. But I would ask him what further steps he can see, what further steps he is prepared to take? Is there any way to speed it up7 And also , is there any way further to improve the process of letting people know where it stands and what has to be done? We have had some improvements. I know I speak for a number of my colleagues, in particular, when I mention Mr. Robert Windsor one of the minister's officials. He is doing an admirable job.

He cannot change the law, and he cannot do what should not be done, but an inquiry to him is answered quickly and fully, and I ~nd that is what is needed. And I do not know whether.Mr. Windsor's services are available to the public at large , because there would be just so many people 1 but I would say to the minister that if some way can be found to provide that type of service to every applicant I think it would be a very welcome one.

And I will close by repeating that I have any number of examples, and I know every member does, and I am sure the minister does of people who are absolutely infuriated almost beyond reason by dealing with Crown Lands and having a year or two or three go by and no apparent action. Some times there is inaction, but more often that is just the system, you know, going its normal way but nobody bothers telling the applicant about it. It causes a lot of unnecesary hard feeling, and I would hope it is something to which the minister could turn his attention. Just one other comment, Sir.

I would hope the minister will make sure this new law, this new provision of the law is widely publicized. I think all of the people who are living on ceown lands with squatters rights should he told of this change to that they can take the appropriate action. Having said that, Sir, we are prepared to support the Bill. MR. SPEAKER: (MR. YOUNG): The hon. member for Twillingate.

May 31 , 1976 Tape 3035 PK - 3 MR. J. R. SMALLWOOD; Mr. Speaker, I am not sure in my own mind as to what this bill is because I cannot find it. Is this the bill, may I ask the minister~which implements the statement of policy that he made here in the House some weeks ago with regard to title to land? MR. J. ROUSSEAU: No. MR. SMALLWOOD: It is a bill that deals only with squatters rij!hts. 'MR. ROUSSEAU: Squatter's rights, and crown land, yes. MR. SJIIALLWOOD: Does it change the old position that against the Crown man had to have active possession of a piece of land for sixty years - MR.

ROUSSEAU: - - ----- Twenty years now. MR. SMALLWOOD: - and as against, not the Crown, anyone else it had to be twenty years? MR. ROUSSEAU: ---- ·-- It is twenty now for the Crown - MR. SMALLWOOD: It is now twenty for the Crown and the same for private individuals? MR. ROUSSEAU: I presume, the law only applies to the Crown. MR. SMALLl-lOOD : It does not change the private, it changes only the claim against the Crown. It has to be only twenty years? MR.

ROUSSEA'i!: Up to January 1, 1977, anybody who has it twenty years - MR·: SMALLWOOD: It seems to me at first sight, that this is excellent, that to establish your ri;::g;::h:..:t:......:t:..:o:......:a:...:;P:.::i:.:e:.:c::e:.....:o_::f~N::e:.::w.:f.:::o_.-:u.:_:n.::d.::l.::an=-d you have to ---have active possession of it for twenty years, it used to be sixty, it still is sixty, twenty years before you can claim it from the Crown.

Now in other words if you go and squat on a piece of the Queen's land, and you stay in possession of it continuously for sixty years, and I take it it is continuous, not continual, unbroken twenty years, in physical pos*ession of it, residing on it, fencing it>probably, and operating it in some way or other, that if you do that for twenty years then even the Crown cannot take it from you. 9205

May 31, 1976 Tape 3035 PK - 4 MR. ROUSSEAU: No, if you have done it for twenty years, after January 1, 1977 you will not be able to. MR. SMALLWOOD: As of January 1 next, next January 1 if at that point you have been in possession of it - MR. ROUSSEAU: Twenty years. MR. SMALLWOOD: - for twenty years, then it is yours even against the Crown. MR. ROUSSEAU: Yes. If not you go the normal application route for crown land. MR. SMALLWOOD: But thereafter if you have not been in possession for twenty years you just go through the same routine as though that change had not been made at all. MR. ROUSSEAU: Right. MR..

