S ri,1311~ Province of Newfoundland FORTY - FIRST GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NEWFOUNDLAND Volume XLI First Session Number 40 S 1E'RhATIM REPORT: (Ha nsard) / II speaker.' Honourable Thomas Lush . 1 Friday [Prelilninary Transcript] 24 November 1989

The House met at 2:00 p.m. MR. SPEAKER (Lush): Order, please! Statements by Ministers MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker. has been renewed on an ad hoc basis through formal reference to Cabinet each year. This has createçl a general uncertainty within the industry from year to year, and to some extent has inhibited the implementation of needed capital improvements in the industry that have medium to long term paybaok periods . . MR.SPEAKER: The hon., the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture. MR.FLIGHT: It gives inc great pleasure today to announce Government's continuing support for the Special Sawmill Assistance Program.

As hon. Members may be aware, this program was established in 1976 to provide working capital loans at preferred interest rates to improve the viability of small and intermediate sized sawmill operations in the Province. And to stimulate production and employment in this industry during the winter months. The rationale for the program rests in the seasonal nature of the sawmill industry. .

Sales for the industry usually peak in the summer, resulting in negative cash flow during the winter months Average profits in the industry are simply not sufficient to support the inherent cash flow problems induced by winter season production. It is because of this and the low equity base of most sawrnillers that commerical lending institutions are reluctant to lend working capital to these operations . Hence the need for a Government sponsored program. In the past, Mr.

Speaker, the Special Sawmill Assistance Program In recognition of these difficulties and th'e overall economic and employment benefits a v a i lab 1 e € hr o u g h •t lie pro g r a mi, especially for rural Newfoundland, I am pleased to inform the House t Ii at this A din i n is t ration, as opposed to the previous Administration, has decided to offer the program on a permanent basis, effective immediately. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.FLIGHT: This marks a significant change in policy with reg.ard to Government's support for a long term commitment to the sawmill industry..

It will also mean that specific levels of funding for the program will, in future, be announced with the tabling of the Budget in the House of Assembly each spring, well in. advance, of the time when s awm ill e r s need the f i nan c i a 1 assistance available through the program. This should greatly assist sawmillers in planning their operations each year Ind in making sound business decisions on a longer—term basis than has been possible up to now. Mr.

Speaker, I am also pleased to announce that based on extensive consultations with sawiniiliers over the past summer the ceiling on loans available to the 'program has been raised from $40,000 to $50,000. Li November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No. 40 Ri

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! Hear, hear! MR. FLIGHT: Therein, Mr. Speaker, lies two of the improvements that I alluded to this program a couple of weeks ago. And that the interest rate charged clients has been set at 3 per cent below current prime lending rates, SOME_HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. FLIGHT: As well loans will be provided on an advance payment basis. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. FLIGHT: And repayment schedules will be set over the May lB to October 31 period each year exactly as the sawmillers requested. The various improvements I have outlined today, Mr.

Speaker, are designed to make the program more responsive to the needs of sawmill operators5 and it is Government's intent to continue with consultations from time to time to ensur that: the program remains relevantt to changing circumstances wthn the industry.

In terms of Governments specific financial comrrritment to the Special Sawmill Assistance Program this coming season, a sum of $700 000 will be made available over the period November 1 to April 1 It is expectc.d that up to 50 small to intermediate sized operators will take advantage of the program, directly contributing to the c r e a t i o n oF approximately 5 700 person weeks of employment-- - SOMEHON. MEMBERS: MR. FLIGHT: - which is the equivalent of about 245 full time jobs during the five month period when loans will be made available. Mr.

Speaker, my announcement today regarding the Special Sawi -ni.0 Assistance Program reflects this Government's commitment, and the resource policy cdmmitment and particularly the commitment, Mr. Speaker, of the Chairman of resource policy, the hon. Member for St. Barbe. The Government's commitment to this important industry, and our resolve to see it make an even greater and long—lasting contribution to the rural economy of this Province..

I encourage all eligible sawmillers to participate in this enhanced program and pledge Government's support to - ensure - that the industry-remains 'a vibrant and important sector in the overall forest products industry in Newfoundland and Labrador. Mr. Speaker, this statement and the actions taken in it indicate this Governments support to the forestry industry, and all that depends thereon. - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Speaker. - MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber valley. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. W000FORD: I am sure, Mr.

Speaker, that the Minister in my line of questioning is . L2 November 24, 1989 vol XLI No. 40 R2

. . there a week and a half ago, went back and took the correspondence that was on his desk and rooted through it and found the Sawmill Assistance Program on the bottom, and made sure that it got out within the two weeks that was ordinarily needed. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR._NOODFORD: Mr.

Speaker, in the first statement there, the rationale for the program, yes, that is true, the seasonal nature of the sawmill industry and the fact that it is not mentioned here but it is down further, but the spin off from the sawmill industry, itself when it comes to logs, in the winter time it is not only the sawrnillers themselves that benefit from the actual sale and the inventory of logs, it is the people in the community who are usually off work at that time of the year and everything is slowed down so they usually go in and cut and sell to the local sawmillers in the area thereby creating some extra income and helping the sawmill er build up an inventory.

The rest of it, Mr. Speaker, the wood lots, a lot of the sawmillers have wood lots and they can cut on it, some of them have not so they depend on this program heavily, and depend on the jobbers to cut and bring it to the mills in the off season for sawing.

Nothing new, absolutely nothing new in the program except for the fact that it would not, it would not be on a yearly interval, it is permanent so to speak, it is in place and will be announced in a Budgetary process every year, good thing, it is good, because it cuts out the uncertainty there, there is no doubt about that, they know what they are going to do the next fall, it is an excellent idea.

But let me tell the Minister, in saying that for the last three years, that I know of, the program was on a three year basis, it was automatic every fall except for the fact that it had to go to Cabinet, but it was never hung up, it was never hung up, they knew it was coming, they knew the amounts that was going t.o be in it and they knew that by the 151:h or 20th of October that it would be out, but apart from that it is a good idea to put the permanent thing in Lhere Overdue, yes, long overdue., they did create uncertainty over the last two or three weeks, there is no doubt about that, they create.d uncertainty in the industry, that has been put to rest now.

It has nothing to do with what the Minister says creates uncertçinty within the industry From year to year because of the implementation of capital improvements, it has nothing to do with capital improyements . The sawmill industry in this Province does not base its inventory it gets in winter time on capital improvements, they know what they are going to get because of the permits they get for the.ir wood lots and the amount of - logs coming in. It has to do with inventory, yes, it has to do with inventory.

They build up their inventory for the winter months thereby crealing a solid employment nature For the summer months . The forty to fifty thousand dollars , yes, I agree with the Minister there as well, that is good, the ceiling is raised from forty to fifty that is because of the fact that it must be obvious that a lot of the millers were coming in For more, the advance payment is nothing new, that was there, that was L3 November 24, 1989 vol XLI No. 40 R3

S always there, they paid it off in the fall of the year. The three per cent interest rate below prime, that was there, nothing new, and the stress, the Minister and his last couple of paragraphs really stresses the fact that fifty—seven hundred person weeks of employment, two hundred and forty—five full time jobs, nothing new, nothing, absolutely not a job new, but it certainly does galvanize the amount of sawmillers there and the jobs that are there and keeps it, I suppose at what the status quo was. That is good and, I suppose, creates some certainty and stability for the sawmill industry.

The $700,000 from what I can understand is enough, but I am sure that if there is more needed the Minister in his wisdom will put more in. I am sure that the Newfoundland Sawmillers Association will certainly let him know about that. Apart from the raising from the $40,000 to $50 ., 000 and the assistance going on a permanent basis, there is absolutely nothing new in it. But then again, we on this side agree with the Minister that anything done positive For rural Newfoundland augurs well for all of us, so I commend him for that. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! Oral Questions MR.RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The hon the Leader of t h e Opposition. MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, the Premier on a number of occasions over the last several months has indicated that the Hibernia project or the Hihernia Development is really only the equivalent of a couple of fish plants. In view of the fact that there are very serious economic problems facing the Province in the fishery and in other areas, could the Premier, this morning, tell the House whether or riot negotiations are proceeding on course with the. Hibernia project? Whether or not. progress has been made?

When, in the Premier s view,. could we expect to have a final agreement reached on the Hibernia proj e.ct? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER_WELLS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Actually, Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful for the question. It gives me an opportunity to report to the Province as a whole the state of affairs at the moment. Since we put things back on track on September 11 by the actions the. Government took in August and September, I commi tted to the people of the Province that I would keep people advised of progress, and if we we.nt off course or fell behind I would let them know.

Up until the day before yes terday we had a briefing of the planning arid priorities committee of Cabinet by the b e n e f i t s asses sment team a n d by the head of our negotiating team, I am happy to report to the Province that the

schedule that was established at thc meeting on September 12 in Montreal has been adhered to. We have noFallen L4 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No. 40 Ri-

behind in any respect. That is not to say that there is no difficult negotiations, or firir positions being taken that have not yet been resolved. There are some firm positions being taken by different parties on issues that have not yet been resolved. I am happy to report to the Province, Mr. Speaker, that the negotiations are on course, and assuming they continue the same way over the next few months, I would expect the anticipated date of mid year 1990 to be met for the signing of a formal agreement.

I have seen nothing at this point that would lead me to believe that that is not likely to occur, although I emphasize again there is still some bargaining to be done, and still some issues that have not been finalized. In particular the Federal Government lender—risk--sharing . assessment is a major thing that- has to be dealt with. - MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. [1 MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank the Premier for his answer A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

I wonder if the Premier could tell the House whether or not progre.ss has been made between the Province, Mobil and its partners, in the negotiations on t.he industrial benefits package that would offset any losses to this Province as a result of the design change in the production platform? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER_WELI.S: No, Progress has not been made in the sense that we only got their package, the final details of their package in the last two weeks.

We have put together a team of competent people who are doing the assessment of it and that is what the meeting was with planning and priorities commitment the day before yesterday, for, that assessment team to report their j udgement of what had gone on and what they had seen in their assessment of the proposal and ask for direction From Cabinet - We gave them that direction and - they wail now move to start: discussions with Mobil and its partners over the next number OF days. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leaddr of the Opposition - MR. RIDEOUT: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier no doubt - realizes that the Province's ability to have any meaningful say in the negotiations on the Hibernia project are really found in the provisions of the Atlantic Accord. Could the Premier tell the House whether or not his Government have reached any final' conclusions with the. Government of Canada, and the required number of Provinces, tc' have the Atlantic . Accord entrenched into the Canadian Constitution? MR. SPEAKER: The hon - the Premier, PREMIER WELLS Mr. Speaker, we have taken no specific steps in that regard, The ability to work a dal does not depend on the Atlantic Accord.

A similar deal could have been worked in 1982 when the. former Government turned it down, The Province would have been LB November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No. 40 RB

. infinitely better off had the former Government not been so obstinate at that stage a better deal could have beem made and every economist who has looked at it will tell you that. And we could have had the thing underway in this Province at this time, and the chances for the project being financially successful would have been greater at that time. So I disagree with the underlying premise. The answer to the question, Mr. Speaker, is we have not had any discussions recently with the Federal Government, but we will see. MR. HEWLETT: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Green Bay MR.

HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I came up on an elevator this morning, Mr. Speaker, totally packed with Liberals, so tightly packed that when the door closed I nearly lost my nose. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. HEWLETT The Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs (Mr.. Gullage) on the elevator indicated he had some news For me on a particular community in my District that I have been dealing with him on. But nonetheless my duty to Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition is such that I must ask him a question on a different matter.

In a summation on a hiji the other day the Minister indicated that the Premier's exemption of Steady Brook from amalgamation with Corner Brook, in his words I do believe, may or may not have been a good idea. So I would ask the Minister is he saying he disagrees with the Premier's exemption, or that because of the inconsistency it is merely an embarrassment to hi rn? MR. GULLAGE: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Prouincial Affairs. MR. GULLAGE Mr. Speaker, Steady Brook was included initially on the list put forward for amalgarna€ion.

It was felt by our planners that it should be, there. And the reasoning was s u c h that it is within the control boundary of the City of Corner Brook. Now Marble Mountain, as we know, has a corporation which has a mardate to develop it. And that complicates the matter to some degree. But we. did decide to remove it from the list, and the reasoning was that it is removed from Corner Brook by some distance. It is within the control 'area, and not within their actual boundaries as s u c h planning boundaries .

And it also has, of course, complications in the fact that there are two towns and two jurisdictions near Marble Mountain. So we did remove it from the list. Subsequent to that I have received letters from both Corner Brook and Steady Brook and my ' r e s p o n s e w a s s u c h that I asked them to make representation to the h e a r i n g s when they are held in the area. I think that is f air. They halve a right as anybody else does, whether they are included in the briefings as a participant and a . . L6 November 24, 1989 vol XLI No. 40 . R6

Hear, hear MR. GULLAGE: I re—examined the criteria and spoke to the - planners before making a decision, a decision which 1 made after concern was. expressed to me by the people in the area about the proximity oF Steady Brook to Corner Brook and the situation regardng Marble Mountain. It was not a simple decision, it was not taken lightly and after consultation wit.h my officials we decided the proper thing to do was to remove them from the list, and, as the Minister I did so. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Green Bay. MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A final supplementary.

I pUt this o n e. to the hon the Premier. The Minister indicates there was no partisan politics involved, I think the Premier, in a TV interview some time ago, indicated that the Huruher River gorge was an issue separating two communities . Also, the Premier in debate indicated something to the effect of other good reasons . If ther.e were no politics and the Humber River gorge was an i s s u e would the Premier care to indicate what other good reasons led to this exemption? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER_WELLS: With the greatest of pleasure, Mr. Speaker.

The suggestion that politics is involved in it is unworthy of the hon. Member. It had nothing • possible community to be amalgamated in a given area or not, is beside the point. Anybody is allowed and permitted by the legislation and by the act to make representation to the hearings And that is exactly what I said to them, if they wish to make repres entation a n d make points concerning Marble Mountain they could do so. MR. HEWLETT: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Green Bay. MR. HEWLETT: Thank you. Mr.

Speaker, I am not fai•ni•liar with the politics of the West Coast, but people who know that situation indicated to me that certain prominent Liberals, including our Minister of Justice • (Mr. Dicks), probably interceded in. this matter. In the three island communities in Green Bay that are up for amalgamation, I won 77 per cent'of the total vote so, Mr. Speaker, there are no prominent Liberals in that neck of the woods to intercede for those people , Would this be the, reason why they were not taken off the list?

The prominent Liberals in Green Bay are on the north shore of the District and the three islands concerned are on the south shore, MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Provincial and Municipal Affairs. MR. CULLAGE: There is no politics involved, Mr. Speaker, SOME HON. MEMBERS: . L7 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No, 40 R7

. whatsoever to do with it. The hon. Member for Humber East (Ms Verge) should know, but maybe she does not take into account, or she objects to it, look at the relative position -of Steady Brook and Corner Brook, with only a narrow gorge that has to accoi'nrnodate a river and a road in between. It is five or six miles apart and the reason given by the Minister explained good sound reasons but there is one very sensible reason. Both the communities of Corner Brook and Steady Brook are self—sustaining and they do not need help from the taxpayers of the Province to pay their debts.

Steady Brook is entirely and totally competent on its own. It is not subsidized by tax dollars to pay its debt. It pays its own debt, has its own tax sources, and that is another good and sensible reason for doing so. Now, that is the other good reason to which I was referring at the time. They can do it without the additional subsidy from the rest of the taxpayers of the Province and that is a good sound reason for taking it into account as well. Apart from that, the reasons that the Minister gave make eminent good sense in the circumstances.

If there is a reason why they want to be amalgamated there is no objection to that either. As he says, anybody who wants to can make whatever representations before the hearings they may, but it is not essential. There is no overwhelming reason for amalgamating those two, as is the case, in many other communities in the Province. MR, SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main. MR. DOYLE: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations.

The Minister will be aware that within her Department site has what is known as a Labour Standards Division, and flowing from that the Minisher puts in place a Labour Standards Tribunal and the function of that tribunal is to adj udicate on matters that are usually initiated by aggrieved employees.

The mandate of that tribunal ran out, I believe, approximately seven months ago, sometime back in May, and there are many, manj case.s before that tribunal which a r e backlogged right now, Approximately thirty or forty cases have been waiting that seven month period to have their cases heard and some of the matters are fairly important. Can the. Minister indicate why it is taking so long to deal with that? Has a new tribunal been put in place? If so will it be given a mandate to deal with all of these backlogged case.s that have been waiting now for about seven months? MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations, MS COWAN Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, I can assure the hon. the Member for, Harbour Main that 'that matter has been taken care of and that I just recently signed the letters going out to the individuals who . will sit on that particular tribunal, and we have put people on that who will deal with the bac kloqçjed cases as expeditiously as possible. MR. DOYLE: Mr. Speaker. MR, SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main. . n L8 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No. 40 RB

I . MR. DOYLE: I thar'iF the Minister- for her answer. A supplementary to the Minister, Mr. Speaker. The Minister has a number of Labour Standards people on staff and a number of people in that division of her Department whose function it is to insure that safety in the workplace s kept at a reasonable level. I would like to indicate to the Minister that, of late, I have had a number of people in -the construction industry, in particular, complanang of a lack of safety measures being employed by contractors around the Province.

They complain that the Department of Labour, the Labour Standards Division specifically, have very little presence on any of these constructions sites, which is causing . a lot of the contractors around the Province to be a little bit shoddy and sometimes unconcerned about safety in the workplace.

Will the Minister indicate how many of her Labour Standards people are assigned specifically to safety on these, construction projects around the Province, and how often the Labour Standards people visit these projects, every indication of late is that they do not soerfl to be visiting these projects as frequently as they should, MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations MS COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, I am very pleased to answer this question.

When I came into my function as Minister of this particular Department, I was appalled by the lack of attention that has been paid to Occupational L9 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI Health and Safety in this Province. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MS COWAN' I indicated not too long ago in this House that I was shocked, because it struck me as if there was almost an exploitive Third World mentality that had been in operation, that it did not matter what condition the workers worked under, as long as they had a job and it was lending some income, and so on, to the Province, that it was fine.

I am taking several measures within the Department to s e.e that that situation is corrected. In fact, the whole area has been one that has predominated in my workday since I became Minister for that Department. I might correct one mistake, too, before I go on. It is not the Labour Standards ' people who lock into occupational health and safety.

We have a special division that does that, that is very, very understaffed, We have about 10,000 workplaces in the Province and we have 10 Occupational Health and Safety inspectors, which means that they deai wi Lii many situations on a crisis basis only, and that is of great concern to me, as well. The construction industry is an area of particular concern, That is because of the nature of the construction business .

People come in, work for the summer, and then they disperse all o v e r t h e Province, and it is ver, difficult to offer seminars and what-•-have.-.you to those individuals We are trying this year a system of seminars that liave to do, Mr. Speaker - No. 40 R9

. AN HON. MEMBER: Answer the question. MS COWAN I was asked several questions. which I am now answering. If you are interested in having the question answered. I will continue, if not, I will sit down. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear. hear! MS COWAN Those kinds of comments,- Mr. Speaker, simply reinforce the opinion I expressed at the beginning, about the lack of interest of the past Government in Occupational Health and Safety. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MS COWAN: If they want Occupational Health and Safety in this Province improved, perhaps they wou'ld be interested in knowing what we are doing.

The construction industry is an area of particular concern, as I was saying, and we are experimenting now with trying to hold a number' of serrrinars . They are beginning ri.ght away all around the Province, on the mobile crane situation, the cranes and the other boom trucks, that type of thing, which come in contact with power lines and have caused a number of serious accidents. It will be interesting to evaluate MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! This is the difficulty when a question is rather long. The Minister was first of all dealing with a

preamble and then she got into the answer. I would hope that the Minister could clue up in another fifteen or twenty seconds for the answer, please. The hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations. MS COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, but I have concluded. MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Menriber for Harbour Main. MR. DOYLE Mr. Speaker, I do not m i n d t h e Minister's long answers. It is refreshing to see that she has finally come to life and she is alive and well.

In view of the seriousness of safety in the workplace, not only on construction projects but in all areas of employment, a n d in view of fact t h a t everyone involved in that particular aspect is concerned with this very important matter, including the Federation of Labour who have mentioned it on a number of occasions in their annual brief to Coy ernment. Will the Minis t.er undertake to call together parties from all sectors of the Labour movement, management as well ., to fully discuss the issue?

Will she table in the House all the information relevant to the number of accidents that have occurred in the workplace over the, last one year period? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations MS COWAN: I thank you, Mr. Speaker. . . L10 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No, 40 RiO

I r L I might say again to the hon. Member from Harbour Main that my concern goes far beyond having an advisory committee. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, heart MS COWAN: I haveRalked to all the concerned groups . I have concerned groups calling me all the time wanting to come in and talk about occupational health and safety. I am at the point of hiring management consultants to come in and do an evaluation of the entire Occupational Health and Safety Program to see how we can better meet the needs of this Province, because it was so dreadfully neglected by the past Government. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUFF: Mr. Speaker, MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East, MS DUFF: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to direct this question to the hon. the Minister of Health, It is a simple and very serious question and I know that the hon. gentleman is going to give me an answer that is neither abusive or , evasive this morning My question relates to funding for chronic care beds in the Province, I know I do not have to ive the Minister a case by case of the desperate situation that some of our frail elderly are living in, in this community, and in fact, throughout the Province.

Lii November 24, 1989 Vol XLI What I would like to ask the Minister this morning is, when will his Department be in a position to provide funding to open the forty—one existing chronic care beds at the Agnes Pratt Home which have been sitting empty since they were built by the previous Government? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health. MR. DECKER: I thank the hon. Member For her question. It shows the concern that she has for health care, unlike ".. her colleagues - who neglected' it For seventeen years, Mr. Speaker. To answer her question, the matter of the forty—one beds is actively. under consideration.

Also, t h e beds in the Dr. Twomey Centre out in Botwood, which is not yet open, are as well under consideration. We are also actively pursuing opening an Alzheimer's unit at the Hoyles Home, So, Mr. Speaker, I am dreadfully aware of the problem that she has brought forward. I am daily reviewing it. I would certainly hope that in a reasonable timc., tile will he ah].e to nmtke the announcement ti at Lies e cli ran i c care beds are open. As, Mr.

Speaker, we intend to open more chronic care beds,. because the real prob'l.....n in the health care system and the hospital system, is with our chronically ill people, more so even than with the acute beds. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MS DUFF: Mr. Speaker. No. 40 RU .

. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East. MS DUFF: I do not doubt the good intentions of Government, but as somebody ha said earlier 'hell is paved with good intentions' and good intentions do not do a whole lot about relieving the situation of some of the frail elderly. I can give the Minister cases in point who are actually in danger of doing themselves personal injury or burning in their homes, and good intentions in this case are simply not enough. We are talking about empty beds. We are talking about a line up of approved patients that want to get into them.

If it is a question of money, perhaps I should turn my attention to the President of Treasury Board and ask the President of Treasury Board: does in fact his Government recognize the frail elderly patient living at risk in the community, as a priority for this Government? Because if he does, I am sure he will agr.ee that he has to provide money to open existing beds, which are only lacking in staff. MR.. BAKER: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of Treasury Board MR. 8AKER: Mr. Speaker, I did not realize she was finished.

I would say to the Member that as the Minister of Health indicated we are very aware of the p roblems, For the four years that I have been sitting in the house and for years before, I have personally been aware of a lot of very serious circumstances that need to be dealt with in terms of care for the elderly, and. there is no doubt that the problem is a difficult problem. I would point out to the Member that maybe many other Members opposite are aware that there is a Budget process that is starting now and that

whereas we cannot respond piecemeal, day by day 1 the plan for health care in. this Province will be very, very obvious, when this Budget process is finished. MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John s East., MS DUFF Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Health Policy which I have read a n d reread, dictates that as long as demand exists hospitals beds must be kept open, institutions must not be 'understaffed, and compassion, that wonderful word compassion, must always take precedence over, - business administration.

If we cannot adequately care for the sick, the disabled and the aged among us, we have failed as a society, and we can take cold comfort in cutting costs and improving hal an cc sheets. I would like to ask Lh Premier, if in fact, he will admit that he. has failed society in being totally unable to fulfill his election proirrises in relation to the care of the frail elderly in our society. MR.,SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier, PREMIER WELLS The hon.

Member, with great respect to her, has included in her question the answer. -We a c k rio ILl led g e I: ha t L h e Fe r inc r Administration failed miserably to take care of the sick and disabled. . L12 November 24, 1989 vol XLI No. 40 ' R12

SOME HON. MEMBERS: - Hear, hear! PREMIER WELLS: They brought us to this sorry state after seventeen years of desperate Administration. Now glue us just a little bit of time, Mr. Speaker, to correct it. We know that we are good, but we know also and we are prepared to admit that we cannot achieve a perfect situation in just a few months.

As the President of the Treasury Board saad, it is under, consideration at the moment, we are preparing the next Budget now, the exact position and the expenditure that we will make on health and other similar programs and the manner in which it will be spent will be disclosed in the next Budget. Now that is within a year. The second Budget will be brought down within one year of our forming Government, I can assure the hon. Member. Sometime before the 5th of May, 1990 the Budget will be brought down and then the hon.

Member will see that this Government has acted pursuant to its criticism, and addressed the terrible mess that the former Administration created, and that hopefully, within a year, we will have a great many, if not all of the problems resolved, but it 'nay take us a year to do it. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East, MS VERGE: Thank you Mr. Speaket. My question is for the Minister of Justice, the question is about the serious inadequacy of space for the busiest court centre in the Province, The Provincial Court in St. John's.

Number one, why did the Minister's Department take a four lawyers room at Atlantic Place for judges offices simply to replace judges ofFices one floor above. Number two, why did the Minister's Department leave no space but the public corridors, for lawyers having sensitive discussions with sexual assault victims, other victims of crime other witnesses. Number three, why did the Minister's Department make no provision for confidential phone calls by lawyers other than the public pay phones in the public corridors MR. SPEAKER: fRe hon. the Minister of Justice. MR.DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With response to the Member's questions for Humber East (Ms Verge). First of all, there is no doubt that the Provincial Court facilities in St. John's are somewhat inadequate. In fact, I could add to the list. There are some problems with security there and access and so forth. I merely point out that it was not this, Administration that put the Prc'vincia]. Cc'u rL in the present circumstances . The j ud3es themselves are ve.ry concerned with the fact that they do not h a v e windows. The requests were made to the previous Government, and nothing had been done about i[...

I first of a].]. want tc' assure the hon. Member for Humber East that, contrary to her own Administration, in the present Budget process I have .in fact, requested funds not only for the problem that she has outlined, but. also For additional space there, that will accommodate the judges significantly, including a new L13 November 24, 1989 vol XLI No. 40 R13

courtroom. So the questions that she has raised are legitimate, except they do not reflect on our Administration but rather her's. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. DICKS: To answer the question directly because of these inadequacies the judges themselves have, I understand, taken over the lawyer's office that was there for use for counsel and are, in fact, using that. So it has made it a little more imperative that we now try to accommodate the lawyers who are there to appear before the court, with additional space.

So I want to assire the Member the problem is well in hand, but it is one of longstanding, that was not addressed in appropriate time, that has broughtabout the current problems Thank you, Mr. Speaker, MS VERGE: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East. MS VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have to correct the Minister. It was his Government that took away the lawyers' room and put lawyers and victims of crime out in the corridor. Mr.

Speaker, the previous Government had a beautiful new cdurthouse built in Grand Falls, a courthouse for both the Provinrial Cpurt and the Trial Division of The Supreme. Court. AN HON. MEMBER: The house that 'Len' built. But 1-14 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI the Liberals will not open it. MS VERGE: Mr. Speaker, that building was completed in the summer. It was ready for occupancy in August yet it sat there empty for four months What is the Minister waiting for? When is he going to open t h e new G r a n d Falls courthouse? MR. RIDEOIJT: He is too busy telling j o k e s to the constabulary. MR._SIMMS: Ah, ha!

He will n o t he telling any more. MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker. MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice. MR. DICKS: Well, Mr. Speaker, let me respond to the questions pertaining to the Grand Falls court. First of all the pressing need in this Province for several years has been a courtroom in Gander. That has been conveyed to me by the Chief Justice., of the Provincial Court, the Chief Jus tice of the Supreme Court, a n d the Chief Jus t i c e of the Court of Appeal. Why, one may ask, was a courthouse build in Grand Falls to start with? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.DICKS: Mr.

Speaker, not only that but the Government had a freeze on, and in order to provide that facility it was not built by the Government, but it Alas built by a private developer with a lease—hack to the Government, which I questioned, No, 40 R1l- . .

AN HON. MEMBER: Recommended by the Chief Justice MR. DICKS: Now the reason it is empty, Mr. Speaker, is that it is still in the process of being completed. And I understand it is scheduled to be opened in the next several months, So it is a facility that will be opened. It is certainly not a priority that should have been addressed in the fashion that it was. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear. hear! answer, but if they asked the Premier what were the causes for the rate of the unemployment to be the way it is, an equally brief question, but the answer will not be as brief.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given MR._DICKS: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a Bill entitled,

An Act To Revise The Law Respecting the Provncial Court - . S . MR.SPEAKER: Question Period has expired. MR.SPEAKER: Order, please! The Chair just wants to make a couple of comments on Question Period this morning, comments that need not be made, and I am sure observations that hon. Members would be totally aware of, but the Chair has to make them. One, I want to advise hon. Members of the necessity to get to their question quick, and secondly, the fact that Ministers should also get to the answer quick. I say to hon. Members again, when the

preamble is long it 'nakes it difficult for the Minister to take the essence from the question, and it also gives the Minister a little leeway to wander around, when the Minister ought not to have that leeway, but it relates to the question that has been asked, I also want to dispel a myth that hon. Members seem to hold, that b r i ef ' u es Lions req Li ire b ri ef answers. Of courst that relates to t h e type of question. If somebody asked the Premier what is the rate of unemployment, that obviously requires a very brief LiB November 24, 1989 vol XLI MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

We will have to revert to that. if hon. Members will allow, because I believe I have already gone. into Answers to Questions. Will hon. Members agree that we go back to Notices of Motion? AN HON. MEMBER: Agreed. MR. SPEAKER: Agreed. 000 Notices of Motion MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of ust1.ce MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I give notice that I will . on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a Bill entitled, "An Act To Revise The Law Respecting The Provincial No. 40 RiB

Court." MR. BAKER: Order 4, Mr. Speaker. Orders of the Day MR. BAKER: Order 2, Mr. Speaker. MS VERGE: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MS VERGE: The Member for number East, on a point of order. MS VERGE: Mr. Speaker, I would like Your Honour's ruling on the question of whether it is parliamentary, or acceptable, for Members of the House to clip their fingernails in the House during a full formal sitting like this? MR. SPEAKER: It is not a point of order. It depends on, I suppose, to the extend on how it is done and how many Members choose to do it.

If all fifty—two chose to do it, it would certainly cause quite a problem, so i just ask hon. Members to abide by the normal rules of what is proper to do, MR. BAKER: Order 2. On motion, a Bill, "An Act To Amend The Income Tax Act, (No. 2)," read a third time, ordered passed and its title he as on the Order Paper. (Bill No. 15). MR. BAKER: Order 3, Mr, Speaker. On motion, a Bill, "An Act To Amend The Liquor Corporation Act, 1973," road a third time, ordered passed and its title he as on the Order Paper. (Bill No. 16).

On motion, a Bill, "An Act To Amend The Quarry Minerals Act 1976," read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill No. 18). MR.BAKER: Order 5, Mr. Speaker. On motion, a Bill, "An Act To Amend The Economic Council Act," read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Orde.r Paper. (Bill No. 27). MR. BAKER: Order 6, Mr. Speaker. On motion, a Bill, "An Act Respec ting The Department Of Development," read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill No. 24). MR. BAKER: Order 7, Mr. Speaker.

On motion, a Bill, "An Act Respecting The Department of Forestry and Agriculture," read a third time, qrdered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill No. 19). MR. BAKER: Order 8, Mr. Speaker. On motion, a Bill, "An Act Respecting The Department of MinDs and Energy, " read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill No. 25). MR. BAKER: Order 9, Mr. Speaker. MR, SPEAKER: Order 9. Third reading oF a Bill "An Act Respecting The Department of Finance". (Bill No. 21). r . L16 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No. 40 R16

SIMMS: Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Lea Jer. - MR. SIMMS Mr. Speaker, I presume that the Government House Leader is going to go through 9, 10, ii, and 12. Nell, maybe we can agree to forego all the formalities so that we can get on with other business. I understand from the Clerks that can be done as long as there is an agreement MR. SPEAKER: Is agr,ed that we take as read the third reading of Bills No. 21, 23, 20, and 28. Order 9, 10, 11, and 12 on the Order Paper? All those in favor, 'aye' • SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye. MR. SPEAKER: Contrary, 'nay' , carried.

On motion, the following Bills: "An Act Respecting The Department of Finance", (Bill No. 21); "An Act Respecting the Department oF Environment and Lands", (Bill No, 23); "An Act Respecting the Department of Justice", (Bill No. 20); and "An Act Respecting The Department of Employment and Labour Relations", (Bill No. 28); read a third time, ordered passed and their titles be as on the Order Paper. MR. BAKER: Order 18, Mr. Speaker. Motion, second reading of a Bill, "An Act Respecting The Department of Fisheries." (Bill No. 26). . 1-17 November 24, 1989 vol XLI MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the -Member for Humber Valley. MR, NOODFORD Mr. Speaker, I would not want the Members of the House to think that I am going to try to follow the footsteps of my colleague to the left (Mr. Tobin) who was he.re yesterday, but he will be back on Monday. I would just like to have a Few words on this Bill, Mr. Speaker, on the amendment to The Fisheries Act. We went through this Bill in Committee.

