Province of Newfoundland FORTY - FIRST GENERAL ASSEMBLY - OF NEWFOUNDLAND Volume XLI Second Session Number 46 VERBATIM. REPORT (Hansard) Speaker: Honourable Thomas Lush S Friday [Preliminary Transcript] 1 June 1990

The House met at 9:00 a. vu. country, This is ultra—important. . £rIQir__cbM1fll: Order, please! Oral Questions Mr. 'Speaker: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. ,cSiLt: Thank you, Mr S p e a ker Mr. Speaker, bcgnn:tiiy the end of this week, I cjuess , the Premier will be representing the people of Newfoundland and Labrador at what may very well be the most important federal! provincial conference to be held for Newfoundland and Labrador since this Province joined Confederation in 1949. Mr, .

Speaker, I wonder if the Premier would tell the House whether or not he will keep - in mind the interest of what appears to be a growing and, greater, greater number of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who want to see the Meech Lake Accord approved? r..iaQQKt: The hon. the Premier Premier ells: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, I will keep in mind their interest, because their interest, really, is no different from the interest of all of the people of this Province, all of the people of the country for that matter, to ensure that we put in place a constitutional structure that will provide for the preservation of the Canadian Federal system, and an opportunity for all of the people of this Province to participate fully, and have an ability to participate fully, on a reasonably comparable basis with citizcns in the rest of the Now I know certain groups or people feel that the impact of this uncertainty impacts on them.

I understand the concerns of the business group that met yesterday and made this announcement. This is the growing numbers I assume the Leader of the Opposition is talking about. I understand and appreciate their concerns. Those people have put tremendous effort into building economic a n d business activity in Newfoundland, albeit for their benefit, b u t in the process they create economic activity and jobs in Newfoundland) and I give them credit and I understand their concerns, and I do not want to do anything that will in any way adversely affect them.

But, in the overall, I must take into account t h e overall interest of 570,000 people in this Province, not the growing 200 people or 300 people who have these kinds of concerns to the exclusion of the interest of all of the people of the Province. Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Leader of the Opçosition. Mr.Rideout: A supplementary, Mr. Speak or. Mr. Speaker, the Preini er referre.d to the group that madt ,. a public statement yesterday. Surely, the Premier will know and acknowledge that that group included businessmen, lawyers, academics, people from all three political parties - - An Hon. Member: , (Inaudible) Mr.

Rideout: Oh? No. I do not know about you, but (inaudible) was a member of this party - Order, please! r Li June 1, 1990 vol XLI No. 46 (Morning) Ri

:1] Order, please! The Chair has, on several occasions, reminded hon. Members about interruptions when people are either answering or asking questions. The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Rideout: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I was saying, that group was a group, obviously, which included people across all political spectrums and large representatives of the community, and I want to ask the Premier this Does the Preinier believe those people are sincere in their view, their strongly held view that the Meech Lake Accord must pass or Canada stands a chance of being fractured and this Province stands a chance of suffering d r a rn a t i. cal 1 y? Mr. ,eake.r: The hon. the Premier. Premier WeLls: Yes4 Mr. Speaker, I have no doubt they were sincere. I said the business group, because it was three businessmen who came to see me: Mr.

Collingwood, Mr. Ayre and Mr. DoiDhin, and it was the three businessmen who signed the Letter and the proposal. I know they have sought and I know they have received some support from others who are not business. I acknowledge that. I don't deny that. I took it to be the initiative of a group of businesspeople, and I believe that's what: it is, in fact, because it was the three businesspeople who came to see me.

When they came to see rue, one of them said, 'We know what you've been doing, Basically, we think you are right.' He said, 'I have talked to people all across this country who think your position is the right position, but now we are concerned because others are resisting what you have said is the right position, and what we agree with is the right position, it may cause the country to fracture.' I say to the hon. the Leader of the Opposition that this is the result of this kind of thing that you saw coining out of Ontario, fueling a sense of national crisis, t h e cause lo be adopted, the Meech Lake Accord as it. is, without logically thinking and assessing about what the impact will be and what's best for the country.

And I disagree with the Leader of the Opposition. I think that is the wrong way to approach it. Nevertheless, I respect his opinion that we should takEr into account their concerns because of what they apprehend as a possibility in the future. Mr. flr: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Rideout: Mr. Speaker, surely the Premier is not suggesting to this House and to t h e. people of Newfoundland and Labrador that there is no reason to be concerned for the future of Canada.

If the Meech Lake Accord Fails, isn't the Premier concerned that Canada will be fractured and that Canada, in fact, could in ' reality break apart? Isn't the Premier concerned about that, Mr. Speaker? MrjB!jsr: The hon. the Premier. Premier Wells: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I am immensely concerned about that. I can't think of that as a possibility. But I am also concerned about the 570,000 people in this Province whose per cap -i ta income is 58 per cent of the F' rn r 1.2 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI No. 46 (Morning) R2

4 11 L -d [IJ national average because of, the system we have in place., and I want to avoid putting in place constitutional changes that will lock us into that forever. That is the concern I have. I am concerned about what the person who sits in this seat fifty years from now will have to face. I have to be concerned about that. And, unlike that group that got together yesterday, I do not have the luxury of thinking only about the dollar impact on me over the next three to five years. I cannot think about that. An Hon. Member: (Inaudible) that is not true. Some Hon. Members: Oh, oh! 2.jj: Order, please!

Ms -Uere: Is that what (inaudible) about? Mr. Speaker: Order, please! The Chair made a ruling a minute or so ago to Members to my left, and the same rules equally apply to Members to my right. The hon. the Premier. I do not disagree with those who express the opinion that if the Meech Lake Accord does not go through it will disrupt economic activity in this country and will cause significant difficulty in this country. I cannot say that that is not so. Yes, I am apprehensive about it. I am vitally concerned about it.

But I have to weigh that possibility against where the Meech Lake Accord constitutional changes will leave the people of this Province and the people of the country ove rthe. next decades and centuries. I have to halnce that. And if the people of this Province are to sell their opportunity to be, to have political and social and economic independence in this country for the next decades and century, it will be the people of this Province who will do it; I will not ask this Legislature to force it on them against their wishes .EQLcLc: The hon the Member for Humber East, Ms Uerge: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the Premier that he is underestimating the integrity and the motives of the businesspeople and the academics and the artists and the cross-section of people in this Province who are growing in number in urging that the Mee.ch Lake Accord be ratified. Now my question to the Premier has to do with Manitoba Liberal Leader Sharon Carstairs. Ms Carstairs has been a close ally of •the Premiers in opposing the Meech Lake Accord. Ms Carstairs said in a revealing interview featured in The Globe and Mail this week - I have at copy here -. that she has given up on Quebec now.

She has concluded it is inevitable that Quebec is separating, a n d she is now concentrating her effort on preventing the other nine provinces from breaking apart, and on fashioning a Constitution for Confederation of nine provinces without Quebec. This is the interview. My question is ., will the Premier tell this House whether Ms Carstairs assessment and sentiments are shared by him? .Mr1ir: The hon . the Premier. Premier Wells: Let me first fl L3 June 1, 1990 Uol XLI No. 46- (Morning) R3

. address the comment about underestimating the integrity of the businesspeople who came to see me. I have not and I do not now, I simply reflect precisely what they said to me. They indicated clearly to me, or at least one of them did; one of them gave an affirmation, the other was stronger in the other direction. So, there wasn't unanimity in their position.

One oft hem said, 'We understand and support the position you have been taking, and I have talked to people all across this nation who express support for your position.' This is what they said to me. 'But now we see this is coming to a crisis and we think we see a possibility of it having a significant adverse effect on the country, it could cause the country to break up.

So, notwithstanding that we think you are right, we think you should give in. ' Now that is the position they have taken, so I have not underestimated their integrity, I have simply reported to the House what one of the three who came to see me said. Another one affirmed that he agreed with the stand that Newfoundland had been taking, but now he was concerned about the impact. A n d the other one said, No, he thought we should not do this anyway. He appreciated and understood the position we had taken, but we should give in to Quebec's position. Now, I have not underestimated their integrity.

I know they have sincere and deeply held concerns, and I respect their opinions. So I do not want anybody in this H o u s e to misrepresent my response to them. The second question the hon. Member asked was the assessment which she characterized or attributed to Ms Carstairs, I do not know what the Globe and Mail did, I only know what the hon. Member did and I know she cannot read specifically in the House in a Question. I will get the

article and take a look at it. I would be most surprised to find that Ms Carstairs has, in Fact, tak en the position t h a t was represented by the hon. Member, but I cannot quarrel with it because I have not read the story, nor have I talked to her about that issue. That is inconsistent with the discussions I have had with Ms Carstairs. And if that is her position, I do not accept it, I reject it. _..peaker: The hon. the Member for Humber East. Ms Verge: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Another question For the Premier.

The - Premier is a lawyer and he has had a much longer career practicing law, working in an adversarial atmosphere, than he has had in politics. Will the Premier agree that as he represents the interests of 570,000 Newfoundlanders and Labrador i a ri s at L lie N r s t Ministers' Conferencc., in Ottawa, this Sunday, he must abandon the adversarial approach of a lawyer and don the mantle of a statesperson? An Hon. Member: Good question. Mr.Speaker: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank. Mr. Matthews: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of '7 r L . 11 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI Nb. 46 (Morning) RI.

. S Fisheries. In light of his comments at the rally in Grand Bank last Saturday, when the town once again rallied to save the fish plant, the Minister made certain inferences at the rally that he had contacted the Federal Minister of Fisheries, Mr. Valcourt, concerning port quotas, of course, which was very pleasing to the ears of the approximately 400 people present. I would like to ask the Minister, can he conFirm that he has written the Federal Minister of Fisheries, Mi".

Valcourt, in support of port quotas, and has he, indeed, asked the Federal Minister to consider this concept when allocating fish quotas for next year? The hon. the Minister of Fisheries. Mr. Mr, Speaker, I should set the record straight, I suppose, in respect to what the hon. gentleman said about port quotas In my speech to the people in Grand Bank last weekend, I said it is obvious that the current system of enterprise allocations, a system which was devised back when we had lots of fish, needs to he reviewed.

I said there are a number of options which could quite possibly be looked at, including port quotas, but I certainly did not come out and suggest that there be port quotas. Certainly I said that is one of the options. Maybe vessel quotas would be an option, for example; maybe a modification or improvement on the exis ting enterprise allocation system and, again, maybe port quotas. Yes, I have written the Minister, on May 17 actually, in which I have outlined some concerns about LB June 1, 1990 vol XLI the current system.

My concerns w e r e sparked by virtue OF w h a t could happen in Burgeo, and that has been an issue in the House, where it has been reported that the current operator of the Burgeo plant is contemplating selling the plant. I have some fears as to what might happen to the plant in Burgeo, if that sale is consummated. There is nothing on the books new in Canada, or in this Province, that would compel that company, NatSea - National Sea - to leave their quotas in Burgeo.

That could be devastating on the town OF Burgeo, and that is what sparked my letter to the Minister, asking him to review the whole system and to give me some kind of an assurance that if and when the sale is consummated that is now envisaged for the plant in Burgeo, that the enterprise allocation will nol be jeopardized, that the new operators will continue to keep that allocation. r..Ei.cLr: The hon. the Member For Grand Bank. Mr_tthews: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would just like to say to the Minister that the Burgeo sit.uation is not comparable to the Grand Bank situation.

