November

25, 1992

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLI No. 71

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Lush): Order, please!

Before proceeding to our routine business, on behalf of hon.

members there are several groups that I would like to welcome to the House of

Assembly today. First of all I would like to mention the presence of the

national executive for the Canadian Federation of Students, the executive

council of the Student's Union, Memorial University, and the executive,

Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Students and the university senate

representatives. Also, we have represented here today, representatives of the

Canadian Teachers Federation and branch presidents of the Newfoundland Teachers

Association. On behalf of all hon. members we extend to all of those groups a

warm welcome.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Ferryland.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to

direct my question, Mr. Speaker, to the Premier. I note the people in the

gallery today are not here for the pleasure of this question period. I am sure

they have a very serious message to deliver. Perhaps it is the same message that

was delivered by the International Labour Organization. I ask the Premier:

having introduced two pieces of legislation which stripped the contracts of

teachers and other public sector employees in this province, can the Premier now

tell the House how long the government will continue with Bill 17 and when will

it return to free and collective bargaining in this province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, Hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, last year when the government

brought in the budget, and in the year before when we brought in the budget, we

went first to the NTA and other representatives of employees and offered to

bargain with them to deal with the massive problem that could only be dealt with

in terms of some adjustment in the wage cost of government. We told the people

that. I think there was substantial understanding, particularly on the part of

the leadership of the NTA, but the impression I had from the - not the

impression I had, the clear statement made to me, was that while they understood

the very difficult position the government was in, they could not readily agree.

They knew what we had to do but they could not readily agree. They knew and

understood the decision government had to take in the legislation that we had to

bring forward to deal with it. Later this Spring in meetings with

representatives of the NTA they clarified that situation somewhat for me at

least, others may have had a different view of it at the time but, for me at

least they clarified it somewhat and said: well, we agree that we expressed the

opinion that we understood what you had to do last year, what we did not agree

with is your projecting forward and putting a cap of 3 per cent on the forward,

that was my recollection of recent discussions with Mr. Reid. That was the gist

of the conversation, so he talked to us at the time about possibly reviewing

that and seeing whether that could be corrected and whether the government could

bring in legislation to cancel that part of it. We are at the moment still

having some discussions with the NTA, not about that alone but about other

matters and the financial circumstances at the time and the government will, in

due course, announce its decision with respect to that overall matter.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Ferryland, on a

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Can we expect that the Premier will deal with the current

deficit in the same way that he has dealt with past deficits? Will there be a

successor to Bill 17, Bill 18 which will further strip away more benefits from

the collective bargaining process in this Province and from negotiated

collective agreements?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: I certainly hope not, Mr. Speaker. I hope

we will not have to do that, but we cannot manufacture money. We have to deal

with the very difficult circumstances that exist. The NTA, I am confident

understands that -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER WELLS: The meetings I have had with them recently

clearly indicate to me that they understand fully this difficult situation that

the government is in and that steps must be taken to do it. Now, I have not been

at the most recent meetings, I was at the first meeting with the NTA but I

understand there have been further meetings with the President of Treasury Board

and others, and I believe there is some reasonable prospect that we may be able

to work out some kind of an arrangement. If we cannot, in the end, this House

has the responsibility to make the final decision. The government has the

responsibility to bring forward the proposal and we bring forward the proposal

and we will marshall as much support as we can get for the government's

proposal, but in the end, this House will make the decision because this is

where the ultimate responsibility lies.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Ferryland, on a

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Is it the government's plan to reduce the deficit by rolling

back the salaries and benefits of teachers and other public sector employees for

the balance of this year and for next year?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, the government's plan for

dealing with the deficit will be announced, as all government financial plans

are, when the Minister of Finance stands in his place in the House and discloses

it in full. At that time the hon. member, along with all hon. members and all

people in the Province, will be fully advised as to the full details of the

government's plan.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier apparently acquired his labour relations skills

when he was Minister of Labour in the Smallwood government in the 1960s. Is it

his mission to turn back the clock to that era, when public sector unions came

to the Premier's office with cap in hand for the few crumbs that fell of the

master's table?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: If there was anything significant, or any

identifiable question, I would attempt to answer it, but I just take it as a bit

of political rhetoric that is not deserving nor expecting of an answer.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes.

MR. HEARN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is also to

the Premier.

