PROVINCE OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY Volume 1 Number 11 5th Session 34th. Ge~eral Assembly VERBATIM REPORT FRIDAY, APRIL 2, 1971 SPEAKER: THE HONOURABLE GEORGE W. CLARKE

Tape 192 pa~e 1. The House met at 11:00 A.M. ¥,x. Speaker in the Chair. Presenting Reuorts of Standinv. and Select Committees. HO~.£~.ROEERTS(~in, of Health): Mr. Speaker, under the Terms of the legislation enacted by the House last year, to amend the {what we can call the) Shaheen Act, one which we dealt with in the special session last summer, the Minister of Finance is required to table certain documents resulting from the Agreement~ I now .rise,on behalf of my colleague 7 the ~linister of Finance~to table these , \P,reements.

They are somewhat lengthy and as I sus~ect.Your Honour ,that most members will not want to take them home aria read Che~ of an evening. We have only had one copy made, these will be deposited with the Clerk and I assume any hon. member can have access to them. These Agreemer.ts ,Mr.

Speaker, include the construction supervision Agreements together with two amendments thereto, that have been made necessary, the ~nagement Agreement, the Sales Agency Agreement, the Agreement between the Minister of Economic Development, Newfoundland , R~fining Comuany,Limited, Provincial Building Company Limited, Provincial Refining Company.,Limited and Provincial Holding Company,Limited. The main construction contract between Provincial Building Company;Limited and Procon (Great Britain),Limited. A letter from Procon, two letters from Procon (Great Britain) Company,Limited,making minor amendments to that.

Approval of Newfoundland Refining Company.,Limited,to the contracts. the Sterling Financial Agreement.,October 16, 1970. The First Euro-Dollar Agreement, the Second Eu~o--Dollar Agreement, a copy of the Crown r.rant. ~J His Honour,the Governor:of the land on which the Refinery is to builU. A copy of the Indenture ,under which the Minister of Public Works conveyed that same piece of land to Provincial Building Comoany, Limited. A corv of the Indenture .by which that land, the buildin~s to be built thereon , was mort~a~ed, bv Provincial Buildin~ Co'llll)any J,imited,to Kleinwort Benson 803

April 2 1971 Tape 192 pa~e 2. ..,, Company,Limited, A copy of the Second Mortga~e between Provincial Building Company,Limited and the Minister of Economic Development,representini Rer Majesty the Queen in right of Newfoundland. A letter from Newfoundland Ufining Company 1 Limited .,in which they undertake not to exercise their option to purchase the shares of Provincial Holding Company,Limited,while the first mortgage is outstanding and a debenture between Provincial Building and Kleinwort Benson,in En~land,the Guarantee A~reement,executed by Shaheen Natural Resources Company,Limited.

A letter from the First National Bank of Chica~o together with an A~reement by S.N.R 1 Delaware Newfoundland Refining Company~Limtted and Provincial Refining Coml>any'l Limited:which relates to the provision of the $10 million equity financin• and~finallY-i a letter from Newfoundland Refinin~ and Provincial Refinin~y under which they agreed to waive their rights to receive 2½ mill power.

The latter Agreement replaces the Can-Carib arrangement and .as hon. gentlemen will recall,when we dealt with it in the House last year we said we would - the Can-Carib arran•ement would fall and we would reolace it by another means - this letter is that other means,of course. There is a question on the Order Paper,from the hon. •entleman from St. John's East 7 who apparently - his memory is a little defective on the point - He has asked for the Can-Carib letter~as it is of no concern whatsoever, of no forcemr effect,it is not bein~ tabled. Mr.

Speaker, there are two agreements which we are not sure if they are covered or not,because the le•islation exe~,ts certain types of agreements. These are the Crude and Vacuum Distillation Process Unit Guarantee Agreemen~ between Universal Oil Products and Provincial Refinin• and the UOP Platformin~ Process License A~reement,between the UOP Process Division,Universal Oil Products Company and Provincial ~efinin~ Company. Limited. These are commercial A~reements,and the leP.islation exempts these. However,as thev may he of interest to the memhers of the !louse anv 804

April 2 1971 Tape 192 page 3. hon. gentlemen wishes to see them on a private basis, because these are the commercial Agreements, we would be prepared to let any hon. gentleman see them. They are private and confidential 7 as the Premier reminds me. In any event,Mr. Speaker, these are the so-called Shaheen ~reements. I commend them to the attention of the hon. members, they are most interestin~ readin~ and I am sure each hon. member will want to read them. MR.J.CROSBIE: Mr.

Speaker, in connection with this. tabling this Agreement. can the Minister supply one other copy of these A~reements.lf there is only one copy in the Clerk's Office,it is goin~ to be vei-y difficult for members to read them. There is going to be more than one member interested. Not only that,if there is only one copy in the Clerk's Office and cannot be removed, they all have to be read here in these premises. So there should at least be one other copy for members to look at. Im.ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, I will see what we can do on that.

Perhaos some of these Agreemants are formal and others are substandard, if the hon. gentleman could let me have a list of the Agreements he would wish to peruse, we would undertake to nrovide copies of them. Some of these ARreements,such as the mortgages,of course.have been registered in the Registry of Deeds and, therefore,readily available. But if the hon. gentleman has some particular Agreement or Agreements in mind,if he could let me have a list,! will see if we can have an extra copy made to be circulated among him and such other members who may wish to read it. AHSBERS TO OUESTIONS: Htm. S.

NEARY(Min. of Welfare): Mr. Speaker, I want to answer a question on yesterday's Order Paper, No. 359, asked by the hon. member for St. John's West. (1) should be redirected to my collea~ue the Minister responsible for Housin~.

(2) I am unable to answer this part of the Question at the moment, Mr. Sp~aker, because there is a special admissions committee set un-comprisin2 of officials between my own denartment and the Depart~ent of Health. It would be SOIIIP-time 8C5

April 2 1971 Ta-pe 192 page 4. ..,, before this committee is in a position to report. They are studying admissions to all Government institutions*to determine whether we are getting the maximum use from these institutions. llntil I get their report.I am unable to state what the precise use of this building will be ,, except to s•y that it will be used for senior citizens.

They could be ambulatory or bed-ridden, they could be different types of senior citizens and if my hon. friend will bear with me, if the House is still sitting in July or August,when I get the report of the co11DDittee,, 1 will be glad to pass the information along to him. Question No, 16, asked by the hon. member for St. John's East Extern. I am afraid,Mr. Speaker, that I forgot to advise my secretary of Your Honour's wish that we make, I think it was eight co?ies, seven copies of the answers.

It is quite a lengthy answer ,with quite a number of figures. l only have two copies, if hon. members want me to read the answer?I would be glad to do it, if not, Mr. Speaker, perhaps we could infringe on the very busy lady in the Clerk's Office to run off enough copies for members of the other side of the House.lf they wan~ &e -to table it,I would be glad to do- it. Question No. 17 tabled.

Mr, Speaker, I would just like to add that the Question that was asked in both instances was as of January 1966-67-68-69- 70 and 1971, and.as Your Honour knows.I made a ministerial statement yesterday that will now chanize these figures,... they have been revised upward. HON. J.R.SMALLWOOD(Premier): Mr. Speaker, I have the answer to Question So 195. on the Order Paper of March 29,

(1) Lundrigan's Limited. (2) transfer of title to land, being a portion of the site of the Holiday Inn at St. John's. August 14, 1969. (3) yes. (4) the nayment of $50,000 for the land referred to, the value of which was appraised at that figure by the Senior Appraiser.,in the Atmraisal Deoartment of the Royal Trust Company. 806

ApTil 2nd, 1971 Tape 193 JM - 1 MR. MARSHALL: I wonder could the hon~ Premier inform of the acreage of land involved, the area of land involved? MR. SMALLWOOD: No, I do not know but it is the land on which Holiday Inns -✓- stands and that runs, my impression tells me, to three or four or five acres, somewhere around there. MR. ROWE: Mr. Speake~ I have the answer to a couple of questions. 401 on today's Order Paper>asked by the hon. the member for Burin, the answer to the question is no.

I have also the answer to question 361 that I referr~d to the other day 1 on the Order Paper of March 25th~asked also by the hon. member for Burin. I will be tabling a breakdown of this as soon as I can get it taken off,but I will just sumarize the answer for the hon. member now., orally. The question asks the location of new schools,indicating in each case the number of classrooms which have been put into service since 1 January 1970 and (2) the location of rebuilt schools.,indicating in each case_.

I take it,with rebuilt schools the hon. member means additions to existing schools,so I have that information, we had it, of course, in the department but I had it also checked with the Denominational Educational Authorities,since the primary records would be with them in the first instance. We have now come up with the totals. 7here were thirteen new schools built in that last year, I might say that in all but one instance these refer to action taken in 1970. It could be that in recent days a classroom has been added here and there and we might not have that information now.

So 1for all practical purposes.these statistics would relate to 1970 and during that year the number of new schools, completely new schools built 1 was thirteen. lion. members may be interested to know that the largest of these schools was at Bishops Falls, a sixteen room school, two other larger schools,one was at Flower's Cove.a twelve room school.,.and one at Harbour Breton 1 a ten room schoo~ and one at Roddickton,a ten room school.

The total number of classrooms brought into being in these new schools, completely new ·schools?was ninety-seven .. so that the average size of the schools work out at something like eight classrooms,on an average. I am referring only now to a new school, brand new schools starting from scratch. 807

!April 2nd, 1971 Tape 193 JM - 2 MR. ROWE: ----- The new of schools rebuilt or extended .•,is much larger. The total number is thirty-seven schools that were rebuilt or enlarged and the number of classrooms added was 123 classrooms, 123 classrooms added to existing ·J, schools. This is in addition to the ninety-seven classrooms. Hon. members may also be interested to know where the largest of these additions vere, two were at schools in St. John's, two schools,twelve rooms each, I do not have the actual names o( the schools.I dare say hon. members might know which they are.

Two schools were enlarged by twelve classrooms each, a school . in Stephenville was eniarged by ten classrooms and the other enlarge­ ments ranged all the way down to one classroom. So the total number of classrooms,added last year to our school services.was ninety-seven and 123 for a total of 220 classrooms, 220 new classrooms were brought into service in the year 1970. The last one of these was in January past, the last one I have a record of.

Since hon. members might be interested to know what has happened in respect of their own districts,! will be tabling a breakdown of these statistics later this morning, The girls are taking it of right now. MR. HICKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question. In the definition of new classrooms does he include portable classrooms? MR. ROWE: Yes, Mr. Speaker, new classrooms could be either standard additions or in some cases portable ones.

I do not have a break.down of the nwnber of portable one,but if any hon. members are interested in that, I would .be glad to get the actual number of portable classrooms that have been added. I seem to recall, speaking from memory now, that there have been some forty odd portable classrooms added sometime during the year. I believe, for example, that the one at Manuela, the extension in Manuela, my recollection is that at Manuels the classrooms added there were portable ones. I could get a breakdown if any hon. member wanted to know.

Yes, I notice there, Manuela has a twelve room school, (no, it is the new school was built in Manuels, I am sorry) that is the new one built there. I will get a breakdown of the portable classrooms for hon. members and I will be tabling the breakdown of this later this morning. 808

April 2nd, 1971 Tape 193 JM - 3 MR. EARLE: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In connection with the portable classrooms, can the hon. Minister report to the House as to whether or not, generally speaking, these classrooms are found to be satisfactory and are they performing the service for which they are ton­ structed in a good way. Are they regarded by the schools as being entirely satisfactory? MR. ROWE: Well, I can only answer on that, Mr. Speaker, that I have to this moment not received a complaint about them.

They have been put in use in a number of places around Newfoundland and I have not received any complaint. Normally.).f there is any widespread objection ,some of the complaints would be directed to the Minister of Education. The other thing is that I found myself once in a portable classroom and did not know I was in it. I did not know what I was in until,during the latter part of somebody pointed out to me that it was a portable classroom. As far as I know,they are giving satisfaction and I have heard nothing to the contrary. MR. WINSOR: Mr.