We have had some concerns with it although it has been stated here already that: there is no major changes to the Bill except the fact that it is going to do away with the Fishery Industry Advisory Board Act, 1975 will be repealed and will be put into The Department of Fisheries Act, 1973. So apart from that there is not a lot there. We did have some concerns, just for the record I guess, about getting copies of the Acts before our meetings aid prior Acts, summation of additions, deletions, and amendmcmts and so on, that has been take care of by Committee.

Seeing that this Bill is on, it gives me the opportunity to bring up some concerns that I have about the fishery in my D i s t r i c t and nor e s pe c if i c a 11 Y pe r t al ri i rig to the fishery response program. I would like to touch on that one first. It is unbelievable, Mr. Speaker, For me to sit here as a Member -oF the House of Assembly a n d representing a part of my District that has a lot to do with t h e No. 40 R17

. fishery, namely the White Bay South part of it, which includes Jackson's Arm, Sop's Arm, Pollards Point, and even some in the Hampden area. To see -Members opposite one after another stand or sit and support the Minister or the Premier or whoever says that we do not need any more money in that Fishermen's Response Program this year.

I am sure that Members opposite as well as I, who represent fishing Districts, are after getting calls and letters expressing their concerns, concerns from their constituents that this program is not going to fulfill their needs - Now to say, always, contact your buddies in Ottawa or contact the Feds, is one thing, but I am sure if the Minister of Fisheries were driving down the road some night out here and he looked in and saw a house on fire and knew there were people in it, I am sure he would not go and look for the owner, he would stop his car and go in and try to do something for the people that are in there, and this is no different.

The element of blame can only be held for so long, it can be only sustained for so long. Blaming, I am hearing it every day, I ani hearing it ever since the House opened last spring, on the Federal Government, if it is not the Federal Government it is -the seventeen years of previous Tory power. When does it stop, when does the Government opposite realize that they are Government, nobody, nobody on this side I am sure, are going to accept blame for everything, I know, but nobody is perfect.

In three or four years time the people of the Province will judge again, the jury is out and will judge again on whether the present Administration did right or wrong. I am sure there will be a lot of things done right and I am sure there will be a lot of things that the public will judge wrong. Blaming present troubles on -past misfortunes is a trap that we all fall into at given times. Often it becomes a convenient crutch for not getting the things done that we ought to, excuses h a v e a time limit.

The older they are they weaker they get, I think Members opposite should take those few points and keep them in mind over the next three or four years. Excuses, like I said, the older they get, the weaker they get - Face it., meet it head on like Members opposite had to do on very controversial issues whether it was the Fisheries Response Program or whether it was Sprung or , anything else, meet it head on. Do not revert, blame it on the Feds, well I am speaking on behalf of my constituents, not ny colleagues.

I am concerned about the F i s he r i e s Re s p o n S C P r o g r a n, very concerned, I have a real disaster. If the California earthquake the other day or, something down in el Salvador or something in Bangladesh or something anywhere, the . Federal Government, the Provi n cia]. Governments a n d many other agencies in Canada would react immediately because those people are in trouble. We have a disaster in the fishery this year in this Province, we did not have to wait til October or November, we could all tell hack in June, as early as June in my District that we were going to have a disaster in the fishery.

We might have had to wait to see if that was going to be because there was no Caplin or no Herring or no ground fish, no cod, no crab, hut -we had certain sectors that we knew back in June that was going to he a disaster. In the White Bay South S S L18 November 24, 1989 vol XLI No. 40 R18

. S part of the District, it is a disaster. The criteria stipulated by CEIC and the Federal Government does not and will not meet the needs of the fisherman or plant workers in the Province this year. The Feds have put three to five million dollars into the program.

Federal MPs have already stated and have already gone after the Federal people that this is not enough and I think that one of the Members, namely Brian Tohin over our way has stated already that we need some three million dollars for his district alone, so it goes to show that it is an absolute necessity that more money shodld be put into it by the Federal Government and I might add the Province, I think that the Province should put something into it, if nothing else, put money into a program and show them up, expose the Feds, take a preemptive strike so to speak and say look, tell the people of the Province that yes, we are concerned, they did not do it, so we will do it.

We are looking at people who have been, this year more specifically and we are coming up to Christmas, a time when each and everyone of us like to spend time with our families and at least have something except bread and butter to put on the table, we have people in the District of Humber valley who are going to have a job to do that this year, Mr. Speaker, unless they revert to Social Services, a n d I am serious I am not talking about sorriething that is hearsay, I am not talking about something that is far—fetched, I am talking about facts. They cannot get on the program.

The criteria - correct me if I am wrong - I think you have to have six weeks this year, in order to be able to get on a fisheries response program this year, and if you have three weeks, they have to be in the fishing industry ten weeks the previous year. Out of 152 in Jackson's Arm - Sop's Arm area, we have 28 people going to work Monday on a Fisheries Response Program that has them working on a senior citizens home there that has been done over the last few yEars through job strategy programs and so on, very successful.

Nothing down in the White Bay part of the area, and much needed, but t h e y have no money for materials, absolutely none. When you look at 28 people going out of Fisheries Response Program for eight or ten weeks, and $125 a week per man week for materials, I do not have to tell any Member Opposite or on this side of the House what that is going to do for the program - very little. The same thing applies to some of the other programs that were supporte.d and said were no good, the people were given money and nothing to do anything with only sit and lay around for the six or seven weeks they are employed.

So, if the Provincial Government came in with a program even to top up the, so called programs hcme., it would help the people do something meaningful in the comrriunity and also look at the fact that we should be giving some of those other people that are much - need unemployment insurance or need the weeks work in order to qualify, and in order to h a v e something this winter to put them through the winter because it is not only this winter, it is not only this o.ne, we have to look at next year.

If it was bad this year, it certainly is going to hr,. much worse next. - We all know, ' and it has been stated in the House previous to 1-19 November 24, 1989 vol XLI No. 40 R19

. this, that there is going to be a cut in the allocation in the TAG, Total Allowable Catch. No doubt, no doubt in my mind, no doubt in anybody's mind. Where and who is going to be hurt by that remains to be seen, but we know that the fishing industry as a whole is going to be hurt.

Identifying at particular community or identifying a particular company, we cannot very well do it now except for the fact that it has already been mentioned under the so called proposal of LIFO proposal, Last In First Out proposal that that would be detrimental to a lot of smaller communities in this Province that depends on that program. For their very livelihood, the community of Jackson's Arm in White Bay, for instance, and Sop's Arm have got absolutely nothing else to depend on.

Some work there in regards to the forestry, and some work there with regards to Cat Arm and a few other places, but other than that, there is absolutely nothing. So, I would emphasize to the Minister and to all of the Cabinet Ministers to t,ake the bull by the horns if you have to. We are after the Feds, yes, I agree they should put more money into the program, I agree they should be more flexible, but I also say that we should look at the human part of it and do something ourselves For the people we represent.

We do not have to Øut something that is going to be there for next year, put something in to help the immediate problem now. And then, as the Minister has already stated, we are looking at a long term plan which would look after next years problems . I agreed not to put anything in for an on going thing, but for God's sake, lool< at something for the rest of this fall. We are getting up, like I said, close to Christmas, close to a time - and there is a lot of uncertainty there, there is a lot of uncertainty.

While all Members are representing fishing Districts in the Province we know that they have absolutely nothing. And a lot of those peop].e are hard workers, both plant workers and fishermen. They are not people who are sitting on the sidelines Mother Nature, along with some other factors, I suppose, performed a very cruel joke on them this year more specifically. They went out but there was nothing to catch and nothing to process . That is not their fault. The last thing a fisherman or a plant worker wants to do is to go down to the social service office.

The last thing any Newfoundlander or Labradorian wants to do is go down to the. social service office. They will go and pick up their unemployment cheque because they knoAi that they had to work X number of weeks, whether it was ten, twenty, or thirty in order to get it. They will do that in order to sustain themselves and their families. The last thing any member in this House wants to do is take away the last thing they have, and that is their, integrity. . fle certainly should not take that away From those people, their pride and their integrity.

They have b e e n beaten, they are down, we should not rub it in, and we should make every effort, and I ask the. Government in its wisdom, to make every effort to try and put, a prograrm in place to hejp those people over the next months, especially this winter. It is not only the actual pec'plo themselves who are suffering directly in the fishery. Let us look at what happens when, for , S S L20 November 24, 1989 vol XLI No. 40 R20

I 4 . instance, 152 fishermen and plant workers around the Jackson and Sops Arm areas have no money. How do the councils collect their taxes? How -do the other businesses around collect, on their bills? That is the way they operate. We are still in the old merchant days, a lot of those communities, where they jo down and charge so much and then pay it the next month, the next two months, or whatever.

Even when they are on unemployment let alone when they are working in the plants and fishing out of the boats, That is still there so it affects the whole community, everything starts to wither and everything starts to die. It stretches outside the communities into .other municipalities in the area. I can only, talk about my own now and that is Deer Lake where the major shopping centres are, and there is no difference from any other region in the Province.

They come there to shop, they come there to gas up, they come there to eat, they come there to do a lot of things, and if they have no money to do it everything suffers. There is no tax base, they have no infrastructure as it it in those communities because it usually goes to the bigger centres like Deer Lake, and they just h a v e. problems collecting taxes in any case. I have heard it now in debate on the Fisheries Bill, and some other Bills, I know you aPe supposed to be relevant and so on, but I have heard the Member for Port de Grave (Mr.

Efford) - we had a great laugh the other evening in the House, Members opposite, and I suppose some Members here laugh-ed, I even laughed myself, at the fact of Sprung. It is always Sprung. If it is not the seventeen years 1-21 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI of Tory rule, if it is not the Feds, it is Sprung. I do not know if anybody else in this House would but I certainly would not back down from a question on Sprung.

I never did, If Members opposite keep up, just a word of caution, keep up talking about the Sprungs of the world and some other thi rigs that this Administration did, yes, I agree it was not handled right. It was not handled right. Hindsight is twenty/twenty. My, you have not got to worry about y o u people being in power seventeen years if you could only have hindsight. You are, there forever morc.. But you are human, each and every one. of you are human, the same as the people who were on t h i s side, identical, the only thing different, different political stripes.

You are human, you are going to be susceptible to making mistakes, and you are not going to have them all right, believe you me. To say that Sprung was wrong and it was handled wrong is One thing but to say that we should not have a new technology in this Province is another thing'. The linerboards of the world, the Come-by—Chances of the world t h e r e, was somethirg wrong with those as well. They were passed as supposed to he failures.

Look at them today, look at them around the Province today and see where the major success is The West Coast, Stephenville, and more specifically depending on the old liherboard mill, now Abitihi—Price, a success, Why was it not a success in the first place? It had to do with management. Why was the Come—by—Chance Refinery not a success in the first place? - combination Of tcLors , management a n d some others. And if Members back themselves into a corner and No. 40 R21 L

. say that we cannot touch this and we cannot do that and you cannot attempt to do this or that, I will tell you Dr. House and his team are going to have a very, very difficult job. They are going to have a very, very difficult job. AN HON. MEMBER: They are the only ones who would have the job. MR.