The Premier makes a great deal about his openness to ideas

and co-operation with the public sector unions. It seems to me he has gotten

more co-operation than he has given, if his idea of co-operation is to call in

and lecture.

I ask the Premier: Will he give co-operation a real chance?

Will he remove the 3 per cent limit that he talked about a minute ago on wage

settlements imposed by Bill 17; and will he work instead to solve problems

through free and open collective bargaining?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I really answered the

question in answering an earlier question for the Member for Ferryland, and

indicated that the government's decision on that issue, that that matter was

under consideration and the government's decision on that issue would be

announced in due course. I cannot state anything other than that to the hon.

member now.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes, a supplementary.

MR. HEARN: Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the Premier if the

3 per cent cut in operational budgets announced by the Minister of Finance in

his Ministerial Statement will apply to the $118 million in this year's budget

for the school board operational grants?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, there were no 3 per cent cuts

announced by the minister. What the minister announced is that all offices,

agencies, and departments of government, and everybody being supported by monies

from the Treasury of the Province, would be asked to seek to achieve reductions

of 1 per cent in the overall salary cost, and 3 per cent in the operational

cost.

Mr. Speaker, nobody is exempt from that. Everybody has been

asked to achieve that. Now whether it will be able to be achieved in every

single agency and department is more than I can say. I can foresee circumstances

where there may well be some areas where it will not be able to be achieved, but

that process is under way right now.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes.

MR. HEARN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It makes it quite

clear.

My supplementary then is to the Minister of Employment and

Labour Relations - the minister who, when he was President of the NTA, could

settle a contract with a handshake and the word of government was good. I ask

him if this

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HEARN: Ask him or ask any of the others. Ask the

Minister of Environment and Lands.

If this government proceeds for the third time in less than

two years to use legislation to strip negotiated benefits from collective

agreements, will he stand by his colleagues that he once led, and will he resign

from this government?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Employment and

Labour Relations.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I certainly appreciate the question, because while some of

the words are slightly different it is the same question that my hon. friend

from Fogo asked, I think, a couple of days ago in the Legislature, and I

answered it at the time. It becomes clear, as I indicated then, that every

member of the Cabinet and every member who is involved on this side of the House

when decisions are made, we have to make up our minds whether we support them or

not. The reality is there are no decisions made, there are lots of discussions

ongoing, and there is nothing for me at this point in time to support or not

support. I think that the Premier and others have tried to make that perfectly

clear over the past period of time.

At a point in time when there is something, it will become

obvious to everybody what I will do, because I will either stand in this House

and support the motion being brought forward and go out and try to convince my

constituents and everybody else in the Province that it is the right decision

for the right reasons at the right time, or, as with any decision made by the

government - and as my colleague would know from his experience in the Cabinet

before, that option and that decision is made by a Cabinet Minister every time a

decision of government is taken.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Menihek.

MR. A. SNOW: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question, Mr. Speaker, is to the Minister Responsible for

Education. He is undoubtedly aware of the teacher internship program being

offered to students studying in the faculty of education at Memorial University.

In previous years the university made this program available to students

studying education in western Labrador. Is the minister aware that this very

important facet of teacher education is presently not being offered in Labrador

west this year?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I am only aware of it because of

the fact that, as any other private citizen, I know what is going on in certain

parts of the Province.

The hon. member, certainly, is not suggesting that this

administration would poke its nose into the administration of the university. We

believe in operating at arm's-length, Mr. Speaker. If we were to do otherwise,

the hon. members opposite, along with the vast majority of our people, would be

severely criticizing government, if we were to interfere in the administration

of the university. We have no intention of doing that, Mr. Speaker. The only

reason I know about the incident is, as any other informed citizen, you know

from time to time what is going on in the Province.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Menihek, a

supplementary.

MR. A. SNOW: Mr. Speaker, I won't dare suggest to the

minister where he should poke his nose, but I would suggest to the hon. minister

what he should do with regard to his responsibility to education in this

Province. Is the minister aware of the tremendous cost burden this is going to

be to the students in western Labrador or the parents of those students affected

in western Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I can only reiterate what I

already said. The university operates at arm's-length from government.