Speaker, I wish to table the answer to a questioD asked by the hon. member for St. John's West, number 328 appearing on the Order Paper of March 31st. MR. EARLE: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the hon. the Minister of Fisheries1 Can he inform the House whether or not the fishermen of this Province have been sufficiently informed or adequately informed of the implementation of new regulations under the Fisheries Act concerning the processing, packaging of fish What I had in mind,particularily~was in connection with the Federal regulations concerning the canning of fish_. where individual 8U9

April 2, 1971, Tape 194, Page 1 - apb MR. EARLE: fishermen are doing this either for their own purposes or for sale to small stores. Have they been informed and given adequate DQ~ice of the regulations controlling that at present? MR. WINSOR: To my knowledge, every operator in Newfoundland has been notified, or at least there is no excus~ for ignorance of the law. If we are going to produce the quality of fish 1 whether in tins or in any other form, then we must enforce certain regulations. We have not,as the Department of Fisheries, gone into really closing anyone down.

I am sure the hon. gentleman will airee, if we are to hold our markets and produce a good quality, and put that quality on the market, then we must, we have no choice but to enforce certain regulations. I know the problem the hon. gentleman has and I have it under consideration. I feel they are all aware of the regulation but it has just befn . procrastinating in bringing it into effect. ORDERS OF THE DAY: ~ON. H.STARKES (Minister of Highways): Mr. Speaker, I have the answer to a question. I wish to table the answer to question no. (177), (178) and no. (181).

It applies to a question asked by the hon. member for Burin,reiarding the erection of A certain sign near the Trans Canada Highway. Permits are not issued~Mr. Speaker, by the Department of Highways or refused to be issued by the Department of Highways. It comes under an entirely different department. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, what are the numbers the minister tabledf (177), what was the next one? :HR. HICKMAN: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question. ~ould the hon. the Minister of Highways indicate to the House,the department or minister who has responsibility for issuing permits for the erection of signs along the Trans Canada Highway. MR. STARKES: Mr. Speaker, as far as I know the hon. member should know full well. I think he was a member of Cabinet lon~er than I. The Trans Canada is a protected road and protected roads come under- the urban and rural planninr, division of the Department of Municipal Affairs. 810

April 2, 1971, Tape 194, Page 2 --·apb On motion of the hon. the Minister of Justice, a Bill, "An Act Further To Amend The Fatal Accidents Act." (No. 15). Read a firat.t_ime, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. Ou motion of the hon. the Minister of Justice a Bill, "An Act To Protect Certain Persons Rendering Aid Following An Accident Or In An Emergency." (No.24). Read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. the Minister of Justice a Bill, "An Act To Amend The Criminal Injuries Compensation Act, 1968. •· Read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

Ou motion of the hon. the Minister of Justice a Bill, " Aa Act To Establish The Newfoundland Law Reform Commission." (No.22). Read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. Ou motion, of the hon. the Minister of Education and Youth a Bill, "An Act Further To Amend The Memorial University Pensions Act." (No.11). Read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. the Minister of Social Services and Rehabilitation a Bill, "An Act Respecting The Department Of Social Services And Rehabilitation." (13). Read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

Ou motion_.of the hon the Minister of Social Services and Rehabilitation a Bill, "An Act To Amend, Revise And Consolidate The Lav Respecting Social Assistance," (No.14). Read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. Ou motion of the hon. the Minister of Provincial Affairs a Bill, "An Act To Amend, Revise And Consolidate The Law Respecting Accident And Sickness Insurance." (No.9). Read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. the Minister of :t-!ines Agriculture And Resources a Bill, ''An Act Further To Amend The Act 4 Ed.

VII Cap 13 Entitled 'An Ac; To Provide For The Transportation Of Timber Over Streams And Lake, And For Other Purpoea In Connection With Crown Lands." (So.1B). Read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. 811

April 2, 1971, Tape 194, Page 3 -- apb On motion of the hon. the Minister of Fisheries a Bill,

An Act To Ratify, Confirm And Adopt An Agreement Made Between Her Majesty In Right -~ Of Newfoundland, Newfoundland Industrial Corporation And National Sea Products Limited And To Make Provision Respecting The Making Of Certain Mon•tary Grant• And The Payment Of Certain Subsidies And Respecting Other Matters Connected lberewith." (19). Read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

Ou motion of the hon. the President of the Council the appointment of the.following to constitute a committee under Standing Order (86), to prepare a list of members to compose a Standing Committee of the Houae named therein; the hon. the Minister of Education and Youth; the hon. Minister of Public Works; the hon. the Minister of Provincial Affairs; the hon. member for Gander and the hon. member for St. Barbe South. 812

April 2, 1971, Tape 195, Page 1 - apb HON. L. R. CURTIS·: Mr. Speaker, I move that item (12) be withdrawn from the Order Paper. MR. SPEAKER: • J. Is it agreed that the item (12) be withdrawn from the Order Paper? Agreed. The adjourned debate on Address in Reply. NR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, on a point of Order. What is the position with respect to motion (22) that notice was given of last night, and has the Leader of the house proposed to deal with it? MR. MURPHY: Mr. Speaker, if I may, I would ask the hon. member to speak louder or those in the discussion on the other side to speak much lower.

It is difficult to follow what is happening on the floor of this House. If they are going to have m.~etings.,let them go in the common room and have their meetings. MR. SPEAKER: I quite agree, it is difficult for the Chair at times to hear what is going on,when hon. members are conversing too loudly. If they have to converse.I wish they would keep it down. The Point of Order, MR. CROSBIE: The Point of Order,with respect to motion (22) ~~- Speaker, that was moved last night,when that motion should be dealt with. I would submit that that is a motion that should be dealt with at this time.

Since the Government controls the business of the House, the Government can call what business it wishes. MR:· cuRTIS: ThiE is the hon. member's motion Mr. Speaker, which will come up on Wednesday. in the meantime, it cannot come up today because the order was not put in writing and tabled before six o'clock yesterday,as provided for in the rules. MR. MURPHY: Mr. Speaker, notwithstandin~ the answer of the Leader of the House, I feel that this matter is of such gravity,Sir, and effects the running of this hon.

House so seriously, I believe this motion should now be discussed rather than have this hanging over the House. As I say, I must second or speak to the Point of Order raised by the hon. member for St. John's West. Because, when we have a motion,such as this, which I think has been the first one that has been raised in this hon. House, and perhaps one of the s11 fev

April 2, 1971, Tape 195, Page 2 -- apb that has been raised in the Dominion of Canada. I think it is really very, very serious and grave enough,Mr. Speaker~to have it considered i~fately. MR. CURTIS: If this Order deals~Mr. Speaker.with the rules of the House, it should at least carry out the rules of the House,and order (29) provides "such notice shall be laid upon the table before six o'clock p.m." That is the rule of the House, ' I did not make it. MR. MURPHY: Speaking again,if I may.Mr.

Speaker, how could we lay it on the table of the House before six o'clock p.m., when it occurred at eight fifteen last evening? It is a physical impossibility. MR. CURTIS: No notice has been given. MR. MURPHY: At 6:00 p.m. today the House is in session. I consider we gave it enough notice..,and I think the matter should be discussed. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, on that point. This motion was moved last night,as soon as it could be moved after the events to which it relates took place. There is nothing at all stopping the Leader of the House fro~ calling this motion.

It is a motion that effects the whole rules and procedures of this House. It is not just a simple private member's motion for debate on private member's day. It is a motion that affects the whole business of the House and should be discussed now. MR. CtJB.JlS:_ Mr. Speaker, the only way it can be brought up now is by the unanimous consent of the House. If they want to ask for that. MR. SPEAKER: The only comment I can make is that this was raised as a Point of Order. I am not too sure if it was strictly a Point of Order.

I would have no objection, if the motion were called now,I would have no objection, obviously, to it beint debated. But the House - the Speaker.. does not call the order in which the items come,whether it is private member's day or any other day~he is advised. I can only say that the order has been called and we must now go into the adjourned debate on the Address in Reply. ~--~J9~_BJ~ Mr. Speaker, will the Pryuse give unanimous consent to havtn, the motion called now? HON. _J .R .51'1/\LLWOOD (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, if there was some way whereby I could properly and in accordance with the rules express the unutcai:rble

April 2, 1971, Tape 195, Page 3 -- apb contempt I have 11 would do so. MR. CROSBIE: ~IR. SPEAKER: (Inaudible) The adjourned debate on the Address in Reply. . .,_ MR. CROSBIE: We just had another demonstration,Mr. Speaker, of the contemptible way in which this House is run by the majority of the House. It ia absolutely contemptible. · MR. SPEAKER: Order please~ MR. CROSBIE: This is the resumed debate,Mr.

Speaker,on the Address in Replyi or the amendment moved to the Address in reply which is; to be added to the Addrt>S$ in Reply ·the words, ''That this House lacks confidence in the Government by reason of failure by the Government to provide for the well being of its citizens and to provide sound plannin~, direction and initiative in developing the natural resources and manpower of the Province.•· I spoke on this motion last night~Mr. Speaker, and covered quite a few points. I do not have too 111Uch time left. The hon. minister opposite is glad of that. Another illustration,Mr.

Speaker?of the lack of,the failure of the·Government to provide for the well being of its citizens?and the lack of sound planning and direction lies in the labour relations field. The acting Minister of Labour is good enough to pipe up a few words there in the labour relations field, and specifically 7 Mr. Speaker,in the field of equal pay for men and women.

What kind of sound planning, what kind of provision for the well being of the citizens of this Province is it, when a Government is in power twenty-two years before it announces that it is going to amend the law to provide for equal pay for men and women,doing the same kind of work in the same place, That has been announced a few weeks ago, but not yet implemented. There are many peculiar things about that announcemen~ Y.r. Speaker, that need clarification.

Of course it was an adoption a policy that has been urged by the official Opposition in this House for many years and rejected by the Government year after year. We kr,ow t.hat this year we are in a different situation. This is the last year that this House will sit, or this session of this House will sit. So, the Government has finally announced.after twenty-two that it is going to provide for equal pay f~r men and women. The question is 815

April 2, 1971, Tape 195, Page 4 -- apb how is this going to be done, and when is it going to be done? The Government announced that it was going to be done for employees ,.,, of the Government and mentioned April 1st. I think the figure given was, that it was going to cost the Government $750,000 a year ~o do that. There has been no breakdown of that cost, but if that is all that the Government estimates it is going to cost the Government to do, to implement equal pay for men and women in the civil servi~e of Newfoundland, then there is something wz,o·ng Mr. Speaker.

In the Department of Health alone,if it is to be provided properly~ equal pay for men and women, working in the hospitals of this Province in the Provincial Government service,the cost to the Government will certainly be in excess of $750,000. This gives us some reason to think that perhaps the implementation of this proposal is going to be far different and far more restricted than the general statement of the position would lead one to think. It was announced that under the Minimum Wage Act there is a period of six months before this co111es into effect. Certainly it is wise7 Mr.

Speaker~ to give employers some notice, at least six -months notice 7 of this change, but we have had no more particulars since the House opened of how this is going to work)!i.nd how this is going to work. What provisio .ns are going to be made for its enforcement? There is no 4ndication wh~tsoever as yet. We have had no statement either that the minimum wage is going to be increased. The minimum wage in this Province is inadequate 1 as it is.for men, so it would not be sufficient to simply have men and women given equal pay,based on the minimum wage as it stands today.

We would expect and hope that there will be some announcement from the Government~during this session,that the minimum wage is going to be increased. Not just that women will get the same minimum wage as men, but that both will be increased this year to at least one dollar and fifty cents an hour. That was not in the Speech from the Throne. We can only hope that 816

April 2nd. 1971 Tape 196 PK - 1 MR. CROSBIE: ~hat is going to be implemented. But, Mr. Speaker, it is easy to say equal pay for men and women, but there are so many ways·~f getting around that, that it is roin~ to be very important as to how this is going to be carried out, and just the exact wordtnp,, and how the enforcement is goinp. to be brought about. That will be the important thing. Who is to determine whether men and women are doing exactly the S8llle job? There can be a little veriation in the job, that may permit employers to say that wo~en are doing a different job than men are.

This is a very complicated matter. I do not know whether the minister or his de~artment are making any study of other jurisdictions where there is e~ual pay for men and women, and what the problems have been in those jurisdictions. But, certainly if the department is not, then it should be doinr, that. So after twenty-two years, the Government finally announces that it is interested in the women's riphts in this Province, and that men and women will have equal pay for equal work. What ·we are waiting for now, Hr. Speaker, is an outline of the implementation of that promise.

And some explanation as to why it was not done last year or the year before or the year before that, or ten years ago, or fifteen years ago,for the well being of the female half of the population of this Province. We have a Royal Commission, the Cohen Commission, which was originally the Rand C0111111.issicm.on labour matters. I do not know if that was appointed, it must have been three years ago now.