SMALLWOOD : It seems to me to be an improveaent, and so I think I will vote for it. I do not know what my co~­ because we have not discussed frankly- but each of will. It is not a party matter, it is a matter for each individual. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Trinity-Bay de Verde. MR. ROWE: Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say a few words in support of the bill. I know the minister is stepping up, he is within hearing distance. Probably, Sir, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing could also take note on some of the things I am going to say because I think it may relate to his particular department.

I may, strictly speaking, be out of order in terms of relevancy here, but it is a very important problem facing many of the people in rural Newfoundland. An awful lot of people curse the Crown Lands Division in trying to acquire crown lands through the particular department involved. But my understanding, Sir, is the problem really does not exist in the Crown Landa Divis~on or in that department, but rather from the referrals from the various other departments.

One of the greatest difficulties, I am led to believe in conversations with various civil servants, is that the Provincial Planning Division of the Department of Municipal Affairs is sometimes very slow in getting their referrals back to the Crown Lands Division 9206

May 31, 1976 Tape 3035 PK - 5 Mr. Rowe: -------- and the Committee that approves or disapproves of the various applications for the acquisition of crown lands. And I am wondering if there is not something that can be worked ant between the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Rousing in order to spaed that particular pvocess up.

Now one of the things that has come to my attention is this, that the Provincial Planning Division had, and I do not know whether they still have, but they had great plans with respect to housing development l or housing development lots or areas in the various rural communities throughout the Province. I have seen the fancy and well planned charts and plot plans drawn up an the walls of the Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing when we were looking into certain particular problems.

But the problem is, Sir, that these plans are plans on paper only and they are good plans, but the problem is that once the people realize what the cost of these plots or lots are, whether they are serviced or unserviced ) they get one heck of a jolt. Because people in Eural Newfoundland are very used to either acquiring land that is handed down through the family or acquiring crown land for next to nothing, and now they are faced with the problem or the very high expenditure of having to purchase planned housing development lots. And they are good plans.

But it aomes as an awful jolt to many of our citizens living in rural Newfoundland to have to plank down $4,000 or $5,000 or $6,000 or $7,000 or $8,000 for a lot.It is just something that they have never lived with 7 and it is almost a cultural or a social shock to them to realize that they had to spend that amount of money for a piece of land on which to build a home.

So, Sir, I am just really extending on the remarks made by the Leader of the Opposition here, and I do not think the problem is really within the Crown Lands Division except for that of a staffing problem, and I do not mean quality, I mean quantity. We obviously require a great number more people in the Crown Lands Division, and 9207

May 31, 1976 Tape 3035 PK - 6 !1!.!~ probably things should have been organized mucll better over the past years, and we should have had all of this computerized at thiS stage of the game. But it is an unholy mess the mapping of this Province and having to search out types of land and this sort of a thing before you can give the go ahead for a person to get a permit to build a home. It is a very real problem, Sir, and ! do not know - I know it is probably not strietly .related to this particular bill but I would appreciate it very much if the mini.ster would respond to this problem, it has been with us for years.

When I served in the district of St. Barbe North it was a very bad problem, and now that I am in a district that has more incorporated communities and more pavement and mor~ Bl!lenities of life I was quite surprised to find that 9208 ,.

Thin rrnrl<'T:I ;s 'iust aR r.r Nit in Trt.ni .tv·· t::w <lr v.-r<IP M~ lt iR or 1•'3!1 in ~t . n.-.~ht> North ;m<l t cou1<1 onlv c:..,ndu<l<' that tl,i.s oroh1t>n :l.l'! oni. t~ extrnsivc throur.hout the rrcwincr nf tl1"1•fnuncll.1n<i :'Inti T.:lt'r:'lrlt'r . Thc>n, of cnurst>. thP '!fni.~;trr o! .Tu,o;t;lcc:> has promi.«co to look into tl-tt.« v•holr huRin.-ns ... r tl•c:> Rtiltus nf t ht> old ' IP.wfoundlnnd rai J rontt nroperty an<l 1 liM 110r>i nn thnt then~ v'Oulo hi' an anRI~~r for rrat 9itbl n tl-f' nE>nr future .