From day one, when National Sea Products entered into negotiations w:i th the consortium of companies to sell the Burgeo plant, they voluntarily - voluntarily ..- offered that allocation of fish to stay with the Burgeo plant. Now the Minister has piggybacked on that and tried to take some credit for it. But let me say to the Minister that in essence what he said in Grand Bank, and the No. 46 (Morning) RB. [1

. people were very pleased to hear him say it, that where an enterprise allocation is owned by a certain company, if that company decides to pull up its roots and move on somewhere else, that allocation should not be allowed to leave that plant. An Hon. Member: That is what he said Mr. Matthews: Now the Chairman of the Fisheries Committee in Grand Bank rose that day, Mr. Speaker, and thanked the Minister for this change in policy and thanked him for supporting port quotas. I say to the Minister, is the Provincial Government supporting the concept of port quotas?

If so, has he corresponded in writing to the Federal Minister outlining this, and has he received any information back from the Federal Minister on whether or not he will he receptive? Because he certainly left the people of Grand Bank with the impression that the Provincial Government was supporting port quotas. _peaker: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries. Mr. Carter: Mr.

Speaker) in getting back to the first part of his question about the Burgeo situation, of course, National Sea has volunteered, and I underline the word volunteered , to allow the quota to remain in Burgeo, but it is only because they have seen fit to do that.

The Federal Government does not -have any law or any regulation that will compel them to do - it, nor does the Province A n d I take issue with that, because what you are doing in a case like that, that enterprise allocation, for example, which is now needed to keep the Burgeo plant operating and the community alive, could very well be transferred to a Nova Scotian fish plant. And it might very well be. who knows? There is nothing on the books to say that has to stay in Burgeo, and it was in that context that I wrote the Minister and that I made my s'peech in Grand Bank.

And I have asked the Minister to join with the Province in setting up what I call a blue ribbon type committee, a committee of people in all sectors oF t h e industry and society in Newfoundland, to look at the whole broad spectrum of where we are going in the fisheries in the Province, including enterprise allocations, and let us see where we are and where we want to go. Because enterprise allocations were brought in at a time when there was lots of fish and, when companies got certain quotas. It was a free—for--all son: of thing, and at the time it served a purpose.

But like everything else after - what? — seven or eight years, there is obviously a ne-ed for review. Mr. Speaker: The honl the Member for Grand Bank. Mr. Matthews: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. - what it seems like to me, Mr. Speaker, is that the Minister knew full well what would be pleasing to the ears in Grand Bank on Saturday, because the concept and the pressure for port quotas was started by the people of Grand Bank, once they found out that Fishery Products International was closing down their fish plant. I would like a supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to the Premier. .[ see the Premier is being distracted, is .

Lb June 1, 1990 vol XLI No. 46 (Morning) Rb

11 . but 1 UlIl wait. I have a suppleThentary question for you the Premier. L?''We ].ls: Oh, I apologize. Mr. Speaker. Mr. Matthews: Sir, no problem. A supplementary for the Premier, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to ask the Premier in light of what the Minister of Fisheries said in Grand Bank on Saturday, and I would just like to run through it once again, what he said was, 'That where an enterprise allocation is owned by a certain company, if that company decides to pull up• its roots and move on somewhere else, that allocation should not he allowed to leave that plant. ' My supplementary for the Premier: Is that now the Provincial Government's position? Is that the Provincial Government' s policy? And is this not a significant shift in Government policy on this particular port quota issue? Mr.

SIeaker: The hon. the Premier Premier Wells : No, Mr. Speaker. There has been no shift in Government policy on the port quota issue, The Minister of Fisheries has stated quite clearly what Government policy is, that he thinks it is time to address the whole question of quotas; and maybe enterprise allocation is no longer suited; and maybe the fact that we have run into the kinds of difficulties we have now with the shortage of fish, that makes it necessary for us to revisit the whole question and look at, amongst other things, vessel quotas, as he has mentioned.

That may make a good deal of sense, to think in terms of: vessel quotas. It may well be an appropriate way to do it. Port quotas may he the Li June 1, 1990 Vol XLI appropriate way. No, there has been no shift in Government policy, the policy that has been stated all along for Government remains as it was, The Minister has written the Federal Minister and has suggested that it is time for a general review, and I agree with that. Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank. s: Thank you once again, Mr. Speaker, Yes, I aqree with that, as well, with the review. No one can argue against that.

But what we have to remember, Mr. Speaker, when you talk about vessel quotas or allocations, is that the companies deploy the vessels and Fisheries Products International has now set up four trawler ports and taken vessels which, in essence, belonged to towns like Grand Bank and has deployed them somewhere else. So that will not work,' My supplementary to the Minister of Fisheries: Would he table the correspondence he sent to the Federal Minister so that we can have a look at it and see, in essence, what he is proposing to the Federal Minister? Would he consider doing that? Mr.

Speaker: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries. Mr. Carter: Mr. Speaker, I certainly will. I have nothing to -- I was going to say hide, but that is not even the word to use withold from the House in terms of that letter. It is a letter, in fact, which is a two or three page letter. I will take his question under advisement, and quite possibly I will table the letter next. week. No. 46 (Morning) Ri LI]

. But certainly, gettang back to the question he asked, the matter, Mr. Speaker, OF enterprise allocations, the whole spectrum of the way fish is being allocated,. I think needs to be reviewed. . I repeat, we have asked the Minister to set up a committee of highly placed people within the industry and Newfoundland generally, to look at the whole broad spectrum of fisheries development, allocations, For example, and licencing policy. We are hoping to get that kind of a committee in place. I will take under advisement the question, and possibly table the letter next week. Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Member for St.

Mary's - The Capes. Mr. Hearn: Thank you, Mr. Speaker My question is also to the Minister of Fisheries. I wonder if the Minister is now in a position to give us the final details on the agreement with the operator of the Twillingate plant - how much is the management fee? How much is the lease? and other pertinent details. The hon. the Minister of Fisheries. .r_.sr±e...r: Mr. Speaker, the agreement the hon. gentleman is referring to was entered into between a receiver appointed by the Newfoundland and Labrador Development Corporation and Dr. Ches I3lackwood's company.

I have discussed the matter with my colleague, the Minister of Development, a n d I understand he h a s the document now ready to table... I presume that when he comes back into the House next week, he will be tabling it. It is his responsibility to table it, not mine. Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Member for Mary's - The Capes. Mr. Hearn: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the Minister for his answer. The Minister has recently been instrumental in arranging for a lease of a building in Trepassey, also owned by NLDC, to a local concern.

Will he tell us under what conditions the building was leased, because I . k n o w he knows, and for how long a n d ror how much? Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries. Mr. Carter: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Gentleman is not correct in what he is saying. This Minister did not arrange for the lease oF a building in Trepassey to the - I presume you are talking about the Devereaux family, , or , company Again, that is being negotiated by the Department of Development.

The building is owned by the Newfoundland and L a b r a d o r, Development Corporation, a n d I understand that t h e Economic Recovery Team, the Department of Development and the NLDC have been talking to a certain gentleman in Trepassey. . I am not sure if Lhere is a deal made yet, hut, again, that s a question that would he more appropriately asked the Minister of Development. Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's The Cape.s. Mr. Hearn: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I say to the Minister, that is not the information being circulated; the information is that the Minister was pretty heavily involved in it.

Could I a s k the Minister what licence or [I] LB . June 1, 1990 Vol XLI No. 46 (Morning) RB

. licences have been issued to the operation, and what conditions, if any, are attached to the licences? Mr. SEMiter: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries. Mr. Carter: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. gentleman knows, for some years now the company in question has been endeavouring to get a primary processing licence, and consistent with our policy, to which we are adhering right to the letter, I should say, we rejected his request for a primary processing licence. He appealed that decision and the Appeal Board upheld the decision of the Department of Fisheries.

I understand he has already gotten a secondary processing licence on which there isn't an embargo or a freeze. I will certainly find out next week exactly what licences he has and report, but I can tell you now he does not have a primary groundfish processing iicence; The hon. the Member for St. John's East. Ms _Duff: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to direct this question to the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs A year, ago, the Newfoundland and La Ii r ado r lie r i t age Coal i ti o n inc t with the Minister and made a request that he establish a task force on Historic Resources similar to the Task Force that was established on the Arts.. Now, I understand that the Ministers response was very positive. I think the group came away from the meeting certainly very pleased, but the Minister said he would not be able to establish that task force until the Arts Task Force had reported .

Now the Arts Task Force has been in the Ministers hands for the pastS two months, so L9 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI I would like to ask the Minister, what is the status of the request of the Newfoundland and Labrador Heritage Coalition concerning a task force, if the Minister, in fact, does intend to establish a task force, and if so, when? Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. Mr.Gullase: Yes, Mr. Speaker, indeed I have met wit[I the Heritage Coalition and we discussed the idea of a task force. I think it has great merit. We are presently considering, however, the results of Dr.

O'Flaherty's Committee, formed to look at the Arts and Culture in the Province, and I wanted to complete that review and, of course, make recommendations to Government. We are in the process now of doing a

summary for Government of that Task Force review, which was qulte extensive, and following the submission to Government, I do plan, in fact, to consider, and most likely proceed with, another study of heritage in this Province. So, I will be reacting to the Heritage Coalition in a positive way, I Feel sure, but it is premature now, as we are s ti]] in the process of dealing with the Arts study. Mr. p&aker: The hon. the Member for St. John's East. MsDuff: Mr.

Speaker, I am not quite sure I understand why it is premature, given that there is almost a critical neglect in the whole area of historic resources and they are two totally different areas, with diFferent manpower, different groups involved, why could they not he parallel tracked? No. 46 (Morning) R9 .

. I would like to ask the Minister iF the delay in dealing with even the Arts Task Force and . with this request and a number of other very important initiatives within those two divisions, is related to the fact that there are so many vacancies in these Divisions. The two Director positions, of both Culture and Historic Resources, have been vacant since the early retirement program, and I think there are either eight to thirteen other vacancies.. in important 0 si. t ions i. ri t lies e relatively small Divisions. Does that, in fact, have a bearing on the fact that everything seems to be happening very slowly?

And when would the Minister be intending to fill the Director positions and the other vacancies within those two Divisions? Mr..aeaker: The hon. .the Minister for Municipal and Provincial Affairs. Mr. Gullage: Mr. Speaker, I am not aware of thirteen vacancies, as the Member suggests, in the Department. I do not think thirteen vacancies exist. I would be very surprised if they do. As far as the Director of Cultural AFfairs is concerned, at the request of Dr. O'Flaherty and the Committee we delayed that appointment of the Director.

They asked to have input into the mandate of that particular position, the job description and so on, and, indeed, we have that input now in the Arts study. MsVee: But yet you have not changed (inaudible) So, there has been no undue delay in the study. We are taking the time that is necessary; my officials are taking the time, along with me as the Minister, to review the study and that is the normal process. It is unheard of to release a study commissioned by the Government prior to the Government seeing it. Ms Uerge: Are you going to do this with the Hughes Commission Report? Mr. Flight: Oh, what a mouth?

Mr.Speaker: Order, please! The hon. the Minister OF Municipal and Provincial Affairs, Mr. Gullaq: So, Mr. Speaker, everything is indeed on time. We do plan to fill the position of the Director of Cultural Affairs as quickly as possible after Government reviews the report and we make decisions on the details of the report. An Hon. Member: You are like cold molasses trying to get up a hill. Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Member for St. Johns East.

Ms Duff: It is my understanding that back in January the Cultural Task Force actually sent the Minis ter information and basically advised him to proceed with the appointment of the Director, because the groups are very concerned about the i m p a c t on initiatives in the Arts of not having a Director in that Division. So, I think we are not proceeding in the normal course. I think there are very undue. delays. Is the Minister aware that there are very serious morale problems in these Divisions, particularly in Historic Resources, and that there is a growing concern in the N . . 110 June 1, 1990 .

Vol XLI No. 46 (Morning) RiO

L . . corrniiunaty , both the Arts and Historic Resources Community, about the lack of action on a large number of very important cultural and historic initiatives? Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. Mr. GullaQ: No, Mr. Speaker, I am not. As a matter of fact the contrary is truc' In my discussions with the Directors and with people involved in the various divsons within Some Hon. Members: There are no directors Mr.Gulla: The various people, as well involved with the Arts in this Province, they are very, very pleased as to the way the various Divisions are being run.