WOODFORD: Sprung is out there now, it is working, there is not a word about it, there is not a worth The money is spent, someone else has it, there is not a word - it is new technology - for any Member on the other side to say what was new about it is complete ignorance, and I mean ignorance in the sense of the agricultural part of it or the technological part of it complete. AN HON.

MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR._WOODFORD: Yes, right, The things that were done - to give you an example of that and what could •be done, I mean those people were shipping two thousand tone of cucumbers to North America every winter from Spain, Mexico, Holland. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR. W000FORD: I They were not subs.idising the poor people in North America, they were paying $1 a kilogram freight to get that over here, and t h e n someone asked me the question why we could not send it from St. Johns to Toronto or down the seaboard. Did someone asI< me that?

A prime example was yesterday, the Minister caine in with a Ministerial Statement yesterday on the great helmet factory that is going to be situated out in the hon. Membet from LaPoile's District. A great thing, they are going to export, but we have always been told more specifically in this Province by bureaucrats and politicians that we cannot do it. We cannot do it, you have to import it. Bring it in, you just cannot do it here. We can do it, we can do things in this Province to export. A prime example is the one in Port. aux Basque just announced yesterday, a prime example.

We are doing it in Pasadena in the Incahator Mall. Then?, are chinese people t h e r e doing the plastic bags and everything, looking after Macdonald's and everything, pretty well all across Canada, and we say we cannot do it. We got it in Sprung. Forget Sprung, the so called Sprungs, Dons and the Phills of the world, but look at reality and look at the business part of it itself. . It is still there, it is working, the.y h a v e their own money put into it and now they are putting some equity into it. One of the very first things I did after only two or three weeks in that Department was talk to this gentleman.

Chris Snelien who was growing the rOnr?i ln lettuce down in the bunkers. They told him that that could not be done. That was a success. I suggested to the Dutch people that when they started to come down here to go in, have a talk to the local greenhouse operators and see how he could help him out. You have the expertise in the horticultural part of it, you have the expertise in the growing of peppers, cucumbers a n d herbs, Go in and take the local fellows and have a talk to them.

Maybe y o u could help them, maybe the local people could grow the plants For you to transplant into your . . 1.22 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No. 40 R22

. . operation whereby you can knock the so called factory syndrome out of the sprung complex, and make it a growing and production zone rather than having reproduction and processing in the same building. They talked to them. We have one of the local operators in there now, this young fellow Snellen, very pleased picking up all kinds of tips on the growing capacity of that plant and the way they do it in Holland - very successful, and I would say that he will be one of the catalysts in making sure whether that plant goes or does not go because of the local content and because of the communication.

That is one thing they did have in Holland that we did not have here. You cannot go in, like I said before, and put a gate up around something, I can put a place in the parking lot, put a fence around it and put all kinds of dogs there. I would have the press there forever and a day wondering what is in there. It has to be open so you can see it and the people in the Province can benefit from it. That could have been a lab and a so—called agricultural college so to speak for every other segment of the a g r icy 1 t u r a]. i. n dust r y in Lii is Province AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR. W000FORD It was not.

I said that first when I s poke, handled wrong, mismanaged. Never mind about the waste. When you look at waste you have to look at different things. Is the ice tank over at the University or over at the Marine Centre a waste? Is the wave tank over there a waste? This Province will never recoup money from those type of operations, but our children and our people are taking advantage of it and people from all around theworld are coming in here. If we take that attitude that it is a waste, this is a waste and that is a waste we will do absolutely nothing in this Province. Absolutely nothing .

We will not be able to move. We are an Island out in the North Atlantic - MR._MATTHEWS: You can waste land if you keep that up. MR. WOODFORO: Look at the country of Iceland, just look at it. A major success in every field, even in the agricultural field, one of the biggest. It can be done there, it can be done here. What I am getting at is we can take that technology and Dr. House and his team I am sure can be looking at this over the next while they are going to have to . Nobody has to tell any Member in this House how much more logs you can assign Jackson's Arm or Cormack. I can tell you now.

Nobody can tell you how many more beauty salons or convenient stores you can put up then.. I can tell you know. They have to look at something different. They have to look at new technology and bringing in new companies that are sustainable and can stand on their own feet and be successful here and not only serve the people of this Prouince, hut also export on a year round basis. And that is going to go out into the smaller municipalities, Port aux Basques , again a primary example, Pasadena. Usually w h e n you h e a r so me thing about manufacturing you hear about St.

Joh.n's or you hear about Corner Brook or Grand Falls or probably 1-23 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No. 40 R23

Gander. But we have the Pasadenas of the world, or the Port aux Basques of the world and other municipalities as well because I know of other local products, for instance, out around the Lewisporte area that are involved and even around my area, So in Holland, to give you a prime example, they have it all around the countryside, pretty well anybody who is interested in that industry it is all around the countryside and they grow pretty well everything, but they are successful because they kept costs down, They are efficient. And that can be done around this Province.

I would love to stand up here in four or five years time and see another building like that, a prime example would be down in Burgeo, if the fish plant goes, what better thing to have their than something like that with fifty or sixty people working. We can. So do not throw out the baby with the bathwater. That is the message. The training for fishermen and so on is going to come. We know there are going to be cuts. We know . there are plants going to go. We know people are going to come out of the industry. So they have to be trained for other jobs and to get into other parts of the industry in this Province.

What is there for them to go to, if we do not bring in the new or do not take chances? If the Government opposite came up with a new idea on something I would be the last one to condemn it. First I would wait and see. I can understand why they tore the guts out of it before. The election was on. The election is over, gentlemen. You won. Forget about it. It is done. The mOney is spent and people are working. L e a v e it 1-24 November 24, 1989 vol XLI alone.

Getting back to the Response Program itself, I say what I said earlier and ask the Minister to take a case to Cabinet where something meaningful can be done now, not in a month or two months time, but now. We have to do something. We have to show that we have a social consciEnce as a Government and as Members of the. House of Assembly. For instance the Sawmill Assistance program announced by the Minister t h i s morning. It was better. Sure, some a s p e c t s of it were better, but why do they have to wait? Is it just because it w a s a P.C. programme? That is the question I ask. It had to be looked into again.

Why was it not just approved, let go and then put something in place For another year? Anyway, it is passed, it is out, and it will be good For the sawmill operators. But the question remains, .Why wait? AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible). It is signed, boy. Give it up. MR. W000FORD Yes. Well, I guess that is something we all get into aFte.r we speak for twenty minutes or a half hour. They say there is only one thing better than a speech by a politician, that is no speech at all . So, I mean, I agree with everybody here.

I know we get up and take our partisan shots and we shoot from the hip sometimes, and we blame it on someone else .or this o rt.hat., hut we should, for o n c e in t h i s House, take a look at it. I am talking about facts, not fiction. I am tal king about people s lives. And I do not want to be an alarmist. I am not being that•:. I No. 40 R24 S S

have proof of it, as I am sure, do other Members of this House. I am sure I am not the only one who has proof of it, that people are out there wanting. And they want to get their eight or ten weeks. They do not want to be given a Social Services cheque. They do not want it. It was not their fault, I reiterate that. So, for God's sake. I say the Minister should confront his Cabinet colleagues and put in place a program so that those fishermen and plant workers can have something to sustain them through the winter months. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Hear, hear! contacting me, as their Member, and I share many of the concerns expressed by the hon. the Member for Humber Valley. To sidetrack a little at the beginning before I get to a couple of points that I would like briefly to make. I also share some concerns with the previous speaker, the hon. Member, mentioned Sprung, and so on. There were some problems with the way it was handled, as he readily admitted, and those were the major share of the problems . I think all of us, on both sides of the House, are extremely hopeful that that will continue to function and prosper. . a . . MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Exploits MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is a pleasure, again, to have an opportunity to rise in the House to speak to Bill No. 26, in this case, "An Act Respecting The Department Of Fisheries". I would just like to make a few brief comments, firstly in terms of comments by the previous speaker, the hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

I am sure all Members in the House concur with the very sincere and deeply felt concern he expresses relative to people involved in the fishery in his District, It is for that reason I was looking for an opportunity to speak in relation to this particular Bill, as well.

Because there are a number of communities in Exploits District that are just about totally dependent upon the fishery and, of course, those people have been I believe, the agreement this Administration put in place upon assuming office, indicates, in fact, in turning it over to the group running it now, if it does work, we do stand a chance to et some return on the money invested. And I think the biggest concern for all Neujfoundlanders and Labradorians . at the time, relative to Sprung, was the shroud of secrecy that surrounded the thing in the first place.

I concur Fully (All th the hon Member' s statements that h a d it been done openly and up front, it probably could have worked from the beginning the way it is probably going to work and that we hope it works now. It is unfortunate that that thin'] has become the epitome of a hit of a political football, because I think, maybe, the reputation of what will be a viable enterprise might be damaged by some of the slurs that we, through back and forth in this House relative to using the Sprung name,

whereas the name should be removed altogether, 1-25 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No. 40 R25

. if at all possible; I know it will not happen, because I will be guilty in this House, too, of yelling out 'Sprung' some day. The problem is with the fact that we will find out, I suppose, in the near future, that something that maybe is really worth $6 million or $7 million probably will show somewhere in excess of $20 million that is somehow tied into it. Somebody will figure out how at some point in time, but maybe all of it could have been done openly, without that shroud of secrecy before, So, L, certainly shae, and I believe all hon. Members share in the sentiment expressed by the hon.

Member that we hope that enterprise works and prospers and that, in fact, it shows the kinds of new things that can be done and that can work in Newfoundland and Labrador. Back to the Bill, just for a few short minutes, Mr. Speaker. I think the initiative taken by this Bill in putting the Fishing Industry Advisoby Board back into the Department I of Fisheries, and so on, instead of a separate entity with a separate Act, is largely agreed upon by Members on both sides Of the House as a right and proper thftng to be doing.

And, in fact, 'dhere has been very little concern expressed over the Bill, itself. 1 am sure it will pass in due course in this Legislature. However, it has provided a useful forum for Members on both sides to speak to their concerns about the fishery. The Federal Governments Response Program was announced j u s t recently. I think it would be dishonest for Members on either side of the House to stand and say that they have not received calls from their constituents, because I certainly have.

And in areas like Leading Tickles, Glovers Harbour, Fortune Harbour, Cottle's Cove, Moore's Cove where they depend very heavily on the fishery, those people have expressed concern that some of them cannot qualify under the present criteria. However, we have had statements made that the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Carter) and the Premier do not seem to care and that they are not . mai<ing representations and that they do not want more money, or that we dc not ne.ed more money a n d Sc) on.

That is partially true .but again it is a typical example of how people use their expertise. in debate to slightly twist the words that are used for t h e i r own purposes and for their own motivation. I think what we have seen clearly on this side of the House through the Premier and the Minister of Fisheries is an approach saying that we will try to whatever degree possible, to maximize the Federal response, And if at the end of the day, which is nowhere close yet, there may still be some kind OF need For provincial involvement Lhen that would stilil be considered and is being considered.

But at the present time every effort is being made through consultation a n d representation to make sure, that the Federal response. is maximized. There a r e some difficulties with the criteria. However, I firmly believe that the Minister of Fisheries in closing the debate, at a future timc., will certainly derrionstrate that those full time people who are totally dependent upon the the fishery on an ongoing basis, most of them, . C L26 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No. 40 R26

. S . contrary to what is being said in this House, have found it possible to meet the criteria as stated by the Federal officials. There are some people who are having difficulty. No doubt about it. And those difficulties are being addressed and hopefully will be overcome in some fashion. So there is an ongoing concern in trying to check to see if this program, as announced, responds properly to the needs of the people who are full time involved in the fishery.

