Volume XL Monday Province of Newfoundland FORTIETH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NEWFOUNDLAND Second Session VERBATIM REPORT {Hansard) Speaker: Honourable Patrick McNicholas · Number 5 24 March 1986

The House met at 3:00 p.m. MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): Order, please! Statements by Ministers MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Development. MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to announce to the House today that government, through the Department of Development and Tourism, has completed a process which results in the privatization of NORDCO Limited, a previously government controlled scientific research and development company. This action is part of government's ongoing efforts to privatize government owned companies wherever possible and feasible.

NORDCO Limited was incorporated in 1975 with a mandate to establish itself as a Newfoundland based company with international stature in technology applied to ice and cold oceans. At the same time the company was to act as a catalyst and encourage and assist other local companies in those areas. In 1979, the company's mandate was revised whereby NORDCO was to increase its contract revenues from industry and government and to become a self-sufficient commerically operating firm.

At that time the company began to build up a fisheries related research and development operation and pursue a number of joint venture operations. L220 Karch 24, 1986 Vol XL Since 1979, NORDCO and its affiliates have generated approximately $35 million in revenue of which an estimated 80 per cent or more has remained in the Province. Further to this is the fact that a greater proportion of those revenues generated by NORDCO came from outside the Province and represented new money in the provincial economy.

In the process the company has built up a strong body of applied engineering, research and development professionals and support staff and has begun to pursue the strategy of future growth based on its own R and D and technology transfer activities. The company presently employs eighty-five permanent staff. The company has proposed a plan for majority ownership by the employees, designed to give NORDCO a clear private company identity and mandate, while at the same time maintaining enough government influence to keep the company in the Province and commit ted to its strong R and D strategy.

As part of this privatization process, government is selling 70 per cent of its interest in NORDCO to an employee group for the sum of $200, 000. In addition, to replace an eroded equity base, government has also committed to an $800,000 equity investment in preferred shares. This arrangement will result in a new investment in NORDCO of some $1 million. Employee ownership of NORDCO will result in the reduction of certain inherent disadvantages of the previous ownership. It will allow a maximization of tax benefits to the company, thus allowing NORDCO No. 5 R220

to continue its thrust in ocean related R & D. It will stabilize NORDCO's expertise base by allowing the company enough leverage to hold key personnel, who are at present in great demand as a result of increasing offshore activity. It will also enable NORDCO to seek further equity injection in order to aggressively pursue its R & D and product development objectives. The direct advantages of employee ownership include an increased dedication and commitment on behalf of owner/staff.

As well, removing government ownership will increase NORDCO's access to markets by eliminating certain bidding restrictions which government owned companies have experienced in both the public and industrial sectors. There will also be an increased opportunity for joint ventures in both the offshore and other highly technical markets. The privatization arrangement for NORDCO will enable the company to pass from government control and fully enter the commercial market without the danger of its ownership, and hence its operations, relocating out of the Province.

The share purchase was offered to all employees and resulted in 6 7 of the 85 NORDCO employees taking advantage of the offer with no individual holding in excess of 17 per cent. The future of NORDCO is bright. The company will now begin to project its' private ownership image to the market at large and assure a growth curve, taking full advantage of offshore and defense market objectives.

It is anticipated that NORDCO will continue to generate subcontracts L221 Karch 24, 1986 Vol XL in the offshore sector through its strong local technical base, and will also be able to attract defense subcontracting work to the Province. In its five year business plan NORDCO foresees a diversified market base which will include commercial and defense products, offshore exploration and development, and fish harvesting and aquaculture projects.

This government has been instrumental in the development of NORDCO into a world class organization which has enhanced the reputation of Newfoundland and Labrador in cold oceans research and development. It is now time for NORDCO to go it alone and reap the benefits that only a privately owned company can in the world markets that they pursue. NORDCO has well positioned itself to grow in the challenging and extremely competitive research and development environment, and the R & D business community and the Province will reap great rewards from their future efforts. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR. SIKKONS: Kr.

Speaker. KR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): The bon. the member for Fortune - Hermitage. KR. SIKKONS: Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank the Minister of Development and Tourism (Mr. Barrett) for getting a copy of his statement to me an hour or so ago so I had a chance to peruse it. NORDCO was a brilliant idea that has proved, since its inception, to be equally as brilliant in No. 5 R221

reality as it was in concept. The concept was one that was shepherded through by the now Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Barry). In his statement to the House at that time. Mr. Speaker, back in 1975. he gave an undertaking that it was his intention to see the company privatized in due course. Mr. Speaker, it is gratifying that the government has followed through on at least one of his undertakings during his time as part of that administration and. Mr. Speaker, if only that same government could show that same kind of follow-through on the labour dispute, we would have a solution reasonably,quickly. Mr.

Speaker, it is a good company. It is a company with a good track record, a company that has attracted some expertise among its employees, employees who since that time, 1975, have made quite a contribution to helping the company fulfill its mandate of becoming a firm of international stature in terms of technology applied to ice and cold oceans. So we are pleased that the time had come to privatize. The minister's statement is silent on a couple of points and I will raise these as questions which can be responded to at some point down the road.

The statement is silent on this point: The same procedure that was followed two or three years ago in relation to the proposed sale of the Karystown Shipyard, which sale was not followed through on, we would assume that same procedure was followed, that a divestiture package was prepared.

After all, we are dealing here not only with the interest of employees whose efforts we have saluted but also L222 Karch 24, 1986 Vol XL with taxpayers' money, and we would assume that a divestiture package was prepared, that bids were invited and received, and that the individuals who are getting 70 per cent of the interest of NORDCO are getting it as a result of that particular process. That would be the normal course of events given that we are dealing here with public monies.

The top of page three of the minister's statement also raises a question in that by implication the total share value of the company would appear to be about $300,000, in round figures, yet in that statement he says that government is now laying out about $800,000 equity investment, equity worth more than twice, almost three times the share value of the company. I realize he . is taking that up on behalf of the government in preferred shares, but there is an interesting proportion there, Mr.

Speaker, and one wonders how effective the divestiture is when government's interest in it is fully two and a half times the share value of the company. That having been said, Mr. Speaker, we do not want to detract from the principle of the minister's statement that divestiture has been undertaken, at least in form, whether in substance remains to be seen. In conclusion, Hr.

Speaker, on behalf of my colleagues I would salute the government's efforts here in following through on some very good intentions, resulting in privatization of one Crown corporation and, as I said earlier, if they could apply that same kind of follow-through to this labour dispute, a lot of us would be much happier than we are here today. llo. 5 R222

SOME HOM. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! Oral Questions MR. SPEAKER: The bon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier which statement is correct. Is it his statement where he said last week in this House that government was still at the bargaining table, or is it the statement of Treasury Board that they will not go to the bargaining table until the workers now on the picket line go back .to work? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Kr. Speaker, I do not intend to get into a battle over words as the Leader of the Opposition (Hr. Barry) would want me to.

All I can say is that as of this moment there are exploratory talks underway between the government as the employer and the individuals representing NAPE. They have met this morning a couple of times and will be meeting again later this evening. Any comment that I would make, I think, if I use a certain adjective, adverb, verb, noun or whatever it happens to be, will only tend to lead to an

interpretation which may not be the one that I intended the word to mean. I am going to have nothing to say on the matter. We are trying to resolve the situation, we are putting our best foot forward. We are working hard to resolve the present problem and therefore I think we should leave it at that until we see how the exploratory talks go. L223 Karch 24, 1986 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER: The bon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier which statement is true.

Is it the Premier's statement as carried in the government advertisement that the cost of parity would be $140 million or is it the union • s statement that the cost of parity would be only approximately $19 million? MR.. SPEAKER: The bon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: It is obvious that the Leader of the Opposition would like to sabotage these exploratory talks. He wants me to get into debate here today over it.

The matter is being talked about between representatives representing government and people representing NAPE and therefore I am going to have nothing to say, I am not going to get into any opinions whatsoever or

interpretations of what has been said. I am going to try to put my best foot forward to give the best opportunity for there to be success in the talks that are now going ahead. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I am sure the Premier does not mean to suggest that the bon. Leader of the Opposition wishes to sabotage anything that is going on. That matter did crop up the last day so I would ask the bon. the Premier if maybe he would like to clarify that? PREMIER PECKFORD: Kr. Speaker, the bon. the Opposition would these talks failed. No. 5 Leader of wish that R223

MR. TULI<: Is that withdrawing, Mr. Speaker? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Leader of Opposition. MR. BARRY: the It is not even worth raising a point of order on. It is imputing motives to a member of this House, Mr. Speaker, which the Premier knows is against the rules, but the Premier when he is in a tight spot tends to find that he has to push the rules in order to operate. I would like to ask the Premier does he intend to attempt to evade responsibility for the fact that we have employees working for his a~inistration who are earning less than the minimum wage? A former Tory called me up the other day, Mr.

Speaker, to point out that he has two sisters, one in the Health Service earning $3, 000 more than a sister in the General Service. I would like to ask the Premier - MR. MARSHALL: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the bon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, since we are enforcing the rules I draw to Your Honour's attention Page 129 of Beauchesne, "a question must not (

c) multiply, with slight variations, a similar question on the same point," and (

d) repeat in substance a question already answered." I would also draw to your attention Your Honour's admonition to all members of this House, including the Leader of the Opposition, to the effect that L224 March 24, 1986 Vol XL supplementary questions are supplementary questions and not to be preceded by speeches. MR. BARRY: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, the bon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr.

Speaker, we have a Premier in this House stand up and say that he does not want to make any statements that may prejudice the dispute when he uses the taxpayers' dollars for double full page ads, Mr. Speaker, putting out political propaganda to put pressure on the workers. SOME HO:U. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. BARRY: Now, if he . is prepared to make statements in paid political ads, why is he not prepared to make statements here in this House? KR. SPEAKER: Order, please! To that point of order, there is no need for a supplementary question to have a

preamble. So I would ask the bon. the Leader of the Opposition if he would pose his question. KR. MARSHALL: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the bon. the President of the Council. KR. MARSHALL: The bon. gentleman was up on a point of order a moment ago and really what the bon. gentleman was R'o. 5 R224

-~ ··-- --,. doing was repeating, in substance, the very same thing. He has entered into a temper tantrum. The hon. gentleman is not very sedate but obviously he needs to be sedated. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, to that point of order. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, the bon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: If the member for st. John's East, the Government House Leader, would go out he would see his fellow Newfoundlanders out there in the sleet and the slush and the rain, and they have been out there now for several weeks, while he is sitting in his nice dry office, Mr.

Speaker, drafting advertisements for The Evening Telegram and other newspapers to .make statements on the strike. Now, why will they not make them in the House? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I do not think there was a point of order raised at all the second time. I gave my reply to the original point of order, that a supplementary did not need any elaboration. Quite frankly I did not see a second point of order. As far as I am concerned there was no point of order the second time. The bon. the Leader of Opposition. MR.

BARRY: the I would like to ask the Premier whether he would admit that there L225 March 24, 1986 Vol XL is a basic injustice right now in the fact, as pointed out by a caller to me a couple of nights ago, who has two sisters, one working in the General Service and one in the Health Service and The one in the Health Service is earning $3, 000 a year more, Mr. Speaker, for doing the same work? Now does not the Premier consider there is a basic injustice when we have a system where right throughout the service there is this type of inequity, this type of lack of parity exists? Would the Premier address that? MR.

SPEAKER: The bon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, we have said in the past, the President of Treasury Board (Mr. Windsor) and other members representing the government, that parity is an issue which we are prepared to address, and we are eager to do that. We have said that, and we want to see eliminated the inequities that are inherent in the system, due to various factors beyond the control of the union and beyond the control of government over the last five or six years as different contracts expired at different times under different circumstances.