The only complaints I get, are from the opposite side. Mr.Speaker: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains. jr. _ Warren: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Premier. Mr. Speaker, a number of months ago the Pre.mier visited the community of Davis Inlet, a n d he met with the Band Council and the Band Chief at the time. I believe it is fair to say that the Premier did see Davis Inlet in a very poor condition. The community needs a major cleanup. Environmentally, it was disastrous.

There are problems with health and sanitary conditions in the community, and the Premier realized this when he was in Davis Inlet a number of mon ths ago. The Premier, during his meeting with the Band Council, indicated to the Chief that his Government would be willing to help finance a major cleanup in the community. Could the Premier advise if he will carry out this promise to the Band Council in Davis Inlet? If so, when can they expect to get some finances to cleanup the community, as we are now getting pretty close to the snow being gone and it is now the right time to do so? The hon. the Premier.

Premier Wells: It is not a question of if we will, Mr. Speaker. The commitment is being honored by work already in progress toward achieving that. A committee made up of representatives of the Departments of Health, Social Services, Justice, and Education are working on the matter right now. Yes, the commitment is there.. The need is great in the community. But it is not ju&t a question of, as the hon. Member says, give the Community some money to do that. That will not work. It has been done in the past, that approach has been tried in the past, and it has been unsuccessful.

So we.. are trying another approach, where people responsible, with governmental respons -ibility for environment, health, justice and education in the Province generally, are going to be directly involved in it, working with the people of the community to resolve the problem in that way, not just throw some rnoney at the community. Mr. Speaker: Question Period has expired Members , before proceeding to the next item of business, we would like to extend a welcome to some students from a couple of schools Lii June 1, 1990 Vol XLI No. 46 (Morning) Ru

. in the Province. So first I would like to extend a warm and cordial welcome to twenty Grade VIII and IX students from the John Burke School in Grand Bank, accompanied by their teachers, Mr. Arthur Cluett and Mr. Gordon IJallis. Some Hon, Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker: Secondly we would like to welcome to the galleries thirty-six Grade V and Vi students from the Newville Elementary School, New World Lsland, accompanied by parents Mrs. Evelyn Reddick and Mrs . Halda Grimes and three teachers Marjorie Green, Roland Hamilyn, and Wilbert Hawkins Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr.

Speaker: Also I would like to advise hon. Members today that we are losing one of our press reporters and that is Ms Sandy Courtney. This is her last day and on behalf of hon. Members we would like to express - Some_Hon. Members: Oh, oh! Some Hon._Members: Hear, hear! I think that shows the high regard which hon. Members hold for Ms Courtney and we want to thank her for her efficient lob in the past and wish her well in her new job. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! EINE .1r_.nRr: I am sorry, the Speaker went ahead, back to C. Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees MsVerae.: Yes, Mr. Speaker, on Mr.

Speaker: The hon. the Minister for Works, Services and Transportation. Mr. Gilbert: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like today to table the report of the exceptions to The Public Tendering Act for April, 1990. A Page will be there momentarily Are there further reports by Standing and Special Committees? Orders of the Day Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Government House Leader. Mr._Baker: Thank you, Mr. Spc.aker. Just a very brief point OF order before - Mr. Speaker: T h e. hon. the Government House Leader on a point of order. Mr.

Baker: We are into second reading or Bill No. 30, the Kruger Bill, and the hon. the PreirFer was not here yesterday. I k n o w the Member for Humber East was in the middle of a speech, but could we 'by leave' postpone the remainder of her speech to allow the Premier to respond to a number of questions, because he has to leave very shortly, Mr. Speaker. So I wonder if 'by leave' we could do that? Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Member for Humber East. fl 112 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI No. 46 (Morning) R12

. n behalf oft he Opposition I give leave. Yesterday we progressed faster than some of us expected, and got into the Kruger Bill, as we call it, when neither the Premier, nor the Minister of Forestry, nor the Minister of Environment, nor any Minister knowledgeable about the effect of the Bill was in the House. The first couple of speakers on our side, the Member for Mount Pearl and myselF, both asked questions; since the Bill simply gives the Governirient authority to execute an agreement along the lines of one deposited with the Clerk of the Executive Council.

We would like the Premier or some representative of the Government to explain the gist of that agreement and then we will resume debating the principle of it. Mr. Speaker, the understanding is, that after the Premier finishes, I will be able to resume my presentation and use the time remaining to inc out of the thirty minutes alloted. Mr. Spaker: The hon. the Premier Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank hon. Members opposite for their courtesy. Mr.

Speaker, when Kruger took over the mill in Corner Brook, bought it from the Bowater organization in 1984, they gave certain commitments with respect to modernization of the mill and refurbishing it so as to make it a very competitive mill. Their projected expenditure at the time, if my recollection serves me correctly, was they projected s o inc tin n g 1 i. k e $ 1 9 7 m i 1 1 io n dollars would be spend in the modernization program. In fact, 113 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI they have spent even more than that, and they have done a very good job.

And here, lest I forget it toward the end, I ought to express on behalf of the people of the Province, but in particular the people of the western Newfoundland area, more significantly affected by the mill operations in Corner Brook. The Kruger ownership of Corner Brook Pulp and Paper has resulted in a tremendous improvement in the performance and operation of that mill, and in the capability oft that mill . I want to commend the company and the owners of the shares of that company for their dedicated effort.

I know they are motivated to earn profits For themselves, but that is a very respectable and noble motive, and I endorse it fully. But I want to say, Mr. Speaker, the Government is very pleased, as I am sure the former Government was very pleased, with the performance of the Kruger company. And I, perhaps, have a more personal involvement in that than anybody else. In t h e process, I do not want to fail to commend the Bowater Group For their 50 years of dedicated efFort and c o nt r i ID u t ion to we s t e ri Newfoundland.

And don't anybody underestimate that eFfort. rhe history that has been written, and when the complete history is totally written; it will be s e e n that the Bowater companies made a tremendous contribution to the economic development of western Newfoundland, in particular, and indeed, the whole Province. But change comes, even after 50 years, and their priorities were changed . They decided thatthey would either close or sell the No. 46 (Morning) R13 .

. mill in Corner, Brook. They worked with the former Government to try and find a buyer, and they did find a buyer, and that buyer was Kruger. I want to commend both the Bowater Group, but also to particularly commend the Kruger organization for their completion of their commitment .to the modernization of that mill. They have indeed, in fact, spent more. There is also a need for further improvement to correct the cx t e n s i v e e n u I r o nine. n t a 1 problems that are characteristic of these old mills .

That environmental correction problem is going to cost, in order to do it correctly, a good deal more than was originally anticipated. As a matter of fact, approximately $38 million will he required in order to carry it out in a proper way, and the Government is insisting that it be carried, out in a proper way.

Corner Brook Pulp and Paper agrees with this, but they are also concerned that the timing of the program, right at this particular time, when there is a general downturn in the newsprint industry in the world, and pressures on the prices; that their projected cash flow will be affected as a :result of that.

Carrying out the modernization program as they did, with an additional . expenditure of some $25 - $30 million over and above that which they projected, and then having to carry out an even more extensive environmental improvement program than had been proj eeted; may in these particular circumstances, market circumstances, put undue pressure on what is already predicted to be a fairly tight cash flow situation. We are concerned, the Government is concerned, that the environmental improvement program not be delayed.

At the time the mill was sold, the Government of the day put in place what is called a PUT Agreement. That Government did not, as such, guarantee any of the Kruger loans necessary to carry out the refurbishing and moderhization of the mill. Instead, what the Government did - I suppose you could say it was a kind o1 a guarantee in a ulay w a s firmly agreed to buy the Deer Lake Power Plant from the banks if the mill could not meet its obligation to the banks for the money it borrowed.

The Government agreed that when you realize on the assets, we give you a commitment beforehand, we will purchase the Deer Lake Power facilities for $30 million, Thus the banks knew that there would be available to them at the very least $30 mill ion from the sale of that asset, so that gave them a certain level of comfort. Now it is all very well to say it is not a guarantee, but it is in the nature of a guarantee in that they guarantee they will purchase something. That worked very well. The guarantee had a limit on it When the company earned $ 3 0 million net profit, the obligation disappeared.

The PUT obligation fell off the table. Well the company has reached that. They have done very well with the mill. . Now they have reinvested that entire $30 million back into the mill a n d the. Government can only be impressed with their performance. That is why I want to express that appreciation this morning. Mr. Speaker, I can only sincerely . . 114 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI No. 16 (Morning) RH

. r hope that the total absence of reporters in the press gallery does not mean that they are not listening to this because frankly. I think it is not enough for me to write the Kruger Company and express that approval, I think it is important that the people of Newfoundland see that their Government acknowledges the contribution the Kruger Company has made. Now, Mr.

Speaker, in order to have an adequate cash flow to continue the operation of the will and to carry out the $38 million capital program to do the environmental correction that is necessary, the Kruger Company has said to the banks, will you agree to postpone the repayment. We can repay what we had agreed to repay at the time of, the modernization. We have earned a profit. We have the ability to repay it. But will you agree to postpone the repayment of it to allow us to use that capital to do the refurbishing for environmental purposes? The banks have said yes, we agree with you. We are prepared to do that.

We have great confidence and great faith in you and in the Corner Brook mill and its future. We are prepared to do that, but do you suppose the Government would be prepared to put the PUT back in place on similar terms and conditions to a level that would approximate, or come close to approximating, the additional capital that you have put in for modernization and environmental improvement.

So they have asked the Government if the Government would agree to reinstate the PUT to the extent of $50 million to allow the banks to raise the remaining capital necessary to do this and to meet Lib June 1, 1990 Vol XLI its obligation. The Government have considered this, Mr. Speaker, and we believe that is the right thing to do. The agreement: that has been entered into would enable this.

The legislation that is now before the House is to authorize the Government to give that undertaking, because it is an undertaking that could result in future financial obligations for the Government, the approval of the House, of course, is necessary. I believe we have just tahl ed this morning the agreement that will., be appended to it. I guess, the hon. Member has not had a chance to see it yet. The Clerks are just now distributing it around, and like most agreements of this nature it has a lot of legalese and words and whereases and et ceteras in it, but it spells out exactly what is being proposed.

What I have described for you is, of course, the general purpose of the Bill and will allow for debate in principle on that issue. I am sure all Members of the House would be happy to endorse it. ihe Members can have then an adequate opportunity to reviewS t h e agreement before we g e t to Committee stage of - the Bill, where there would be opportunity to discuss any issue in detail. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr.S.aker: The hon. the Member for Humber East. Ms Verge: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier has provided more. information about this Bill, hut there is still some information that we must have to fully understand the meaning of the Bill and the purpose ol the bcirrowing, which is being backed by this No. 46 (Morning) RiB C

. extended and expanded PUT option. I will g e t to some of those questions. Let me say first, though, that as I mentioned when I began my remarks yesterday, the newsprint mill in Corner Brook is and has been the single most important industry in western Newfoundland.

It is one of the most important industries in the whole Province, both in terms of contribution to the gross domestic product and also in terms of employment in the miil and in the woods I agree with the Premier's assessment of the merit and value of Bowaters ownership, and management and operation of the mill for fifty years, and of Kruger's contribution over the past five and a half to six years, Kruger being the parent company of Corner Brook Pulp and Paper Limi Led The Premier was associated with Bowater, as he mentioned, although he failed to add that he has had no association whatsoever with either Kruger or Corner Brook since he moved out of Corner Brook Premier Wells: That is inaccurate - just as Bowater was downsizing t h e. mill and j u s t beFore they announced to the public that they were pulJ.ing out altogether.