If, however, there are other problems, if there are people living in what are basically fishing communities who are having difficulty qualifying for unemployment insurance for other reasons, then I do not believe that the Minister of Fisheries or the Premier or anybody in the Province is trying to see that they get included in a Response Program that is earmarked for people who are involved full time in the fishery.

So there may be a difference of opinion or some people may be, categorizing other workers in the community as people involved in the fishery because they live in communities that largely depend on the fishery. And maybe some of those other people are not qualifying this year for unemployment insurance programs, but that does not mean that they should be rolled into a Fishery Response Program. That may have happened in the past.

And I guess some people on the different side of the House might even argue that that has merits, that regardless of what they are involved in, if there is a program out there with money in it that you try to get everybody into it whether they are in the fishery or not.

But you have to differentiate at times and say if L27 ' November 24, 1989 Vol XLI it is for the fishery use it for people who are legitimately involved in the fishery, maximize the use of it for people who are legitimately involved- in the fishery, and if there are other needs in those fishing communities where people need assistance to make sure that they qualify for , t Ii ci r u n e in ploy me n t I 'i s u ran c e benefits then other criteria in other programs are the way to address that not to try to move people into a program not designed to handle their needs. I rise at this time, Mr.

Speaker, as well on this bill relating to the fishery to ask if the Speaker would, in fact, for my education as a Member in the House, look into the . propriety OF using exerpts from Hansard,, points raised in the debate, in a fashion that does not accurately reflect votes that were taken in this House. And I refer to a document in this case, and I would ask the Speaker to check into it. at some point in time and report back to the House, that was circulated with a title saying ' Resolution on all—plants—open policy'. And. I would like for , a couple of minutes, Mr.

Speaker, to explain the basis of my qus Hon thai: I would like to have answered in this House at some future point. Maybe the rules of order concerning r ego I. ut i o n s i. n ti is House are different From any other organization that I have euer been involved in, whether it be a profes sional orgi:'nization , a union, a service club, or whatever. I have always understood that in the normal rules of order applying to resolutions, that a resolution ' to be voted on by carrying it, defeating it, or amending it and then carrying it, the only things No. 40 R27

. that can be voted on are the actual words of the resolution itself, and that any

preamble does not get voted on, that any

preamble that is- referenced as a

Whereas is only giving rationale as to why the actual resolution itself is presented for consideration, and when the vote is taken on the resolution, Mr. Speaker, the only thing that the House then has stated is how it feels on the words that come after, therefore

be it resolved. Because if such a resolution is passed it means if there is an action in that it is to be done if carried in the House. If it is rejected it means there was a proposed course of action which is not to be followed through on. If it is amended and then carried it means that some different course of action other than the one originally proposed should be considered by the House and then if carried actioned as amended. So, if I might go through the resolution as stated on this paper, which was debated in this House and rejected, and the count was recorded in Hansard, it talks about

Whereas the fishery is the Provinces most important industry. My recollection of the dahate on that day is that every speaker agreed with that pretext, with that part of the

preamble, and it was based on that reason, I think, that the emergency debate on the fishery was agreed to, because it is acknowledged widely that it is, and remains, the Provinces most amportant industry. There was no vote taken on that and it :15 improper as far as I understand,i unless this House has different rUles than any other organization, to consider a vote on some thing that says

Whereas. That is a I statement of introduction, ljheri it goes on to say,

Whereas the fishery is now facing a major long—term resource crisis, a statement which was agreed to by every Member that rose in the House to speak to that debate, It then talked about,

Whereas it is vital that any Government response to this crisis recognizes the necessity to adopt an all—plants—open policy. . My recollection as well is that every speaker that spoke said that certainly if there was not a resource crisis and if all the plants could stay open, if that was not going to be a problem, that would be the preferred way to go . But, that was only introduction and there was sno disagreement in this House, that I can remember being registered by anyone, about those statements The hon. Member presenting the resolution then got on to what he wanted the House to try to do, which the House would eithe.r agree with, or disagree with by vote. It said, Therefore

be it resolved, the first part, Mr. Speaker, that the Government immediately inform this House of the basic principles of its action plan to address the fishery crisis that it has proposed to the Government of Canada. No., disagreement whatsoever. As a matter of fact the Premier stood and tabled, For public consumption, the total details of the basic principles of its action plan, available for every Member of the House and the public.

No disagreement whatsoever, but at least since, it is actually the beginning, of the resolution, this side oFt he House stated if that is where the resolution had ended we would have supported it. As a matter off act it did not even need our support because we actioned It, therefore that part of the resolution became unnecessary and redundant. Then there was a vote taken because no amendments were offered, Mr. [I] 1.28 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No. 40 US

. . . Speaker, from Members on either side, there was a vote taken on the last part, the second part of a two pronged resolution that went on to state, Therefore be it further resolved that this House immediately establish a Standing Committee on Fisheries so that the Government can, on a continuing basis, have the benefit of the views of the Members of this House in developing appropriate fisheries policy. It was on that basis that speakers on this side of the House stood at the end of the day and voted against that resolution.

It was the only issue in the debate that day of which there was any dissatisfaction and opposition expressed on this side of the House by Members that participated in the debate, and by Members that stood at the end of the day to be counted so that they could show where they stood on the resolution. Then to find, Mr. Speaker, that a few short days later, a week later, there was a document using the record of this House,- and select excerpts from it, suggesting for public consumption that there was a Resolution before this Assembly dealing with all—plants—open policy. No such Resolution, Mr.

Speaker, was ever presented to this House. The reason I raise the question is to have the Speaker report back so that I will know for future time how the actual debate of this House is to he treated when it is presented to the public . The hon.

Opposition House Leader rose at the beginning of the Assembly Session yesterday and talked about the media and asking them if they would consider adjusting a headline that they wrote, because he did not think that it accurately reflected the vote that was taken in the House on another Private Member I 5 Resolution and of course, I am sure that in past practice the media people will decide based on the request of the hon. Member, whether or not they will adjust their headline and put a correction in the paper.

However we have Members opposite, for some deliberate unknown reason trying to go out and state that a Resolution was placed before this House that never existed, a n d a r e implying here on that basis that certain Members were for , this thing and certain Members against it. Now if there ever was a Resolution about all— plants— open then everybody in this House would have known where the hon. Member for, St. John' s South would have stood,• because he would have stood in this House the same as he did down in front of the plant in St.

John's South the Sunday before that, when he was part of the demonstration organized and let by himselF the Member for St. John's East, Members of the union, and plant workers. B e c a u s e if there is any way to keep all plants open, and that plant in particular, that Member has gone on the public record everywhere as saying he is for it and to have an insinuation now through something, Mr.

Speaker t h a t unless the Speaker r e p o r t s back to t h i s House and suggest to me that I an] totally in e r r o r a n d that this Ho u s e o p e r ate s di f-Fe r e n t 1 y -Fr o rn any other organization in the Province, to suggest that that same Member and o t h e r s on this side stood and voted against the Resolution on an all-- plants--open policy, I do not knoIAi the proper phrase, hut it is in s ome way certainly a misrepresentation of a very serious nature of what occurred in this Assembly, and if that kind of thing is allowed to continue then I really believe that there is very little value in any thing that will happen in this 1-29 November 24, 1989 vol XLI No, 40 R29

S Assembly if it can be distorted in that fashion, so I understand the hon. Opposition House Leader rising yesterday and suggesting that maybe the media might have used a slant in a headline, but I would like to know how the rules of the House apply to

preambles and Resolution, and is there any prohibition or restriction on hon. Members within the House making selective use of Hansard documents and the record of the vote in this Assembly in an inappropriate fashion. Being selective as well, Mr. Speaker, in recording where does your MHA stand. At the top it certainly talked about Resolution and all— plants— open policy, I would like the Speaker to give a ruling to the full Hbuse on that, because that was not the Resolution, there was no Resolution on that. Mr. Speaker, if I might continue, selective use, Mr.

Speaker, as well at the end of that same document, distributed by Members opposite, suggesting in particular, Mr. Speaker, that certain Members voted in a certain fashion, but in no way giving the full list of who voted in . which way, inappropriately addressed as it is, but then it puzzles me as to why there would be particular note of the Member for the District of Mount Pearl voting for a policy on keeping fish plants open

whereas the neighbouring District, the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, and the Member for Naterford - Kenmount, no record as to how he voted at all. Now, if it is important for the hon. Member for Mount Pearl then why is it not important to state what the neighbouring Dis tn ct Me mn be r and rep r e s e n tat i v e a 1 s 0 voted. So, with that Mr. Speaker, I would conclude my comntnents on this Bill L30 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI by saying that I would like, Mr.

Speaker, for a ruling to be rendered in this House for all Members to be party to and be able to avail of, as to the propriety of the misrepresentation of a resolution defeated in the House of Assembly on the basis of the actual words 'what constitutes a

preamble, what was actually voted on, and what is right and proper for Members to use arising from and resulting from debates in this Legislature. I thank the House, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to rise and speak and I look forward in a day or so, at the discretion of the Chair, having some commentary and decision rendered as to the appropriateness and propriety of that kind of action relative to votes taken in this Legislature? Thank you very much SOME HON, MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The tapes. MR. HEARN: Thank you very much, Mr.

Speake.r I listened with some interest to the Member for Exploits trying to squirm his way out of a tight situation. There is no doubt about the fact that the Members are in a bit of a tight hind and you could easily see why he was trying to back away from it in Parliamentary fashion. I would suggest if it is not the concern of the breakdown of the Resolution that affected the Member I would suggest it was the numhe rof telephone calls and letters t hat the Members opposite have gotten since their stand was known on the No. 40 R30 E]

. C 0 Resolution concerned, The Member, who was rookie Member in the House, is not aware of the fact that on several occasions in the past his colleagues who were on this side for a ntimber of years, on many occasions amended

preambles because they realized that the

preamble was part of the total package. And, on several occasiOns resolutions were amended because the

preamble did not suit them. Of course, when we voted we voted upon the total context. Quite often sections were left out entirely or considerably changed, because the

preamble is part of the total package that you vote on in the House. The Member also has to be very much. aware of the fact that in discussions on the future of the fishery, that the Government policy as stated by the Premier and others is quite clear, that they realize that in order to rationalize the fishery, plants must close. So the Government has already stated quite clearly and categorically that plants have to close in order. to rationalize the fishery in the Province. Consequently, they are not in favour of an all-plant-open policy. .

The Member for Pleasantville suggested that we should put in a resolution on that alone, that all plants be kept open It might be an extremely interesting one because we would then get on record the statement of the Premier and his direct feelings on all- plants-open and we would see what

part it plays in his amalgamation, centralization and rationalization philosophy. opposite we might have to rely very heavily on the Minister of Finance. Now, he is not' in his seat unfortunately so, but I am sure he is listening. Anybody who has followed, and I. say this in all sincerity, anybody who has followed the career of the Minister of Finance, who has taken any of his courses, who has read any of his . writings, will realize that the Minister has a deep feeling for the small rural Newfoundland community. SOME HON. MEMBERS: ftar, hear! MR.