We recognize that, have recognized it, do recognize it today, and want to eliminate it. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Opposition. MR. BARRY: the Leader of the Mr. Speaker, I compliment the Premier for that statement, for that answer. That, Mr. Speaker, No. 5 R225

is addressing the question and that, Mr. Speaker, is showing some move towards conciliation. But I would like to ask the Premier, if he really wants to make a breakthrough in this strike and get these workers back to work as quickly as possible, has he considered - and it is completely within his power; the courts are not involve~, nobody else involved - has he considered revoking this decision to impose a thirty day suspension? It is a barrier to getting the talks going. It would be a sign of good faith and I would say, Kr.

Speaker, it would be a very strong inducement to letting the President of NAPE see that the Premier is serious and might even lead the union to committing itself to go back to work when it saw that sign of good faith. Would the Premier consider that? SOME HOR. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER PECKFORD: Now the Leader of the Opposition knows I could answer the question on parity as a point of principle, and we as a government want to move to wipe out the disparities that now exist between individuals in the Public Service . who are doing . the same work yet · they are not getting the same money. That is an inequity that has to be solved. There is no question about that. Everybody understands that, knows that it has to occur. In the final offer that was put before talks broke off that is what we were trying to do.

We made it a basic policy, a tenet of government, this year about three or four months ago, through Cabinet, that the workers in the L226 March 24, 1986 Vol XL General Service and MOS must get a higher increase than other workers who now are getting more money yet are doing the same work. No question about that. we established that principle months ago. On the question the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Barry) just asked, I cannot give him a direct answer to that. Talks are ongoing and obviously there are a whole range of factors that are going to enter into the matter of these present talks being successful.

So for me to say anything here today is being very unfair to the people. The President of Treasury Board (Mr. Windsor) and the Minister of Labour (Mr. Blanchard) just left, and are going back to talk again tonight. Obviously there is a range of issues being looked at from government • s point of view and from the union's point of view. For me to get into - MR. TULIC: Why did you not get talks going this weekend? PREMIER PECKFORD: Look, boy, we have got negotiations ongoing, we have got talks ongoing with the union. KR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER PECKFORD: I am not going to negotiate in public and the union agreed this morning neither are they. The ministers and the people representing the union have undertaken to say nothing about the talks and, therefore, if I say anything now on an issue like suspensions and get into that, I am thereby violating an agreement that has been made by the President of Treasury Board, the Minister of Labour and the people representing HAPE. No. 5 R226

MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Fortune - Hermitage. MR. SIMMONS: We could assume therefore, Mr. Speaker. that some villain in the piece has run those ads on radio and in the paper. The Premier is not responsible but somebody out there is doing it unknown to him. Mr. Speaker, a message - yes, a message too, I guess - but a -question for the Minister of Justice (Ms Verge). Last week she pleaded ignorance on the substance of that injunction.

She knows full well, of course, that the Treasury Board people who sought the injunction did so on the advice and with the direct use of a lawyer from her department, and I find it passing strange that she would not personally, as minister, be aware of the provision of that injunction, if not the actual wording. Does she now, then, Kr. Speaker, want to take the opportunity to rephrase for the benefit of the members of the House and the public the misleading statement she made to the House last week in which she said she was not aware of the substance of the injunction at that time? MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice. MS VERGE: Kr. Speaker, unfortunately the member opposite, and I take it the editor of The Evening Telegram, do not recall accurately what I did say in the House of Assembly last week. I have a copy of Hansard here. What I said at the time, and what I will reiterate L227 March 24, 1986 Vol XL now, is that that is a technical legal question. it is a matter of legal

interpretation. Of course I am aware of the interim injunction that was issued, but the meaning of that injunction is not a matter that necessarily is one of black or white, yes or no. In any case it is not admissible according to the rules of procedure, according to Beauchesne, for the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to disclose in the House of Assembly advise given to departments of government. So I reiterate what I said last week; it is on the record, copies of Hansard are available to all members.

Besides, as the Premier has indicated, the government is involved in exploratory talks with the union and no comment will be made by members on this side on any of these matters which may, in any way, jeopardize talks or violate the agreement that has been made with the union to give the talks the ·best possible chance of success so that the dispute may be resolved. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary. the hon. the member for Fortune - Hermitage. MR. SIMMONS: We are not looking for legal advice . We understand the parameters in that respect.

We are looking to the minister to respond, to answer to the House for matters within her jurisdiction. Now there is nothing complicated. Kr. Speaker, about this injunction. It says, "NAPE, its members. " General Service people are members of NAPE. I do not know why she persists in this, Mr. Speaker. Who is she trying to fool, herself No. 5 R227

or somebody else? This is a very clear matter. She knows full well that the skating that was done last week was for political purposes. Why is she part of it? Where is the zeal that brought her into politics to protect interest groups? Suddenly she is allowing a very large interest group down there to be trodden on by an unfair application of the law. MR. MARSHALL: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! A point of order, the hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: I want to refer Your Honour to page 130 of Beauchesne where it says it is out of order, under paragraph (m) , to "ask solution of a legal proposition, such as

interpretation of a Statute, a Minister's own powers, etc." Clearly what the hon. gentleman is asking for is an

interpretation of an injunction. That injunction is an order given by the court. The

interpretation of that order and that injunction is clearly within the purview of the court and not within the purview of the minister. It would be, Mr. Speaker, I think infringing very much into the areas of the jurisdiction of the court, and I submit that it is completely and absolutely and patently out of order. KR. BARRY: To that point of order very briefly, Mr. Speaker. KR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition. L228 March 24, 1986 Vol XL KR.

BARRY: The thrust of the question is what was the intention of government, who was it intended to cover when they said, "All the members of NAPE"? Who was it intended that the minister's solicitor would have that injunction cover when the Department of Justice's solicitor drafted it? Was it intended to cover all the members of NAPE or only some of the members of NAPE? KR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, I am reading the particular reference of the bon. the President of the Council. It does appear to me that what the hon. member is asking is a legal question that in this case would be out of order.

But maybe he would like to reword his question in some other way. The hon. the member for Fortune - Hermitage. KR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, again I maintain I am not asking any question relating to the legal. The injunction, which I am prepared to table, identifies NAPE as the defendent and then later says "its members. •• "Its members, •• not some of its members. Now the question stands. My colleague from Mount Scio, the Leader of the Opposition (Hr. Barry), put it. The minister, as part of her responsibilities, IIWSt know what was the intention of government in seeking that injunction.

What was the intention of government? is my question to her. What was the intention in seeking that injunction, and was the injunction intended to cover the General Service, as would be quite apparent from the wording of the injunction? No. 5 R228

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice. MS VERGE: Mr. Speaker, the member is persisting and repeating the same question over and over again. He is persisting in trying to elicit from me legal opinions given to other branches of government, is persisting in trying to elicit from me answers on matters that are currently before the Trial Division of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland. I have made my position clear, which is that these are complicated legal questions, matters of opinion, matters ultimately for the courts to rule on.

This particular matter is still before the Chief Justice of the Trial Division of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and it will be dealt with by him in a hearing scheduled for tomorrow morning, and for all of those reasons I have nothing further to say to the House on that matter. MR. SIMMONS: One further Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: supplementary, One further supplementary, bon. the -member Fortune-Hermitage. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. the for I will stay clear of the legalities altogether and I will ask a very different question, Mr. Speaker, bearing directly on that minister's responsibility.

The question is this: Why did she last week stand idly by while the law was being unfairly, inequitably applied to different groups of NAPE? Why was she party L229 Karch 24, 1986 Vol XL through her silence to allowing some people to be arrested who should never have been arrested, and then a different

interpretation made the following day so that there were no arrests? There should have been none at all. Why did she, a champion of minority rights in terms of her credentials in the past, stand idly by and allow that travesty to be perpetrated on people? MR. SPEAI<ER: The bon. the Minister of Justice. MS VERGE: Mr. Speaker, there was no inconsistency in application last week. There is on the record an interim injunction which was sought and given by the court when one set of circumstances pertained, when one bargaining unit was conducting an unlawful strike. Circumstances changed.

There was no inconsistency in the actions taken by the Crown or the law enforcement officers of the Crown last week. The interim issued by outstanding. with by the future, and nothing more MR. FENWICK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: injunction which was the court is still It will be dealt court tomorrow and in on that matter I have to say. The bon. the member for Kenihek. MR. FENWICK: Thank you very much, Kr. Speaker. My question would be to the Minister of Labour, and it has to do with the whole question of legal and illegal strikes and the appropriateness of whether or not No. 5 '• R229

negotiations should occur when that occurs o And calling on his vast number of years of experience in the Department of Labour, both here in this Province and what he knows that has gone on in other provinces, my question to him is, does he know of any instances where we have had illegal strikes, technically or otherwise, in which actual negotiations have occurred prior to these individuals going back to work? MR o BLANCHARD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAI<ER: The bon. the Minister of Labour. MR. BLANCHARD: Hr. Speaker, I thank the bon. member for Kenihek for the question o I am not aware of any illegal strikes, Hr.

Speaker, where the Department of Labour has stepped in and actually gotten back to the bargaining table while the illegal strike was in progress. Bow there may be shades of definition to that, Hr. Speaker. A case has been quoted over the last few days where negotiations of a sort occurred, it depends I guess on the strict

interpretation of negotiations, but I have never participated, Mr. Speaker, in face to face negotiations with the two parties present where an illegal strike was in progress. MR. FEHWICK: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker .. MR. SPEAI<ER: A supplementary, the bono the member for Henihek. MR.

FENWICK: I have a list here, I am not going to go through too many of them, but I can refer, for example, to L230 March 24, 1986 Vol XL postal workers, prior to the time they got collective bargaining rights in the late 1960s, on the federal level, the trawlermen's strike in the middle 1970s, and hospital strikes in this Province, prior to legitimization of the collective bargaining relationship, in which there appears to have been illegal strikes when negotiations occurred. But the one that sticks out is the one - MR. SPEAI<ER: Order, please! MR. FENWICK: Hr.

Speaker, we are in a position here where we have a Gordian knot that someone has to cut, and my question is to the Minister of Labour. Since you have already said that negotiations of a sort have occurred in what were technically illegal strikes, can I then ask · the Minister of Labour if he will encourage negotiations of a sort to occur here prior to the people going back to work? MR. BLANCHARD: Hr. Speaker. MR. SPEAI<ER: The bon. the Minister of Labour. MR. BLANCHARD: Mr.

Speaker, the talks that we are currently in, the exploratory talks we are having with representatives of HAPB over the last three or four days, are precisely the kinds of things that I had in mind and referred to, where you get down, Kr. Speaker, and try to work out an accoiiUilodation to get back to the table, where the parties will go back, a set of circumstances under which the employees will go back to work, the same precise thing as the President of Treasury Board Bo. 5 R230

and myself have been doing since last Friday. MR. CALLAU: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the member for Bellevue. MR. CALLAU: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Transportation (Mr. Dawe). Could the minister indicate - he probably does not have up-to-date information and it is difficult to tell, I know, whether an accident on the highway was caused because the MOS workers were out and so on - approximately how many vehicle accidents have occurred on o~r province's highways as a result of the action taken by the MOS workers approximately three weeks ago? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. Minister of Transportation. MR. DAWE: Mr. Speaker, in the member • s

preamble he identified correctly that that would be virtually impossible for me to say as it relates to the number of accidents that have occurred. I would point out, Mr. Speaker, that unlike the member opposite I would not suggest that any accident was caused by either the action or the inaction of people operating in this Province, whether it be the MOS or the management staff who are manning the equipment. I would suggest that perhaps the member is treading on somewhat dangerous ground if he is accusing the MOS of causing some accidents. MR. CALLAU: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: L231 March 24, 1986 Vol XL The hon. member for Bellevue. MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker, somebody asked a question last week, and the minister opposite thought it was a low question, about how much money is being saved as a result of this strike. Last year the government saved $23 million as a result of the teachers strike. The minister just gave a low answer, Mr. Speaker. He knows what I am suggesting is that the lack of snow and ice control may cause accidents. MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): Order, please! The bon. member is making a speech. MR.