Also, the Premier might have rounded out his sentiments of appreciation by paying tribute to the Peckford Government for its efforts in attracting Kruger to the Province and in securing from Kruger a commitment for a $200 million modernization program. As the Premier said, Kruger has actually spent more than $200 million on miii modernization.

From what I know, and I believe most members of the public believe, the work done to date has improved the quality of the newsprint produced, has enhanced the marketability of the product, and has assured the long—term viability of the Corner Brook operation in the context of the worldwide newsprint market. However, Kruger has not fulfilled its obligations to abate pollution.

I hope, in the absence of the Premier, who is just leaving, somebody else in the Government is going to be able to answer precisely what kind of pollution abatement will be done with the financing being guaranteed by the Government through this Bill; because I assure Members of the Government that the people of the Corner Brook area are becoming more and more concerned about the affects of pollution from the mill., both air pollution and water pollution.

As I said, Kruger has not lived up to its obligations set out in the original agreements with the Provincial Government on taking over ownership of the Corner Brook mill five and a halF years ago. It has exceeded its spending target on mu. 1 modernization, but the effort has not gone into pollution abatement. One OF the improvements completed was converting mill burners From oil burning to both bLinker C oil and bark and wood chip burning. That has had the desired affect of lowering energy costs For operating the mill, but it has had the. detrimental consequence of aggravating the air polluton pro b 1 eli.

It has resulted in the iii 111. stacks emitting sooty particles, and for [1 1-16 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI No, 46 (Morning) RiO

. . those who are Familiar with the geography of Corner Brook, they might appreciate the fact that Corner Brook, topographically being shaped like a bow, and the prevailing wind being in the direction of the townsite for much of the year, townsite is subjected to a rain of sooty particles. There are people who believe that the invisible gases being putoff from the mill are harmful to health. That has never been proved. But it is apparent that the invisible gas.s are irritating, the sulphur fumes are bothersome.

And to many of us living in the townsite part of Corner Brodk, it seems as though the sulphur fumes are worse. Now, Mr. Speaker, it is important for me to emphasize the concerns of my constituents about pollution that is resulting From the Corner Brook newsprint mill, Now the Member for Port de Grave, the Minister of Social Services, not being familiar with Corner Brook, undoubtedly cannot appreciate these peoples concerns. But let me assure him that these are concerns every bit as real as concerns of his constituents in Coley's Point or Bay Roberts. Now if the Member will allow ine to proceed, Mr.

Speaker, this is a serious matter. I would like on behalf of my constituents to have the Government explain just how the borrowing that is being backed through the provisions of this bill, and the agreement enabled by the bill, will address both the air pollution problems and the water pollution problems associated with the operation of the Corner Brook mill. As I explained there are two types oF air pollutions , the particulate emission which is now worse, since 1 17 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI the mill started using bark a n d chips as well as oil fo rf uel The invisible gases which also seem to be worse.

The sulphur fumes seem tobe worse in the past couple of years than ever. And then water pollution includes suspended solids as well as dissolved solids. Now the Provincial Government has jurisdiction over the air and it is responsible For air pollution controls for abating air pollution, a n d s e e i n g that the quality of air meets environmental standards.

That is a Provincial Government responsibility, The Federal Government, on the other hand, has jurisdiction over the water, and is bringing into force shortly, stringent new water pollution regulations, I say stringent, in the eyes of some e n v i ro nrne n t a I. is t s t he s t a rid a rd s will not be high enough, but they are stricter than present Federal water guidelines. Now, Mr. Speaker, when the Premier spoke he mentioned the figure of $37 million. Mr.Baker: Thirty—eight million.

Ms Uerae: T h i r t y -- e i g h t ml] lion the Government House Leader says, as being the target of Kruger borrowing, that is being backed by the Government under this measure. Now, Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that the full cost of addressing the air pollution problem associated with the Corner Brook mill is more than that. And furthermore it is my understanding, from speaking with e n u iron in e n t off i c i a 1 s i n other provinces which have newsprint mills, that t h e likely cost of addressing the water po] lution No. 46 (Morning) R17

. problem to meet the new Federal regulations is much more than that. In other words, the total cost of curbing both the air and water pollution problems associated with the Corner Brook mill is probably in the order of $100 million or maybe more. And what I would like to know, Mr.

Speaker, is precisely uihat is Kruger or Corner Brook Pulp and Paper Limited going to do to address pollution problems related to the Corner Brook miii with the borrowing that the Government is backing through this Legislation and will those measures address fully the pollution problems, so as to have the mill comply with both the Provincial air pollution guidelines and Federal water guidelines, those are the most important questions, Mr. Speaker.

I should add that the people of Corner Brook are becoming more and more cynical about both the will of Government, particularly the Provincial Government, and the ability of Government to ensure compliance with environmental standards by a large corporation, such as Corner Brook Pulp and Paper. Now, we appreciate that there is always a need to balance industry and employment on the one hand with environmental compliance. Mr.

Baker: (Inaudible), Ms Verge: The Governmônt House Leader is asking about the comparison with the Government of which I was a Member, and it is fair to say that the doubts about the effectiveness of the Provincial Government in ensuring environmental compliance began during the Peckford Administration, because it was then that the first extension of Lii e air pollution corn p1 ian cc req u i rem e n t s of t he or i g TI. n a 1 agreement was granted. However, this Government has been in office for more than a year and the problems have become worse and the level of concern among the public is growing.

This is the Government that has the responsibility now, and I call on them, before we pass this Bill on second reading, to answer the questions that I lust posed. Mr. Efford: (Inaudible) Ms Verge: Mr. Speaker, the Member for Port de Grave, doesn't know what he is talking about and I would suggest that he wait until we get into a social services measure before he starts interecting. I know the Government House Leader is pointing to the DraFt Agreement that was lust circulated. I haven't had a chance to read that properly. I see in a

schedule a list . of projects; some of this list uses technical language and I have some familiarity with it, but, what I would ask the Government to do, bearing in mind that this is a public forum and bearing in mind that we are here to serve the interest of the public, that a representative oF the Government explains this in lay person's language.

Basically, what the people in Corner Brook want to know is, after Kruger or Corner Brook Pulp and Paper spends the money, whether it is $38 million or, some greater amount that the Gouernmcnt is helping them borrow, will the mill in Corner Brook meet Provincial air pollution guidelines and Federal water pollution regulations? They want to know whether the rain oF sooty particles will end and whether summertime they will be able to S is . No. 46 (Morning) RiB 118 June 1. 1990 Vol XLI

U 4 . enjoy their patios and their gardens without any visible air pollution. They want to know whether there will no longer be sulphur fumes on muggy days that are irritating, particularly to people with asthma and bronchitis. Mr. Speaker, I hope this doesn't degenerate into a partisan shouting match about who did what, when, about the seventeen years - we are here today in this public forum, it is 1990, the Liberal Government has been in off-ice for, more than a year, the people in Corner Brook are becoming more and more concerned and they would like answers . I am here as their representative to ask questions.

I have just done that and I would like the Government to give a straightforward, nonpartisan answer about when the air pollution emanating from the Corner Brook mill is going to end, what ability the Provincial Government has to ensure that happens and happens as quickly as possible and also, what, to the knowledge of this Provincial Government, is being done to have the mill comply with the new Federal water environmental guidelines? Mr. Speaker, I will take my seat now and listen with interest to the answers that are forthcoming from the Government. The hon. the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture.

Mr._fliqht: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in the essence of time it is pretty difficult to do a better job than the Premier did with regards to explaining the reasons for the extension to the PUT Agreement. I understand, of course, that the Mernhcm only received the Agreement and the Legislation minutes before L19 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI she spoke. I understand also that she would not have had a chance to look at the recommendation with regards to the environmental capital expenditures that will be undertaken as a result of the legislation, or as a result of the extension to the PUT.

She indicated that she saw very quickly a list that accounted for $38 million but she did not understand the technical end of it. And I have to say to her that I and not very many people understand the details of what is required to he done to effect the changes. But I will go over the changes with her.

I might say to her also that in the Committee stage she has the opportunity to zero in, so to speak, on any particular concerns she has with regards to her own personal knowledge of the soot problem or whatever, and decide and have an explanation as to what extent these proposed changes will address the environmental concern, particularly the air pollution concern, the soot raining down on various areas of Corner Brook. But in the meantime I will just very quickly - and I am not even sure that it is necessary to read these things but actually that is probably what I should do. They have outlined very clearly in

schedule C the expenditure

schedule and the amount of money that wail be spent. And this money will he spent as a result of the extension of the PUT Agreement. It will permit them to reach the compliance

schedule that they had agreed to, probably with her Administration. A n d I want to say this to the Member, and she would we 1 know this probably, that the new Federal requirements that she talks about that will cause Kruger No. 16 (Morning) R19 C]

C] or Corner Brook Pulp and Paper to spend a lot more money, and Grand Falls, and mills all across the country, in order to meet the new environmental requirements of the Federal Government is by and large probably over and above anything that will be done here.

I mean these came lately and I can tell her, and I am sure she is aware, that the management of Corner Brook Pulp and Paper and Abitibi—Price and the mills in the country are now talking to and analysing and determining whether or not they can, how they will, where the 'noney will come from and all the rest, because she is right, there are vast expenditures required to comply, particularly with the Federal requirements.

There is a time frame allowed and I know the companies are wrestling wiih it now, and it is the corripany's intention to comply with the various Federal regulations that have been brought down, and I might say, have been introduced and brought down and imposed on the industry over and above (inaudible) It is possible that some of the work that will be done with this $38 million will have the effect of dealing with some of the Federal Government's requirements, but it was not designed to because, as the Member knows, the new Federal requirements were outlined by the Federal Government quite recently, and the various Pulp and Paper Companies in the industry, particularly the owners and operators of the older mills at which these new environmental requirements are directed, is now in the process of discussing with themselves, discussing with the Federal authorities and determining their ability to meet the new requirements.

It is their intention to. try to meet them, however, it will b. a requirement of Corner Brook Pulp and Paper over and above the compliance

schedule that they have agreed to here. So Mr. Speaker, there are seven projects announced here under the Environmental Capital Expenditure

Schedule for the summer, $150,000 - collection and disposal system for sulphite cleaner rejects; $150,000 - collection and disposal for a chip washer of sawdust effluent, that is fairly self—explanatory; $600,000 the rebuild of No. 6 boiler to reduce particle emissions, and I am sure the Member is aware, and her colleague for Corne.r, Brook will. probably be aware, that $3.7 million will address the emissions and improve the burning efficiency, and maybe will totally address the problem she refers to, the one that she is particularly concerned about, the soof emissions.

But obviously that is a project to address that problem which is experienced in Corner BFA oo k now. No. 5, the rebuild of No. 3 boiler to further reduce particle emissions by improving burning efficiency. There is exactly $7 million earmarked for this particular item out, of the $38 million in this particular

schedule of expenditures, which I would think addresses directly the problem that she refers to. And then No. 7 - a new boiler to burn all bark wood refuse produced at the mill, that again is self—explanatory as to what it would mean to the environment. Complete the necessary pollution abatement equipment and monitoring devices to ensure compliance with the Federal/Provincial regulations, $30 million. a . 1-20 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI No. 46 (Morning) R20

. A c i d tower scrubber to reduce 502 emissions - $150,000. Nell, Mr. Speaker, that answers some of the Member's concerns. That is where it sits right now. And specifically if she wants to zero in on any one particular expenditure, and if she would wish to undertake herself to determine exactly technically what that means, then she has that opportunity. If she will indicate to me her concerns, I will use my office and use the ability of the Department of Forestry to determine exactly what is meant by a given expenditure, and relate it to her in Committee. .r..P!AEr: The hon. the Member for Humber East.