I would like the "inister of Hunicipn1 Aff nirs, Sir. i.f at all rossihle •·ith:ln the r ules, to respo nd to this husincss of "hnt l'xactlv is the status of tl-tes~> charts, thNl<' plans of t'lr Provincial Plann:lnp, Jlivision hecn u se it is re-l:~ted tn this 1-1'mle hul'<i.ness of :1cquisi t ion of C'ro~m 1.-.nd. :lrc::t11s,. if J c:m u.«c .-.s an exa~:~nle, in Old l'E>rlican, nnd 1.n I! :'lot'~; ll:'lr hour, ttnrt in !li.nterton, :'I no in one othe?r communi. tv thl' name rRC:loPs me for t1H~ moment - the r e 'VIRs this fllan rh:awn up for ,, nic P 1i ttlE' c u l-cle? ·· s;~c w:l t'h All the p](lts a nd what !utvP you, nod it hns heen deferred or is f r ozen or stop!'IP.rl, no nctlon 1!' ta! ·in~ pl;lce on ft nnw for some r eas on or another - it mt.p,ht hr " rE>sult of the cuthnclts but thert> is no action ;~nd cnnsP(1urnt1y people eannot hu1.ld alonp, the road, s<~v to Rav de VC?rrlP, ht>cnw;e that 1•oulrl 1-r. rihh<>n dr.vP.lopmen t, they cAnnot huilrl alonJt the r oan dotm the Tri nity Bay Sout h Shore t-ec1tuSP that 11011 ld he r ihhon deveJ opmP.nt, thc.>y cannot rlev e lop ou t to the J)nni t> 1 ' s rnv(' Roar\ hPcausP that HOuld he ribbon develorment . ::tnd t'1pv are lust runnin~ out of land.

And t honestlv do not 1-T>ov w'l:.t thE> nnswc-r Is . As a result oeoplE' :tre tryinR to ac au1rt> C:ro~m lnnd, «:.v, hc-t"'c('n the cnmmunitit>s <Jnd ;mtomati.cally the rJ;mntnr. l11vlston puts the :ute r1.r,ht do1m nn that hec a uSE' this 1~> rihhon <!('vel opmen t alonn th e hi~thway . Not~ I under s t a nd the Planninr Oi vision is planning to put up 1-1h11t thP.Y call r ~al c-r urban fences vhich h::ts:lcally · you have a community 11h> T.ead Cove, 'lt is 11 r ihho n c•~unftv , it is illepal or the ~eoartment will not now for i\ rersnn to huild on outside of the last house in th11t community . n2o n

May 31, 107~, Tape 303~, Page 2 -- apb }1R, ROWE : Now I can see the reason for controls, ~- --- Sir, hut the people are simply boxed in. They cannot acquire private land ldthin the counnunity. The Provincial Planning Divtsion apparently are not going ahead with their, in some cases, development of these housing lots.

I am not blaming the minister for that because in some cases the people are not supporting the development of these housing lots for the simply reason that they p:ot one jolt when they realized that they are going to have to pay three or four, five or six thousand dollars for the lot, something which was just unimagtneable to them up to the present time. Now probably this is the price we have to pay for progress, I do not know. But it seems - MR. "FLIGHT: It is exactly the same with the rest of the country. It is for servicing that lot. HR.

ROWE: In some cases it is serviced lots and in some cases it is not serviced lots. MR. MURPHY : --·---- It is not just the Crown land you are talkinp, about? ~1R. ROWE: No, l!le are talking about an actual planned little lot in the middle of the community and the cost is an admirable one. But I would suspect that between the restraints and the fact that the people are really