Unfortunately, the late ehief ~ustice Rand died, the commission was taken over by Professor Cohen, I.think, that is at least two years ago, eertainly a year and a-half apo, Wl! still have no report on that Royal Commission, Mr. Speaker. Surely a Government that appoints Royal Commission can take some measures to keep in touch with these Royal Commissions and to try top.et them to speed up their work and bring in their reports. There will not be any implementation in this House of the Cohen Royal Commission Jleport, because 817

April 2nd. lS'71 Tape 196 PK - 2 MR. CROSBIE: it will not be received until the House is over, or if it is received while the House is still meeting, there will not be tim~. The Government is derelict in its duty in not seeing that the Royal Commission~ expedite their work. We have the Royal Commission on Forestry,appointed in 1967,that only reported to the Government several months ago, and the report was only tabled several days ago. We have the Frazer Commission a~1d.n, Question No, 223, that was answered• I think, it was answered yesterday.

The hon. the Premier was asked;''has the Government received a report of the Royal Commission on Taxation and Revenue for the ,I City of St. John's established in 1965? The answer was '"no". ''If not, when does Government eJq>ect to receive this report?ll Do not know:' The Government does not know. Well, surely, 1-'r. Speaker, after a five year period,the Minister of Municipal Affairs or the Premier or some member of the Government should be in touch with the commissioner and ask him when they can expect to have his report ·.

Not just to report to this Rouse and the public that they do not know when .the report is going to come in. The question was asked; how many times have the Commission sat since l January, 1969? Answer:Qdo not know.~ The Government does not know how often that Commission have sat or even if it has sat since }anuary 1,1969. Why does not the r-.overnment know? Surely, lt is the ~'!'ernment' s duty to see that this Commission reports or1 if not, appoint another Commission or replace the Commissioner. What is the cost of this Commission, was another question asked?

The reply to that was answered later, the answer will be given later. This is not the answer to a question, Hr. Speaker, to say an answer will be given later. An answer tabled here a year ago, shoved that the Commission had costed, as up to one year ago, $23,735.00. What has been spent since that year ago? $23,000 it cost up to a year ago, still no report. The subject is not t~at complicated, }Ir. Speaker. The tax structure and revenue sources of the City of St. John's, the jobs can be do~e in six to nine months by anyone who puts his mind to it. The hearings were held 818

April 2nd. 1971 Tape 196 PK - 3 ~. CPO~BIF= some four years ago. As the Board of Trade said the other day, the brief they put in is outdated now. It was put in four years p.,. aFO, What value is the report going to have when it is based on briefs submitted four years aro, and hearings held four years ago? The hearings are strangulated, not only marinated. It is the responsibility of the Government. M..r. Speaker, when it appoints a Royal Commission to see that it takes some act~on under the Government Commission, or that it reports within some reasonable len~th of time.

And, if the Government cannot get any action out of the Commission, then the responsibility is to cancel that Commission and appoint another. The Commission was announced, in the first place,just out of the blue, without any consultation with the St. John's Mtmicipal Council. And,when it was appointed, and announced in December 1965, the hon. the Premier said, the Commission would be reporting and legislation would be broup,ht in at the session of the House of Assembly held in 1966, at that session.

That was the announcement made in December 1965, ~This is an emergency.~ This Commission wiil bring its report before the 1966 session and lep.islation will be passed at the 1966 session in accordance with the Co'l!Dllission's Report,if the Government accepts it.'· Here we are in 1971, no report,and no explanation from the Government as to what has happened. The Goyernment just does not know, and apparently does not care. "ffi.. SPEAKER: Order, please, I have to advise the hon. member his time is up. MR. CROSBtF: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

So for the reasons that I have been enumeratinp, last nirAr and shortly this morning, I can see no other choice but to support this non-confidence motion. Because it is amply shown, Mr. Speaker, that the Government have failel to provide for the well bein~ of our citizens. have failed to provide sound planninr., direction and initiative, in developin~ the natural resources and•the manpower of thi~ Province. 819

April 2nd. 1971 Tape 196 PK - 4 MR. T. A. HICKMAN: Mr. Speaker, the Motion that is before the House is really a Motion of non-confidence based on the failure of Government- .,to provide sound plannin~, direction and initiative in developing the natural resources and manpower of the Province. Now that is a pretty all embracing motion and one which, I submit,hon. members could spent many, many hours dealing with the various aspects,in'.fields of development of our natural resources. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to restrict my comments primarly to the failure of Government to plan at all or properly plan for the development of our fisheries in this Province. ~ast month or the month before last, we ~-itnessed a conference at the Arts and Culture Centre and a statement by the Minister of Fisheries. And in that statement the hon. the Minister of Fisheries outlined programmes which may or may not be implemented in this Province, and it is rather difficult to take any real issue with the pro~rammes that were announced or recommended or suggested by the hon. the Minister of Fisheries.

The total cost of the proposed prograrnmes,spread over many years,is $37 million.of which the Federal Government will be asked to join in a joint cost, a joint-shared fisheries development ·programme,amounting to $10,000. Now, Mr. Speaker, I direct this House's attention to the various items that the hon. the Minister of Fisheries set forth in this plan, lt is not a plan, it is simply a statemen~without any indication to what planning has gone to it or what plans are behind !t,to implement it.

But all of these items. pretty well all of these items,with the possible exception of the last two; drap.gers subsidies of .$2 million and the joint­ share fishery progr8Jl11'!e1 deal with the :f.nshore fishery. Now in dealing with the inshore fishery, I belive this House and Government must take a pretty long,hard look at the productivity and the prospects of the inshore fishery in this Province, and in so doin2 should not exclude from its thinking and from its plannin~ a sepnent of 820

Apr!l 2nd. 1971 Tape 196 PK - 5 '!-ffi, HICJa~AN: the fisheries of this Province, which last year landed 318 million pounds of fish,as against 180 million pounds of fish from the inshore. I refer, Mr. Speaker, to the ground fish produccion, the offshore production of fish in this Province. And, when you read the statement of the Minister of Fisheries, and when you look back over the Government's .planning with respect to the deep sea fishery, then I submit, Mr. Speaker, that · you will be hard put to find any pl~.

True it is that from time to time.phen a fish company, a deep sea fishing company~1ets into trouble, it comes to Government, it asks for financial assistance, . it gets financial assistance by way of Government guarantee. It is saved from insolvency or from closing its doors and the crisis passes, and then they ~o on a~ain for another few months. Well, 821

April 2nd., l°:171 Tape no 197 ~age 1 (mw) Mr. Hi.ckaan. -.,, Mr. Speaker, that is not planning. That is not the kind of planning that the planning 0 that the deep sea fishery in this Province requires today, if it is going to survive.

What we would hope for, and I believe what the people oi Newfoundland and particularly the people along the south coast, really from Catalina, more than the -south coast, from Catalina around to Port aux Basques, are entitled to expect, is one overall,comprehensive plan,to indicate to_ them as to where we are going in maintaining and developing the frozen fish industry a.~d the ground fish industry,as prosecuted by offsho~e - fishermen. ,And tied in with that, Mr. Speaker, tied in with that are other allied industries.

Last year, in this House, I raised the question 1 and it was raised by other hon. members,of the most discouraging and most disheartening 1$i.tuation,that has prevailed in my hon. friend's district of Placentia West. with respect to the Marystown shipyard. Now that Marystown shipyard was designed and conceived for .the purpose of taking care of the needs of the deep sea fishing enterprises of the .. Province of NewfotD1dland.

The projections at the time indicated 7 and they were quite unrealistic, because 1 as the hon. member for St, ·John's West said tonight.that the amount of thought and planning that went into that yard was minimum. In the beginning there was a suggestion that that yard would produce a dragger a month. In point of fact, it produced two draggers and then the bottom fell out of the market, The Federal subsidies disappeared and that is all we have heard. But, Mr.

Speaker, this time last year, I submitted to this House statistics and figures furnished by the frozen fish industry, which indicated that their projected needs for the next five years, in order to maintain the present production of ground fish, not to increase it, to maintain the ,resent production of ground fish,was twenty-seven new draggers. Nov we have lost a year. The production of the offshore fleet is decreasing each year and again last year we witnessed the same decrease in production. But:as of today, nothing has happened in Marystown. We have heard 822

Tape no. 197 Page 2 Mr. Hick:nan. .. .,, an announcement about National Sea Products, -a. large comJ:l31ly, a great company a compar.y that according to the-Toronto Globe and Maifhad a most successful year last year, a company that obviously is not in need of the same financial assista~ce as some ~four local companies and a company that does not have anypi.ore expertise in its midst;than many of our local companies in this Province can produce c1.t this time. We now hear of some very generous terms granted to that company,to enable it to open the Ross Steers Plant in St.

John's and eventually to have two dr8:ggers built . in Marys town at this time. and-i5ometime in the future;draggers number seven to ten inclusive will be built at the Maeystown shipyard. But where does this leave the frozen fish industry in Newfoundland 0 generally? Because remember, Mr. Speaker,that whilst we are going through a period of comparative prosperity in the frozen fish industry at this time, it is a prosperity that is not dependent entirely, indeed, I do not know how dependent it is at all on the productivity that has come from tne Eastern Sea~oard. of Canada.

It is a prosperity that is dependent to a large extent on the failure of the Foles and the Icelanders and the Scandinavians to produce the same quantity of fish that they have produced iu previous years. So, we have to assume that.i~ we are going to remain competitive, we have to assume that ,if the frozen fish industry is going to continue as a viable operation.,that we cannot rely on periods of prosperity which inevitably follow in the fishing industry by periods of recession. Now, Mr.

Speaker, when this programme was announced - you know, it would be easier to be against motherhood than against an announcement thatwill result in the opening of a frozen fish plant anywhere in this Province. Where doea this leave the other plants? Where does it leave the plants that are competing in the same . market with National Sea Products?

Because the competition in the frozen fish markets(and our only market is in the United States) is so keen that if one large organization has a financial advantage over the other, a financial advantage provided not by their earning capacity, not provided by their perfection in management blEprovided rather by Government grants, Lf they have an advantage over our local producers in days of tight competition{and this has happened so often in the past during the 1968, during the 1966 to 1968 to S<">~

April 2nd., l'.171 Tape no. 197 Page 3 Mr. Hickman. 1969 period) that they can undersell and undercut our producers in the · .,, market.and they have done it. A quarter of a cent a pound can result in the loss of the sale of Newfoundland produced fish, when the market is tight. lihat I would like to see in this Province, Mr. Speaker, is a plan for the overall development of the frozen fish industry ., one that is available to every frozen fish operator in the Province.

I think that six months ago, more than six months ago, a year ago, the frozen fish operators in this Province should have been told or they could have been told that there was an indication,from the Government side of the House,that this would be given consideration. There is now available to you, today, 1970 subsidies in addition to the subsidies being paid by the Government of Canada,to enable you to place orders with the Marystown shipyard right now. This would have done two things. It would have reactivated that yard.

It would have helped the yard maintain the few skilled personnel that did not leave, when the close...down took place a year before,and to attract back,hopefully pther skilled personnel tha~ are necessary, if we are going to build the type of modern dragger that is required. So, this was not done. There was no activity. There was no activity at all. There was no planning at all. There was nothing to indicate to our frozen fish operators as to where they turn next, if they are going to maintain the present production. How they find themselves in a rather awkward position.

The yard is not yet functioning,from the point of view of building offshore draggers. The subsidy that is coming from the Province so far is being restricted to the Nova Scotian company that is moving in. They are na.1 faced with a rather awkward situation. They need, today, more draggers. They need a

schedule of delivery of draggers over the next five years. That

schedule has not been made available or is not available. It could not have been given anyway. Now they are faced with the prospect of having to go abroad and buy draggers and bring them into this Province and.Mr. Speaker, it should be a matter of some concern to this House, when knowledgeable people in the frozen fish industry indicate that they can go to Europe, to many of the shipyards in Europe, build a 824

April 1st., 1971 Tape no. 197 Page 4 Mr. Hickman. dragger, forfeit the Federal Government subsidy, land it in Newfoundland at a cheaper cost than they can get it built here, •J, Nov, Mr, Speaker, if we are going to use the multiplier effect, if we are going to say that when you establish a primary industry that service industries or allied industries must flow, then obvious_ly the planning for the development of the offshore fishery, which should have been on-going,has to be on-going and which was debated au great length in this hon. Bouse last year.