MsVerg: With leave, Mr. Speaker I am not an engineer, most of my constituents are not engineers, most of us cannot appreciate the fine detail of the schedule. But what we want to know is when all these projects that are listed in the

schedule are carried out will the air pollution problem be gone? Will we be free from particles of soot? Will we be free from annoying and possibly harmful sulphur fumes and other invisible gaseous emissions? And what k i n d of clout does the Pro v Inc i a 1 Go v e r n rn e n t Ii a v e to ensure that all of this is done and that the desired end result is achieved? r.aaEsr: The hon. the Member for Kilhride Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to say a few words about•t his Bill for , Kruger and raise some of the questions again L21 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI that were raised by the hon. t h e Member for Humber East concerning the pollution control that is planned for Kruger over the next few years. Mr. Speaker, before I get into that I do want to associate myself with the words of the Premier when he suggested that Kruger has been a very valuable addition to the west coast of our Province, and certainly a saviour for the pulp and paper industry in the Corne.r Brook area.

They took on a project, and I do not know of any other group who were serious about doing it, when they took over the Bowater paper mill in Corner Brook. They did spend a ]ot more money than they originally had planned to upgrade the mill, but one of the Kruger specialities, as far as I know worldwide .is to take over old inefficient pulp and p a p e r o p e r a t io n s a ri d m o d e r ii i 7 e them and turn them around to make a profit. Now, Mr. Speaker, the Premier also said some glowing words For the Bowater Corporation who were there before.

And I also want to suggest that the Bowater Corporation did do a good job. While I was Minister of Fores Lry and before that, I always had the impres sion that there was very little or no silviculture going on in this Province, Mr. Speaker, but when I did become Minister of Forestry and I had a few visits to the Corner Brook area, I did note that the Corner Brook pulp and paper operation now operated by Kruger, is in a much better resource supply situation than the two A b i t i b i mills that we h a v e in the Province, Mr.

Speaker, And the reason for that is that - the Bowater Corporation did do a lot of silviculture work in this P r o v i n c e prior to most OF us No. 46 (Morning) R21 S

11 realizing that it was done, and they did more thinning in the Province than any of us realized. I see the Member for St. George's shaking his head, as if to say no, Mr. Speaker, The larger supply or the larger landmass is not necessary, the economic viability of a mill is based on the wood supply within a radius of the mill. And within that 50 mile radius, which is the figure used For an economical wood supply, Bowaters have been doing, and have done in the past, quite a bit of thinning and that allows the Kruger Corporation to continue the operation in Corner Brook on a long-term basis Mr.

Speaker, the Member for St. George's again shakes his head, no. But I visited the sites and I saw what was done. I was told the age of the wood that is going there now, and it was obvious to see that the thinning was done and it was all done before Kruger came there. Before Kruger came there, Bowaters had to be there; that was the only other one operating in the area. Mr. Speaker, the logical conclusion is that Bowaters did do the thinning work, and Bowaters did do the planning to allow Kruger to operate that mill over the long-term Mr. Speaker, one problem probably associated with the Member for St.

George's District is that there was not enough work done on the far west coast of the Province. Out in the St. George's area there was not, in the distant past, enough silviculture work done, and that is why there is a resource problem in that area of the Province. Some of that area supplies the Abitibi/Stephenville mill, which will cause some problems in the future for a resource supply. In the economic area, for the wood supply for Corner Brook pulp and paper, Mr.

Speaker, there was silviculture work done, and it was done long before most of the residents of this Province realized it was being done, which shows the foresight Bowaters had. Obviously if they were doing that they must have had a commitment to stay here, so I do not understand why they left. However, I am pleased they left, because Kruger is doing a better job in that area, both with silviculturn work and in upgrading the mill., and in reinvesting the money they are making into the Corner Brook mill so that it will have a much longer future.

Now the Minister of Forestry suggested that we will have opportunity in Committee to discuss the details of the agreement that was tabled h e r e today, and that is correct. But, Mr. Speaker, what we have to do with this Government, in second reading stage, is ask as many questions as we can so that the Ministers will have time to g e t the information for when it comes to Committee, because they all come here unprepared for, any questions at all. Mr. Speaker, as we saw when the Bill was introduced yesterday, the Minister of Mines and Energy - yes, Mines and Energy I believe was obviously caught off guard.

It was not his fault, Mr. Speaker, he did not have the information he admitted he did not have the information. Unfortunately, the Premier was not here at the time to introduce the Bill, and the Minister of Forestry was not here. Both, obviously, were on Government business, When the Minis ter of Mines and Energy introduced the Bill, he did not. h a v e the information to answer a . . L22 June 1, 1990 vol xti No. 46 (Morning) R22

a . . questions so we had a very brief introduction. Mr. Speaker, when we go to

Schedule C, as read out by the Minister of Forestry a few minutes ago, I would hope that when it comes to the Committee stage, he will be able to answer questions on exactly what types of pollution the $38050 million will address when the pollution work is done between now and 1992, when this money is spent. I understand the Federal regulations which were introduced recently have not been totally included in this plan, because this plan was being worked on long before the new Federal regulations were introduced.

And I would expect the $38 million will not cover the complete cost of both water and air pollution, which has to be addressed in the Corner Brook area. The Federal regulations are very stringent according to the industry, but not stringent enough according to some environmentalists who operate in this country. I would be interested in knowing the details of what type of pollution each of these categories are going to address. Mr. Speaker, you can s e e number one there, the collection of disposal for the the r in o - me c han i cal p u 1 p cleaner rejects.

Now this could be water pollution or it could be air pollution, It is probably not both, because there is only $150,000 allotted to it, and $150,000 is not going to clean up a lot of pollution. I saw some of the figures when I was Minister of Forestry, what it is going to cost. I know the . Federal regulations make it even more L23 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI stringent, so :rom that I conclude that the $150,000 would not do a great deal of work in cleaning up pollution. Mr.

Speaker, the collection and disposal of the sulphite cleaner rejects, another $150,000, does not seem like a lot of money to me when we are talking about $38 million and a little more. Mr. Speaker, when the Premier or the Minister of Forestry closes the debate on this, and when he speaks in second reading, I would hope that he will have some technical details so that the people of Corner Brook can be assured. Now, the Federal regulations, as I said, deal with water pollution more than air pollution.

The residents of the City of Corner Brook, a group of whom I met while I was Minister of Forestry, are much more concerned with air pollution, because it is visible and it affects them daily, when the emissions are coming from the stacks. Mr.Efford: (Inaudible). Mr. R. Aylward: Yes, my Government was helping them with t h e plans which came to Fruition under your Government, We decided to have our Department oF Environment help them with the plans to do more modernization. The first thing we did was have them there. At least that was one step, to have a new, modern mill in Corner Brook.

I know the Minister of Social Services did not agree with that at the time., he wanted to s e e Corner Brook being devastated by the closing of the paper mill, purely for political reasons, so that he could get a couple more seats out in the west coast area. No. 46 (Morning) R23

There was glee in the Opposition when it was announced that Bowaters was going to move away, but thanks to Premier Peckford, and the Member for Ferryland, who was Minister of Forestry at the time, and the Member for Mount Pearl, who was Minister of Finance or Treasury Board at the time - An Hon. Member: No, Development Development. Those three Ministers were ins truinental in attracting the operator to Corner Brook, so that we h a v e a better mill. The Minister of Education, at the time was also very involved, as well as the Member for Humber Nest, who retired before the last election. But, Mr.

Speaker, when it was announced that Kruger came, it was to the disappointment of especially the Minister of Social Services, who was in Opposition at the time. Mr. Speaker, I would like the Premier, or the Minister, whoever is going to debate this in second reading, to get some details on what type of pollution will be affected by this cleanup, this $38 million cleanup.

Maybe he could contact the company and see if the new Federal regulations increased the requirement and the cost of the pollution cleanup, so that we would know how much more money the company will have to invest in order to do the proper environmental cleanup. Maybc., the Minister of Forestry, when we are into Committee stage, would give us a brief rundown on what the Government plans to do to help the Stephenville and Grand Falls mills when they tackle their pollution problem also.

Is there some similar plan of loan guarantees for the other two wills in the Province, which also have to do some pollution cleanup in the near future because of the new Federal regulations? Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Soeaker: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy. The Minister will now close the debate. Dr. Gibbons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This morning, I believe, we. received the appropriate clarifications that were asked for yesterday, and this morning the Minister of Forestry did answer most of the questions asked. Certainly, when the $38 million worth of projects listed on

Schedule C are completed, our Provincial regulations will primarily be met, and the Federal regulations, as they existed at the time, I believe will primarily be met. But the new Federal regulations, which have just recently been announced, are still being assessed, and we don't know the full implications of the new Federal regulations. The three items listed first on

Schedule C are primarily we ter pollution abatement projects, and the collection of rejects, the collection of sulfite and the wood chip washer and sawdust effluent project, these total slightly less than $1 million, and these are primarily water pollution measures. The other four measures listed on

Schedule C are the air , pollution measures. Four, five and six all address the matter of soot and ash. Particularly the rebuilding of numbers three and six boilers are addressing the soot. The new L24 June 1, 1990 vol XLI No. 46 (Morning) R24

. /1 . boiler us ted in number six, the $30 million project, which is primarily going to burn wood bark and other wood refuse, with the necessary pollution equipment to meet all existing Federal and Provincial regulations, this is a new project and naturally you can see this is the big one, $30 million of the $38 million allocated. When that is done, plus number seven, to reduce sulfite emissions, the regulations will be met, as I understand it.

However, there can be no assurance that there will not continue to be some soot emissions; there can be no assurance that you will not see some soot and sulfite, but there will be major reductions in the amount of sulfite presently being noticed in the Corner Brook area. We are trying to bring it into line with the present regulations, particularly the Provincial regulations, and the Federal regulations as we knew them.

Anything new that comes out of the latest Federal regulations, after appropriate assessment, we will be able to tell you what that means The other particular aspect of item number six, the $30 million boiler, is that this is going to help the mill with energy consumption.

This is going to help reduce the amount of oil that is going to be burnt in the mill, so it is going to be a matter that will help the total productivity, the efficiency of the mill and the cost; it is going to help in the cost of the mill; there will be less oil being burnt because this new boiler is going to be using a considerable amount of bark and wood.

That is an energy matter, as well as a pollution abatement matter to reduce the ash. else I want to addr'ess at this time But, certainly, when these projects are done, over the scheduled time frame that is shown there; some of them have already started, and the rest will get under way by June 1, 1990, all to be completed by June 30, 1992, most of the concern should be taken care of by that time. 1 do not have anything further to say at this time, and I move that the debate conclude.

On motion, a Bill, "An Act To Authorize Certain Agreements Between The Government Of The Province And Other Parties Respecting The Future Operation Of The Corner Brook Newsprint Mill," read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House, on tomorrow, (Bill No. 30). Npeaker: The hon. the Government House Leader. Mr. Baker: Motion 2, Mr. Speaker. Mr_ Speaker: Motion 2, the hon. the Minister of Finance, to move that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider Certain Resolutions relating to The Financial Corporations Capital Tax Act.

The motion is that I do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into Committee of the Whole Before moving, if the hon. Members would permit, we have some students here we would like, to welcome to the gallery. We have twenty-five Grade IX students from St. Francis High School, Harbour Grace, accompanied by the t h e i r teacher, Brother Whitty. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! I do . no think there is anything L25 June 1, 1990 vol XLI No. 46 (Morning) R25 r

. On motion, thaL the House resolve itself into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Speaker left the Chair. Committee of the Whole Mr. Chairman: Order, please! Bill No. 26. Mr. Chairman: Bill No, 26 was just carried. An Hon. Member: Just carried? An Hon. Member: Yes. Ms Verge: It did not go through second readinq, and the Minister of Finance did not speak to it. An Hon. Member: Didn't he? An Hon. Member: No, he did not. Resolution Mr. Chairman: The hon. the President of Treasury Board. That it is expedient to bring in a measure to amend The Financial Corporations Capital Tax Act.