CALLAU: Let me ask the Minister of Education (Mr Hearn) a question, Mr. Speaker. The minister knows as well as I do that there are countless numbers of school bus operators who refuse to operate because of the lack of proper control of ice and snow conditions. Does the Minister of Education have a figure of how many pupil-days, for example, have been lost in our schools as a result of the poor control of ice and snow as a result of the walkout? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Education. MR. HEAIUJ: Mr.

Speaker, we have been made aware that two areas of the Province have had school closures because of road conditions. Whether or not that is because there is a strike underway right now is hard to say, because there have been many days during many Winters when schools in certain areas have been closed because of storms or ice conditions. There No. 5 R231 '·

is no way that we could determine how many days have been lost because people are on strike. MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the member for Bonavista North. MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the President of Treasury Board.

In view of the ever increasing delicacy of this labour dispute, and in view of contradictory remarks from the Premier and the Minister of Labour and the President of Treasury Board himself, I wonder if the President of Treasury Board could indicate whether the initiative on Friday by himself and by the Minister of Labour to start exploratory talks with NAPE had the full support, the full endorsement, of Cabinet? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the President of Treasury Board. MR. WINDSOR: Mr.

Speaker, outside of the fact that that question is somewhat improper and it does not deal really with an area of responsibility of my portfolio, I want to say to the bon. gentleman that I know that he does not want to do anything or say anything that would impact on our ability to continue with these exploratory talks and to reach an agreement to return to the bargaining table. So I am going to protect him from himself, Mr. Speaker, and say to him that obviously I cannot answer that question. MR. LUSH: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. L232 March 24, 1986 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the member for Bonavista North.

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, on Friday, in response to a question from the media as to whether this initiative had the support of the Premier, the President of Treasury Board answered, "No conunen t . " In view of that answer that he gave the press of no conunent, I am wondering whether he can indicate whether or not the initiative, the exploratory talks, did have the support of the Premier or does it mean that there is a lack of purpose and a lack of direction or, much worse, that there is a lack of uniformity or a lack of political - MR. MARSHALL: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A point of order, the bon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: -···-- Number one, the bon. gentleman is going into a long speech. I ... realize he cannot help that, that is endemic to his nature. But the next thing, Mr. Speaker, the main substance of my point of order is that it is obviously completely out of order in the Cabinet system of government for the bon. gentleman to ask what were decisions of Cabinet and what were decisions of individual members of Cabinet.

The bon. gentleman can be assured of this in all things, I say without equivocation, that this Cabinet and this government stand as one and unified. That is the system under which we operate in this Province and the British Parliamentary system. So it is No. 5 R232

out of order to ask any minister a question like that. MR. SPEAXER: To that point of order, it does appear to the Chair that the bon. member is out of order in questioning what are Cabinet decisions. · The bon. the member for Bonavista North. MR. LUSH: Certainly, Mr. Speaker, we have the right in this House to ask whether a certain minister is acting on behalf of government or whether he is just running off at the mouth.

This is the question I was asking: In view of the minister's answer, as to whether the initiative had the support of the Premier, was "No Conunent, '' in view of that, Sir, I am asking whether this indicated whether or not these exploratory talks had the approval of government or whether it shows, Mr. Speaker - MR. MARSHALL: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAXER: Order, please! A point of order, the bon. the President of the Council. MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I have to say it is exactly the same question that the bon. gentleman asked.

Whether the bon. gentleman asked whether this has the support of Cabinet, or he asks if it has support of government, it is one and the same, Mr. Speaker. MR. BARRY: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. L233 Karch 24, 1986 Vol XL MR. SPEAXER: To that point of order, the bon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Long experience in this House has shown that when a member starts getting too close to the nub the Government House Leader (Mr. Marshall) starts popping up.

Now there are obviously some serious differences of opinion between the President of Treasury Board and the Premier and other members of Cabinet as to how to proceed, but members on this side are entitled, Mr. Speaker, to ask questions on an important matter like this to determine just exactly what is happening. Is the President of Treasury Board, Mr. Speaker, proceeding on his own bat, for example, with the thirty day suspension? Was that his brilliant idea? This is the type of thing that the member for Bonavista North (Mr. Lush) is trying to elucidate, and I think that those questions are properly in order. MR.

MARSHALL: To that point of order. MR. SPEAXER: To that point of order, the bon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: The only difference of opinion that has ever occurred in this Cabinet to my knowledge, to the benefit of the government and the people in Newfoundland, is the difference of opinion that occurred between the government and the former Minister of Mines and Energy (Mr. Barry) and that is a matter, Mr. Speaker, that is a known fact. What the bon. gentleman is trying to do is to ask questions which are completely and absolutely out of order and he No. 5 R233

Q knows it. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, the bon. member should try to address his questions to a particular minister strictly on points that are in the control of his own portfolio. It is about as simple as that. The bon. the member for Bonavista North. MR. LUSH: I am asking the President of Treasury Board to respond to an answer that he gave, but if he does not have control of that I do not know who does. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. LUSH: Maybe I should ask the member for St. John's East (Mr. Marshall) to comment upon the answer.

The question is, do these exploratory talks have the approval of government? That is the question to the President of Treasury Board. Obviously they do not. SOME HOtl. MEMBERS: No answer. MR. FUREY: Hr. Speaker. MR. SPEAICER: ·The bon. the member for St. Barbe. MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier. On February 14 the Premier said in this House, and I quote, 'Mr.

Speaker, when we are so insensitive as · a government to suddenly not respond to what is clearly the majority opinion in this Province, then we do not deserve to be here any more. ' I L234 March 24, 1986 Vol XL want to ask the Premier will he now give his assurances that he will remove this wall which his administration has built between himself and government, or will he heed his own words, that he does not deserve to be here any more and he should resign? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Premier.

PREMIER PECKFORD: The latest poll figures that have just come off the press indicate that if there was an election called today the P. C. Party would still form the Government of Newfoundland, number one. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: Number two, that the Leader of the Opposition is running behind his party and, number three, that I am running well ahead of my party. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. FUREY: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! A supplementary, the bon. member for St. Barbe. MR.

FUREY: the In light of the Premier's answer and his confidence in his polls, will the Premier call an election today? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Premier. llo. 5 R234

PREMIER PECI<FORD: Yes, Mr. Speaker, when I am ready, in my time. KR. FUREY: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the ·bon. the member for St. Barbe. KR. FUREY: In all seriousness I would ask the Premier would he remove the threat of suspension as a sign of good faith so that we can start the healing process in this Province right away? KR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Premie~. PREMIER PECI<FORD: Talks are underway now, Mr. Speaker. I am not going to get into matters that are presently, obviously, issues which are important to the union and important to government.

Let me just say to the bon. member, if I was in the bon. member • s shoes I would be very, very scared because right now the NDP Party has over 21 per cent of the popular vote in this Province and the Liberal Party just a tiny bit over 30 per cent. KR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The time for Oral Questions has elapsed. Presentins Reports by Standin& and Special Committees DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): L235 March 24, 1986 Vol XL The hon. the Leader of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! PREMIER PECKFORD: Come down and run against me. KR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Order, please! The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table copies of Minutes of Council pursuant to

Section 26 (1) of the Financial Administration Act which relates to the precommitment of funds and, also, copies of Special Warrants pursuant to the Financial Administration Act. Petitions MR. FENWICK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the member for Kenihek. KR. FENWICK: Mr. Speaker, this petition is just a final kick at the cat before the Budget tomorrow. I will read the prayer of the petition because it is similar to one that I presented before, but these are new copies that have arrived since then.

Sixty-eight individuals from Old Perlican and from Green • s Harbour say, "we, the undersigned, petition the Provincial Government to either eliminate the 12 per cent sales tax on cable service in rural areas or else find some way of lowering it so that we do not pay a much larger amount in sales No. 5 R235

tax on our cable service than do people in urban areas, such as St. John's, Newfoundland." I have given the arguments before. I do not want to take up the time of the House in going over them, but it is essentially that the $20-odd per month in rural areas means twice as high as sales tax being collected as is on the $10 or $11 in urban are~s. It is clearly inequitable, and it is clearly something I am hoping the Minister of Finance will correct tomorrow with the Budget. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Orders of the Day MR. MARSHALL: Motion 1, Interim Supply.

On motion that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on Supply to consider certain Resolutions for the Granting of Interim Supply to Her Majesty, Mr. Speaker left the Chair. Committee of the Whole on SUpplY MR. CHAIRMA!l (Greening,): Order, please! SOME HOII. MEMBERS: Carried. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker. MR. CHAIRMA!l: The hon. the member for Fortune-Hermitage. MR. SIMMONS: No, Mr. Chairman, this bill is L236 March 24, 1986 Vol XL far, far from the carrying stage.

Last week I said on behalf of the Opposition when we first spoke on this Interim Supply Bill, Bill No. 18, that we were tying the passage of this bill to a settlement in the NAPE dispute. We believed the two are very directly related. We stand by our position on that, which means, Mr. Chairman, that we have at least this afternoon, and maybe many other afternoons and evenings and nights, who knows, during which to pursue some of the detail. Mr. Chairman, we do not sense on the part of the administration any urgency to expedite the passage of this particular bill.

Indeed, it is traditional in most parliamentary forums for the minister to at least do the courtesy of sitting in his seat during this particular period, to hear the concerns of the Opposition and to answer their questions. I put some questions to the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) last week on two separate occasions to which we have no answers. Next week they will be moaning and groaning I suppose, Mr. Speaker, that the Opposition would not co-operate and so they, the government, are unable to pay the bills. They have the responsibility, Mr.

Speaker, for dealing with that issue and I do not believe they are exercising that responsibility very well. I keep saying, Mr. Speaker, I mean of course, Mr. Chairman. I think of Mr. Chairman as an eminent Speaker of this Chamber and in days to come, it is only a matter of time. We welcome him back. The gentleman from Humber West (Mr. Baird) did an excellent job No. 5 R236

but we nevertheless gentleman from Terra Greening). MR. TULK: missed Nova the (Mr. He had better do it this term though. MR. SIMMONS: My friend says he had better do it this term. He is one of the men that we cultivate. We cultivate that gentleman and others. We know that this labour dispute in particular has brought to a head a number of tensions in the Tory Caucus, and I do not - MR. TULK: The Chairman is as fair man. MR. DECKER: He has Liberal leanings. MR. SIMMONS: He is a Liberal gone temporarily gone astray.

But as I think another Premier of this Province used to say one time, "While the light holds out to burn, the vilest sinner may return. " So I tell him to get out his old Liberal membership card and dust it off. He may have reason to use it sooner than he thinks. We have said again and again, Mr. Chairman, that we are tying this bill and its passage to the settlement of the labour dispute. We mean that and we intend to stand by it because, Mr.

Chairman, I cannot think of anything in recent times in this Province that is so blatantly unjust, that affects so many people, whether it be the MOS unit of NAPE or the General Service or NAPE members generally, or whether it be the bus drivers out there on the roads or the school children whose education is being interrupted as a ramification of this dispute.

I L237 March 24, 1986 Vol XL cannot think of any issue in this Province in recent times that has been more unjustly handled by the administration of the day or one that affects more people, thousands and tens of thousands of people, than this particular dispute. If I were a part of the government · I would be day in and day out, night and day, looking for a solution and trying to find ways to minimize the aggravation. I notice in Question Period the standard or rehearsed line is that the administration does not want to increase the aggravation but, Mr.