It should have been sufficiently advanced that every frozen fish operator in Newfoundland today would know when he can get his draggers built and that he can get them built in Marystown, This is not happening, All we know now;that there are two draggers in Marystown,at terms that had not been made available to any of the local fishing companies, Mr, Speak.er, MR. ROBERTS: Would the hon, minister permit a question? MR. HICKMAN: Yes. MR. ROBERTS: AB a matter of interest, Have any of the ~ocal fish companies asked to have similar terms extended to them?

I mean the hon. gentleman - can only speak of his own knowledge 1of course,but does he know of any fish company that has asked for this assistance and been refused or not been granted it? MR. BICKMAN: Well I can only know what I read from statements made by_ the spokesman from the fish trades.

It was indicated to the public, I think, it was in December of last year,that the frozen fish trade, as an organization, has met with the leader of the Govemment and,I presume, others and had asked for some clarification of the fisheries policy and as to where they stand and had pointed out their need for draggers now~ MR.ROBERTS: Mr. Spealrer, does the hon. gentleman think that,from that statement - let me put it as a questiou. Is he aware that the Govemment are prepared to make the same assistance available7 MR. HICKMAN: I am not. ~m.. ROBERTS: That is what I thought. MR..

HICKMAN: I feel reasonably certain that the frozen fish operators - if they 825

April lat •• 1971 Tape no. 197 Page 5 Mr. Riclaun. were, then why would they be negotiating outside the Province~ MR. ROBERTS: Because the prices are incredibly much cheaper in Europe., as the 1Dn. member has j'llllt told us at great length. MR. HICKMAN: Delivery dates are very relevallt. Of course, prices are relevant. but •• MR. ROBERTS: And delivery dates. MR. BICKMAN: But what 1 am saying is pn the question of price~ 7 that if the same subsidy is made available-to the Newfoundland fish operators, then the price of the Maeystown shipyard will be competitive. Then 8~6

April 2nd, 1971 Tape 198 JM - 1 MR. HICKMAN: we are concerned only with the delivery dates. MR. ROBERTS: The hon. gentleman drew a conclusion and I have, I think, through his own words,shown that his conclusion was invalid. The hon. "J, gentleman did not know what he was talking about. MR. HICKMAN: You know I love to be put in my place by the hon. member from Rennies Mill Road,on the frozen fish operators but, Mr. Speaker, MR. ROBERTS: I do not live on Rennies ~ill Road, you live on Carpasian. MR. NEARY: (Inaudible). MR. HICKMAN: I know the information, Mr.

Speaker, all you have to do is go to a meeting of the frozen fish union in either Burin or Grand Bank, they share the concern or to any clients that I used to have before I went into public life. You know some people give up clients when they go into public life, 1t is a practice that I commend to anyone. Mr.

Speaker, I submit to you that 1in any planning for the fishery development of this Province that no Government can overlook the needs and demands of the segment of the frozen fish industry that produces 318 million pounds of ground fish and concentrate its entire emphasis on the segment of the frozen fish industry that produces 180 million pounds. Now, Mr.

Speaker, the hon. the Minister of Health,in outlining the Government's economic development policy,before the fire chief's convention on August 5th of last year,indicated that he believes that the inshore fishery does not have a very satisfactory and sound future insofar as that segment of the fishing operation is concerned. Now maybe he is right. MR. ROBERTS: That is not what I said. Perhaps the hon. gentleman could read the speech, it is better than the one he is making. MR. HICKMAN: Well, that is a matter of opinion. MR. ROBERTS: I agree, on opinion it is a better speech. MR.

HICKMAN: I did not see any screaming headlines of compliments following. MR. ROBRRTS: One does not expect screaming headlines. MR. HICKMAN: These new jobs may just about disappear, just about replace the disappearing jobs in the inshore fishery. There are about 20,noo Newfoundlanders who make some kind of a living from the fishery and my 8~7

April 2nd. 1971 MR. HICKMAN: Tape 198 JM - 2 understanding is that even with the maximum development Newfoundland in the future might be able to provide a decent living for about 12,000 fishermen. MR. ROBERTS: That is not to say that the inshore fishery is disappearing. ff .you are going to quote me, quote me accurately. . .,, MR. HICKMAN: Well, is the inshore fishery disappearing or is it not? MR. ROBERTS: I have not said that. MR. HICKMAN: I say that it is, Mr. Speaker. MR. ROBERTS: Oh, well then you are saying it, not me. MR.

HICKMAN: I say that it is disappearing for a very simple reason that if the inshore fishery is going to remain a viable force in this Province that it has to have a great deal more in the way of mobility than it has at this time because,basically, Mr. Speaker, the inshore fishery or two­ thirds of it is conducted in the part of Newfoundland,which by the very nature of geography in parts of Newfoundland their operations are very much restricted. Now, Mr. Speaker, in this programme of development - MR. WORNELL: May I ask the hon. gentleman a question? MR. HICKMAN: Yes, Sir. MR.

WORNELL: Is the hon. gentleman aware that in Francois.in my district, there are nine dories operating the inshore fishing and when I was there about two weeks ago they were landing around 17,000 pounds of fresh fish per day, that is in dories! MR. RICKMAN: Two-thirds of it conducted. prosecuted in areas,as a result of geography\are restricted to six months operation maximum per year. On the South Coast of this Province we have an insho~e f~shery that has never been as viable as it could be. There is an area where we have real possibilities insofar as the inshore fishery is concerned.

In the town of Lawn,over six to eight week period,the production from the inshore fishermen runs eight to ten million pounds. Now that is a lot of fish, 9ut when you have that kind of production. Mr. Speaker, crowded into a six to eight week period,this does not yield the maximum return to those vho are involved in the prosecution of the fishing,for the very simple reason that they cannot find, they are unable to find outlets for their producticn that comes in 828

April 2nd, 1971 Tape 19g JK - 3 MR. HICKMAN: such huge amounts during such a restricted period, MR. MURPHY: Mr. Speaker, with reference to the statement just made by the hon. member;six to eight weeks fishing in Lawn, I wonder if I could •J direct a question and ask him why it is only eight weeks,the fishery there, with fish so plenty? MR. HICKMAN: Well there is a very good reason for it, Mr. Speaker. the Lawn fishermen have traditionally been trap fishermen and the trap fishery in Lawn lasts from six to eight weeks. MR.

ROBERTS: Today all over the Province the trap fishery is six to eight weeks, we do not tell the fi·sh where to come in. MR. MURPHY: I am trying to get .the hon. member to explain it. MR. HICKMAN: Right 1 and this is what I am about to explain. MR. ROBERTS: I hope he gets better advice than he is getting from the - MR. HICKMAN: Here is the unfortunate situation with respect to Lawn and the same situation prevails with respect to Red Harbour, I have no doubt, and I see my hon. friend nodding his head.

I have no doubt that the same situation prevails up the Western Shore,in the district of Hermitage and in the districts of Burgeo and La Poile,that these trap fishermen, these fishermen are traditionally trap fishermen but they are also located in an area where the fishery could be prosecuted and prosecuted successfully twelve months of the year. For instance, off the port of Lawn there is a bank called Martin's Rock~ it is a grey sole fishing bank.

There are two or three other known good fishing grounds in the vicinity of Lawn and, fortunately for the people in that area and the fishermen in that area, they are not plagued by dragger operations.be it a foreign or Canadian, the draggers cannot get into that water to do the necessary fishing.but the fish is there. Now where does planning come into it, Mr. Speaker?

It comes into it in this way; for years and years the Lawn Co-operative Society then the Lawn Town Council and lately the Lawn Development Committee have been saying this port.and the same applies to Red Harbour and form~rly to Port Elizabeth, these ports have real possibilities for an all year round 829

April 2nd, 1971 Tape 198 .JM - 4 MR. HICKMAN: production.if longliners were introduced to the South Coast of Newfoundland. The longliner fishing operation, on the South Coast of Newfoundland; for instance,in Fortune Bay there is one but they are faced with pretty heavy "J, expenditure. They want boats of sufficient size and strength and design that will enable them to fish in the months of January and February and March~as they do in the Rose Blanche, Isle aux Morts area. They fish in a different type of boat, it is not really a longliner. Now, Mr.

S~eaker, it is not a big job, it is not an industry that is going to provide great announcements or great glamour but many years ago 7 in the SO's,there was built in the town of Lawn a salt cod fish plant. which was subsequent~y taken over by Government when the salt cod fishery failed then given by Government,for a dollar a year,to the Lawn Co-operative Society. Mr. Aiden Maloney,when he was assistant Deputy Minister of Fisheries 1 tried to get something going there, worked out a formula which did not succeed,and the next thing we knew that plant was being used as an abattoir.

Now they come back again and I think they have a very good case to make. ,:he reason why they have a good case to make is because of the potential production in that area. I think the people of Red Harbour can make a good case for an all year round fishery. We know they want to do it. AN. HON. MEMBER: They have not even tried to fish all year round. ~IR. HICKMAN: They certainly are in Lawn and I think it is significant that the residents of Port Elizabeth,who moved to Black Duck Cove in Burin,do fish in the winter,on trawlers. So obviously they have the inclination to fish 1 if they are given the opportunity.

Now this does not involve the expenditure of millions of dollars, Mr. Speaker. I am not sure that it involves,right now,with the price of fish 1the expenditure of any money on the part of Government. What it does demand and what it does need is a change of philosophy on the part of Government,that this is real industry, that these are real permanent jobs, that these are jobs that are resource based and that we are prepared to exert the same kind of effort 8~0 in attracting,be they outsiders.or encouraging existing fish operators in -

April 2nd, 1971 MR. HICKMAN: Tape 198 JM - 5 Newfom1dland in going into Red Harbour or Lawn or Francois or places on the Southern Shore or places in St. Mary's Bay~as we are in bringing Mr. Shaheen to Newfoundland. •,1, 831

April 2, 1971, Tape 199, Page 1 -- apb MR. HICKMAN: These are the labour intensive industries.I know that everybody gets up and they talk about the iishery and they talk about Newfound~!nd sitting on the doorstep of the great fishing grounds of North America. That used to be true. I am not so sure that it is true any more,when you look at the declining catch. I do say, that so long as it is there>Mr. Speaker, that this is where the real thrust must come in the development of our resource' based industry. If the rest of it comes, fine.

If we find uranium on the Burin Peninsula or in the Clarenville area,great, that is something that we did not anticipate before and we will take it as an extra plum. But, we do know that this resource is available, we do know that it is not being developed to the extent that it should be ; and we do know that the concentration on it has been woefully lacking in the past. Mr. Speaker, one of the problems,when you talk about the fishery,1s that we are .' talking about a field in which we have a divided jurisdiction.

In fact, I do not know how divided it really is,because the Government of Canada seems to have far more jurisdiction and far more control and far more power of determination, as to the future of the fishery, than does ·that. ·of anY. irovince. Mr. Speaker, we cannot turn our backs on the various statements that have been forthcoming from knowledgeable people in the fishing industry in Newfoundland and knowledgeable people in the Department of Fisheries in Ottawa.

When you pick up the newspaper of September 12th.1970, and you see headlined. '"Fishery in state of collapse.'' and then it goes on to quote a statement or a speech made by Mr. Gus Etchegary~who was referred to on opening day.by the hon. the Premier.as one of the (and he is) one of the great fish producers, or knowledgeable fish producers in this Province.

When you look at the disaster, and it is a disaster, that has over­ taken our offshore fishermen in the last few years, then it seems to me that we have to forr,et jurisdictional responsibilities and jurisdictional rights and use our best efforts and even better efforts,if we can find them, to try and bring to the attention of the Government of Canada that we will not tolerate inactivity and inaction .as we have seen it in the past. There is suddenly a big cry now about the seal fishery. Properly so!

April 2, 1971, Tape 199, Page 2 -- apb There has been a cry everr time a foreign dragger or a south coast dragger sticks its nose inside the twelve mile limit, and properly so, --~ but where is the hue and cry emanating from here to Ottawa with respect to the real problem that is now facing and has overtaken the fishermen? Let me give this House just a few ~acts: The catch first; with respect to the inshore fishery. The catch and quantity of our inshortfishermen in Newfoundland has dropped roughly by half over the last ten to fifteen years.