On motion, resolution, carried On motion, Clauses 1 through 3, carried Motion, that the Committee report having passed a resolution and a bill consequent thereto, without amendment, carried. Mr. Chairman: The hon. the President of Treasury Board. Mr. Baker: Order 2, Mr. Chairman, Committee of the Whole. Mr. Chairman: Committee of the Whole on Bill No. 31. Shall clause (1) carry? Ms_Verge: Mr. Chairperson? n.shairman: The hon. the Member for Humber East. MsVerg: Thank you, Mr. Chairman It was my understanding, from speaking to the Government House Leader, that we were going to do Bill No. 26 next? Mr.

Baker: The process of Motions is to move the Committee, then call the heads and that was done. That is the process of that Motion 2. I do not know what else to say about it. Some Hon. Members: You ai"e sleeping! You are sleeping! Mr. Chairman: The hon. the Member for Humber East. Ms Verge: It is highly irregular for a Bill to go through the House without the Government sponsoring the Bill, not to even speak to it. Mr....__Windsor: Wait until the Minister speaks. An Hon. Member: Vote against what? Mr. Windsor: Is he allowed to speak today, or is it one oF his days off? Mr.

Chairman: Bil] No. 26 was introduced by the Chair and clause by clause was called and voted on. Ms Verge: Well, Mr. Chairperson, with distractions I thought y o u were into Bill No. 26, but I was waiting for the Mini slier of S El C 1.26 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI No. 46 (Morning) R26

4 Finance to rise in the usual way. Our Finance critic is prepared to speak to it, and I would ask that we revert to Bill 26 and have some discussion about what the meaning of the Bill is. We owe at least that much to the people we are here to represent. for Mount Pearl. Mr. Windsor: Mr. Speaker, if I might just address this issue. I understand what the President of Treasury Board is saying, however clearly - An Hon. Member: (Inaudible) Mr. Chairman: Well, the Bill has been voted on and carried in the Committee. I am just wondering what the pleas ure of the House is, if we wish to revert back to that or not.

The hon. the President of Treasury Board. Mr. Baker: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am operating here under some very basic assumptions and that is when we move into the Committee of the Whole to consider a Bill, that we go through a process of the Chairman sitting down and carrying the title and t h e clauses and all this kind of thing. There was no indication on the opposite side that anybody wanted to speak to it.

Now that is the normal process in the House, and I was operating under the assumption that everybody knew that, especially seeing Members opposite sat for a number OF years in Government, sponsored bills and knew the process of bills going through the House. I am sorry if there is a misunderstanding here, but that is the process it went through and I really do not know how to handle it beyond that. These are the assumptions I. was operating under, and we have been doing it over since I have been here. That is all I can say, Mr. Chairman.

That process has happened, and I do not know if there is anything I can do about it. Mr. Chairman: The hon. the Member L27 June 1, 1990 Uol XLI Mr. Windsor: I have been recognized by the Chairman. I do not need your recognition. Now, Mr. Chairman, c] early when a piece of legislation of this importance comes to the House of Assembly, the Minister of Finance should at least speak to it. We were sitting here waiting For the Minister to speak. When he didn't, we did not realize that a motion had been called. I can appreciate Your Honour's position.

So I simply say to the Government House Leader, can we now revert to this and debate this Bill? We do not have a great deal to say about this piece of legislation, but we would like to address it. Now, the Government House Leader should consider, An Hon. Member: You had your opportunity (inaudible) Mr. Windsor: Well, we will have an opportunity to debate other Bills too, and we can debate them for a heck of a long time a heck of a long time. The Government House Leader should consider.

If he wants continued co—operation in this House of Assembly, then he should revert to this Bill and give us the opportunity to debate it - if he wants to get out of here before Christmas. Mr.Chairman: The hon. Member For Humber East. No. 46 (Morning) R27 .

. Msuerae: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. The Government House Leader talks about process and the normal process. It is normal in the regular process for the Minister sponsoring the Bill to at least say a few words about it. We were waiting for the Minister of Finance to rise in his place and give some explanation of the Government's purpose in advancing the Bill Now, our finance critic was intendinq to speak to it, not at length, but he has some comments we feel should be made in a public forum at this stage.

We apologize for failing to realize that the Minister of Finance was departing from normal practice in staying in his seat when a finance bill in his name was called, but we now ask the House Leader for leave to revert in the process so that our finance critic can speak to it, as I say, not at length, and then we can get on with Bill 31., the Hydro Bill, which we may want to debate much, much, much more extensively. Mr. Chairman: The hon. the President of Treasury Board. Mr. ------ rhank you, Mr. Speaker. The acting Opposition House Leader has put a request which, perhaps , you should have done five minutes ago.

I first of all, want to say, Mr Chairman, that I resent the characterization that somehow the Minister of Finance did something unusual, He did not do anything unusual. I resent that. I resent that! What happened here was the fact that Members opposite were simply not listening to what was going ' on, did not know what was going on, did not understand what was going on. That is what happened L28 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI Now, I said at the beginning that I am sorry if there is a problem here.

But the problem is not the problem of the Minister of Finance, it is a problem that when things were called, Members opposite simply didn't get up to respond at a time when they could have gotten up and responded. Now, Mr. Chairman, having said that and described the situation accurately as it is, I would he willing to revert, by leave, to allow the finance critic to say. whatever he wants to say about the Bill. I would be willing to revert to that stage of the proceedings Mr. Chairman: Okay. Ms Verge: Mr. Chairperson, on behalf of the Opposition, I would like to thank the Government House Leader. An Hon.

Member: Very gracious! Mr. Chairman: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl, by leave. Mr. Windsor: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also thank the hon. House Leader. He is quite correct that we were lacking at the moment but, nevertheless, we did expect the Minister - I guess our Fault, Mr. Chairman, was in expecting the Minister of Finance to speak. Records will show that since that Minister has been in office, he has not generally spoken, he h a s not generally been allowed to speak on major financial matters. He usually gets somebody to - An_Hon. Member: (Inaudible). Mr.

Windsor: I have leave of the House, and I don't need leave of the hon. Member, thank you. Mr. Chairman: Order, please! No. 46 (Morning') R28 ' S . II

ci a . Mr. Windsor: Mr. Chairman, there is not a great deal I wanted to say about this particular piece of legislation. It is pretty straightforward. It increases the tax from 2 per cent to 3 per cent, so it is a 150 per cent increase in that tax. That is really what it is. It is a tax grab, as we saw throughout the Minister1s Budget, a quick way of getting money. Now, the Minister is not going to get too many people concerned about the poor financial corporations, because when one looks on the surface, well, it is only the banks and the financial institutions paying their fair share. Mr.

Chairman, the banks and the financial institutions are going to pass this right along to the consumer. Really, what I wanted an opportunity to say here today, Mr. Chairman, is that I think it is time the Minis ter of Finance had a look at what the banks and financial institutions are doing to the people of Canada, particularly, of course, of Newfoundland, and I think all Finance Ministers should have a look at it. The costs now in doing banking in Canada today are incredible. The banks are virtually doing what they will in manipulating money; moving money from one account that you might have to another at will.

It is just incredible the charges they are applying. Interest rates are going through the sky 15,75 per cent I believe now, as of today. How do we expect business and industry to develop in this Province or in this country with interest rates of that nature, and tack 3 per cent on top of that? Mr. Chairman, really what I am saying here is there is nothing i1n the Bill itself other than the L29 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI amount. That is all it does, change an amount from 2 per cent to 3 per cent. It is a disincentive to development again, another one on top of the Minister's payroll tax. It is another tax on business.

I know the Minister can hide behind the fact that it is a tax on business. A tax on business is a tax on consumers. The Minister of Finance doesn't agree with that. He doesn't. Where is it going to come from? Santa Claus is going to give the corporations that lax to pay. An Hon. Member: (Inaudible) from income tax. Mr. Windsor: Deductible from income tax, Your Honour. Yes! Mr. Chairman, again it is a disincentive. Every move this Minister has made has been a disincentive to business and to development.

Very clearly this is an anti—development, anti--business Government, and it reflects very directly on the consumers of this Provinée. Very, very directly. An Hon. Member: Are you waiting for another (inaudible)? Mr. Warren: No, boy, we are putting in another rubber factory. Mr.Windsor: No shipyards either, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, I will close with that, because I don't see any point. The Minister of Finance is obviously not going to respond. The Minister of Finance is capable only of making silly faces and sly comments over there.

He hasn't made an intelligent comment in this House of Assembly since he took his seat here, Mr. Chairman. NrcPriun: Order, please! No. 46 (Morning) R29 [1

. Bill No.31, Shall Clause 1 carry? The hon. the Member for Humber East. Ms Verge: Thank you, Chairperson. This Bill authorizes the Government to charge Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro a fee, with the amount of the fee being set from time to time by the Cabinet . for the Government guaranteeing borrowing by Hydro. Now, Hydra, to carry out its r es pons I b 11 i ties and to pr 6 vi d e for inultimillion dollar generation capability, has to borrow mega dollars. Chairperson, the added cost that the Government will be putting onto Hydra by charging a fee for guaranteeing.

Hydra's borrowing will,, obviously, be passed on to consumers. Hydro sells its product to what we have known as Newfoundland Light and Power, now renamed Newfoundland Power. Newfoundland Power, in turn, of course, has . to recoup from consumers enough revenue to provide a reasonable rate of return to 'its shareholders: So, Chairperson, this measure will lead to higher electricity costs for consumers throughout our Province Now, as I understand it, the contemplated fee for the year is about $9 mill ion.

This $9 million added cost to electricity ratepayers, is part of a grand design of this new real change Government to hike electricity costs dramatically. In the Government's first Budget, last spring, the Government announced a three year phaseout of the $30 million Provincial Government subsidy of rural power, an elimination over three years of the subsidy paid the PDD, the Power Distribution District.

Again, that $30 million will h a v e to be absorbed by Hydro by charging higher . cost to Newfoundland Power who, in turn, will have to pass on that cost to consumers, to householders and businesses throughout the Province.

Chairperson, $9 million for the new Government loan guarantee fee that is provided for in this Bill, $30 million because of the Budget position announced last year, and now the payroll tax announced by the Government in its second Budget, the Budget this year, the payroll tax of 1.5 per cent on payrolls in excess of what is it? - $300,000 per year, will extract a significant amount of money from Newfoundland a n d Labrador Hydro.

Hydro, in turn, will pass that on along with the other costs, along with the loan guarantee, fee cost, along with the elimination of the PDD subsidy, to Newfoundland Power. l'he payroll tax, though, will h a v e. a compounding effect, because that is being levied on Newfoundland Power, formerly Light and Power, as well. The combined payroll tax, the double—whamrny tax, will ultimately be extracted from t h e pockets of electricity consumers around the Province individuals people on social assistance, senior citizens ' getting a guaranteed income ' supplement, single parents trying to raise their children, Mr.

Chairman. Then, next year, the Federal Goods and Services Tax is coming into force. So electricity consumers in this Province are in for one rude awakening over the next couple of years. Sadly, they are going to see their light bills soar, they are going to see their light bills increase by as much as 50 per cent over the next couple of years. Mr. Chairperson, it is not because . . 130 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI No. 16 (Morning) R30

. (I . of some invisible regulatory agency, the PUB, it is because OF budgetary decisions of this Government and also the Federal Government, in the case of the GST. But it is this Provincial Government which has chosen as part of its budgetary strategy to sock it to electricity ratepayers in the Province. Now through this measure to extract $9 million and, according 1:0 the bill, the fee may he adjusted any time at all by the Cabinet; the Cabinet meets at least once a week, so at a whim the Cabinet can increase that fee, $30 million dollars the Government is going to deny Hydro.