Chairman, actions speak louder than words and for all the pious words of the Premier and the President of Treasury Board (Mr. Marshall) on this issue. look at what they did during the weekend. Just as soon as the House had risen, they rush off to oz FK and contract for a week of radio advertising. They contract with The Evening Telegram and the lord knows who else to get advertising to pump out something that is blatantly false and proven to be false by the NAPE union. The Premier was given an opportunity to correct the record today and refused to do so. Why, Mr. Chairman?

Why, because of the poll that the Premier gloats in? Members of the committee, have you noticed that even if you take the Premier's figures - I have long since learned not to take his figures - but if you take the Premier's figures, he implicitly admits that his administration has the support of less than 50 per cent because the two figures he quoted for the other parties, if you assume to be correct, total more than SO, so, by his own admission in this committee today, by implication, his administration and his party has the support of less than half the people out No. 5 R237

there. I could have told him that a long time ago, mind you, but I have long since learned not to get to excited about the Premier's polls or particularly the Premier's recital of his polls because the last time he recited a poll that affected us was around Karch of 1984 . His polls showed him then that the Liberals would get two to four seats, I think. He was going to have to appoint an opposition and then, of course, along came the member for Mount Pearl (Mr. Windsor). There is no need to appoint an opposition now because he has the member for Mount Pearl right at this table. MR. BARRY: Even the member for St.

John's East (Mr. Marshall) smiled at that one. MR. SIMMON'S: Which proves, among other things, that the member for St. John's East does smile, a matter about which there has been some doubt. .All HON. KEMBER: (Inaudible) MR. SIMMON'S: ' I hate to interrupt him because he is making what is surely his finest speech. MR. TULK: Did he say something nice? MR. SIMMONS: Oh, yes, he says something nice quite often and means it once in a while to. Kr. Chairman, I do not even know if we have the ear of the Minister of Finance (Dr.

Collins) so we are going to take our time because when this ten-minute period runs out, I will get another ten minutes and several more L238 Karch 24, 1986 Vol XL ten-minute periods between now and the passage of this bill. I have a lot of time. I would say more time than the government House Leader (Kr. Marshall) has on this matter although I can understand that the last thing they want to do is call the Throne Speech. Have you noticed in recent years. Mr. Chairman. the newest conventiQn they use? Compare it to Ottawa, Queen • s Park and Westminster and you will notice that there there is a defined period.

You have a Throne Speech and then the members are given five or six days during which members on the government side, backbench and members generally can air the ~oncerns of their constituents and the direct reasons they were sent here. But what happens here? Through orchestration by the Government House Leader (Mr. Marshall), they see to it every time that the minute the Throne Speech comes in, the minute we open a new session, we have another crisis about Interim Supply and then bang-o, a budget which is already a month and a half overdue.

So Interim Supply and then budget effectively preclude any up-to-date debate of the Throne Speech. They will call it next September, mind you. MR. TULK: Do not bet on that. MR. SIMMON'S: That is right, do not bet on that, because they promised after a day or two of debate in the last session to call the Throne Speech but it died on the Order Paper. We never, ever completed the debate on the Throne Speech, on the Address In Reply. Ro. 5 R238

Mr. Chairman, what an insult that is to the Lieutenant-Governor alone who comes here. We appoint a committee. We are suppose to give him a response just in terms of the sheer formalities. We stand in this House when we get a message from him and yet we kick the office in the teeth by not even responding to the address. We are suppose to deliver an actual Address In Reply.

We can only do that when we conclude the formality of the Throne Speech Debate but, more important than the formality is the substance and we, as members of this House, have been denied during the past few years the opportunity of debating the Throne Speech for obvious reasons. The gove .rnment does not particularly want held up to public scrutiny the nonsense that occurs in that particular Throne Speech. So, Mr. Chairman, since I am not going to get a chance during the Throne Speech to make my Throne Speech remarks, I might as well make them during this debate on Interim Supply. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Barry) was at the University the other day and he read what must be the guts, the substance, of this particular Throne Speech. It is on Page 1, the third paragraph in. MR. BARRY: It is called fighting words. MR. SIMMOITS: Exactly. "Perhaps one of the most positioire events to occur has been the significant change in attitude brought about by the election in late 1984 of a new Government in ottawa. A new spirit of federal - provincial understanding and co-operation has clearly emerged across the Nation since that time.

We now have a Federal Government that ~s sensitive to L239 March 24, 1986 Vol XL the circumstances. Acrimony has given way to harmony, etc . , etc . , etc." Mr. Chairman, I cannot even read it. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! The bon. member's time is up. MR. SIMMO NS: Would you just get up and say a sentence? I want to go again. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I always like to go by the policy that there should be one side and then the other side. I did not see the member. I would yield to the member for Menihek (Mr.

Fenwick) but I really cannot stand this afternoon to hear two Liberals in a row, as erudite as the hon. gentleman is. Mr. Chairman, I want to reiterate once again and I just want to make one little point. I am not going to speak for a long, long period of time, just a short period of time. If today I have to bear listening to two or three Liberals at a time, I will bear it. I have a strong stomach and I can do it. Mr. Chairman, today we are considering Interim Supply.

I do not want to prejudge the Committee or the House or anything like that because it is the House that determines these things, but if we do not get Interim Supply through Committee, what is going to happen No. 5 R239

is, because obviously there has to be an adjournment of the House over the - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Why? MR. MARSHALL: Do the hon. gentlemen want to sit on Good Friday or do they want to sit on Maundy Thursday? The hon. gentlemen would . sit on Maundy Thursday, Holy Thursday and Private Member's Day is Wednesday. The fact of the matter is that on March 10, I would just point out again, in the great spirit of co-operation that we have shown from time to time, I wrote the bon. the beaten Liberal and I told the bon, gentleman that the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) was to bring down his budget tomorrow.

As sure as night follows day, and night will follow day tomorrow, Mr. Chairman, it will be a bright day tomorrow, the Minister of Finance is going to bring down his Budget Speech. When the bon. gentleman brings down his Budget Speech, the hon. gentlemen may not understand it. I lmow the member for Fortune - Hermitage (Mr. Sinunons) does. It will set forth the intended expenditures and projected revenues of the government for the 1986 - 1987 year. The bon. gentlemen, I lmow, do not think very logically but they understand that fiscal years are different that calendar years.

So from April to next March it will set down the expenditures and it will set down the revenues. Therefore, there will be before the House the complete programme of this government for the ensuing year. Now, what is Interim Supply? It is merely just an advance on the money to enable the bills of L240 March 24, 1986 Vol XL government to be paid while the budget is being brought down, while it is into these democratic committees that we have set up, while the Budget Speech is going on and while the normal democratic process is taking place.

So I am just going to say to the hon. gentlemen, on March - and I lalow I am inviting the hon. gentlemen to get up and make a rain of words against me but, I am going to point it out once more to them. I appeal to the bon. gentlemen to be reasonable. I know one of them was reasonable at one time, the bon. the member fa~ Twillingate (Mr. w. Carter), and I am quite sure he is still a very reasonable individual, even though he went across. The fact of the matter is, Mr. Chairman, we have to pay the members of the public service who are working in the essential services area and the management.

You have to pay the hospital workers and you have to pay supplies and what have you. So, I just refer to the letter of March lOth. I will not, as some people think is sometimes my custom, heap insults on the bon. gentlemen there opposite, as enticed as ·I am to heap insults on them. I will just point out that if Interim Supply does not go through today, the problem is we will not have the legislative authority from this Chamber to be able to make the necessary payments. So I would just urge the bon. gentlemen to get relevant, to get serious, to pass the Interim Supply before the day is over.

Knowing that the Budget - MR. BARRY: Settle the strike and you got it, no settlement, no supply. MR. MARSHALL: No. 5 R240

The hon. gentleman says, 'Settle the strike. ' The keeping open of this House is going to prolong this strike because we get here in this House and the hon. gentleman's idea of settling the strike is to have the government arrest every single person in the MOS and the General Service. The only thing that I have been able to discern from the official opposition on this side of the House with respect to the strike is that they want us to arrest everybody. It also shows that the hon. gentleman, who is coupling the two together, takes a rather cynical attitude towards it.

He is coupling the rights of the people in the Province to get paid, the hospital workers to get paid, the rights of suppliers to get paid, the necessity of continuing essential services and the hon. gentleman who has no perspective at all, an unfortunate perspective, has gotten here and he has somehow coupled them together. It is one of the reasons why we have such a difficulty in dealing efficiently with the business of this House. We are dealing with Interim Supply, now that is one thing. MR. J. CARTER: We are dealing with dirt bags. MR.

MARSHALL; The strike is another matter, the legislative programme is another, the budget is another matter, the Budget Speech is another matter but the bon. gentleman wants to lump them all in together. The hon. gentleman is making a big mistake when he is doing that because it is not right. The fact of the matter is that there is a strike on. What has that got to do with Interim Supply? L241 March 24, 1986 Vol XI;- He says if the strike is not settled what he is going to do, in effect, is withhold the right of people who are working day by day to get their salary cheques.

He is going to risk bringing the hospitals to a halt because we cannot pay. So he wants to blaclanail. Mr. Chairman, we are not going to bend to blackmail. We respect this Committee and we respect the House. We even respect the rights of people to put Liberals in the House, as unpalatable as it is to us from time to time. That being the fact, Kr. Chairman, we would like for this to go through so that we can get Interim Supply, get on with the business of the Province, preclude the possibility of people not getting paid and hospitals not getting paid and hospital services not being able to be rendered. MR.

OTTENHEIKER: And welfare recipients. MR. MARSHALL: And welfare recipients as well, as the hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs just said. If the hon. gentleman wants to couple them together in his own mind, the bon. gentlemen should not be led. The bon. gentlemen there opposite can only think of one thing. What they construct their future, airy fairy government on, and it is a theoretical one because it will never come into existence, is misery and disaster. The hon. the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Barry) and his cohorts hope that the offshore is not going to occur.

They hope that Labrador is not going to open up and that the markets for , the Ho. 5 R241

iron ore are going to go down. They hope that there will be no NATO base up there. They hope that the fishery will be a failure. They hope the squid will not come in and what they are doing now is showing their colours. They are doing exactly the same thing. Kr. Chairman, I would be the last one in the world to try to provoke the bon. gentlemen. I would just ask them to get somebody sensible, like the bon. the member for Twillingate (Mr. W.

Carter); to get up and talk for ten minutes when I sit down so that they can reflect on it and hopefully not make drawn positions with respect to this and realize that it is necessary to pass Interim Supply, and we can get on with the rest of the business of this Province in the House, as I outlined to the Opposition House Leader in my letter of Karch 10. Thank you. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRKA» (Greening) : The bon. the member for Fortune - Hermitage. MR. SIMMONS: I think that bit of balm should be entitled Sweetness and Light. It is touching to see the healing hand extended, the absence of vile.

It is amazing. It is touching so near Easter Sunday to have that kind of sweet charity extended to us. If we did not have the motivation we needed to be co-operative. surely we got it in the last ten minutes. Mr. Chairman. the gentleman for St. John's East (Mr. Marshall) began his remarks with these words L242 March 24, 1986 Vol XL that I put down for posterity, as will Hansard, 'those democratic conuni t tees we have set up. ' You talk about disillusion! Now the member for St.

John • s East wants us to understand that he is responsible for a mechanism called the Conunittee of the Whole, which we are in right now. What else will he take credit for? Maybe the end of the Second World War and Easter Sunday itself and so many other things. I think his book will be called And On The Seventh Day. I Rested. Those democratic institutious and conunittees that we have set up! That is the problem, Hr. Chairman, with this whole process. The gentleman for St. John's East, the real Premier, has got such a set of blinkers on that he does not understand some of the basic realities.