The average catch of the average small inshore fisherman in Newfoundland is about fifty percent of what it used to be in the mid-fifties. At the same time, and this is the significance ,~!r. Speaker, at the same time the total catch in the North West Atlanti~ by member·; nations of the International Commission of _;le North Atlantic Fishery, increased from two million tons,in 1958, to four million tons,in 1968. The Soviet catch in this area increased from 117 thousand tons.in '58 to 741 thousand tons.in 1968. The cod catch of the member nations increased from 880 thousand tons to 1,860,000 tons.

On the other hand, in the period from 1963 to 19691 Newfoundland's total catch dropped from 450 million pounds to 300 million poundsA despite the fact that Newfoundland fishermen have been operating at their efficiency peak and are better equipped than they have ever been in the past. The statistics,Mr. Speaker, in haddock.are frightening. In 1965, the total catch in the North West Atlantic was 249 thousand tons~of which the Russians took 129 thousand. The total catch in 1968,by all nations,was 97 thousand tons. In three years,from 249 thousand to 97 thousand tons.

As far as Newfoundland fishermen are concerned, the haddock fishery is gone: The thing now is like the great auk ,on the funks, you read about it, we used to have a haddock fishery, ~one! The decline in red fish~from 1958 to 1968.has been from 325 thousand tons to 182 thousand tons. Cod; we are told by the scientists that cod.fn their opinion~has passed the sustainable yield. You say, what has all this to do with this hon. House? Why should we even talk about it? Why should we talk about it? Because there is Federal nonsense,1fr. Speaker. llere we are,faced with the decline and the collapse of 833

April 2, 1971, Tape 199, Page 3 -- apb a segment of our fishery 7 which employs 10,000 people on shore and off. The warning signals are up, the evidence is there, and what do we do about it? -✓, MR.. HICKMAN: We do not go to another world. We do not go to any other world at all. What we do do is,we ~ell the Government of Canada, we do not care what political party you belong to, we do not care how embarrassed you may be by this, the simple fact of the matter is . that one of our resource industries iS in real trouble,but you can save it.

Not simply by putting in price support, not simply by giving subsidies to dragger operators, but you can do it by starting to assert your rights over the continental shelf,now. That you bring in controlled fishing areas. It is all very well to come back to the Government of Newfoundland, to the people of Newfoundland.and say,"Look we are negotiating, we have international treaties,,we cannot offend the Portugese, we cannot offend the Russians, we cannot offend the Americans, we cannot offend anyone." But,Mr.

Speaker, let me direct this House's attention to the fact that negotiations through ICNA and other international organizations have been going o~without any real results,for the last ten to twelve years.

I do not see the United States Government sitting back and say-lnst,"If we cannot negotiate this on a friendly basis,you can clean out George's Bank or Brown's Bank to your heart's desire: They have evolved a continental shelf theory, and supposing they are one hundred percent right, supposing they are, and supposing the Government of Canada goes out and says," Not that we are going to stop and preclude and say that you are not allowed on the Grand Banks, or you are not allowed on Pearl Banks, but we say you are not going to be allowed on certain sections of the Grand Banks or on Mizzen, or Quaero, or St.

Pierre Bank during the spawning season." This is what they have now done in George's Bank and Brown's Bank,to try and brini back the haddock. Regretfully, the scientists and the biologists, the marine biologists.are not too hopeful of success. 8ut at least it is worth a try. Why cannot we, why do we not have that same thrust, why do we not have that same 824

April ,2, 1971, Tape 199, Page 4 -- apb determination to go to Ottawa 1as we s~e emanating from Western Canadian Premiers when their wheat is in danger? When they are faced with their rivers .. ,, being polluted,they do not care who they embarrass in Ottawa, they go to Ottawa and they will stay there and they will embarrass anyone in sight, but they bring back the results. Mr.

Speaker, even though we are not autono'IDOus,ins~far as the control of the fisheries are concerned, we are autonomous in the sense that we have the right to go to Ottawa and aay," You have the evidence, we have the evidence, the scientists have the evidence, and the facts speak for themselves. we want protection and we want it now." If you look at it from a purely selfish point of view, and maybe that is the only way to look at it. Only last night or the night before last, there was a gentleman, I cannot remember his name, from Memorial University,on the news media.

He was expressing great concern over the decline.in food production throughout the world. He started to refer (I do not know if he was trying simply to make a point, or if he was speaking statistically) but he started to talk about the starvation that would come upon this earth,in areas of affluence?before the turn of this century. In fact, I believe he talked about the eighties. We have a great food product off our shores,and the demand is bound to increase. The anxiety to get their hands on this food product is increasing on the part of European nations and even the Japanese.

But we do have some l'lghts,you know. We had some off-shore rights prior to Confederation,which we never gave up to the Government of canada when we joined. No offers nor no generous statements from the Prime Mlnister of Canada,about sharing off-shore mineral rights returns,can be treated as anything more than an attempt to take away from us- certain vested interests that we have and that other canadian Provinces do not have. What I would like 835

April 2nd., Tape no. 200 Page 1 . .,, Mr. Hickman. I would like to see, in the processive plan, a planed, concentrated, bi-partisan assault on the Government of Ottawa and ask them now, not next year, now,to bring in restricted fishing areas on the Grand Banks, the Quearo Bank, Mizzen Bank, St. Pierre Bank, Green Bank and any other fishing banks we have off our coasts. The decline,for instance,in the Labrador fishery; The hon. minister told us last year that the Labrador fishery just about disappeared, and I guess that fact speaks for itself.

But then he drew attention to a very significant fact; the Hamilton Banks, this time of the year and even earlier, which I am told is the spawning season for that part of the North Atlantic, are just scraped clean, primarily by the Russians in that area. Obviously, the statistics now show that~when you have uncontrolled and irresponsible offshore fishin~~that that reflects itself in t~e production inshore. This year, I suspect ,not as a result of any control on the part of any Government and not as a result of any international agreement, that we will see some improvements in the Larbrador Fishery,this year.

It has failed before. The hon. member is quite right. But I see one bright spark, but it is only a spark. This year some control was exerted over the Hamilton Banks, not by agreement but by Mother Nature. This year, fortunately, for the first time in many years. the foreign draggers could not get in there in January and February and commi:t·their acts of wanton destruction. This is what they have been doing. Now, Mr. Speaker, whatever emphasis is placed on the inshore fishery - as I said earlier,to be against emphasis on the inshore fishery would be about as difficult as being against motherhood.

Whatever emphasis is placed on that, I do submit,should not be at the expense of the offshore fishermen of this Province. They are the great employers of all-year-~round labour They are the men who keep the plant workers occupied. They are the 836

April 2nd,, 1971 Tape no 200 Page 2 Hr. Hickman • J, men who in January, February, March, when they are out on the Grand Banks, keep the shop keepers and the barbers and other service industries going. and the lawyer~ and everyone, else, In fact not the lawyers so much on the south coast but the hon. Minister of Health,he looks foward, as I do, to an extension of these services, as I look forward to an extension of the circuit services to the south coast as well as to other parts of this Province.

I would be more than happy to have the hon. minister as a partner in the shopping centre in Marystown. and . coming events may very well cast a shadow before them, Interruption. (lnau~ible). The hon. member has not been involved in real estate practice since I was called to the bar in 1949. you know. I realize sincerity is not a word that commends itself to the other side of the House. MR. NEARY: I challenge the hon. member to make a statement now and set a good example for his colleagues. MR. HICKMAN: Will you keep the hon. minister .- is there anywhere that you can keep the hon minister of mushrooms quiet? MR.

SMALLWOOD: Sincere, did you hear that? HR. NEARY: Not going to accept the challenge. MR. HICKMAN: There is another .. - why does not the hon. minister exert his influence to further the recommendations of the Kotaszek Commission? MR. NEARY: Now is the chance. Now is the chance. MR. HICKMAN: He is in Govemment. I am not. Mr. Speaker,quite recently, _last week, in fact we had on the south coast of this Province the !xecutive Vice-President of the Atlantic Provinces Economic Council, Mr. Harry Flemming, a man of great qualifications. I am sure, from having heard the gentleman,that he is highly qualified,not in

April 2nd., 1971 Tape no 200 Page 3 Jlr. Hickman. ..,, public life. He told us when he was being introduced that he has been the Liberal candidate in Halifax (well he was not prepared to count} but he is not in public life,as such. He is a man of high qualifications as an economist and he is a thorough-going, loyal, native and resident of the Atlantic Provinces, He indicated and brought out,to those in attendance at that dinner at Grand Bank,certain suggestions and certain warnings and certain plans, which I believe are very applicable to the Government of this Province.

He told us that unless the Newfoundland and Maritime Provinces are prepared to work in a much closer alJl.ance _ be did not go as fa~ as to say that Newfoundland should become part of the political alliance id.th the other Maritime Province,as some people are now m0oting and some people are now suggesting. But what he did say was that we must have far closer co-operation between the four Atlantic Province than we have seen in the past.

He said, if we do not work together as a safeguard against Federal commitments or we must work together as a safeguard.to preserve Federal commitments to promote economic development on the Eastern Sea Board. He made a very relevant statement: He said that,because of problems in Quebec, Ottawa no longer a~uears to regard the Atlantic Provinces as the primary problem area for Confederation. But in attempting to gain Federal assistance, ptiorities in the future, the east coast region will have more than Quebec to compete with.

The economic aspirations of Western eanada are going to have to be given greater consideration. The possibilitie9 of the Artie are being recognized. To realize them, Ottawa must be the spearhead. The problems of the major cities are going to require even great attention by the Federal Government. The noises of Canadian nationalism are becoming stronger every day in Central Canada. Who knows whether the day may not be far ofr when we 828

April 1st., 1971 Tape no 200 Page 4 . _,_ Mr. Hickman in the Atlantic Provinces will be denied the access we need to foreign capital to develop our resources. Now that, Mr. Speaker, is one of the reasons, Lt is one of the disadvantages of being caught up in national policies. Everytime we pick up the paper now, we hear- some great nationalist·in Southern Ontario 1who is overly influenced by what he sees on the American television. It gives him an inferiority complex.

We hear of nationalists in llestem canada or in Quebec and they say; we have to keep Canada Canadian, We have to keep the Canadian resource industries in the hands of Canadians. We have to restrict the movement of American capital into the resource industries of this aation, Now this may be very well for Ontario. I am not sure it is.

I am not sure that even the people who live in the Empire of Ontario have been that generous with their investments in their own industrial development, But nothing could be more disastrous.for the Atlantic Provinces of Canada and in particular the Province of Newfoundland,than to allow or for this nationalism to become a reality, Mr.

Speaker, anyone who is familiar with the political history of C4nada knows that,if you ~eep harping on it long enough, if the forces of nationalism continue to grow,that some day some political party will come along and say this is a pretty good ')>lank to put in our platform, and they will get themselves elected. Then we will have the great lectures on nationalism again. There will be more Maritimers, momNewfoundlanders . crucified under the guise of Canadian nationalism. It is not Canadian nationalism at all.

Canadian nationalism, as I interpret it, is the philosophy that saysi we have got a programme (you would almost call it a foundation programme) or we have got a nationalistic belief that says that the affluence 8 ::!9

April lat., 1971 Tape no. 200 Page S Mr. Bickman. . .,, of Canada must be open to all parts of this count-ry. Tliat is good Canadian nationalism. But I will tell you what is not Canadian Qationalism. I will tell you what is poor, petty, unadulterated provincialism;is when some gentleman stands in a public forum in toronto or Vancouver or Quebec City or in the House of Commons or :Ill the Parliaments of Quebec or Ontario and says; "We must keep CDadian indust~ Canadian." 'mat is not nationalism. He calls it nationali8111. It is nothing like'•it. That is pure unadulterated, selfish provincialism.

Do not anyone ever think that the Atlantic Development Board and the ·Atlantic Development Grants ever had the blessings of the people of. Upper Cana~. 840

April 2nd. 1971 Tape 201 PK - 1 MR. HIClO¼N: They were not agianst it. They say, oh, yes, you people .. ,, down there in Eastern Canada and the Atlantic Provinces.you should get some money. _ We are--·goin~ to be generous to you. We are goin:z to make Atlantic Develop1"ent Board Grant, available to you. The next day you·.would hear that same gentleman stand in the H'ouse of Commons or you would hear him stand in the House of Assembly in Ontario, or you would hear him talk to a Service Club in Hamilton. He would say;I am questioning the wisdom of the Diefenbaker Government, that Pearson Government.