Formerly the Government paid an annual subsidy to Hydro for the PDD. That is being phased out. $10 million was removed last year, another $10 million made $20 million this year, and the Full shot next year. That is going to have to be passed on to consumers. As I mentii )ned, the cumulative payroll tax is being extracted from Hydro, from Newfoundland Power, and, ultimately, another gouge of the electricity ratepayers Chairperson, the Minister responsible for Consumer Affairs is not in his place, that is the Minister of Justice.

I wonder when this Government is going to wake up to its responsibilities to consumers. The Minister of Social Services, who was yammering away when we were dealing with the Kruger Bill, is not in his place. I wonder how he is going to conpensate social assistance recipients, and others in the Province who are vulnerable financially, For the rising, the soaring electricity bills. Chairperson, to make matters worse, to make matters much, much worse, to set the stage for this massive increase in electricity costs, the Provincial Government has restructured and gutted the Public Utilities Board.

The Public Utilities Board, through the contribution of Board member Andy Wells, with his concern for the impact of utility rates on the average people in the Province and with the expertise he gained through a couple of years of membership on the Board and study of utilities regulations, was just having an affect on the P U B regulatory process here. He was probably the first match for the utility executives and their lawyers Make no mistake, the utilities are huge corporations.

Thëry have been guaranteed a healthy return on their investment. [hey have a ni a s s ed con s ide r able cx pert i S C about the regulatory process. And until Andy Wells came on the scene, as a member of the PUB, there was no match for the. utilities; when the utilities went to the PUB, it was prc'tt y well automatic that the PUB would approve their request. [he Federation of Mayors and Municipalities made an effort in years gone by - I believe the Member for St.

John s East was involved with the Federation at the time in representing the interests of consumers beFore. the PUB, when the utilities would apply for rate increases. However, the PUB had to hire generalist lawyers who had no opportunity to acquire specialized knowledge about the utilities regulatory process. I am sure the lawyers retained did their best, but for a generalist lawyer the Member for Bonavista South is r L31 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI No. 46 (Morning) RB!

. nodding . I am sure lie can appreciate this - to undertake to represent the consumers of the Province before the PUB, is an impossible order, it is like a fly biting an elephant. Chairperson, the Government restructured the PUB. It made smaller the number of Board positions, which might have been in order, given the decreased work load. But it set itself up so that it could pick and choose among the conririssioners , and it decided to keep those commissioners who had consistently sided with the Utilities and got rid of Andy Wells. Now what kind of a message does that give the people of the Province?

And it is suggesting replacing Andy Wells with a public servant, with a Department of Justice lawyer, who is supposed to be a consumer advocate Now, Chairperson, how can the people of the Province have any confidence in that kind of consumer advocacy? And when people see what the first consumer advocate has actually done, people are shrugging their shoulders. As the costs climb, as the light bills show higher and higher amounts, this Government is going to hear an earful from constituents.

Chairperson, this loan guarantee fee measure is just another of a whole series of initiatives taken by this real change Government in socking it to electricity consumers, in allowing For alarmingly high increases in electricity rates, And that is going to jeopardize the position of individuals and householders in our Province who have to gel: by on very, very low incomes: Social Assistance recipients, I say to the Minister of Social Services, senior citizens living on fixed L32 June 1, 1990 vol XLI pensions, many getting the 015, single parents, people who a r e strapped with the cost of living.

Now, Chairperson, the Minister of Social Services is responding to my presentation by waving the Sprung Pickle Cook Book. I would suggest to the Minister that he might better earn his keep, he might better give the taxpayers a return for the one hundred thousand—plus a year they are investing in him, by undertaking to compensate Social Assistance recipients and other individuals and householders his department is supposed to be serving, for the rising for the rising electricity costs.

He had better serve the people he is supposed to be representing by laying out a plan for the Government for reimbursing consumers of §lectricity who cannot bear the added costs that are being put on them by the direct Budgetary actions of this Government: by this Bill., by this. $9 million loan guarantee Fee Bill, with provision for even higher amounts, even greater gouges in the future; for the $30 million subsidy that is being taken off; for the payroll tax that is going to hit both Hydro and Newfoundland Power; and for the Federal 051. this Minis ter of Social Services is still talking about pickles. Mr.

Efford: (Inaudible). Mr. Chairman: Order, please! Ms Verge: What is really going on, Chairperson, is that the Minister of Social Services, who probably, privately, is one of the few true Liberals in this ultra right wing Government, headed by the current Premier, the Minister is ashamed of what the Government is doing. That is why he is not No. 46 (Morning) R32 a .

. r LA . addressing the Bill. He is trying to deflect attention from the Government's increase in electricity costs. He is ashamed of that; he cannot handle that; he cannot deal with it; he cannot own up to it, so every time the topic comes up, he has to shift to another subject, he has to try to divert attention away from what the Government is doing. He tends to try to camouflage what the Government is doing to electricity ratepayers within the Province. Chairperson, there is no excuse •there is no excuse - for what the Government is doing to electricity consumers in the Province.

There is no defence for the Government socking it to Social Assistance recipients and others on fixed incomes with no ability to supplement their, income, with no ability to get a salaried job. Chairperson, the Government I have characterized as real change and also ultra right wing and conservative, is forecasting a surplus on current account this year. They would rather have a surplus on current accounts than to try and keep down electricity costs; they would rather gouge electricity consumers, regardless of their ability to pay, than have less of a surplus or a balanced Budget, j ust an evenly balanced budget.

Chairperson, these measures being taken by the Government as a key part of their budgetary strategy, are having no regard to the ability to pay of the electricity ratepayer. Ihe Government talks about progressive and regres sive taxation. Nell, I say to them, this is the mc st regressive budgetary measure of them all They are socking it to individuals and householders without any L33 June 1, 1990 Vol. XLI regard to their ability to absorb rising electricity costs. Mr. Efford: What would you do? What would you do? Ms Verge: Chairperson, the Minister of Social services is asking what I would do.

When I was a Member of a Government - not all of us over here had an opportunity to serve in Government I was fortunate to serve in a Government for about ten years, and the Government I was a Member of, number one, provided a $30 million subsidy to Newfoundland Hydro for rural electricity. We did that. The Government I was a Member of guaranteed Hydros borrowing. We did not charge a fee for that.

The Gpvernment I was a Member of, year after year, in putting together the Budget and looking at revenue raising options, considered a payroll tax as one of a number of possibilities, and year after year we 'rejected that option, because we felt it was a disincentive to business activity in the Province,- we felt that it inevitably would be passed on to consumers, and it was a regressive measure. Chairperson, that is what I would do. I would continue those policies.

If I saw that social assistance recipients were being subjected to rising, out of control electricity costs, electricity costs rising more than the rate of increase in social assistance payments, I would certainly act to correct that inequity. I would never allow social assistance recipients to be subjected to less purchasing power because electricity costs are rising, thanks to direct budgetary measures of this Government, leading to higher bills without appropriate adjustments in the No. 46 (Morning) R33

. social assistance rates. Now, chairperson, the Minister of Social Services is shaking his head, yet he has not made a constructive contribution to this discussion.

All he is doing, as I mentioned before, is trying to throw me off, trying to deflect attention away from the exposure of this Government as an anti-consumer Government, as a Government that is undertaking as a major part of its financial program, regressive measures, measures which are going to be costing taxpayers, without any regard to the means of the taxpayers Chairperson, this measure to compound difficulties for the citizens and businesses we are here to represent, is a bad Bill, it is a Bill that should be rejected flatly by this Assembly. Mr. Chairman: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Efford: (Inaudible). Another pickle, the Minister of Social Services says. Mr. Chairman, I want to have a few words on this Bill, a bill which the Minister of Social Services should be standing up here lambasting.

He should stand up for the people he represents in this Province, the social service recipients, when they are being f:leeced by the Minister of Finance once again, by causing another $9 million to be added to the Hydro bills of the people of this Province, which is only one step this Government has taken to increasE., over the next five to seven years, the hydro bills in this province by some 50 per cent, I would say. . Anyone today who has an electricity bill of about $300 a month in the colder months, will have their bills raised from this $300 to $450. Mr.

Chairman, I noticed, while the Member for Humber East was speaking, the Member for Placentia was continuously interrupting her. He is one of - the. Members on the other side I would expect to stand up for the electricity consumers in his constituency, to see that they are not being hard put by this Government taking another $9 million from t h e electricity consumers in this Province. Yes, the Member for Placenti.a I would expect to be one of the Members opposite. He took a very difficult and hard stand in his position as a Government member on the Argentia ferry, for which L commend him. He did a good job.

I know he did a lot of work in getting a year-round Argentia ferry for his District. Mr. Chairman, I have confidence in John Crasbie, the Federal representative for that area, and I have confidence in the Member For Placentia, who, I' think / will convince the Federal Minister of Transport to create the year-round service, which is logical and sensible and should he done for Argentia. But, Mr.

Chairman, knowing the concern of - the Member for Placentia for people in his area, and knowing his independent character, I expect that before this debate is finished he will stand in this House and request the Minister of Finance to forego this fee which will cause the taxpayers of Newfoundland, this, year to pass out another $9 million on their hydro bills. 'a C r L34 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI No. 46 (Morning) R34

. . Mr. Chairman, I remember a few years ago in this House, when retroactive legislation was brought in by a former Administration, the one who was most upset about that retroactive legislation was the hon. the Minister of Social Services. Nhat is he doing today? Supporting a Bill with a

Section which says, retroactive, effective October 1, 1989, almost one full year. So, it is not only the $9 million, if that is what the fee will cost for a year, this year the electricity consumer of this Province might have to fork out $18 million to cover a full year's retroactive legislation. Now, Mr.

Speaker, If this fee has to be put in, and I know of no logical reason why it has to be - it was requested of the former Administration when we were there and, at the time the request came to us, via people in Finance, we reviewed it and figured that the electricity consumers of the Province had too great a burden on them at the time. We would not inflict this fee on Hydro for guaranteeing the loans we guaranteed, Mr. Chairman.

But what this Government has done is not only inflicted this $9 million on the taxpayers of Newfoundland, they have another $30 miNion they took away in the Power Distribution Subsidy, which is a $30 million increase. And what else have they done but install a payroll tax which will be another 1.5 per cent on the payroll of Hydro, which again will be paid by electricity consumers in this Province. The ones who will find it hardest to pay, the ones who always find increases hardes I: to pay; are the people who receive fixed incomes, such as senior citizens.

They will find L35 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI it extremely difficult to pay this $9 million increase, plus the payroll tax of 1.5 per cent, plus the $30 million because ofL he subsidy missing. The senior citizens of this Province are going to find it extremely difficult to pay. these increased fees, this 50 per cent increase in electricity rates . The others who will find it extremely difficult to pay are the social service recipients , who had a meager 4 per cent increase in t h i s years Budget. It will he taken away totally by the increase in hydro rates over the next couple of years.

So, actually, the social service recipients will receive less money; they will have less disposable income than they had before. Now, Mr. Chairman, I expected, From watching the Minister of Social Services when he was in Opposition - I was rather pleased that he was made Minister of Social Services, because I thought he had a heart and had a feeling for the people who received social assistance throughout this Province. But, Mr.

Chairman, what I have noted since this Minister of Social Services has been made Minister of the Department, is that in the eleven years I had served as Member for the Dis tr ct of Kilbride I have never in all these eleven years had so many calls relating to difficulties in receiving their fair share of social services in this Province, Mr. Chairman. . There have been cutbacks in transportation. Thc4re have been cutbacks in medical services. There have been cutbacks in heating allowances and in emergency allowance.s to the social service recipients in the District of Kilbride. And, Mr.