HEARN: Over the years, the Minister of Finance has stressed time and time again that we were not putting enough attention to keeping the small areas alive, He, in his - whatever input he had into his courses at University into his say into c u rn cu 1 urn, would aiwa ys stress the fact that there should be more to do in the schools that related to living in an outport. And I hope that the Minister today realizes that the small outports around this Province are being seriously threatened by what: is happening in the Fishery.

I am not sure today whether vc'y many Members in this House really realize what is happening. We have discussed many, many serious issues here. We have talked about Sprung and we have talked about the forestry, we have talked about Come-by--Chance and we have talked about employment. All serious issues, all affecting jabs, all affecting technology, all affecting our future. . However, perhaps the salvation of the fishery as it exists today in Newfoundland, if it is to be left in the hands of the people But we have to remember that this Province was first settle.d because of the fishery.

Hundreds of small 1-3 1 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No. 40 R31

S settlements all around the Coast grew up simply because of the fishery. People still live there and prosper because of the fishery. If the fishery is allowed to die in all or any of these little towns, then the towns and the areas around them die also. Looking at the benches opposite and when we look at the Cabinet except for the Minister of Fisheries who has had a lot of experience in the Fishery, and hopefully the Minister of Finance.

The knowledge of the effect of a devastated fishery on the lives of people in the rural areas, I am sure, cannot be planted upon the minds of others simply because they have never experienced what it is like to live and fish and depend upon the fishery in smaller rural areas.

So, I hope that the Ministers, who sit around the Cabinet Table in particular, and the people who sit in the back benches and who realize that part of what has been our history is just about to go down the drain, that they will use their persuasive methods to convince theit' colleagues to make sure that the fishery does not die in Newfoundland.[ The all—plants resolution that the Member From Exploits talked about, in itself is extremely important because if any of the plants are allowed to die, and we can come up with all kinds of reasons why perhaps companies cannot afford to keep thm open.

But we can come up with a lot better reasons why they should not be allowed to close. And I say again, that if a company, whether it be F.P.I. whether it be National Sea or whether it he anybody else and I mentioned the two of those specifically because they have larger plants and larger quotas than anybody else - if they for financial reasons want to back out of Burgeo, which would- completely wipe out the area, if they want to back out of St. John's South, which would affect a tremendous amount of workers and fishermen, would not completely devastate St.

John's or anything, but it. certainly would have an effect economically and a trernendot.i s effect upon the lives of the people who depend upon the facility for work and For a market. If they want to back out of Trepassey which would eliminate the whole Isouth east corner oft he Avalon , if they want to do that, then there is not much that can he done to stop them, they a r e private companies. But what can he done that the Federal Government with the backing and the support of the Provincial Government can make sure that the quotas that are assigned to these plants stay with the plants .

That is one possibility. If companies know that they are leaving behind a lump of the quota which hopefully as the stocks rebuild if the management plants work, if stocks rebuild then these plants will become viable again four or five or six or seven years down the road. But once companies move out. whether it he the National Sea Plant or the Trepassey Plant or the Harbour Brett on Plant, once they move out and move that quota, move the cod and other species that they process in these plants to some of their larger operations which are not operating full time now, and we know the problems they are going through.

National Sea moreso than FPI. And they build up two or three or four super plants, operating twenty .... four hours a day, making money For the company, providing lots of work for the people in the selected areas . We realize that the areas * . S 1-32 November 24,1989 vol XLI No. 40 R32

which were left will always be left. It will not return to the areas they have moved out of. Everyone realizes that. So to say oh, we are only closing temporarily that, of course, is a fallacy. Because once they move out of 'the smaller areas there is no way they will move back. Number one, there will be no work force there in three, four or five years time. The younger people will have to pack up and move to Toronto or to Cold Lake or to Vancouver or wherever else Newfoundlanders move. The middle age people will have to resort to welfare, because there is nothing else in any of these areas.

That is what is going to happen if we allow plants to die. If the quotas are left, number one, the owners, the companies will think twice about moving out, even if they do then somebody else might be encouraged to come in, somebody who believes that the fishery can grow and prosper again might come in. You are not getting anybody to come into National Sea plant down here or to Burtjeo or to Trepassey or to La Scie unless, and that is an inshore plant, maybe we should look at the larger ones too, Marystowri or Grand Bank, you have a quota assigned to the plant.

Because these plants cannot operate viably on what fish that is available inshore. So maybe if the Government has the intestinal fqrtitude to take a stand like that then the plants can be saved. Companies say we do not want welfare. The' choice is either give the companies a hit of welfare now and worry about f*ee trade when we get to that situation. Either . give the companies a hit of welfare or give hundreds or thousands of people around the Province welfare. That is the choice that we have. I mentioned the Newfoundlanders moving to Toronto.

I happened to be there myself on the weekend to a meeting with some of the President of Treasury Boards former friends and the Public Accounts across the country. SIMM5: Hear, hear! MR.HEARN: And they were asking about him. MR. SIMMS: And they said what a fine job you were doing. What a big improvement. MR.HEARN: Actually they thought he did quite a good job, and he did in Public Accounts MR. SIMMS: Conic on, they did not say that MR. HEARN: Too bad it did not carry over to Treasury Board. AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear! MR.

HEARN: However, I got in a taxi one night and there were two or three of us and the driver said, 'Boy, he said, you fellows sound like Newfoundlanders . ' He was from Badgers Quay. He had been up in Toronto around twenty-five y e a r s working, He said, 'Basically you have to work hard You work long hours, and', he said, you just barely make a do of it. So when we talk about outport people because their way of life has been destroyed having to pack C.] .1 L L33 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No, 40 - R33

I up and move to Toronto, and it is much like in the other larger areas, but Toronto where there is lots of work - 1 heard somebody on radio this morning saying, 'Well, there ai'e lots of jobs in Toronto and they cannot find work . AN HON.MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR. HEARN: Yes. And they can find an apartment for $1,000 a month, an apartment that you would not put your horse in at home. Somebody told me they paid $750 a couple of years ago For an apartment without seeing before they went in, there was no door and the mice scampered all over the place, A townhouse rents for over $1,000 a month.

And to buy äny kind of a house, just a small two or three room bungalow, you know, that we call a modest one around the Province will cost you $200,000 or $300,000 anywhere near Toronto. The cost of food is a w&y worse than it is around here. And the cost of clothing is more expensive generally than it is in Newfoundland. So to think about moving to Toronto, unless you know the context - AN_HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR. HEARN: Oh, no, no, it is cheaper here. Oh, yes.

You can travel any of the malls or any of the large stores up there you will find that the cost of fdod a nd clothing is much higher than it is here in St. John' AN HON. MEMBER: That is where you go, MR.HEARN: No, the cost of living up there for the average person is extremely high and you work. Both people have to work, if the husband and the wife are not working they will tell you that they just cannot make a go of it. So that is not a very great prospect for a fellow 45 years of age with six kids, getting' out or a boat to try to move up to a place like Toronto. So consequently we cannot let it. happen.

You say, well what is the alternative. With the poor fishery they are not doing very well, Many people in the Province will tell you, and unless you know the area, unfortunately, a lot of people who have not lived in the small areas and have not grown up there do not really realize that outport people who are used to living in rural areas, people who have depended upon the fishery can get along on very little .

They might not be able to provide some of the finer things that we would want, but they own their own houses, they build them themselves quite often on their own land, which does not cost $40,000 or $50,000 or $100,000 a building lot. They can provide a Fair amount of their own food and even clothing, vegetablc.s , fish, nr::.at et cetera. Consequently, they can supplement that income.. They cannot do it on Yonge Street. So when we look at what is happening, we have to look at these things because we are not just putting a few . people out of work in some outports .

We could be destroying a way of life that we have known for so many years in Newfoundland and we could be taking a race of people, moving them out of the rural areas either into welfare in our own larger centers or to a life of hardship in t h e larger areas in Canada. That is the choice we have when we deal with I I 1-34 November 24, 1989 vol XLI No. 40 R3'L

. . the fishery. The immediate problem that some of them are experienced fishermen who have done quite well over the past but for the last couple of years have been hit rather drastically and many of them find themselves this year without stamps enough to even qualify for UIC. Once again the Member for Exploits said that maybe we are getting it all confused. He said, maybe there are a lot of people out in the communities who are trying to take advantage of the Fishery ;Response Program to get their stamps.

That there may not be too many fishermen because people will tell you that most legitimate fishermen got their stamps. I will say to him, yes, he is right, the majority, over SO per cent of the fishermen in the Province did qualify for UIC this year and some of them had to work, scrape, and move to get ten weeks of employment in the fishery. Others did fairly well because of good caplin fisheries, good crab fisheries in certain areas and stamps they got on salmon or whatever. But many fishermen, a large percenthge, when you are talking about thousands ' and thou s and s the n u tribe r 5 a rn o LI n t quickly.

There are hundreds who did not, solid legitimate full—time fishermen, get their stamps simply because of the fishery in their area. A complete disaster that occurred in many parts of the Province. I have whole crews in my own area, I have whole communities where, the fishermen did not get 'enough stamps to qualify for UIC. That in turn meant that many of the small inshore plants dad not work for any more than a meager number of weeks.

People who every summer depend upon second shifts in particular, regular plant workers, because with a good fishery most inshore plants worked double shifts at least for ten, twelve, or fifteen weeks.

This year, because of the poor fishery we have very little or no work in relation to second shift workers, so many r.egular plant workers did not qualify for UIC either, so we are looking at large numbers of legitimate people, granted what the Member said to a point was true, there are many others in communities who would like to get on there, desperation, in many cases, there are af ew dollars coming in the community, there is a program, why can I not get on it, and when you have hungry mouths to feed, and no money coming in since May or June you can understand thc.de. speration So hopefully the Province will step in to take up the slack that has been left by the programs, the Feds have been told over and over that the regulations would n o t. work, they were told that yes, maybe there will have to be basic guidelines to eliminate abuse, because it is abuse of programs in the past that makes everybody a little more conscious of what they are doing now and harder to get money than it was earlaer because of abuse, but they were tcilcI pLit in your guidelines but 'nake them flexible enough to address the needs of legitimate people out there.

They could easily do it by having the Fishermen s Committees by having the Union, by having the Fisheries Officers who cover all the areas of the Province., Provincially and Federally, by having them verify who is legitimate and who is not. It could be done quite easily, hopefully it will be done, hut it has ' to be done pretty soon. We 'talked about Christmas , Chris ti'nas is coming up and if you have n o t L35 November 24, 1989 vol XLI No. 40 R35

. made since early June and then you only made enough to pay for the bills you had run up during the spring, what prospects have you got for putting food on the table or toys around the tree for Christmas. The prospects are not very bright and that is exactly what is happening in many parts of rural Newfoundland today.

The Member for Exploits said, at the e n d of today, the Provincial Government might step in, it is a Federal responsibility, but the Provincial Government might step in at the end of the day and I say to the gentleman that the end of the day For a lot of Newfoundlanders is pretty close at hand, so if you are going to show that you are going to do something, do not wait until it is too late, do not wait until a larger percentage of our population has gone to Toronto, do not wait until Christmas eve comes around and families find that they have nothing for the children on Christmas day and I am not trying to over emphasize the fact that it is a serious situation.