Government supports the university to the tune of $119 million. We would be

severely criticized if we were to say to the university: you must teach

paleontology in Labrador West or you must hire a geologist to go to the North

Pole and do some work. We are not in the business, Mr. Speaker, of administering

universities to that extent and we have no intention of doing it. I am pleased

to tell the people of Newfoundland and Labrador that that will continue to be

our position, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Menihek, on a

supplementary.

MR. A. SNOW: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again the minister refuses to accept the responsibility of

delivering education to the people of this Province and directing the education

of the people of this Province. Mr. Speaker, can the minister guarantee me, this

House and the people of Labrador, that the university, when they have to go

through their forced budgetary cuts, that it is not discriminatory, that it's

budget cuts will be made across the board to the whole Province and not

discriminatory towards rural Newfoundland, to ensure that the people of western

Labrador and others parts of this Province are not discriminated against?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, this Province, as hon. members

will know, is having an extremely difficult time adapting to the fiscal

realities that exist. Hon. members will know that we have a $153 million deficit

in our current account. Hon. members will know that we have rung up debt over

the past number of years close to $5 billion. Hon. members will know that there

is only one credit agency which has us rated at an A rating. If we were to lose

that credit rating, Mr. Speaker, it would have severe repercussions for this

Province. Now, hon. members know that.

One thing that government and I, as a member of this

government, can assure hon. members opposite and the people of this Province, is

that what we will do will be done fairly and with balance. No single group will

be sorted out to bear the full brunt. We are, all of us, into this together. The

fisherman, the farmer, the logger, the teacher, the doctor, the nurse, the

politician, the minister in Cabinet, we are all in this together and it is for

the well-being of all of our people, of the whole Province. That is the reason

no one person will be discriminated against. But that also means, Mr. Speaker,

that all people must share the responsibility for dealing with this very

difficult problem.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Premier,

and further concerns the International Labour Organization's findings and

criticisms of this government.

Mr. Speaker, in addition to finding that the Newfoundland

Government had gone beyond normally accepted limits in restraining collective

bargaining by rolling back negotiated settlements, the International Labour

Organization said that this type of legislation could only prejudice and

destabilize the labour relations climate in the Province. Would the Premier not

agree that the International Labour Organization was right and that the

government's actions have, in fact, prejudiced and destabilized the labour

relations climate in this Province to the point that there may be, in fact, an

overwhelming reaction by the public sector unions in this Province to the great

detriment of public order and public confidence in this government?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: I wouldn't be so irresponsible as the hon.

member to suggest that any public sector unions would be responsible for the

lack of public order in the Province. I don't expect anybody to behave in this

way. We run a democratic system here, and if the government is acting

improperly, then in a few months the entire people of this Province will have a

responsibility and an opportunity to tell the government how irresponsibly they

have been acting, or give the government credit for what it has been doing and

return it, which is what I expect will be done. So I don't expect hon. members

to stand in this House and promote disorder in society. That is not worthy of

the hon. member, really.

In terms of the International Labour Organization, I know

what the International Labour Organization said about the Canadian Government,

about the Ontario Government, the Manitoba Government and the New Brunswick and

Nova Scotia governments, and the Newfoundland government. I know what they said.

But what they did not know and were not told - and probably should have been

told - is that the government, on each of those occasions, went to the public

sector unions with a proposal to sit down and negotiate changes that would

enable us to live within our means. What the International Labour Organization

does not have is the responsibility to manage the finances of this Province.

They can sit in their ivory tower in Geneva and make these great proclamations

about what should or should not be, devoid of any responsibility for anything,

to anybody.

It is easy for anybody to be an armchair expert in those

circumstances. It is quite something else to take responsibility.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East on a

supplementary.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What the Premier should know, if he does not, is that this

body - the International Labour Organization - in fact is composed of

governments, employers, and unions - trade unions - and they have responsibility

for international standards in freedom of association and free collective

bargaining.

Now, Mr. Speaker, is the Premier telling the people of

Newfoundland that these international standards that apply are too good for the

people of Newfoundland and that only the Premier's standards and what he thinks

is right and proper and just and principled will apply here in this Province,

and not the international standards that are developed by all of the countries

in the world?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: It is not a question of standards being

good enough or being acceptable or not. It is not a question of standards. It is

a question of all of the people of this Province being able to pay the cost of

government or not.