One of the basic realities was sent across to him some days ago when the Leader of the Opposition spoke on this issue. I repeated that reality last week. I repeated that reality about a half hour ago when I made my first remarks in this afternoon's conunittee, and I now repeat it again for him to hear. No amount of sweet talk, cajoling, insulting or whatever other tactic he wants to engage in is going to dissuade us from our purpose in this particular matter. We understand full well the implications of Interim Supply not passing, we understand that. We have been around here before.

We also understand the serious devastating implications of this strike continuing. We cannot get from the President of Treasury Board (Mr. Windsor) whether his initiatives have the endorsement of government or not. They hide behind the rules on that one. We do not even know if the government No. 5 R242

has really focused on this matter. We know that they have been out taking some polls, and I assume from the Premier• s respond today on polls he has been governed in terms of his approach to the strike by polls as well . That is all I can construe from what he said. Now, Mr. Chairman, they are not - MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible). MR. SIMMONS: Oh, too bad, Kr. Chairman, the present Premier is not here now. He shut the member for Burin - Placentia up pretty well around three o'clock thi~ afternoon. I wish he were here to keep him quiet now because I have some things I want to say. My people sent me here to say them.

Then, if he wants to get up and say somethings, he can say them and I will listen to him in silence, as I expect him to do in my case. Mr. Chairman, the message I want to get through to the gentleman for St. John's East (Mr. Marshall) and to the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins), but the gentleman for St. John • s East particularly, because he is the Government House Leader, responsible for the government's agenda in this House, is that we are not going to be dissuaded by cajoling or insulting or any other tactic. We are sticking by our guns on this one.

The government can do what it has to do, but from out standpoint here, we are here until that strike is settled before we pass Interim Supply, before we acquiesce to the passage of Interim Supply, we are here. We have no schedules to go elsewhere, South, North, or anywhere . We are prepared to stay. We would like L243 Karch 24, 1986 Vol XL to have Good Friday off, if possible. We would like to have Easter Sunday off, if possible. MR. TULK: If it is necessary, we will come back Saturday and Sunday. MR. SIMMONS: Kr. Chairman, we are prepared to hang her down here until this matter is resolved. You see, Kr.

Chairman, once this House rises, once this House recesses, there is one powerful lever removed from government to get on with a settlement. They do not have to face the picketers as they come into the building every day to get here. They do not have to look at picketers up in the gallery that they are paying $13 , 000 a year. There was one of them there this afternoon I saw who was getting that wage. It is no secret. He was on television last week saying exactly what he was getting. Mr.

Chairman, as long as the government does not have this leverage, this thing goes on and on and on, it effects more children's education and it effects the pocketbook of so many people. I can understand the rush that they may want to go places, but we are here on this one. Now have they got that message? Do you think they have that one? Have they got it this time? We may have to say it again. Other members will say it, but have they got the message, do you think, that we do not intend to see the passage of this bill until the strike is settled? Now the member for st. John's East (Mr.

Marshall) talks about whether or not the two are related, and he construes that they are not related. Well, let me take him Ho. 5 R243

through it again. We submit they are very closely related for a number of reasons. Here is another reason that we have not advanced yet: We feel that a government that will not treat its employees fairly, we feel that a government that will manipulate law enforcement to serve its political ends cannot be trusted with $750,000,000 in the first place, which is what they are asking for. Now, Hr. Chairman, if they will - HR. TULK: Did you say billion? HR. SIMMONS: Three-quarters of a billion dollars, and this ·is just Interim Supply.

They want the entire budget for Transportation and the entire budget for Public Works under Interim Supply. It is traditional to ask for two or three months supply, they are asking for twelve months supply, in some cases. Maybe, Hr. Chairman, if we were completely sinister we would see even more of a reason in this bill that relates it to the strike than we thought about. Why are those two departments, Transportation and Public Works, from which the HOS units largely come, which are out on strike right now, singled out for the full twelve month supply as opposed to two or three months?

Perhaps the government is looking for a longer haul here if they can only get this House out of the way. Perhaps that is it, Hr. Chairman. Let me say it again, Hr. Chairman, just in case the gentleman from St. John's East (Hr. Marshall) does not fully understand. We think the two are closely L244 March 24 ·. 1986 Vol XL related. Any hon. crowd that would manipulate law enforcement to serve its own political ends cannot be trusted with $750,000,000 in the first place. They can have that $750,000,000 from our standpoint if they show some good faith on the labour dispute, good faith resulting in its being settled.

Now. the gentleman from Carbonear (Hr. Peach) says they are showing good faith. The real proof of the pudding, I say to the gentleman from Carbonear, is the settlement of the dispute. The people concerned have not been covert or oblique on what they are asking for, they are asking for something that other employees of government already have, that is to say a certain wage level. They are just asking for parity, the catch-up provision, to allow these people to get the same kind of money that other employees doing the same work are already getting.

Indeed, if the government which today followed through on an initiative by my friend from Mount Scio (Mr. Barry), the initiative to privatize NORDCO, would now take his advice on this strike, we would have a settlement reasonably soon. MR. TULIC: He would certainly have the House closed. HR. SIMMONS: He would have the House closed and he would have the $750,000,000 they want to rush out and spend. Hr. Chairman, I do not believe our requirements, our conditions are unreasonable. I understand the government would like to get the bill without those particular conditions, and they have ways, I No. 5 R244

suppose, if they get even more undemocratic. But I do not know how you can be more dictatorial, more undemocratic than they were out in ' front of this building last week in the way they applied that injunction. But if they want to take over the House altogether, and I would not be surprised, nothing with this administration surprises me any more, then that is their funeral, that is their choice. If they want to do it in a dictatorial fashion, it would be very much in character for them to do it that way.

I do not see why they would treat the members of the House any more gently than they do the people who work for them normally, when they are not on strike. MR.. CHAIRMAN (Greening) : Order, please! The hon. member's time is up. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Chairman, we will be back at it again. We would now like to hear some responses from the minister. Would the minister tell me why the full amount in Public Works and about 95 per cent of the amount in Transportation is being asked for at this particular time? That is a fair question. MR. DECKER: Kr. Chairman. MR.. CHAIRMAN: The bon. the member for the Strait of Belle Isle.

MR. DECKER: I will gladly sit down if the bon. Minister of Finance wants to get up. Surely I would think that a bill of such importance would have an array of speakers from the L245 Karch 24, 1986 Vol XL other ·side just forcing their way up. I will be quite glad to yield to some speaker on the other side. I am just doing this out of duty, Mr. Chairman. I did not come here to sit down and watch things slide through without being debated, nor did I come here to monopolize the time of this House when there are other members who might want to say something on the Supply Bill. Mr.

Chairman, Friday .past I sat in this Chamber during Question Period and the galleries were filled with men and women who have been forced into going on strike. I looked up at that

section up there, just up in that corner, and I saw a placard that one of the strikers had smuggled into the galleries. No doubt he was unaware that it was illegal to bring those placards in. He did not realize what he was doing. In his lack of understanding of what he was supposed to do in the galleries, he brought this placard in and he held it up plainly for all on this side to see. The words on that placard were, "'Bill 59, he is not our Brian."' When I saw that placard, Mr. Chairman, I was reminded of Blackwood's painting entitled, 1971. In that painting, Mr.

Chairman, all the morbid, sinister effects that Blackwood uses his paintings come through quite obviously; right in the foreground there is a picture of Joey and behind Joey there is a group of people. The scene is bleak. It is a dirty snow and icy color, and some people, obviously Newfoundlanders, are stood up with their backs toward Joey. Mr. Chairman, I will confess that I did not understand what the painting was about until it was explained to me. It was explained to me that in 1971 the people of No. 5 R245

this Province turned their backs and walked away from the then Premier, Mr. Smallwood. When I looked at "Bill 59, he is not our Brian, •• on that poster I said to myself, we have a similarity here but it is only a similarity. In 1971, Mr. Chairman, Newfoundlanders walked away from Joey. In 1986, Kr. Chairman, we have a Premier and a government who turn their backs on Newfoundlanders. It is a little bit similar but the effect is the same. In 1971 we saw the end of the Smallwood era, in 1986 we are seeing the end of the Peckford era. Now, Mr.

Chairman, is that not a tremendous message to send forth to Newfoundlanders today, Newfoundlanders who are out there suffering the sleet and freezing rain? Surely goodness there cannot be a greater curse on strikers than freezing rain; this rain sticks to the glasses of people who have to wear them. What a tremendous message to go forward from this House today, 'You are in the last days of the Peckford administration.' What a tremendous message for the strikers out there to whose glasses the freezing rain is sticking. What a tremendous message, 'we are in the last days. • As a former preacher, Kr.

Chairman, 'the last days' has a different connotation. Nevertheless, the message is even greater to Newfoundlanders, to know that the struggle will soon be over, the unjustice will soon be wiped away. I get overwhelmed with it, Kr. Chairman, and then I keep going back. We are in the last days of the Peckford administration. Let me give you some indications: One of the biggest indications that we are in the last days of the Peckford L246 Karch 24, 1986 Vol XL administration is the struggle that is taking place today within the Peckford Cabinet. It has become common knowledge.

Hon. gentlemen know of the struggle that is taking place within the Peckford Cabinet today. The President of Treasury Board (Kr. Windsor) gets up and acts completely contrary to the Premier. We get the President of Treasury Board and the Minister of Labour (Mr. Windsor), totally on their own initiative, trying to get some little backroom meeting going with NAPE, trying to make a name for themselves. Because do not forget, Mr.

Chairman, there is a very strong rumour around that the President of Treasury Board does have a war chest in place -and that he is just waiting to put on the crown of the Premiel:', he is just waiting to take over that position. If he could only make a name for himself in this dispute what a spl:'ingboal:'d it would be fat' him to take the Pl:'emiel:'' s position. Remember 1971 when John Cl:'osbie had the same little thing going, Kl:'. Chairman? The same thing was happening in Cabinet in the 1970s when John Cl:'osbie was dl:'iving his knife into the back of Premiel:' Smallwood. It is all happening again.

It is the downfall of a col:'rupt administl:'ation which sneaked this way by two elections, which built peoples hopes up on the gl:'eat l:'ewards of the offshore oil, which got Newfoundlandel:'s looking forward to the day when they would have their place in the sun, when theil:' biggest pl:'oblem would be whether the interest !:'ate was going to go fl:'om 12.5 pel:' cent to 13 per cent; all we were going to worry about was our investments. The farce, the silliness that has taken place in this Province over the last six or seven years, while No. 5 R246

this Premier has been in office, is absolutely funny, it is hilarious. If it were not for the anguish and the pain that it brings to Newfoundlanders it would be funny. But, Mr. Chairman, it is not funny. When I looked up in that gallery a few days ago, Mr. Chairman, one of the men I saw up there was the old gentleman whose job in this building is to carry the mail around to the various offices. I do not know the man • s age but I would assume he is in his sixties. The old gentleman who takes the internal mail. MR. BAIRD: That is the job we have lined up for you after the next election. MR. DECKER: You know the gentleman I am talking about. How that old gentleman is by nobody's

interpretation a law breaker. That old gentleman is the last person on earth who would want to go on strike, who would want to defy any order or any law. But, Mr. Chairman, he could only be pushed so far. He could only be tramped over by hobnail boots so many times. He could only take so much, Mr. Chairman. This is the message that is coming through loud and clear to a corrupt Peckford Administration, to a divided Peckford Administration, to a Peckford Administration which is repeating the history of 1971, division within itself, the Chairman of Treasury Board (Mr.