I just say to you, and some of you do serve Districts where they have been hit hard this year and when you go home on the weekend, go visit some of the people and taLk to them and anybody who does not know any body around their own area call some friends or colleagues you have or relatives who live in small communities where they have the fishery failure and ask them how bad is it this year and they will tell you it is pretty bad and the only hope that they have rests right here in this House and in Ottawa and unless we come up with programs to help them when they are stuck, well then the long term plans that we talk about, we will not have to worry about them because they will not be around, they will be hiring the Ryder truck next week and heading up along also, not knowing what they are going into because they just know we can get a job, but a job in Toronto or a job in Vancouver is not like living at home, because home is where the heart is and there are a lot of people up along who would come home tomorrom if they had a chance, and maybe with the proper , management of the fishery, by keeping the plants alive, by keeping the hope alive, a lot of these people who are up along in a few years down the road, when we get back in power will get home.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for LaPoile. MR. RAMSAY: Mr. Speaker, I wonder you know about the rhetoric of hon. Members opposite with regard to this Governments supposed lack of caring and all this sort of stuff, my District last .year, when the former Government was in power, xperienced the exact same problems with the Fishermen's Response Programs, where were they then, Mr. Speaker, where were they then. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR. RAMSAY: Emergency Response Program in my District. Aha, aha, my District was left out, yes, it was, it was so. I offer that; Mr.

Speaker because of the commrrents of the former Minister of Education, the hon. Member for St. Marys the Capes, t h e r e is an element of blame you say, an element of blame to people in the Federal Government, fine, you speak of that, you speak of this so called element, whom do we blame. Will we blame a situation where you have a Federal system of S . . L36 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No. 40 R36

:i C . . Government whereby the Federal Government concentrates power and concentrates voting power in the two larger Provinces, whereby decisions are being made which affect us here in our Province? And these decisions that are made will continue if the Meech Lake Accord was adopted as it stands. We would be forever seen as the Province looking for handouts from above, from the wealthy Provinces, and they would continue to see us as the poor Province which always needs help from Central Canada, This is what hon.

Members opposite would like for us to remain, as we are, with more power for the Provinces, without the financial ability to look after our own people, either through the gaining of new employment initiatives that are possible with the offset of proper programs. They see it differently, and that is fine, but to put that element of blame partially on us here in the ProJince and say that because of this element of blame, we have to put money into the program - now, the way you people did it over the last number of years when you, the Party opposite were in Government, automatically, almost a knee—jerk reaction.

We have to he seen as doing something for our Province. So we will take some of the money, of which half of it comes from the Federal Government anyway, and put it into the program, thereby letting the Federal Government off From their responsibility. And you let those people off their responsibility and they now lie in wait with this criteria, waiting for us to react. The Member for Humber Valley mentioned the scenario of a fire, if you saw a house on fire. Well, this house is on fire, it has burned down. The fish are no longer there. The house burned down. Now, he said, you go and look for the owner.

Well, you do not go and look for the owner, but who pays for it? The owner pays for it. The owner, if his house has burned down, will pay, either through his insurance premiums or through having to build a new house. Well, therefore you look for the owner. The owner is, in this case, the Federal Government, The Federal Government should pay, rather than come up with a knee-jerk reaction and you react immediately.

It is a matter of positioning.' Now, if we automatically take some of this money and put itin there, we are never ever going to get out of this where the Federal Government will get away From their responsibilities . Why are we where we are now economically? Well, you say there is no fish in Meech Lake. I say there is a lot of fish in Meech Lake, an awful lot of fish. And that is what there definitely is, if we are given a proper voice in. a Triple E" Senate, thereby being able to effect the policies of the Federal Government through an equal House of the Federal Government, w h e r e we would have an equal say.

And, not speaking of the oLhor equality, of language .which the hon. the Member for Humber East mentioned - AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) a Newfoundland joke. MR. RAMSAY: What do you mean, a Newfoundland joke? It is far from a Newfoundland joke. You are the only people in the whole of the country who are voting totally against the Newfoundland idea of Canada with Meech Lake being an improper doci .iment. L37 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No. 40 R37

S SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. RAMSAY: A Triple "E" Senate. Time will definitely tell. And, if it is allowed to happen as it. has happened now, we will be no further ahead. My children and your children will be here debating the exact same thing Because, if unanimity were in there, do you possibly think you are ever going to get all ten provinces and the Federal Government to agree on something? AN HON. MEMBER: They already did with Meech Lake. MR.RAMSAY: They did not! They agreed amongst themselves, but the Provinces and the country itself has not agreed. SOME HON._MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR.

RAMSAY: You are talking about Christmas coming. Mr. Speaker, Christmas coming up, fine. The Federal Government is capable. We have not •heard a word about this from Mr. Crosbie, Mr. Speaker, He conveniently, on an issue like this, dodges to one side, is being seen as helping the fishery by going to NAFO and whatever. Maybe it will take a full initiative of the federal cabinet to do this. Maybe it will take the personal responsibility or the Prime Minister, to do it. But, Mr.

Speaker, Christmas is coming and they are using this to their advantage in not reacting to any of the representations made by our pedple, and the Opposition. They are not reacting at all . They are just saying, we will fix it up. We will change the criteria, or whatever. Sixty—eight per cent of the people in my district do not qualify under the current Emergency Response Program. That is fine. I say it is fine, that is the way it is right now, but that has to be changed, and they have been giving us assurances that the criteria will allow people, who have a traditional ti to the fishery, will be looked aft e r.

AN HON. MEMBER: But they are not. MR. RAMSAY: What do you mean, not looking after them? AN HON. MEMBER: You are not looking after them now. MR. RAMSAY: Okay, now, but say next week, or whatever. AN HON. MEMBER: Christmas will soon be here. Christmas will soon be here. Christmas is one month away exactly. I do not argue that. It is getting close and the Federal Government have the ball in their court. They can hat the hi:'ll around right now. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR. RAMSAY: Exactly. You spoke of the material's component, the $150 per work week per person on one of these programs .

If we go and take sonic of the money from the provincial treasury which the Federal Government, as Mr. Mulroney has stated, is so kind to allow us to have, a little bit more, well S S L38 November 24, 1989 Vol. XLI No. 40 R38

S . $150. If we go and add another $150 to that, add some Provincial Government money to it, will we be doing what is right for the taxpayers of this Province? I suggest not, Mr. Speaker, because that $150 extra that we may put into it is $75 federal anyway. It should, because of the fault if we want to say it, we are going to blame the Federal Government, the Federal Government should put the money into it.

Why should we take the money that is required for health services, education and other important things in this Province, and the fishery, I do not mean to say it is any less important, but when the reason and the blame for the problem lies soley with the Federal Government should we take money that we need for other things and . put into that? We should not. You talked about an all—plants—open policy. Nell, you have heard here in the chamber that we support keeping the plan:ts ready for later on when the resource is brought back up to stream keeping the plants going..

I personally support that kind of thing, an all—plants—open, but I do not support the resolution that you had on the Standing Committee. It is plain and simple. I voted against the Standing Committee which is part of the resolution. Senate. We have no way of changing that Legislation. If it is held up now it is seen as heresy or something, it is a terrible thing, this appointed senate. It is seen as something terrible, because of course, we have a PC Government in Ottawa and we have a Liberal majority in the Senate.

Now, . granted that it is an appointed senate, but that is seen as something terrible, and they will talk about it. These bureaucrats who do not know how to set a proper criteria is someone sitting behind a desk in Ottawa, and I have spoken to some of them and asked how they ever came up with this kind of criteria when the problems are so marked because they do not know. They think these are people going around and they are going to take their little bit of work here and there and they are, oh, a Fishermen's Response Program, we are going to get on that and wo are going to use it.

This is Lhe attitude of Central Canada towards this Province, and at the epitome of this attitude and are we going to allow that to c.ontinue? And I say, no, we not allow Meech Lake to pass in its current Form, And that is where the fish is in M'::ech Lake, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! . SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! - MR. RAMSAY: But you warped that. Anyway, Mr. Speaker, we have to deal with the faceless bureaucrats in Ottawa with no measure of being able to change the Legislation of the Government of Canada in the House of Coinmons because of the L39 November 24, 1989 vol XLI AN HON.

MEMBER: (Inaudible) Meech Lake., MR. RAMSAY Now you keep on talking about money is the solution. Maybe we need more money as a materials component to the Emergency Response Program. Fine .Maybe we need more money, and that s hould be evaluated when the Fishery Response Program properly No. 40 R39

. addresses the needs of the people of the Province as required by the Federal Government, Then we will assess it. And I am sure my hon. colleague, the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Carter) will, if more money is needed, and this Liberal Government will see to it that the proper amount of money for materials will keep people from doing something like having to sit around because there is no' materials component to the program. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. RAMSAY: You heard yesterday about two new industries in Port aux Basques, something of which I am very proud to have been a part of, and I am sure that the hon.

Government opposite would take some credit for it being where it is, and, of course, the former . Liberal Government in Ottawa who made the initiative in the first place to put the incubator malls in place. MS COWAN: Who said that? MR. RAMSAY: The former Liberal Government in Ottawa, yes. MS COWAN: Oh, no. MR. RAMSAY: Oh, yes. Oh, yes. Maybe not Pasadena, but Port aux Basques anyway. One thing I wanted to speak about was one of these particular companies, XL.

Helmet which - if you want to know where Newfoundland stands right now, the Canadian International Development Agency, I think, is the proper, CIDA, as it goes. CIDA has a program where they allow plastics equipment to be leased to third world countries. Well we have managed through X.L. Helmet to lease some of this plastics equipment for Port aux Basques to manufacture . containers for the fishing industry. How many containers, you might a s k a r e produced here in this Province now. Not very many, a very, very small percentage of the total.

How many of these fish trays, anywhere From a three pound to a ten pound tray are manufactured in the Province? Very few. Most oF them come from Montreal and Nova Scotia. AN HON.MEMBER: And Grand Falls. MR.RAMSAY: And this past year, a bad year in the fishery, there were 59 million containers used in this Province alone at about $1.10 to $1.15 per container. That is $O million business if we capture the whole market, even if you capture 10 per cent of the market.

You are talking about a $6 million business for this Province that has never, never ever been thought of, actually I suppose it has hen thought of, but it has never been carried out before, SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! afl1tMffiri So that is economic diversification, and that is the kind of a thing. I will just give you some of the things that Port aux is looking at in a general sense. There are a few that are very, very different, I suppose, because some of them will he . . L40 November 24, 1989 Vol XLI No. 40 R4O

. ci] exported and will not be for a North America market at all. This Helmet Company has a contract with a company called the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle Company. We are going to be making teenage mutant ninja turtle helmets in Port Aux Basques, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. RAMSAY: Exporting them all over the world AN HON. MEM8ER: (Inaudible) in St. John's? AN HON. MEMBER: What is it? MR. RAMSAY: Oh, a teenage mutant ninja turtle is some new cartoon character or something which is all the craze, and they are going to be manufacturing child safety helmets with this moniker or whatever.

And everybody - AN HON. MEMBER: The hon. Member across the floor will be the first one. MR. RAMSAY: - will outfit everybody in this Chamber, Mr. Speaker, with one of those helmets when they are Produced AN HON. MEMBER: You nc.ed a hockey helmet (inaudible) MR. RAMSAY And, of course, hockey helmets, yes. We have a design for a new hockey helmet. We may call it the Mariner Hockey Helmet, Mr, Speaker. We may very well call it that. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. RAMSAY: We have, Mr. Speaker, also signed a deal with a company in the United States through X.L. Helmet, when I say we, the people of the area who