Now there are limitations on what the people of this Province

can bear. The government cannot just use the power of the Legislature

willy-nilly to force people to pay endlessly because groups want more. Everybody

wants more. I want more, the same as everybody else wants more. Everybody

understands that; but we have to act in a responsible way, and that is all the

government is doing.

It is not a question of saying the International Labour

Organization, which is a unit of the United Nations, is unacceptable in setting

standards. I just point out to you that nobody at the International Labour

Organization has any responsibility to raise the money to pay these costs. The

government of this Province does.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East, a

supplementary.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, what the Government of

Newfoundland has done is use the power of the Legislature willy-nilly to rip up

contracts that it had negotiated -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARRIS: - and that is the principle to which the

International Labour Organization is referring.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get on with his question.

MR. HARRIS: The question, Mr. Speaker, is: Is the Premier

willing to acknowledge the finding of the International Labour Organization that

the kind of legislation this government has put in place is, in fact,

detrimental to workers' interest in unionization, since members and potential

members could consider useless joining an organization which has represented its

members in collective bargaining, if the results of such bargaining can be

cancelled constantly by law. Is the Premier sending this message out to the

people of Newfoundland: Do not bother with unions, because your agreements are

worthless?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: No, Mr. Speaker, absolutely not.

I acknowledge what the International Labour Organization

said. I also acknowledge that the International Labour Organization has no

responsibility to cope with difficult circumstances. The government of this

Province does; and when the Province, and for that matter the nation, finds

itself in the kinds of difficult circumstances that Canada and the provinces in

this nation have found themselves in in recent years, and find themselves right

at this moment, there are emergency circumstances that warrant the use of the

power of the Legislature if no other solution is reasonably available -

warranted if those circumstances exist.

Mr. Speaker, it was the judgement of the majority of the

Legislature - and remember, the majority rules in a democracy - it was the

judgement of the majority of the members of this Legislature that the

circumstances existed that warranted that action being taken.

Now the International Labour Organization may not like it. I

do not like it. I do not like seeing it happen. It does not happen on a routine

basis. It happens only in circumstances that are warranted, where there is no

other alternative - and that is exactly what occurred, Mr. Speaker, and the

International Labour Organization should bear that in mind before it makes it's

pronouncements.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fogo.

MR. WINSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for

the Minister of Education.

The minister is well aware that officials in his department

are responsible for administering Canada student loans, if

not paying. He might try to say it is a federal government responsibility. Is he

aware that student loan appeals are behind some two to three weeks, and now,

only appeals that were in prior to November 2 are being processed, they are

still that far behind?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is not correct.

There have been some difficulties in the student loans office over the past

number of months. I think, 95 per cent of the applications were appealed. Some

of the employees were off on sick leave. Some of the people over there are

undergoing a considerable amount of stress. I am not sure how the hon. member

asked the question, but the reality is that yesterday, all appeals up to

November 2nd had been dealt with, and the applications in today's slot are from

November 2nd or 3rd onward.

I talked just recently with the Director of Student Loans and

he assures me that by December 2nd or 3rd, I think it is, that, barring

unforeseen circumstances, all of the appeals will have been dealt with, Mr.

Speaker. So the hon. member is partly on the right track, but he should listen a

little better when he brings information before this House.

I met with the Federation of Students for Newfoundland and

Labrador, yesterday. We had a very intensive talk about this and we are all

trying to find a way to deal with it. But the reality is, yes, there is a

backlog there. Everything has been cleared up to November 2nd or 3rd and

hopefully, by the first part of December, all of the appeals should be cleared

up.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fogo, on a

supplementary.

MR. WINSOR: Mr. Speaker, the minister is not right -

appeals have not been cleared up. I have one that has been waiting six weeks and

it is still not cleared up.

Let me tell the minister this: for post-secondary students,

both at university and trade school, the term comes to an end the first week in

December. How does the minister think these students are going to get through

the end of this year when the term ends before the appeals are going to be

processed? What is the minister saying - drop out of university?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Education.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to stand in this

House or anywhere else in the country and try to back up the student loan

situation in this great nation. The hon. member will know that when that person

who was going to inflict prosperity on Newfoundland got elected in 1984, one of

the first things he did, Mr. Speaker, was put a cap on student loans.

AN HON. MEMBER: Which party was that?

MR. DECKER: That was the Tory Party.

Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, that same administration, my

friend's bosom pals in Ottawa, also inflicted a 3 per cent administration fee on

student loans. So the student loans program in this nation is in a mess. Every

education minister in Canada has brought that to the attention of his Tory

cousins in Ottawa, and if he is half as concerned about this issue as he

pretends, by getting up here and going on with political tripe, he will talk to

his colleagues in Ottawa and try to resolve the whole mess involving student

loans. And, yes, Mr. Speaker, we have to administer it, but I can tell you, it

is becoming more and more difficult to administer, because we are not getting

the support we should get from the nation to provide those student loans.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fogo, on a

supplementary.

MR. WINSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me tell the minister that I know a lot more about student

loans than he will ever know. I happened to be getting them for six years of

university, Mr. Speaker. I am not talking about the amount of money, I am

talking about the processing of applications, and I am asking the minister: How

does he propose to help students get through this crisis they are now facing as

a result of the incompetence of this government to provide enough people to

process student loans appeals, so that they can have their money now? How does

he propose to help them through this crisis?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I addressed that in the first

question the hon. member put forward. I explained to him that there have been

difficulties with student loans. I have told him there was a problem with sick

leave. I have told him that, over the next weeks - last week and the week before

that, Mr. Speaker, employees have been working day and night to process the

loans, they have been working flat out, day and night, weekends and whatever and

they fully intend to have the whole thing cleared up early in December, but that

is not in any way for me to get up and defend the student loans program in this

nation, which is in a mess, and the hon. member's party inflicted the mess on

the country. It is a bigger issue than Newfoundland and Labrador. The whole

student loans program is in a mess and the hon. member should be out of this

building, on the telephone to his friends in Ottawa and demand that they deal

with the issue.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main.

MR. DOYLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a question for the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

Is the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs aware

that under the new utility tax measure which he announced a few days ago, that

the Town of Conception Bay South will lose approximately $250,000 in municipal

revenue, which will have a devastating effect upon the financial position of

that town and cause a mil rate rise of approximately 1 mil for that, is he aware

of that and would he tell the House what his plans are to deal with that

particular problem that the town is going to have?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. HOGAN: No, Mr. Speaker. I am not aware that the

figure enunciated by my friend for Harbour Main is the exact figure or not, and

I do not know how he could arrive at it. The utility companies could not supply

us with the 1992 information to arrive at that figure or any other figure.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main, on a

supplementary.

MR. DOYLE: Let me inform the minister that I came at that

figure from two sources. One, from his own department and two, from the Town of

Conception Bay South. That is how I got that information. Now the people of

Conception Bay South are in for a shock, Mr. Speaker. Is the minister aware

also, that the town is going to lose another $200,000 when the third year of the

new municipal grant structure comes in in January, and that loss is going to

mean another hike of 1 mil in the municipal tax rate and that will be a revenue

loss to the Town of Conception Bay South of $450,000 for that year, $450,000 for

one year, Mr. Speaker?

Now when is he and his colleague, the Minister for Conception

Bay South, going to take this issue seriously, the way they should, and can the

minister tell the House how the Town of Conception Bay South is going to cope

with a revenue shortfall of $450,000 for one year? Can he tell us?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. HOGAN: Mr. Speaker, the figure that the member just

mentioned of $250,000 loss as a result of this is a figure completely foreign to

this minister, Mr. Speaker. The best figure that I have is for 1991 and the

figure is $106,000 that the town will experience in a loss.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main, on a

supplementary.

MR. DOYLE: Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe that the

Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs is saying that. I mean, he is the

one responsible for the new grant structure; he knows what the Town of

Conception Bay South told him not too long ago that will mean an additional

$200,000 in January and this revenue shortfall -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary and please get to it.

MR. DOYLE: - of the utility tax rate is $250,000? Now,

Mr. Speaker, is the minister aware that the Town of Conception Bay South faces a

20 per cent municipal tax increase in this coming year? Is he aware of that, and

tell me what he plans to do to make up that revenue shortfall for the people of

Conception Bay South?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. HOGAN: No, Mr. Speaker. This minister or this

government or this House is not aware that there is a 20 per cent shortfall in

the Conception Bay South municipal budget for next year because they have not

submitted it to us for information or for any other purpose.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

There is time for a short question and similarly, a short answer.

MR. WARREN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I have two or three different questions for the

minister, so if it has to be short I will keep them for tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has expired.

Order, please!