They are sending down money to the Atlantic Provinces, you know they are handing it out to them. They are ~iven to this Atlantic Development Board and they say; ''here, take it,''you know. Our"-money~ It is not businesslike , Now they always ask; 'well, we would like to see the Eastern Canadians, they should get their share. We would like to see it, but they cannot get it on these bases." They try and nationalize it. They try and - what they try to do, Mr.

Speaker, and what they have been doing for generations, they have been doing it since 1867J rhey use Canadian nationalism, as a crutch for their own Provincial economy. Now, Mr. Speaker, we are not bein~ unCanadian~ We are not being petty Provincial politicans. We are not being a factor of division within this country. If we~as a tmited Atlantic area,lay our cards on the table, we have not got the political influence that we should have. If you put us all together, we do not do anything more than compare somewhat favourably with the number of members from Toronto ancl Montreal. All of what this means, Mr.

Speaker, that in any planning for the future of this Province, whilst we have our own pecularities, and whilst we have our own special interest,and whilst we must demand,whoever mav find themselves in public life,detennine effort to develop our resources, one of the worst thinrs we could possibly do.in this Province,is to turn our backs on our nei~hbourinr, provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. Because when you put all four of us to~ether, and wheri an election 841

April 2nd. 1971 Tape 201 PK - 2 MR. HICKNAN: is approachin~, and you talk to the Prime Minister of Canada, I am sure that he counts on his fin~ers the nlll!lber of seats in Tororito alone, and then looks at the ones,all four of us have 9 here in the Atlantic Provinces. I have not seen 1 in the p1anning for this Province 1 the kind of association, the kind of enthusiastic co-operation that we must have amongst the four Atlantic Provinces. I am not talking about political unity.

I am not talking about the province of. (I do not know what you would call it) Nova-Brunswick-Scotia, I do not know what we would do with Prince Edward Island, because that is not realistic insofar as Newfoundland is concerned. I am convinced that it has real possibilities and real probabilities insofar as the three Atlantic Provinces are concerned. But, what I am sugp:esting is that we have got to have, we cannot stay away from Atlantic Premier's Conferences~ · t,e cannot have our officals stay away from conferences called by other Atlantic Provinces'Pr.emiers.

We cannot have · this diversity of educational facilities that we now find in the Atl~ntic Provinces. You know, I once represented the hon. the Minister of Education at a Research Conference that was held at Memorial,three or four years ago, and it,was an attempt to try and come up with a programme of research that would keep our universities apace of what is going on in other Canadian universities.

They had a formula there as to what the students population should be,to maintain a viable research centre, and the total student population to maintain that research centre could be found in the Atlantic Provinces,if you took all the universities and you counted even the very small parochial universities that you find in certain parts of New Brunswi.ck nd, I think, the Gaelic College in Cape Breton, you could do it. But, what do we find when we get in there?

Dalhousie was sayin,z, the place for it is here, Pe are the lar1,1;est university or the oldest university,or we have got the professional and the staff to implement this 842

April 2nd. 1971 Tar,e 201 PK - 3 MR. HICKMA.~: and we have the Dunne Grants and the C.D. Howe Grants. You had the University of New Brunswick making similar claims and "J, pointing with pride to the benevolence of Lord Beaverorook. And you had our university saying; not likely. Not likely, you are not ~oing to go outside of Newfoundland, if we are going to have it in Newfoundland. So what has ~appened? It is lost. It has not come to fruition.

The former Minister of Education in Nova Scotia told"'lle that he . . tried for years to get an Atlantic Province Conference of officals on this very thing, but he was doomed before he started. Because everybody put their own selfish needs ahead of the research needs of the universities of the Atlantic Provinces. And who takes advantage of all of this? The people who take advantage of it, the institutions that take advantage of it and profit by it are the institutions of learning in Ontario and British Columbia.

Then we will sit and lament and we rub our hands, and we are moved to tears when we talk about the exodus of young,educated Newfoundlanders,moving out of this Province. The hon. the Minister of Labour, he knows, he has got a brotQer who is an outstanding professor, I presume he still· is in Queen's. MR. NEARY: Westem,he has always been. MR. HICIQ,f.AN: Western, and I had the very good fortunate of meeting Professor Neary. This is the same thing that you hear all the time, What is the matter with the university institutions in the Atlantic Provinces?.

And I am sure the hon. the Minister of Education agrees with me. I have heard him espoused these doctrines that, unless we get unity of effort in research facilities,that the monies that are available from Ottawa will continue to pour_into Upper Canada, will continue to pour into Simon Frazer and U.B.C. and we sit back and lSI!lent the fact that the professor, the Dr. Nearys_ and the Dr. Jones and the Dr. Smiths and the Dr. this and that have to leave this Province, that we have educated them np~to the masters level and off they r.o somewhere else. 843

April 2nd. 1971 Tape 201 PK - 4 }fR. BICK.MA.~: Now, we could stop this, Mr. Speaker. We can stop it by a bit of co-operation on the part of Governments in the Atlantic P~ovinces. We can stop it by close co-operation between the universities in these Provinces. He can stop it, if we start to get the mesl!ia!?e throu~h our people , that we and Nova Scotians and New Brunswickers and Islanders that our hearts have to beat as one. That our aims are the same. That our problems are-the same. And, if we want to have a voice in Ottawa, we are only goin~ to do it and get it, if we ~o there as ·a united body.

I am not the sli~hest bit concerned who the Premier of Nova Scotia is, or who the Premier of Prince Edward Island is, or New Brunswick or Newfoundland. I am concerned with the unity of purpose on the part of whatever administrations find themselves in power. Now, ~r. Speaker, just one other thing in the field of planning,which points up the desperate need and the sometimes unfortunate results that can occur when any province 1 in this anxiety to develop,obscures~the necessity or disre~ard the necessity for planning. We have had changes - l-fR. }'.ARSHALL: On a point of order, ~r.

Speaker, I am sitting only two or three seats 4Way from the member for Burin and I cannot hear him, and I would appreciate,if Your Honour would draw the attention of other members of the Rouse that, if they want to·conduct meetings they could go outside the confines of the House. MR. S!-'ALLWOOD: Oh, sit down you jack assl }lR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I have already mentioned that if hon. members have to converse, they have to do it undertone, so it cannot interrupt the proceedings of the Rouse. Would the hon. member please continue? MR. CROSBIE: Mr.

Speaker, on another point of order, is the use of the term ''jack ass " parliamentary? MR. SPEAKER: The use of the term is not parliamentary. MR. CROSBIE: So the hon. the Premier should withdraw the unparliamentary term. calling another member ''jack ass," A.~ HON. HE1-fJ\ER: Inaudible. 844

April 2nd. 1971 Tape 201 PK - 5 MR. CROSBIE: Perhaps, tnat is so. That is too much to expect. MR. SMALLWOOD: Inaudible. . .,_ Mil, SPEAKl:R: Order, please! Would the hon. the member for Burin continue. MR, BARBOUR: Inaudible. MR. RICKMAN:· Well, I suppose a.ge and planning go hand in hand, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker,. last year we saw the change of administratiou in several provinces of Canada, and two in the Atlantic Provinces. 845

April 2nd. 1971 Tape 202 PK - l MR. HICKMAN: New ~overnments in Nova Scotia, }Tew Bnmswick. They said, before we can embark on a co~rse of development, before we can emba~k on a course of industrial development or anythin~, we have to find out where we stand? MR. CALLAHAN: The first thin~ they had to do was fire half of the civil servants MR. HICKMAN: So-this they did, and the Liberal Premier of Nova Scotia, Mr. Reg{ffl., had certain studies carried out and yesterday he made known in the reports,and the radio indicated that there was a shock of horror and contempt and ridicule of the previous administration.

But, here is what he found, •he said; in the case of the power contracts. Listen to this now, M..r. Sp~aker, in the case of the power contracts,guaranteed by the Province of Nova, between Nova Scotia Pulp and Provincial Power Commission,quote: "substantial losses would be incurred by the Commission.over a period of ten years,•· the Premier said in the speech Wednesday. "Cost projections indicate the loss to the Commission in 1971-72 Fiscal Year could exceed $500,000, and in 1973 is expected to ue in the vicinity of $700,000 to $800,000.'' Mr.

Reg~, said; they could be expected that these losses would escalate, as fuel costs increase," because· the former Government specifically refused to allow the Power Commission to put the normal fuel cost escalation clause in the agreement. A contract with Pyro Minerals, . Limited for a ten year period,startinr, 1966.with estimated cost assignable to Industrial Estates,was based on indicated energy requirements and current fuel oil prices at the Thermal Plant,and it would cost the Province some $1. 8 million to this date.•' Now, the Provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick and PrE.

I. and Manitoba are facPd with the same desperate need for new industry as this Province. And so~eti~es, they ~ay have to take very desperate steps in order to attrAct. tut, I do suspect, !-!r. Speaker, that in our planninp. we would be most unwise, if we did not profit from the mistakes of other administrations. I think. Premier P.eP.an esoousinp the doctrine•, of his Liheral Government,is correct when he expresses concP.rn over the fact the previous administration did not Bake provision for escalation in the 8 1 .• '.A ti

ApTil 2nd. 1971 Tape 202 PK - 2 MR. HICKMAN: cost of fuel and escalation in the cost of producing power. And I submit to this Rouse that, that same philosophy, that same ya~~stick that same caution has to be used by the Liberal Govemment of Newfoundland. Mr. Speaker, when we 166k at the Auditor General's Report, and he talks about,under subhead 1502 - payments,tinder the Industrial Incentive Act. of $3 million for the cost of providing electrical power by the Newfoundland C0111111ission to ERCO, an. additional payment of $145,490 apparently had not been budr,eted.

Then you can see the difficulties,experienced by Premier Regan1will be manifold in this Province in the future. Mr. Speaker, this is the type, I cannot use cost benefit~studies, because that is not a word that is accepted. I cannot use priority, because has that been dero~ated and subject to all sorts of ridicule all over the years. But, I do say, Mr. Speaker, that in our anxiety to attract industry and,if the Deputy Speaker was in the House,I would use his words that he made and wrote so forceably just two years ago.

That,if we would vut out the announcements before the fact and waited until after the industry ~as.in hand, our powers of negotiation would improve a hundred percent and we would not then be in the clutches of people who know they have us, because of the political implications following the first announcement. In that my hearts beats in accord with the,hon. the Deputy Speaker and the member from St. John's North. MR. EARLE: Mr. Speaker, the hour is very close toil:00 P.M.

If the House so wishes~I will proceed until then,but I wish to adjoum the debate at that time, or if it is your wish.it could adjourn until after lunch. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member may continue . it is just five minutes to 1:0( P.M. ·-Whatever the House wishes 2 If the Rouse, wishes ,we can call it 1 P .M. and resume at 2~30 P.M. I now call it 1:00 P.?-f. and I leave the Chair until 2:30 P.?-'. Is ? it 2:30 P.M. or 3:00 P.M. the wish of the House~ ~IF.. CURTIS: Three o'clock. ?-fF .• SPEAKER: rntil 3:00 P.M.

PROVINCE OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY Volume 1 Number 12 5th Session 34th. General Assembly VERBATIM REPORT FRIDAY, APRIL 2, 1971 SPEAKER: THE HONOURABLE GEORGE W. CLARKE

April 2nd, 1971 Tape 203 JM - 1 The House resumed at 3:00 P.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER: Order! MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, I move that we now proceed to order 22 on.the Order Paper of today.which is a motion THAT this House regrets the failure of The Speaker and Deputy Speaker to enforce The Standing Orders and Rules of the House, fairly and impartially. I move seconded by the Leader of the Opposition. The position, Mr. Speaker, is that this motion is on the Order Paper, the Standing Orders of our House state that in cases not covered by - MR. SMALLWOOD: Mr.

Speaker, this matter has been disposed of today and cannot be referred to again today. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, no motion similar to this was made today. This was discussed on the point of order this morning and I am now moving that we proceed to another order.as is permitted by the rules,and the reason for it is that the authorities, the Parliamentary authorities at Ottawa can confirm, Mr. Speaker, that Oil a motion such as this - MR. SMALLWOOD: On a point of order, may I have a ruling from Your Honour? May I have a ruling from Your Honour please? May I have a ruling from Your Honour? MR.

CROSBIE: vote of censure in 1956. MR. SPF..AKER: Well, the hon. member has stated his point of order, I presume. The situation is this,that the matter that the hon. member for St. John's West has referred to has been disposed of earlier in this sitting and,secondly 1 the hon. member now has the floor on the adjourned debate, He was speaking when we recessed at 1:00 o'clock. Now we are interrupting the proceedings to introduce another motion. Will the hon. member please continue his speech? MR. CROSEIE: Mr.