Chairman, I would say that my. District is probably one or: the No. 46 (Morning) R35

fortunate Districts because there are not a great number of social services recipients in the District of Kilbride because we are a fairly fortunate District, most people are able to find permanent jobs, or certainly permanent seasonal jobs to look after themselves. So the social service recipients who do live in my District are becoming increasingly concerned as to what this great Minister of Social Services, while he was in Opposition, is doing to the disposable income of the people on social services. Now, Mr.

Chairman, one other Member in this House who I expect would stand up and disagree with the imposition of this $9 million, retroactively to October 1, 1989, Mr. Chairman, would be the Meinber for St.. Johns South. I know that he has fought hard for the people who work at National Sea and who have lost their lobs or who have had their lobs cut in half, I guess, because of a good agreement by the union. But their disposable income will be reduced, Mr. Chairman, because of the situation they find themselves in, completely beyond their control. But, Mr.

Chairman, I know the concern that he has for the people at the Newfoundland Dockyard who have lost their jobs over the last little while, and the difficulty t h e y are going to find in getting the type of employment and the type of wages that they have been used to over the last number of years. Mr. Chairman, I expect that the Member for St. John's South would he very concerned that the hydro rates, the electrical rates for his constituents are going to be increased by the imposition of this fee, and I note in the bill, Mr.

Chairman, that it just says, fee The Lieutenant—Governor., in Council may make regulations respecting the calculation of the fee referred to in subsection (1). So, Mr. Chairman, if the fee is 1 per cent or 1.5 per cent now, I would say when the gouger, the nan with the biggest hands in the pockets of the people of the Province in history, Mr. Chairman, will continue to increase this fee in order that he - An Hon. Member: (Inaudible) - Mr. R. Aylward: No, I am not talking to you, I am talking to the Minister of Kentucky Fried Chicken over there. Mr.

Chairman, I would say that the Minister of Finance next year will increase his Fee rather than try to help out the electrical consumers because it will not have to come back to this House from now on. Cabinet, Mr. Chairman, will have the opportunity to increase this fee at will, behind closed doors, and it will not have to come to this House of Asseinhly again. But as I said before the most despicable part of this act that .E see, besides the $9 miD ion tht. will be taken away From the consumers of this Province., Mr. Chairman, is that the bill will he retroactive to October 1, 1989.

Now it is bad enough taking money on people . and increasing their hydro rates to cover the $30 million PDD subsidy that was removed. It is bad enough to have a payroll tax added on to them, so that will increase their hydro rates this year. . It is bad enough to have a fee as it is, brought into this House of Assembly on, the loan guarantees that tAlC offer L . . L36 June 1, 1990 Vol. XLI No. 46 (Morning) R36

r a . . Hydro. Mr. Chairman, these things are all bad enough. But to make it retroactive is rubbing salt into the wounds of the consumers of this Province. And the ones who will be affected most are the ones who have the least amount of disposable income, and the people with the least amount of disposable income are people who are on fixed incomes, who are receiving pensions that unfortunately they do not have control to increase whenever they get extra costs. The people on social services, Mr. Chairman, who have no control over what increased revenue they get, Mr.

Chairman, it is up to the goodness of the Government who are stealing this money on them. They are giving them some money, 4 per cent, I believe was the increase this year, up front, and it makes it sound good, and what• t hey are doing by the back door, Mr. Chairman, is taking that 4 per cent back, plus much more. In hydro rates alone, Mr. Chairman, they will take the great amount of it, before all these increases hit the consumer. And, what comfort the consumers of electricity in this Province did have, Mr.

Chairman, in that they had some representation on the Public Utilities Board, some comfort that their point of view was going to he put forth in any increases in hydro bills that would come before that board, what has this Government done to give them more comfort, Mr. Chairman? They have taken away the consumer rep on the Public Utilities Board and replaced the rep by a part—time consumer advocate.. I don't know the person. Casey is his name hut I don't know his abilities and I don't know him personally.

But, no matter how L37 June 1, 1990 Uol XLI good that person will be you cannot do an adequate job part—time, especially if you a r e carrying on a very active law practice in the meantime. You cannot represent the consumers of this Province within the Public Utilities Board, Mr. Chairman, by doing the job part—time.

I would even suggest that, had the Public Utilities Board kept the representative the consumers had on there, I would h a v e a little more comfort in knowing Lha L this increase would he scrutinized properly, and, in comments made by the Public Utilities Board, at least one representative on that board would say, This is too much of an increase.' This Government is putting too much pressure on the electrical consumers of. this Province, fleecing them and taking away as much of the disposable income as they can, besides increasing personal incdme- tax, besides payroll tax, besides taking away the PDD.

Besides all the measures this Minister of Finance has taken, what they are doing now is even more despicable, in bringing retroactive legislation into this Ho use. Mr. Chairman, the Members opposite, who sat in Opposition when a pr e v i o u s Ad in i n i s r a [ i on brought in retroactive legislation, should be going through the ceiling now when they see that their Premier and their Minister of Finance are trying to pull the same trick on the people of this Province that they deplored and fought against. They screamed and yelled and shouted that this was completely unFair.

And, no matter what legislation we bring into this House, i •t should never be brought in retroactively, Mr. Chairman. No. 46 (Morning) R37

. The Minister of Social Servides was one of those Members, the Minister of Health was one of them; I mean, he was bouncing off the walls here behind me when this retroactive legislation was brought in. Mr. Chairman, I think the Finance critic, at the time, was the present Government House Leader and, certainly, he was extremely upset with the introduction of retroactive legislation. And what did they do, Mr. Speaker, with all their - before we finish this Bill, I will have the Hansards when they are brought up to me, so we can go over some oF the words that were said about retroactive legislation by hon.

Members opposite. I am sure the Minister of Health is going to be very interested to be reminded of what he did say about retroactive legislation when it was brought to this House before. Now, the Minister of Mines wasn't here at the time, but I would say he was probably upset somewhat, but not saying so.

The Members down in the corner here, these people here who are certainly concerned about their constituents, are not showing me the integrity I thought they had, because they should be up here standing today, condemning their Government for stealing, or For Fleecing, I should say, the consumers of electricity in this Province. And the Member for Placentia has it in him to do it, because I saw him do it last week. The Member for Carbonear, who is not here right now, has it in him to do it because I saw him do it on the community college issue in his District. I am sure the Member for St.

John's South has it in him to do it but I think he wants to get into Cabinet too bad, so he probably will not do anything like that. The Member for Pleasantville is not here right now, 1 am sure he is out on constituency business, but he would be one who would speak up, and I know the Member for Waterford - Kenmount is not shy of expressing his opinion to the Minister of Finance, especially when the Minister of Finance insults some of the businesses that his buddies are carrying on, so, I know in private he made representation to the Minister of Finance, The Meriher for - Mount Scio, I mean, yes.

I know in private he made strong representations to the Minister of Finance and he was probably one of the people who is, responsible For the Minister of Finance apologizing, which I thought was a good thing to do at the time, but, I am sure he is not shy in making representations to the Minister of Finance on that issue, and I am sure that he would probably get up in this House and make the same strenuous 'arguments against the increase for electrical rates for the consumers, and particularly the people who live on Bell Island who find it extremely difficult to find work.

Obviously there is not a big lot of work to find on Bell Island, but the Member for Mount Scio Bell Island has, I understand, initiated a development conFerence to go on Bell Island very soon, but, Mr. Chairman, whatever initiatives he will bring to Bell Island, whatever disposable income will come of that initiative that he is bringing, will he taken away again by the Minister of Finance with his continued increases in taxes and his continued increases in the electrical bills of this Province, As I said before, the Hydro rates over the next seven years in this Province, from initiatives that had been taken £ . .

L38 June 1, 1990 Vol XLI No. 46 (Morning) R38

S * L already, will increase almost or just about 50 per cent, Mr. Chairman, which is an amazing increase for anyone who can just afford to pay their electrical bills right now. Mr. Chairman, a 50 per cent increase on someone who now has a $300 light bill will raise it to $450 and there are people I would say in the rural areas of this Province who have less mortgage payments to make than $300 or $450, Mr. Chairman. But what I would like to see today, Mr.

Chairman, before the debate is concluded on this issue, today or next week or a few days down the road, is some Members, particularly back bench Members on the Government side of the House, get up and express their concerns - Mr.Walsh: Did you when you were a back bencher? E_QiLiuJard: No, I never had these concerns. When I was a back bencher I was very supportive, I always got up and supported the Government because they brought in such good legislation and they brought in such progressive legislation. I had nothing but admiration and I Supported them wholeheartedly. I was very much supported, Mr.

Chairman, when the hon. Member for St. John's East was instrumental in getting a consumer rep. p u t on the Public Utilities Board. I really did support that because I felt the electrical consumers of this Province would have a certain comfort and when the position was made, I felt the comfort, but when they put the person there, Andy Wells, whom I knew to be a very competent person, that gave me a greater comfort and gave the con s u mer s of el e c t r i c i t y a r 0 u n d this Province - Mr. Chairman.

I know this consumer rep. who was on the Public Utilities Board, even L39 June 1, 1990 vol XLI went back part—time to university in the United States, so that he could upgrade himself to be a better consumer advocate and consumer rep, on the Public Utilities Board, but what are back benchers in this Government supporting, Mr. Chairman, taking that away, to take the representation away from the consumers of electrical energy in this Province. They take the representative away and replace him with a part—time representative. I have to say, Mr.

Chairman, when I am speaking to people who find it very difficult to understand any type of simple logic, I have to keep repeating, especially for the Minister of Social Services, I have to keep repeating that he is doing damage to the social service recipients whom he is supposed to be representing in this Province. I have to repeat it because he is very slow to learn maybe, or he does not want to hear probably. He is certainly an intelligent man, but he will not listen, - Mr. Chairman. I tell you how slow he is to comprehend, he has a recipe book for pickles in this House which is about eleven pages.

Now he has been Minister of Social Services for more than a year, Mr. Speaker, and he cannot finish readtng eleven pages of pickle recipes Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr. R. Aylward: He has been one full year trying to read eleven pages and they are double spaced. I mean it is not very difficult. There is not a big lot on each page, and they are only very short sentences. I think there are a Few abbreviations in there, Mr. Speaker, tsp. , it means teaspoon in case you are not sure. When No. 46 (Morning) R39

. you - read it, if you are having difficulty with the abbreviations bring it over, I will explain it to you and then probably we will get through the first four or five pages in a week or so. Ms Verge: (Inaudible) poor people. Mr. R. Aylward: Mr. Chairman, I know he has difficulty in comprehending Some Hon. Members: Oh, oh! .ir...ieake.r: Order, please! Mr. R._Aylward: I think, Mr. Chairman, he is gone to page five now, he is after turning another page in that. Oh, he is still on page 4. Okay. Yes, he had a hard time with page 3 because there were two recipes on the same page.

He could not get through that one very good, it was kind of hard. It was a difficult one. I think the headings were a problem. Some Hon. Members: Oh, oh! Mr.R.Aylward: But I know he has difficulty understanding so I have to keep repeating so that maybe some of the attributes that he showed and some of the concern that he showed when he was on this side of the House for social service recipients, some of the concern that he did show at one time might come through again. They are hidden away in there somewhere. I believe the Premier gbt them.

When the Premier put him in suspended animation for three or four weeks or a month period there, when he put him in limbo for a little while, Mr. Chairman, he did not take him out of Cabinet, but he did not leave him in Cabinet, but Some Hon. Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Efford: Now I know why you put up the lights in Mount Pearl, so you could weed your garden in the night. Mr. R. Aylward: No, that was not the reason, Mr. Chairman. The reason was that when I planted the plants they will grow twenty—fours a day in my garden, I did not need to weed them because the plants got up quicker than the weeds. Mr.

Chairman, I k now the hon. Minister knows very little about agriculture, so he would not understand it anyway. An Hon. Member: (Inaudible). Mr. R. Aylward: Mr