Windsor) trying to get the Premier's job, the Minister of Labour (Mr. Blanchard) trying to get back some credibility because he was one of the ones who agreed to going on and arresting our fellow Newfoundlanders. Kr. Chairman, just would have happened L247 Karch 24, 1986 think in what this Vol XL dispute if the General Service had not gone out on strike? I have to hand it to Fraser March, you know, he is very astute. Fraser March realized that had the General Service not gone out, the Transportation Workers would have been beaten. We are nearing the end of the snowfall.

Come the last of March, a lot of the Transportation Workers are layed off, the temporary ones anyway. If there happened to be a snow storm early in April, a few were called back. But generally speaking, after the last of March, the Transportation Workers would have been beaten. They would have lost this strike. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! The bon. the member's time is up. MR. DECKER: Thank you. I will come back, Mr. Chairman. MR. I<. AYLWARD: Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The bon. the member for Stephenville. MR. I<. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a pleasure to speak to this bill.

It is a foggy day outside today and I think that is indicative of this administration. I have an

article here which I think tells a tale of the situation we have in this Province today. The money that is not coming into Newfoundland is the direct cause of the administration we have here today and the direct cause of the administration we have in Ottawa today. Ho. 5 R247

i.::. t~. ·:~ ·· The Atlantic Insight edition for Karch ofH-19.136 tells the tale. It ''-.. ~; is titled,- , ..

Losing Clout, Atlantic Canada' s.:-tE- Cabinet Ministers in O~tawa .. ~;~hey are not even boxing ;::;~_·;~ _ I ~.; ·~ ~ .:..n'il.. anymore .L for Newfoundland, Kr. -:"! ~~ Chairmaruu~: ~It says, "The loss of ~( clout rai1e John Crosbie, Robert Coates ~Gad Elmer MacKay in the federaL.s E:abinet are signs of ·_1 • '<,: /:£ ·,: _::._; .~ ·:·.E;· ... t~~ ::. ~\ .~. ~- :ati.J~· ~\'((~ t:. •.• . .:!,. \) ·:;e.': ·~J f:: .• :~ ·.;..'";t t :.: .. ·.':.i&j; ' .:_~ .:.: ~ ' ·~;-~. ~ :t ~-"-!: ',). ;~e. -:.- -~~ - .. ~ ... :-.... ,._. ·. ~~' .. ·-~ ~~,·· ·.;:;t , .... 1ooilt >:\( •• .. _,. . - -..;..~- .; <} i. (~;c Atlantic Canada's weakening influenc}t;., in Ottawa." That is unreal b& think that that could possibly:;;~ :happen with all this co-operat.imL. .and consultation.

I am somewn.t.:. amazed • I have talked to many 1Ef)eople who have said to me, "Whatr•is happening up there in Ottawa? 1r~ have a former Tory leadershipe candidate for the federal .pastty in toe Cabinet and he does not: even have an economic portfolio .•.t. . and we are getting nailed tovthe wall down here." A few years ago, with all those bad LibeFals up in Ottawa, we were getting done in right silly! You just could not get anything from them! o:. Now they brought deregulation in. There was no such thing as Structure 90, we were told. .

But now there are articles 1 all over the place and people seying, Structure 90 is in and gone~1. : It is destroying the transportation of Atlantic Canada.'* _ _., What do we have down here, Jteople .. are saying, with our governme&t? . There is nothing going 'On.; :::. They are turning a blind &ya\ , and not even going to say a Wont.. while we get done in down here,.-=r-t: ····-at·.~~ KR. BAIRDv. • YC:•1. Did anyb~ ever tell you you look like Brian Tobin? an~ KR. K. AYLWARD: r I will :·d,.e.U you now, I would 'obin rather 1Q9kr (~like Brian Tobin than look like.¥OU.

Vc L248 -:J•March 24, 1986 Vol XL As far as I am concerned, asking for $750,000 in Interim Supply in three days is just an example of the management of this Province by this administration. We have lost all our clout in ottawa. We were supposed to have more clout and we have lost it all. They are not even throwing punches anymore. It is absolute foolishness . The han. James McGrath says here the Canadian Transport Commission started to look after regional interests. He now wonders if the Province will be turning back to the era of the bush plane under deregulation.

He says, "Who will carry the people from Deer Lake?" Here is a man up there twenty-three years in parliament and he is on the Tory side saying that. We have people down here saying, "n~thing is going on." We are getting done in right silly and they are sitting down here doing nothing. I attended a meeting over at the University the other day. Federal transfer payments are going to be cut. It will not hurt that many people as badly, but it is going to hurt Newfoundland very badly, as a matter of fact. It is ridiculous. What do we have over there?

Because of the partisan way they want to get on, if the Liberals were in now, they would be over at the University saying .. the federal government is doing Newfoundland in again. They are doing us in again." I went over there the other day, I was sitting back and they were saying "well, boy, you know, there are tough times in Canada now. We have to cut back wherever we can. It is going to hurt Newfoundland but, it is going to hurt the other provinces as well. " We have the highest unemployment rate in Canada, the highest unemployment No. 5 R248

in North America, and we are down here saying "now, well, we have to go along with Ottawa." MR. TULK: Kissing cousins. MR. K. AYLWARD: Co-operation and consultation! I think that this edition of Atlantic Insight says it all, "Losing Clout." They cannot even negotiate any collective agreements any more. I have some information for the ladies and gentlemen across the way. A federal programme that was brought in in 1977 by the bad Liberal Administration set out monies for Labour Canada. What they did was they provided so .much money to educate the labour unions in Canada for negotiating.

The Federal Tory Administration, which thinks that everything up there that was set up is bad, has now decided to extend that programme because it has done such a good job. But I want to give them some advice. I am going to ask them to put some money aside for Newfoundland • s Labour Department down here so they can help them do a course on how to negotiate a collective agreement, because I think they have had a problem. SOME HOB. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. TULK: For the minister. MR. K. AYLWARD: This

article is dated February 17, 1986,. It is only recent and here we have a gigantic dispute going on, out of all proportions. We have people who do not know what is going on over there that are trying to solve a dispute. Just want to show the ineptness, I L249 March 24, 1986 Vol XL attended an Arts Conference, the first time in months or years that we were trying to solve some of the problems in the Arts. They planned it for a year. The minister decided not to show up. He said he is up in Montreal. AN HOB. MEMBER: You were there. MR. K. AYLWARD: I was there, I took good care of it as a matter of fact.

He was· up in Montreal all right, he was gone to Grand Bank for a banquet. I have no problem with that but, they have been working all year to set the Province-wide Arts Conference up to discuss the problems of the Arts, which is directly in his purview. He decides not to show up and listen to the views of the Arts community. Maybe I am just a way back in another day but, my philosophy is that you go to the people who have the problems, talk to them about the problems and try to come up with a solution. That is obvious.

I think that minister gives an indication of what exactly this administration is like, because he decides he is not going to bother to go, and you tell people you are going to go there and not show up, tells people he is not going to listen to them anyway, to whatever they say. So I think this is exactly what this administration does and practices. As is evident, it is starting to be shown again. They are only asking for $325 million and they want it in three days. MR. EFFORD: If they want it in three days, they will have to earn it. Ho. 5 R249

MR. K. AYLWARD: I just lost $20 at the hockey game, and that took two weeks to give away. AN HON. MEMBER: It shows lack of judgment. MR. K. AYLWARD: It shows lack of judgment. That is about the only lack of judgment this guy will show or on this side we will show because when we take over on the other side, we are not going to be as inept as this administration. We are also not going to sit down while Ottawa does us in like we have never been done in in the last twenty-five to thirty years. I wish we had seven Rhinoceros Party members up there now because of the administration up in Ottawa.

We are suppose to have four Tories, four out of seven, and the three Liberals. If it was not for them, it would be all over. We would not have prayer. I must commend them. They are doing an excellent job for the interest of Newfoundland and Labrador. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. K. AYLWARD: They see the problems coming from Ottawa and they are going to directly affect this Budget down here. Taxes are going to have to go up again because Ottawa is deciding that we are going to be pushed further out into the Atlantic Ocean. MR. TULK: Have you seen the Nielsen Report? KR. K.

AYLWARD: I have seen the Nielsen Report. If the Tories had their way up L250 Karch 24, 1986 Vol XL there in Ottawa, Newfoundland is going to be over by England very shortly because I think they want to push us as far away as they can get us. MR. TULK: No, boy, they would sink us. MR. K. AYLWARD: They would do more than sink us. Yes, increase the rates on the ferries to get over here, increase the taxes down here, get rid of the railway, put us in bush planes and get over from the West Coast, that is real good Tory philosophy for Newfoundland, I will tell you.

It is really going to help the West Coast of Newfoundland and Labrador and Central Newfoundland. I will tell you, if that is Tory philosophy this gentleman will never ever, ever quit until they are gone from Ottawa and Newfoundland. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. K. AYLWARD: Co-operation and consultation. I just cannot believe it. I see money here for labour. Labour is getting $1,509,600. I hope that this new re-training progranune is there in that because somebody is going to have to do something over there to get this dispute settled and all other disputes that are going on settled. MR.

TULK: They are going to use that to hire negotiators. KR. K. AYLWARD: The new buzz word today is exploratory talks. I know we have had some good finds of gold on the South Coast and a few other places here on the Island but, it took a few years to find that. If we are No. 5 R250

going to keep up exploratory talks, I figure that · this labour dispute will go on and on until no end can be found. I would like to advise - MR. CHAIRMAN (Greening): Order, please! The hon. member's time is up. MR. K. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear .! MR. DECKER: Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the member for the Strait of Belle Isle. MR. DECKER: Mr. Chairman, I was making a few remarks there which I did not get a chance to finish. I wish there was some way we could have this time limit extended, Mr.

Chairman, so that we could speak for four or five hours at one time without having to stop because it disrupts you. I forget what I was saying. I forget where I was. I do know what I was saying, Mr. Chairman. MR. BAIRD: And everybody else forgot what you said too. MR. DECKER: I do know, Mr. Chairman, I was saying that we are in the last days of the Peckford Administration. I think it would be appropriate to refer to the early days of the Peckford Administration, Mr. Chairman.

The thing that stands out from me about the early days of the Peckford Administration was when L251 March 24, 1986 Vol XL you turned on your television set, even if you were up in the Strait of Belle Isle, up in Roddick ton, you turn on CBC television and there would be large crowds of people, Mr. Chairman, and the Premier would be literally wading in amongst the crowds of people, wading in amongst them, Mr. Chairman, and what a site it was. Here was this young man, no baggage, no hangers on, he became Premier without having to pay any debts, to pay off any political favours, Mr.

Chairman, squeaky clean, wading into the crowds of Newfoundlanders, wading in among them, shaking hands with then, padding them on the back and laughing. It was a pretty picture. This was the early days. He was handing out to them hope, telling them that if we can fight Ottawa - one of the things he suggested, Mr. Chairman, is we might even become an independent nation again, proud and free! He even went and got a flag, Mr. Chairman, in preparation for the day when we cut off the umbilical cord from Ottawa and we became a proud independent nation once again. I think he had it right down pat, Mr.

Chairman, about how the Responsible Government worked and how we were a Dominion of Newfoundland. I heard the Premier refer to it as the Dominion of Newfoundland. The thing that he always took pride in in the early days of the Peckford Administration was his ability to meet with Newfoundlanders face to face. If there were, Mr. Chairman, some sort of a dispute, the hon. Premier did not mind a dispute. He simply walked down amongst this crowd of Newfoundlanders, talked it over with them and, in a matter of minutes, everything was solved. If it were an official opening, No. 5 R251

the Premier had no fear of his fellow Newfoundlanders. He just walked in among them and took

part in the celebration or whatever the case might be. These were the early days, Mr. Chairman, that was the beginning of the Peckford administration. That was before the ·President of Treasury Board (Mr. Windsor) wanted to become Premier. MR. TULI<: He wants what? KR. DECKER: He wants to become Premier. You have not heard of the war chest. You must be the only person in Newfoundland who has not heard about the war chest. That was before the Minister of Career Development (Mr. Power) really wanted to see the Premier move aside, that was before that.