Speaker, on a point of order, under Standing Order 33: Standing Order 33 states that when a question is under debate no question is received unless to amend it, to postpone it to a day certain, for the previous question, for reading the Orders of the Day, for proceedin~ to

April 2nd, 1971 Tape 203 JM - 2 MR. CROSBIE: another order, ~o adjourn the debate or for the adjournment of the House, and! have moved)as is permitted by the rules.to proceed to another order, namely order 22,because all Parliamentary precedent is that a motion of this nature must be dealt with before any further business is under.taken. This was what happened at Ottawa on June 4th, 19561 when Mr. George Drew, the Leader of the Opposition, moved a motion similar to this 1with reference to the Speaker at Ottawa.

That was called as the first business on June 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th,when it was eventually voted upon,and the authorities state that a motion such as this should be debated immediately,because the Speaker's position remains in doubt,if he occupies the Chair despite the possibility of a nonconfidence in the Speaker being passed by the House. It is quite obvious, Mr.

Speaker, that this motion, that this is not a private member's motion, This is a motion that takes precedence, it is a privileged motion that should be dealt with by the House now, and I cannot see how the House can function properly unless this motion is dealt with that is now on the Order Paper. MR.

SPEAKER: I have already said that;if you look upon this as a question of privilege,it was stated and a ruling was given on it this morning, Now the hon. member for Fortune is in the process of making a speech, He had already started it before one o'clock~when this House recessed for lunch,and he is now in the•midst of his speech, I therefore · rule that he has the right to continue his speech now,uninterrupted. MR. MURPHY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak on the point of order. MR. SPEAKER: I have given the ruling and there is only one thing that any hon. member can do about that. MR.

CROSBIE: In that case then, Mr. Speaker, I appeal the Speaker's ruling. I have no confidence - MR. SPF.AKER : MR. CROSRIE: HR. SP_F..AKER: Order please! and I want this motion dealt with as it should be. The motion before the Chair is that the ruling of the Speaker be sustained. Those in favour "Aye" contrary "Nay~" I declare 8•!9

April 2nd, 1971 Tape 203 JM - 3 MR. SPEAKER: the motion lost. DIVISION: MR. SPEAKER: When the House is about to divide there will be silence, that is in the rules too. Those in favour of the motion please rise; The hon. the Premier, the hon. the President of the Council, the hon. the Minister of Highways, Mr. Noel, the hon. the Minister of Labrador Affairs, Mr. Hodder, Mr. Strick­ land, the hon. the Minister of Education, the hon. the Minister of Mines, Agriculture and Resources, the hon. Minister of Community and Social Develop­ ment, the hon. the Minister of Provincial Affairs, the hon.

Minister of Social Services and Rehabilitation, Mr. Barbour, Dr. McGrath, Mr. Moores, Mr. Saunders, Mr. Mahoney, Mr. Wornell. Those against the motion. The hon. the L~ader of the Opposition, Mr. Hickey, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Earle, Mr. Crosbie, Mr. Burgess. MR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion carried. MR. EARLE: Mr. Speaker, I had hope that with the opening of the curtains today and the letting in of some sunshine that perhaps the atmosphere of this House might have thawed a little and that our normal good temper and friendship across the way would be returned.

Unfortunately 1 I do not see the slightest chance of that, in fact there is no chance of it whatsoever. ibis is very, very unfortunate for the people of Newfoundland because there is no danger of good feeling and good fellowship returning until there is an election to settle this matter once and for all. I could only hope and pray, Mr. Speaker, that this type of bad feeling~which is now bein~ generated by this House,would be hastily brought to a conclusion with a calling of a general election.so that we could once and for all settle this matter.

The conduct of this House.in this session,has been deplorable beyond any imagining. I could only wish that the television had been present for all sessions,to let the people of Newfoundland see what is going on in their House. I do not know what it is, Mr., Speaker, some of us are getting a little older, some of us have been here a long time, a few of us have been

April 2nd, 1971 Tape 203 JM - 4 MR. EARLE: here altogether too long and this spirit of irritability, bad temper is certainly growing as time passes. May that time be brought to a hasty conclusion very soon. Mr. Speaker, to get on with the subject at hand, the motion of the hon. member for St.

John's East is so all-embracing as it is,in effect,a motion of censure against the Government for what it has done, for what it has not done or for what it has failed to do properly over the years and this, of course, covers such a tremendous range of activities, mistakes, errors and omissions that it is almost impossible to know just where to start. My other friends on this side of the House,during the past few hours,have covered some of the subjects and I will attem?t ,this afternoon, to cover a few more. I will just, if I may, Mr.

Speaker, refer to a few things which were of recent happening, which have been highlighted in this House by questions asked by us,either verbally of the Ministers or on the Order Paper. In particular this morning I asked a question of the hon. the Minister of Fisheries,about whether proper information had been conveyed to the fishermen about the restrictions or regulations which were brought into effect to control the canning of fish,either for sale or personal use. Now I have had some experience,over the years,in canning, probably as much as anybody in the Province of Newfoundland, I recognized what the hon.

Minister had said was very, very true indeed , that there needs to be regulation and control,but he did not answer my question. The question I asked was not whether there should be regulation of this nature or whether there should be control but whether the information had been -to conveyed to the fishermen, those who look~these activities as a partial means of livelihood. ke did not answer that question.

My reason for so asking was that I had had an approach from my district,only this morning,by telephone , where fishermen were now ready, 11'.'ld ready to go fishing in a certain area which took them ten miles from their homes, where they were-about to start on their spring operations,and they were in a quandary, they were puzzled because they did not know about t~ese

April 2nd, 1971 Tape 203 JH - 5 MR. EARLE: regulations and they found that the preparations they have made were of no avail and that they were going to be hampered in what they normally under­ took. But whether or not this hampering was good or otherwise,it should have been conveyed to the fishermen that these re~ulations were in effect.

It is no good for the Minister or anybody else to say that this appeared in the Gazette or some other publication,because 99,9 per-cent of the fishermen never see these publications and have no means of knowing what is going on. · So, in effect, what I am saying is that the Government's relation­ ship with the fishermen of this Province and their contact with them some­ how or other over the years has been eroded. They have lost contact with the people.

The people, as the other side of the House so frequently boasts, are hand and glove with the Government because they understand the Government,but my contention is that the Government is now so far removed from the day to day every day needs of the people that the people just do not understand what is going on. This has been revealed all the way through this session and I suspect that it will continue to be revealed, as the session proceeds,in the silly types of answers that we get to our questions.

The complaint comes from the other side that if they merely say, "yes"or 'ho~we are not getting enough information, if they go into hours of debate we are complaining because they are saying too much. Now this is a childish and silly attitude to take. Actually people holding portfolios and Ministers of the Crown should be above that kind of childish sort ,:of comment.

What this House needs and what it wants and what it should insist on is not abrupt rude answers nor does it want verbose silly answers nor does it want all of the private members day taken up in extending answers so that the clock runs out so that we cannot get across our points at all. This is what has happened in the last few days. What should be done in this House as is done in all other democratic Houses across Canada ts that the question period be limited. It is true there are Ordl>r something like 400 questions on tHe,Yaper at the present time, but probably 8 ~ •) ..; I..

April 2nd, 1971 MR. EARLE: Tape 203 JM - 6 this House will and should meet this year until August.and there will be ample time to answer not 400 questions but if necessary 4,000 questions and to give proper answers. 'There is no need for this kind of comedy, comic opera,if you like to call it, or pretense,with the real objective, of course, of hindering the proceedings of this Rous~, This, I am afraid Mr. Speaker, has been what is responsible for the signs of bad temper which emfmate from this side of the House.

We are absolutely sick and tired of being kicked around, just because we happen to be a minority over here. We represent a great number of people throughout this Province. We were put in this House to get for them the information,to do a job for them,and we expect the courtesy,from the other side of the House~of treating us as properly elected representatives of the people.

The type of answer to which I refer was conveyed in some of the remarks.particularily of the hon. the Minister of Social Services and Rehabilitation but it was even more dramatically illustrated in the statement he made, I think it was yesterday. Now out of that statement came questions.from this side of the House 1 on the recent controversary and public comment about the unfortunate children in the home for deliquent boys and girls, these homes. The Minister revealed,in his answer,that there was something like 468 breakouts had happened in the past five years. I asked the hon.

Minister why in the past five years,if there have been that great number of breakouts,why it was only during the past six or eight months that publicity to these had been given at all. I served in the same portfolio as he did. I had the same number of these breakouts. the same number of problems but did I use these particular unfortunate children­ and they are very unfortunate children and to be pitied,for personal -.::_.•

April 2nd., 1971 Tape no 204 Page 1 Mr. Earle, publicity in the press~ This is what was behind all of this trouble with these homes. The boys and girls in these homes were built up to expect publicity and notice, Unfottunately, the minister is responsibile for using them to get his own name in the press,so that all of this sort of thing reacts very, very badly to what is - the minister who was in that department, namely myself is quite prepared to rest on his record. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR. EARLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The public can judge that~as to what happened when I was Minister of Welfare.

That is not for the minister to say. I think that the department was conducted as well as it ever had been conducted. There was no turmoil. There was no silly publicity on things which should not have been made public. There was no attempt on my part •• MR. NEARY: Capitalistic hypocrit. MR. EARLE: Ah! hah! Capitalistic hypocrit. What is wrong with the hon.minister? MR. NEARY: Fish merchant. MR. EARLE: What is wrong with the hon. miniser. I suppose hes a socialist or something. He calls himself a Liberal. MR. CROSBIE: An opportunist. MR. EARLE: So it is a socialist opportunist. _MR. NEARY: (Inaudible). MR.

CROSBIE: Opportunist! MR. EARLE: Mr. Speaker, it is very difficult to keep your mind on what you are sa~ing, but •• MR. NEARY: That is for sure,with that kind of trash. MR. EARLE: Thank you. Thank you. It is being echoed from the other side. I appreciate the hon. minister's comments. They are IIK>&t helpful. 854

April 2nd., 1971 Tape no. 204 Page 2 Mr. Earle. · .. ,. This particular minister,he has revealed it again now, his whole inward thinking is directed towards people who somehow or other have been fortunate in this life and have had some advantages. He thinks that they are all his enemies. We are not his enemies in any/.,ay. We sympathize with him, We have terrific sympathy for his inability to grasp •• MR~ NEARY: Only the classes who exploit the masses. _MR. EARLE: For his inability to grasp what this world really means. He has been talking baby talk since he has been elected.

He continues to talk baby talk.so we cannot expect anything else better from him. Thia continued reference to lawyers' fees and all this sort of thing. the great champion of the people. He does not have to go very far to question lawyers. We are sitting all around him, If he is so anxious to know what money lawyers eam, why does he not ask some of these lawyers on the other side, just what they got in fees in recent years? What firms ,from which they are associated, collected from the Government? When all these firms come into the country, under big corporations and so on, who gets the business?

This House would be astounded, if it were revealed to them the law firms which lawyers on the other side have been co110ected with for years,have collected astounding fees. This hon. minister,whom I like .referred to as the "little bull dog." MR. NEARY: The hon. member is going to defend the lawyers. MR. EARLE: He loves to try to pinpoint the fact that there are only lawyers on this side. Of course, all the lawyers DD this aide are only engaged in gcuging high conveyance rates for land title and so on. It is so ridiculous. I do not think we need to go any further into that. MR. CROSBIE: He is a little cracky, MR.

NEARY: There is mutton chawa again with his wit. MR. EARLE: The hon. the Premier was kind enough to refer to a remark that 8~· -~J

April 2nd., 1971 Tape no 204 Page 3 Mr. Earle, . .,, I made during the great Development Conference in which I said that , because of the revelation of what I consider to be the fo~thcom:1.ng Budget Speech and estimates of this House, which had not been presented to this House, I said that I thought the ministers of the Government should resign. I still think that.

Because since that Development Conference, and even buildinR up to it, the Ministers of the Crown have used every possible opportunity they could to tell the public wat they were going to do by way of expenditure in this coming financial year or 1971-9172. Now none of this 1 up to this time , has been disclosed in this House , in detail.

And,if nothing else,the Government should have the courtesy~to the people's House, to make these announcements here in this House, not at an economic conference or so-called economic conference, The proper place for them is here,where they can be discussed, argued about, voted on, passed or not passed. But not,for political purposes ,to come out publicly and tell the people,before it is being passed in this House, what they are going to do with the peqie's money.