I would like to correct some names with respect to the

introduction that I made earlier in the session. Present in the House of

Assembly today is the president of the Canadian Teachers Federation and

presidents of other teacher organizations across Canada. I think I said branch

presidents of Newfoundland, but they are presidents of other teacher

organizations across Canada.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Notices of Motion

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for St. John's East.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This is not a notice of motion, but I do wish to give notice

to the Chair that I have a question of privilege to raise in this House. Before

speaking on the question of privilege, it requires some research with the Table

to find exactly the nature of the question but I do wish to give notice of that

question of privilege.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Kilbride.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, before I present this

petition, I have to ask permission of the House of Assembly to accept the

petition in this form. It was delivered to me yesterday at a meeting and it is

not addressed to the proper form of the House of Assembly that we usually

accept. It is a petition from teachers in St. Kevin's Elementary School and I

would like permission to present it today. I recognize that it is not on the

proper form.

MR. SPEAKER: As the member said, the petition is not in

its correct format. It is from the staff of St. Kevin's Elementary School in the

Goulds and it is addressed to the hon. member. It is not at all in the proper

form of a petition. It is up to hon. members whether or not they want to give

the hon. member permission to present the petition in this form.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure what the practice

is that has grown up over the years. I haven't seen the document. I wonder if

perhaps the hon. gentleman would allow us to look at it overnight. I mean, let

us get on with the regular business of the day. The difficulty with matters

addressed to hon. members, is that we can all bring in all our letters, provided

they are signed by at least one person, we can start presenting them as

petitions, and the next thing we know -

MR. SIMMS: Why not?

MR. ROBERTS: The hon. gentleman, the Leader of the

Opposition asks: Why not? There is no reason why not as long as the House

decides to do it but we have a petition practice, Mr. Speaker, which goes back

as far as this House goes, in my understanding, and that practice is

well-established. The hon. gentleman has been in this House for ten or twelve

years. All I will say - I am not saying we, on this side, say 'aye' or 'nay'.

What I do say, is, the hon. gentleman didn't ask us in advance - he has no

requirement to, but let us have a look at it. If it is in accord with what this

House has done, then I shall certainly give leave, as one individual, and ask my

colleagues to do the same. But I don't think it is proper of him to come in,

spring a document on us that is obviously out of order and then request us to

waive the rules. That is not why rules are here, Sir.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Kilbride, on a point of order.

MR. R. AYLWARD: The hon. member has been out of the House

for some time and I realize what he is saying was the practice some years ago

when he was a former member. Over the past couple of years, in particular,

several members have risen in their place and asked permission to present a

brief. I can tell hon. members of this House of Assembly, this was presented to

me and I was asked by the person who gave it, to present it as a petition in the

House. I advised that person that it was not on the proper form but I would ask

permission of the House to present it - that is all I am requesting. If I have

permission I will do it, if not, I will throw it away.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is right with respect to some laxity being

afforded petitions, but the Chair has always asked for the consent of the House.

At this point, the Chair does not have the consent of the House, therefore, we

cannot present the petition.

MR. R. AYLWARD: By leave, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member doesn't have leave.

MR. ROBERTS: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. All that I

have said is that -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Two members cannot stand at the same time. The hon. the

Government House Leader is on a point of order.

MR. R. AYLWARD: I was standing Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: But the hon. member stood on a point of

order.

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, all that I have said is that I

would like to see the petition. I acknowledge that what the hon. gentleman said

is correct, that apparently, a new practice has developed. If he had the

courtesy or the decency to give us a little advance notice, Mr. Speaker, then we

would be able to respond to it. The hon. gentleman is either being genuine, in

which case, he will accept what I have said, or he is playing political games,

in which case, I have no interest in getting down in the mud with him.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. R. AYLWARD: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride, on a point

of order.

MR. R. AYLWARD: I do not wish to play political games

with the hon. member. I made a simple request of this House. I am trying to

carry out an undertaking that I made to constituents of mine, to come to this

House of Assembly and ask permission to present -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

The Chair is listening to a point of order. It is a new one,

but I am just giving the hon. member a minute or so to finish up.