That was before the member for Grand Falls, the Minister of Forestry (Mr. Simms) who I miss today, wanted to be Premier. I honestly wish he were here because he definitely does something for my guile when he is here, when I look across and see him. His perm is growing out now but still he does bring something to this han. House. All this wading in among the crowds of Newfoundlanders, Kr. Chairman, took place in the early days of the Peckford administration. It took place before the corruption set in. It took place before the rot set in, Mr. Chairman.

Let us move ahead in time, let us come away now, let us move forward now, Mr. Chairman, from the early days of the Peckford administration when the young, vibrant, squeaky clean gentleman waded in among us L252 Karch 24, 1986 Vol XL Newfoundlanders. Let me show you another sight in March of 1986 and I will show you a sea of Newfoundlanders, upwards to 5, 000 who paraded on the front steps of the Confederation Building. Mr. Chairman, this is not the opening days of the Peckford administration, I am talking about the closing days, the dying days. The former PC voters as the Minister of Finance (Dr.

Collins) pointed out to me so eloquently. They did indeed vote PC, Mr. Chairman, and had they not voted PC, Mr. Chairman, we would have had a Liberal government in this Province. I hasten to say they are former PC voters, Mr. Chairman. Here is this sea of Newfoundlanders, now mind you, they are not out to an official opening of the Confederation Building. That is not why they are there. They are not there to praise the Premier because he has fine taste in art. That is not why they are there.

They are not there to praise the Premier because he has written a tremendous piece of literature which will go down in history for generations yet unborn to read. They are not there to inaugurate the publication of the han. Premier's book. No, Kr. Chairman, they are there because they believe from the bottom of their hearts that they are being underpaid, that they are being discriminated against and I agree with them, they are. They believe strongly enough in this, Mr. Chairman, that they are prepared to put their jobs on the line. Do we see the han.

Premier wading in amongst thos·e Newfoundlanders and shaking hands with them? 'How are you boy?' It is funny, Kr. Chairman, wading in among them, whacking them on the No. 5 R252

back, 'How are the rabbits going? Catch any rabbits those days? What are the moose like? Did you get a license this year?,' the man of the people, the old Brian. How does he get into the building, Mr. Chairman? He has to go and get a police escort. The same fellow who before the corruption set in, who before his government began to fall apart, could walk in among any crowd and slap them on the back and ask how the moose hunting was coming or how the rabbit catching was going. Now, Mr.

Chairman, he cannot get into the building to his place of work unless he has got two of the biggest, ugliest, brawniest police officers in this Province to escort him acros .s the picket lines. Hr. Chairman, I could recommend to the bon. Premier that he should begin making reservations in Hawaii somewhere to have a place to go. and live after he is kicked out of office because it is extremely difficult for former dictators, Mr. Chairman, to get a place to live. Marcos, I ------understand, is in Hawaii because nobody else will take him. The guy who thrown out o{ Haiti the other day, France does not want him.

They are trying to boot him out but no one will take him. It is a very hazardous designation to be referred to as a former dictator. So, my advice to the bon. Premier, Mr. Chairman, is to begin to buy a few properties around the world because, when he is defeated and defeated, Mr. Chairman, he is going to be, just as sure as the sun is going to rise tomorrow, just as sure as the tide is going to come in once again, just as sure as the moon waxes and wanes, just as sure as day comes and night follows day and day follows night, just as L253 March 24, 1986 Vol XL sure as that, Mr.

Chairman, the hon. · the Premier is on his last few days because we can see it around us. He is not wading into the sea of Newfoundlanders. Mr. Chairman, I wonder how good my memory of Greek is. I remember, Mr. Chairman, about King Oedipus Rex in Greek mythology. I am sure the bon. Chairman remembers Oedipus Rex in some of his readings. MR. GILBERT: That is not Sesame Street. He would not know. MR. DECKER: _Mr. Chairman, Oedipus was indeed a great king. At the end of that Greek tragedy, Mr.

Chairman, the poem goes something like this: You will correct me I am sure if I am wrong. 'Sons and Daughters of Thebes/Behold this was Oedipus, greatest of men/He was envied by all his fellow men for his great prosperity/Then lo, what a full tide of misfortune swept over his head/ And learned that mortal man must always look to his ending/And none can be called great until that day when he carries his greatness down to the grave in peace.' Mr. Chairman, that is an excerpt from Oedipus Rex, the Greek tragedy. What we are witnessing in this Province today is the demise of Oedipus Brian. MR.

CHAIRMAB (Baird): Order, please! The bon. member's time has elapsed. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The bon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: !lo. 5 R253

Mr. Chairman, I hope - MR. DECKER: I shall return. DR. COLLINS: Good, I was hoping the bon. member would return because we like the unfolding of this fairy tale and this Newfoundland myth that we have been hearing. I will just make two comments, Mr. Chairman. Firstly, the bon. gentleman is incorrect when he says that there is something new about the Premier having a police escort. There was a labour disturbance in this Province when this administration first took office and, like in so many situations where there is a public tumult, or a public commotion, there is often the odd kook out there.

Now, he may not have anything to do with the people involved in the difficulty. He can be quite separate from government, quite separate from - MR. DECKER: Mr. Chairman, is the bon. calling Newfoundlanders Has he stooped so low would call Newfoundlanders MR. CHAIRMAN: minister kooks? that he kooks? To that point of order, there is no point of order. The bon, the Minister of Finance '. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Chairman, as I say, in any population where there is tumult and upset, there often is a kook out there and it has often got nothing to do with the people involved in the controversy.

It is often someone quite separate. That person can often make a threat on some public figure. We had kooks in the United States who L254 Karch 24, 1986 Vol XL shot a President there. We had kooks in the United States who wounded a President. We had kooks in Italy. I do not know what their nationality was but they shot a Pope. We had a kook in Sweden who shot a Prime Minister. So kooks happen! We may have kooks on the other side of this House for all I know. But anyway, at that time, at the beginning of this administration taking office, there was a kook or a number of kooks who threatened the Premier's life.

The Premier quite correctly, and it would have been totally irresponsible for him not to take such a threat seriously, got some police protection. During this present thing the same thing happened again and I am sure it will happen in our history and in other public figures' history down through the ages. For the bon. member to say that this is something new just means that he has no concept of history. I am surprised at the bon. member. I thought that the member had a really good insight into historic processes but he does not. He can see only as far as his nose can reach.

What is happening at the present time is as far as his vision will reach. Mr. Chairman, that is that point. The only other point I want to make is this . There are 5,000 people, I think, involved in the labour dispute at the present time. That means there are 25,000 people who take their income from the public service who are not involved in the public dispute. Those 25,000 are working on behalf of the people of this Province. By and large - I do not suppose we can say the 100 per cent, you cannot say 100 per cent about anything - they are doing a good and honest day's work and they are No. 5 R254

worthy of their hire and they are worthy of being paid. How do these 25,000 honest people, get paid? They get paid when this House gives authority to government to expend monies and they do not get paid if this House does not give government the authority to pay money. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! DR. COLLINS: Now that authority we have at the present time is going to run out in a few days. If the bon. members opposite do not pass this bill, they are saying to those 25,000 workers 'we do not want you to get paid for your work.' That is what the hon. members opposite will be saying.

That message will be out there. 'We do not want you to get paid. We do not care if you have been working on behalf of the people of Newfoundland, if you have been leaving your homes coming in here, putting in a decent day's work and doing all the things that are required of you, we do not care about that. Just for our political image and our political purposes, we do not give a, whatever, and you are not going to get paid as far as we are concerned. To the extent that we can stop it, we will ensure that you do not get paid.' Mr.

Chairman, we appeal therefore to members opposite not to be so heartless and cruel and self-centered. Let the members opposite allow us to have the authority to pay these honest workers out there, workers who are probably, to some extent, in their own districts. I know there are some in my district and they deserve to be paid because if they are not paid, obviously, their families will suffer. I appeal to L255 Karch 24, 1986 Vol XL members opposite. Do not let the families of these people suffer from the point of view that you are attempting to bring that about. Mr.

Chairman, I can tell you this government, no matter what happens, will not let your dastardly plan, if that is your dastardly plan, come about. We will make sure that people understand the nature of the dastardly plan. We will make sure that the people who are working and deserve to be paid, if there is any risk that they may not be paid, that they know where that risk comes from. But we will also assure them that we will not let that risk come to fruition and they will indeed get paid. MR. BARRY: Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The bon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr.

Chairman', we did not see the Minister of Finance standing up in this House and calling the members on the picket lines kooks while they were here in the galleries. That is not a very brave thing to do when the galleries are empty and the press are absent to start calling these hard working men and women who are looking for a decent wage kooks because they are out on the picket lines. DR. COLLINS: A point of order, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN (Baird): A point of order, the hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: I hesitate to really do not No. 5 rise because have a point I of R255

order I suppose but I just want to point out that the Leader of the Opposition is now making his own spurious case. I did not at any point 'in time say that the members in the gallery, I did not say that any particular person was a kook. MR. TULK: You should have said a point of privilege not a point of order. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Chairman, you cannot bring up points of privilege in Committee. MR. CHAIRMAN: There is a point of order on the floor. DR. COLLINS: You cannot bring up points of privilege in Committee. There is no such thing as points of privilege in Committee. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

There is a point of order on the floor. DR. COLLINS: The bon. member who is making that statement, the Leader of the Opposition, knows it is wrong and he is only making a spurious argument. MR. SIMMONS: Hr. Chairman, a point of privilege can always be raised. MR. CHAIRMAN (Baird): The Chairman of the Committees cannot hear a point of privilege. I can rise the Committee. MR. SIMMONS: That is blatant nonsense, Mr. Chairman. Of course you can hear points of privilege in Committee. L256 March 24, 1986 Vol XL MR. CHAIRMAN: No, I have to rise the Committee. MR. SIMMONS: Well, you might have to do that. MR.

CHAIRMAN: To that point of order. By the minister's own admission, there is no point of order. The bon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Hr. Chairman, I would like to respond to the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) in this way. I hope the minister is listening. We, Mr. Chairman, have said, no settlement, no interim supply. That is our position. A settlement or a very, very clear evidence that there is a reasonable attempt by government to settle. If there is a reasonable offer, a reasonable attempt that is rejected by the other side, then we are not going to hold up the business of the House.

We are not going to blame that on government. But unless we see a move towards settlement of this dispute, no Supply Bill will pass this House as long as we can talk it out. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear. hear! MR. BARRY: Hr. Chairman, there are certain options open. MR. REID: You are taking backwater now. MR. BARRY: Ro, I am not taking backwater now. I would like the Government House Leader (Mr. Marshall) to hear this too so that there is no misunderstanding. We will not be No. 5 R256

passing Interim Supply at six o • clock today if there is no settlement of this dispute. SOME HOM. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. BARRY: Point number two: The Government House Leader has the option, if he so wishes, to have us sit tonight. If that is done, Mr. Chairman, we will sit tonight. We will sit through the night and we will sit up to the Budget Speech tomorrow and we will not, Mr. Chairman, as far as we can do so, permit Interim Supply to pass before the Budget Speech tomorrow while there is not a settlement of this dispute.