This is what I meant,where the Ministers of the _Crown should resign, because they have been literally, this year, disclosing budget facts,since the turn of the year took place. Last year, when I rose to speak on a number of occasions, I was accused of breaking Cabinet secrecy . I never did that. I never approached anywhere near it.

But I contend that what has been happening in this year of 1971 has been a disclosure of a far more closely guarded secret of Government, in all democratic governments,and that is the Budget Speech, This has been done for nothing but rank, partisan, political purposes, which tried to tell the people in advance and to fai the people into the feeling that great things are going to happen. We had the usual sentimental eulogy the other day on the anniversay of Confederation. It is proper that this House should recognize that great ,anniversary ..nd ... pay due tribute to it: and all that it has meant to Newfoundland.

But: it is extremely sickening,after twenty-two years. to find the members of Government bending over backwards to pat themselves on the back for all that has happened in the last twenty-two years. It is so ridiculous, 0 r-· r> C, • 4 ~ )

April 2nd., 1971 Tape no. 204 Page 4 Mr. Earle. ".•. It is so infantile to make this sort of a statement. This Province haa spent in the last twenty-two years, I would hazza~~ a guess of upwards of $2 billion. That is $2,000 million. feed. That is a lot of money. That is not-chicken Now if we do not have something to show fo= the expenditure of $2,000 million, there is something very much wrong. But all tnat this side of the Bouse is contending,that the world is progressing. The world has progressed in the last twenty-two years and Newfoundland has progressed with it.

A lot of these things 1which have been done with that $2,0QO million 1could have been done much better, if there had been a 110re democratic government operating in this Province. MR. SMALLWOOD: The Tory Government would have done better? MR. EARLE: The Tor., Government should hang its head in hame if it had not MR. Sl«LL WOOD: That is including the years the hon. gentleman was in the Liberal Government? MR. EARLE: Yes, including the years that the hon. gentleman was in the Liberal Government. MR. SMALLWOOD: He includes himself in that indictment? MR. EARLE: What is the favourite saying of the Premier? MR.

SMALLWOOD: If the hon. gentleman had his way, he would be over here now. MR. EARLE: Burns there a light so - what is it? The vilest sinner may return. I just forget that quotation. MR. SMALLWOOD: What did the hon. gentleman, sinner, return to? Returned to the Tory Party. MR. EARLE: The hon, gentleman ••• MR. SMALLWOOD: Returned to the Tory Party! MR.

EARLE: The hon, gentleman referred to, as the Premier well knows, was the only one, I think, in his experience, that before doing anything of which he knew the Premier would disapprove, and would not agree, had the courage and the guts to go before him and pass him in his resignation. Be did not go behind his back. 8~7

April 2nd., 1971 Tape no. 20Jt- Page 5 MR.. EARLE: It was not accepted. But what happened after that is a uttar for history, ·.-. MR. CROSBIE: Things changed a week later. Mi. EARLE: However, after having welcomed Sir Humphrey Gilbert in the Bouse and gone on with a lot of this stuff, it is all so tiresome. We have heard it so long that I think it is high time that the House got down tG business. I have, Hr. Speaker, in discussing the actions of Government and the proposals of Government and the planning of Government, discussed a little of each department.where I can.

We are in a very peculiar position this year, a position which I do not think has happend in Newfoundland for many, many years, if at all,and that is that wh~t is proposed to be done this year has already been revealed. A lot of it was revealed at the Economic Conference or the Development Conference.

While I object to this,on the principle that I have already MDtioned,that this is a revelation of what should be done in the budget and in the Budget Address, I take even gra.,er exception to the fact that much of this was so politically slanted that it should never have ~ea allowed to have been uttered in the conference which pretended to be a development and economic conference. To take the outstanding instance of that, I think I have already referred to this in the House.

But ·the outstanding announcement out of that conference,which had to be retracted by the Minister of Education a few days afterwards,was to auggest a proposal that the Government were considering taking over the capital costs of all schools, the construction of all schools. This was to do away with the assessments and so on. This smelled so much of actual partisan politics ••• Mil. ROWE (F.W.): To a point of privilege, Hr. Speaker. to a point of personal privilege. The statement the hon. gentleman has just made ha been made three times here in this House.

It was made last night by the hon. gentleman there,who offered us solutions to all the problems of Newfoundland and Canada in the space of a three hour talk. 858

April 2nd., 1971 Tape no201t i:'age 6 Mr. Rowe (F,W,) It was made by the hon. member for Burin earlier, At that time, I stooa up and I gave documentary evidence as to what I said and showed ana still can show that my second statement was merely to confirm what I hatl said at the beginning, nothing more or less. Now my hon. friend has just said that I retracted what I said in the beginning. He is either wilfully misstating the facts or he does not know what he is talking about, one or the other. I am prepared again, Mr. Speaker,to document this. If my hon. friend would accept my word, I would be very happy.

If he does not, I will be compelled to rise again on this matter and to present the actual words that I said and to ask Your Honour to rule on whether or not there was a retraction. ,o use the other gentleman's words, that I recanted on this. I did not recant. I did not retract. I merely tried to explain and did explain and restate what I had said at the beginning - no retraction, no recantation~ merely a restatement of what I said. I am prepared to restate that,anytime here that the hon. gentleman makes a statement just as he just made - a statement which is either untrue (It is untrue.

It may not be untrue for him. He may not know the difference) or he is either misstating the facts. He is either telling a lie or he does not know what he is talking about, one or the other. MR, EARLE: Mr. Speak.er, I think I am as good a judge of the truth as the hon. minister on whether it was a retraction or a restatement or another statement or what it was. The point which I make is that it should never have been made in the fi~st place,whether it had to be retraced or repeated or whatever it was.

The damage was done the first moment that statement was mentioned, because it was done for a particularly unsavoury purpose. Passing on to a number of other failures of the Government, or in my opinion, matters on which they could have done better: There has been very 0 .• li ttle said, in this session of the House so far, about 8~9

April 2nd., 1971 Tape no •• 20~ Page 7 Mr. Ecle . the resettlement programme. I have been very close to this for a number o( years, because the district which I represent, namely, Fortune Bay, was one of the earliest sections of the country where resettlement from settlement to settlement started. A lot of this in the early days was voluntary. The people, themselves, moved into other places~for very good reasons; to seek work and to go to better locations and so on. A number of settlements were vacated.

Now that was speeded up, accelerated,if you would like to call it , when the various programmes of the Government came into force, I have no quarrel with the Government on these programmes, because I think those who wanted to settle or resettle deserved all the help they could get. The only thing was that they did not get enough or sufficient. But this applied to those who wanted to resettle. We can literally say now,today, that nobody was forced into resettlement,wh!ch I suppose technically is true. But as the circumstances develop in these places, there was no other alternative for the people but to resettle.

And cover it up as we may, er talk about it as we may, it left a great deal of heartache and hardship in people's hearts, especially some of the older people. The point,which I feel should be stressed at this time 1 was that where people of themselves decided to move or where th~v ~-ere helped to move, the job was not carried far enough. I have one outstanding example of it, in a little place called Garnish. Garnish is a fine town, with a fine group of people. They were joined by an equally fine group of people from a place called Point Rosie.

I took my political life in my hands,in Point Rosie,and I had a political meeting which I think, if those were there, would go down in history. It has been probably the most hectic one that was held for many, many years. But at the time of the last election,in 1966, I went into Point Rosie. They were clamt'uring and had been clan.ouring ever since thetehad been a Liberal member down there, to have a road built for that settlement. It is eleven miles fro• Gar~ish. 8CO

April 2nd.,1971 Tape no. 204 Page 8 Mr. Earle. ..,_ It was at the end of nowhere, It had no harbour and,as far as I could see, it had very little future, I told the people quite frankly that I thaght that their children would be better off, if they decided to move somewhere else. But this did not satisfy them at various times that I went in there. They were very fond of their homes, They wanted to stay on. The people wanted to stay on. They were fond of their ho~es. They wanted to remain there.

The price of remaining there, of course, was a road to that settlement, about eleven miles~to bring them into the modern da~ and age. When the last election was called, I was offered $25,000 to make a pretense at starting a road to that settlment I would not accept it. I went into Point Rosie and held a public meeting and told them. I said that I would be only fooling you, if I started a road, because it H 1ould never be finished, Therefore, I am not going to recommend to Government that a road be started.

Now, if you wish to stay here,that is your own business to stay here, but I siggest that,as long as I am your D1e1Dber, you may never get that road~ Well the place went up. You can understand. But I can aay this, Mr. Speaker, that the people from Point Rosie, who are now mainly living in Garnish, I say ar~ the best friends that I had in Fortune Bay today. I respect them, and they respect me. I think we worked out a compromise,which is most satisfactory to all of them.

But this brings about the point at which I started,and that is to say that these people who were God fearing, fine people.who had fine clean homes, moved into Garnish and a plan was set up. They bought a nice little plot of land, Some of them bought houses around the place, They started to fix it up and move in. Now, it was nearly two years,in the process, before those people got properly settled away and some of them are not quite settled yet. Some of them are elderly people. Some of them are not capable of doing much more for themselves because they bave reached the age, where they cannot. 8G1

April 2nd., 1971 Tape no. 20~ Page 9 Mr. Earle. " J, I think that in a circumstance like that that the hard and fast rules of a resettlement programme should not have applied, or should not have been made to apply. There was just this little bit extra that needed to be done to see that 8C2

April 2 1971 Tape 205 page 1. the people were made as comfortable in their homes as the homes from which they moved. But it was this little that was ::not done that made the people so annoyed and so terribly disappointed with the Government's action. and the fact that it took two years to do this only rubbed salt in the wounds. You can understand and I can sympathize with the people in a circumstance like that. The Hon. Minister for Social Services and Rehabilitation is out of the Chamber. But I did want to refer to his department because I have had some experience with it.

He made an announcement the other day.which I know will be accepted very favourably by a lot of people, where the Social Assistance rates to short-term recipients, that is the people who are temporarily without jobs and so on, ,will be increased. As my hon. friend, the member for St. John's West,pointed out,this is only replacing what was taken away from them years aRO· But, I felt, in the limited experience I I had in that Department,of only ten months, that what should have been done there, and I was working hard at it when I was transferred to another department.

Instead of, in a sense ~almost - and this is putting it very very broadly I am afraid - instaad of giving people an incentive to stay , on welfare,the main objective of that department should be to try to help them to help themselves. I wanted a number of new people appointed, twenty- five I think it was at the time, to go around this country, spend some time in each of these settlements.where there is a very hig volume of welfare, to talk to them, and to try to helo them to educate themselves into doing somethinii: to help themselves. This programme, to the best of my knowledf?e•, wae never carried out.

I have been tn a lot of welfare homes, I have been in hundreds of them. I have talked to many, many of the people and I h~ve come away wi.th the impression that no matter how low a man is, how hard up he is,his main desire in life to ~ecome independent. He wishes above everythin~ that he could ii:et some 8C3

April 2 1971 Tape 205 page 2. · .. ·. work and get something to do so that he could be independent and earn his own living. Now there are a few exceptions, there always are in the world, hut the great majority of them want to help themselves. In our welfare system, I feel this is where the present Government has fallen down quite badly on the job,because that part of it has not been stressed enough. There has not been enough attention to helping people to help them­ selves, I have seen virtually miracles take nlace in welfare.

I vill not name a settlement, but I know a settlement where, when I went there first there were at least, I would say, seventy per cent of the peoole on welfare. There was a particularly tough welfare officer in the district. He was a fellow who was a, he knew his business, he knew his job very well. He was not liked. But he carried out his duties officially and well and he got across to the people.after many rows, what he was trying to do. The last year I went in that same settlement,on a midsummer day, there were a few women and children around, but no men.

So I asked some of the women~ "where were the men?" oni! thing and another.'' are making good income1 '' They said: "they are all on draggers and fishin~ and I said, ''how are they getting on?'' They said, ··they I said; "you seem to ha-ve your homes fixed uo a bit.• · "Oh yes;;Sir, we are doing all right now." I said; "well, boy that is great.~ I said; "do you remember Mr. So-and-so who was here and the times you used to have with him and how you had despised him." I said, "he helped you did he not?' ' They said;"yes; J'hey admitted he had helped them.

He had helped them to re-establish themselves, and this is wetfare as welfar