I do not want to have the Government House Leader, the Minister of Finance or anybody else misinterpreting what we are saying. In the past, Mr. Chairman SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. BARRY: _._ ........ Are you going to control the Committee, Mr. Chairman? It has been the practice from time to time for the Opposition to keep government on tender hooks as to whether or not Interim Supply would pass and the threat of having cheques held up has often been effective in having the Supply passed. I am telling the House Leader this is not one of those situations.

We are serious in what we are saying so that the Government House Leader can make his plans. We do not intend to permit Interim Supply to pass this afternoon or as long as we can speak on Interim Supply. Using whatever rules of the House are L257 March 24, 1986 Vol XL within our capability to do so, we will fight Interim Supply until we · see settlement of this labour dispute forthcoming. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Chairman, I just ·have a few words to respond to the han. gentleman. They might be serious, Mr.

Chairman, but they are also very irresponsible. The han. gentlemen there opposite wish to take this pattern. We have attempted to run this House, despite what the han. gentlemen like to say about us, in an orderly fashion. We have done this particularly in the days of the Peckford Administration. We have had every session divided into two whereby, in an orderly fashion, we try to deal with the budgetary matters, Supply, the Address in Reply, and overall government policy. That is in the Spring. Then in the Fall, we have had another which has been a legislative session.

We have seen all of those efforts, in which we have tried to bring about an orderly session, thwarted. Last year I think we were treated to some four weeks over fifteen sitting days where the bon. gentlemen there opposite debated Supplementary Supply. It is a fact that in most jurisdictions, and particularly in the federal jurisdiction where they pass monetary bills of up to $130 billions, that they pass after some eight or nine days of debate. No. 5 R257

We are dealing here with Interim Supply. It is not like we are dealing with the Budget, and we are asking the hon. gentlemen to pass the Budget within a day or so. We gave the hon. gentlemen adequate notice of this on Karch 10. Tomorrow the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) will bring in his Budget. That Budget will contain the entire package of the government, its intention with respect to spending, its estimations with respect to revenues and the means of raising revenues for the ensuing year. So it is not as if we are asking the hon. gentlemen to give us a blank cheque.

We have asked the hon. gentlemen to pass Supply, realizing the period of time that we are in, realizing that we are near the end of Karch when the ordinary legislative powers expire, and realizing that we are in the Easter season where, if Interim Supply is not passed today, it is going to be impossible then for Interim Supply to be passed before the end of this month with the consequential problems that will entail in effecting payment of cheques to salary workers, hospital workers, and people in receipt of social assistance. What is the hon. gentlemen's response?

I say it is a lack of perspective that the Opposition has shown under the leadership of the hon. gentleman. He wants to couple together the settlement of the strike with the passage of Supply. I know he cannot see two things at once and he sees everything altogether. This is a real example of the instability of the hon. gentleman in the way in which he is dealing with the government of this Province. We ,are in the Legislative Assembly L258 Karch 24, 1986 Vol XL of a democratic government. We have been trying to run it in an orderly fashion and this is the type of way that the hon. gentleman is dealing with it.

He wants to deal with the strike and deal with Supply. So he wants to put the people who are recipients of social assistance in jeopardy, pending the resolution of the strike. It may well be with all the good efforts of the government and with all the good intentions of everybody that everybody might certainly like to see all things passed at once, but they may not be possible. Is it right? Is it responsible? The hon. gentlemen may be serious as they say, I have no doubt they are, but is it responsible for the hon. gentlemen to take the position that they are taking with respect to this Interim Supply Bill?

Let us understand what we are talking about now. We are not asking the hon. gentlemen to give us a blank cheque for millions of dollars. What we did on Karch 10 was we gave the hon. gentlemen adequate notice of the fact that when the House reconvened that we would bring in Interim Supply when we did, on Thursday March 20. We also wrote the hon. gentlemen and said "as you are aware Karch 25, falls on the Tuesday before Easter.

Because of Easter Week, the House will thus have no opportunity to sit beyond the delivery of the Budget on March 31." I think that is reasonable enough. •• Additionally, it is intended, as is customary, to adjourn the House after the Budget Speech until April 7 for the usual Easter Holidays. •• Having given the hon. gentlemen notice of that, having provided three days for Interim Supply debate, having provided for the llo. 5 R258

budget of the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) and the government to come in tomorrow so the full spending plans of the government are before the people, is there really any justification for the Opposition to turn around and take this position? They are playing little games and some of them are serious, like the member for Twillingate (Mr. w. Carter) and the member for Burgeo-Bay d'Espoir (Mr. Gilbert) but the usual ones have little jackass smiles on their face as if they are playing little games in a high school in Grade XI or Grade XII when talking to the teachers.

The fact of the matter is they have been elected, .Mr. Speaker, in the same way that members on this side of the House have been elected, with responsibility to provide for the timely payment of hospital supplies and the working of hospitals, with the responsibility for the payment of the salaries of hospital workers, with the responsibility for the timely payment of social assistance recipients and what have you. Let it be understood, Mr. Speaker, that what we have tried to do here, as I say, is to provide a democratic framework for the operation of the House.

We have given the bon. gentlemen a time table with respect to it and they have, once again, rejected it. They are playing games. They can play games all they want to but who they are playing games with are the nurses in this Province who may be waiting for cheques; the social assistance recipients who may be waiting for cheques; the pensioners who may be waiting for their salary cheques as a result of the irresponsibility, the puerility and the immaturity L259 Karch 24, 1986 Vol XL of the hon. gentlemen.

The hon. hatred gentleman in his vested of the Peckford Administration and his government should not get up and try to couple his own personal ambi tlons in with this very, very important measure that we have before the House. I will just conclude by saying, Mr. Chairman, that we have attempted once again to be reasonable. We have given them the framework. We have told them that the budget will come in. We have brought Interim Supply forth. If this Interim Supply is not passed, and if, as a result of this, the people cannot get paid their salaries, well the blame can be on the bon. gentlemen.

If the bon. gentlemen further thinks - MR. DECKER: A point of order, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: A point of member for Isle. order, the hon. the the Strait of Belle MR. DECKER: · ~- Mr. Cliairman, when the bon. gentleman was going through his litany of people who would not get their cheques - I am going to assist the hon. gentleman if he will allow me - I understand that some members in the top echelons of the civil service also got a 6 per cent increase and they are going to get this in a lump sum after this thing is passed.

He failed to mention this 6 per cent, which I understand is a considerable amount of money too, Mr. Chairman. The hon. gentleman should not leave those people out. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Chairman, listen to the bon. Ho. 5 R259

the living apocalypse. The bon. gentleman got up in this House a few moments ago and the only thing the bon. gentleman had to contribute to this debate was try to incite things as he always does when he gets up. He thought his speech to the House was amusing but it was not particularly amusing. Mr. Speaker, we were also asked why do we not sit during the nighttime? Yes, why do we not sit during the nighttime and into tomorrow and the Budget Speech, and into Wednesday and into Thursday and into Good Friday and into Easter Sunday? The fact of the matter is, Mr.

Speaker, that we have ordered .the affairs of this House in a way that we have avoided at all times night sittings . Generally, despite the bon. gentlemen there opposite, it has been for the benefit of the operations of this House. This government, number one, has no intention of sitting nights. This government has given due notice to the Opposition of what its legislative programme was. This government has given quite adequate time for the Opposition to pass Interim Supply.

The hon. gentlemen want to play games with the lives of social assistance recipients and pensioners and want to try to link it to the resolution of the strike and what have you. One does not follow the other. It shows how they got : things out of all proportion. We are not going to bend to it, Mr. Speaker. We are the government and we would just ask the hon. gentlemen to act responsibly and pass it. SOME HOlll. MEMBBRS : Hear, hear! L260 March 24, 1986 Vol XL MR. CHAIRMAN (Baird): Order, please! I would like to remind the hon. gentleman his time is up. MR. EFFORD : Mr. Chairman. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The bon. the member for Port de Grave. SOME HOlll. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. EFFORD: Mr. Chairman, speech like cried but I home. MR. SIMMS: after listening to a that I would have left my tissues at When you cry tears do not fall anyway. MR. EFFORD: Tears do not fall, then I would not need a tissue. But to sit here and listen to the minister over there standing up for five or ten minutes and go on with a lot of blarney like he just went on with is unbelievable. To try and threaten the people of this Province and try and threaten the Opposition Party that they must - MR. TULIC: Frighten us to death. MR.

BFFORD: Frighten us to death that we must do as they say or else. I mean a tactic to be used by such an educated man, it is time to leave, it is time to get out of this situation because the day that we are going to sit down here and have the minister opposite stand up and inform us, 'lllow you do exactly as I say or we will tell the people of the Province or lllo. 5 R260

else, everything is going to be over.' Come on, gentlemen, we have to realize that this democratic system works a little bit better than that. We do have the freedom to think. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. EFFORD: We do have the freedom to speak. As much as you try not to allow it, as much as through the dictatorship of your leader - DR. COLLINS: Why do you not use your freedom? MR. EFFORD: I do once in a wh.i.le. When I am confronted with looking at you people all day long, it takes a lot away from it. MR. PEACH: Tell us about your arena Tell us about all the government put into it. MR.

EFFORD: now. money To the member for Carbonear (Mr. Peach), I was quite happy that the federal Liberals put in $182,000. SOME HOB. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. EFFORD: And I was quite happy that every man, woman and child in the Conception Bay - Port de Grave district walked and raised money. I was quite happy about that. SOME HOil. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! SOME HOil. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. EFFORD: Hr. Chairman, could we have the L261 March 24, 1986 Vol XL backseats quieted? MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! MR. EFFORD: There is a wonder why Randy Collins is not back in the House of Assembly. MR. PEACH: This is your last te~.

MR. EFFORD: The member from Carbonear knows different than that. He saw evidence of that Saturday night. The member for Carbonear knows different than that. Mr. Chai~an. getting back to the business at hand. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! MR. SIMMS: Yes, boy, stop wasting· time. MR. EFFORD: You should speak to your goats behind you, put a yoke on them. Hr. Chairman - MR. TOBIIl: There are people in your district had to come in and get me to help th~. They could get no satisfaction from you and you know that is true. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! The hon. member has the right to be heard in silence. MR. EFFORD: Mr.

Chairman, threats government in power are to do anything to Opposition over here by the not going keep the from doing llo. 5 R261

their job. We have a job to do. We were elected by a number of people in this Province. MR. J. CARTER: By the scum of the earth. MR. EFFORD: What did the bon. member for St. John's North say? MR. J. CARTER: You were elected by the scum of your district. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. CALLAN: That will bear repeating John. MR. DECKER: Kr. Chairman, I have to rise on a point of order. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! A point of member for Isle. MR. DECKER: order, the bon. the the Strait of Belle This House is sinking. Some days ago one of the members referred to Newfoundlanders · as being lazy.

Now the bon. member for St. John's North (Kr. J. Carter) is calling Newfoundlanders scum. The majority of that district put that bon. member here. I think it is only right and proper that the member for St. John's North withdraw that remark. It is n·ot fitting for this House to refer to Newfoundlanders, regardless what their political strife happens to be, whether it is Tory or NDP or Liberal or even Conununist, Hr. Chairman, there is no excuse for calling Newfoundlanders scum and I would challenge the bon. member to withdraw that remark. L262 March 24, 1986 Vol XL MR.

CHAIRMAN (Baird): To that point of order, I would have to check the Hansard for exactly what was said. The bon. the member for Port de Grave. MR. EFFORD: Mr. Chairman, I can assure the member for St. John's North (Kr. J. Carter) that everybody out in my district will be told the exact words that he used in this House of Assembly. It shows what a low life person you are. If the member for Carbonear (Kr. Peach) and member for Harbour Grace (Mr. Young) laughed at that and went along with those words, they will also be told of exactly the words that he used that they condoned. M