The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am not playing political games, I am trying to

fulfil an undertaking that I made to constituents of mine yesterday afternoon,

after a meeting, a meeting which was attended by members on both sides of this

House of Assembly. I told them that it was not in the proper form, but I said I

would ask for leave of the House to present it on their behalf. If I have leave,

I will present it. If I do not have leave, I will not present it. It is as

simple as that.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

My understanding is that the hon. member doesn't have leave.

So the Chair made that ruling and, until the hon. member gets leave, then the

Chair has no choice but to move on to other items of business.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I ask once again: Do I have

leave to present the petition?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to take his place, please. The Chair

has asked whether the hon. member has leave, and I will now ask again: Does the

hon. member have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No.

MR. SPEAKER: No leave.

Orders of the Day

Private Members' Day

MR. SPEAKER: It being Wednesday, we are onto a private

member's resolution.

MR. R. AYLWARD: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride, on a point

of order.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I sent a letter, which was

sent to me, to the Speaker to look at to see if it was acceptable in this House

and it was not acceptable. As far as I know now, somebody is going to make a

copy of that letter, which I request not be done, and I request the return of my

letter.

MR. SPEAKER: The letter has been returned.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, it being Private Members' Day,

I understand the Opposition wish to debate Motion 5 in the name of the Member

for Humber East.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am very pleased to initiate an afternoon-long debate about

higher education in Newfoundland and Labrador and focus the attention of all

members of the Assembly on Grenfell College, in particular.

I will begin by reading my full motion, recitals and all:

WHEREAS the economy of North America is becoming increasingly

based on knowledge; and

WHEREAS Newfoundlanders and Labradorians must become better

educated if our Province is to advance economically; and

WHEREAS Grenfell College in Corner Brook is the only

university campus in the Province outside St. John's; and

WHEREAS Grenfell College, with few exceptions, is only

offering first and second year Arts and Science courses and is not even able to

meet the needs of first and second year students because of a shortage of

science laboratories, library facilities, classrooms and other space, as well as

personnel;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the government immediately

provide Grenfell College with capital and operating fund increases to equip it

as quickly as possible to offer the full range of first, second, third and

fourth year Arts and Science courses to meet the needs of the people of the

Province.

Mr. Speaker, of all possible initiatives within the power of

the Provincial Government, in my view, nothing is more important for the future

of Western Newfoundland than major expansion and improvement of Grenfell

College. I believe this is vitally important for the future social and economic

well-being of the West Coast.

Mr. Speaker, the Wells Administration, which has now been in

office for more than three-and-a-half years and which has brought down four

budgets, has paid lip service to the importance of education. The government, in

the winter of 1990, published a White Paper on post-secondary education. In that

document, Mr. Speaker, right at the very beginning, the following statement was

made, and I quote: 'The skills and knowledge of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians

will be a critical factor in determining the future success of our Province as a

vibrant society and a viable economy.'

Then, on page 8, the following statements: 'Increased demand

for post-secondary education is a challenge which government must meet as it

prepares for the future. Meeting the challenge is particularly important if we

are to improve our economic position in relation to other provinces and

countries. Newfoundland's post-secondary participation rate in 1987-88 was 8.3

percentage points lower than the Canadian average.'

The White Paper continues by making the following statement:

'In addition, Newfoundland's labour force has a lower level of overall

educational attainment than that of the Canadian labour force.'

So, Mr. Speaker, the Wells Administration has talked about

the importance of higher education. The Premier, ministers, and supporters of

the administration, since they have been in office, as well as when they were

campaigning in the 1989 election, have promised to improve university education

offerings in the Province.

Mr. Speaker, by way of background information, I will point

out that, unlike most other jurisdictions, most other provinces of Canada,

Newfoundland and Labrador has only one university. We have only Memorial

University of Newfoundland, with its major campus in St. John's and with another

campus in Corner Brook - that being called Grenfell College. Only PEI, of all

the Canadian provinces, the same as Newfoundland and Labrador, has only one

university.

Grenfell College opened in 1975. The facilities then opened

were designed to accommodate about 650 students. The plan was for first and

second year Arts and Science courses to be offered. In the beginning, the

facility was known as the Junior College - the Western Newfoundland Junior

College of Memorial University. In 1979 it was named Sir Wilfred Grenfell

College. In 1988 there was a significant expansion with the addition of full

four-year degree programs in visual and theatre arts. In 1988 a new $8 million

fine arts building was opened so that the Grenfell campus now comprises the main

building, opened in 1975, with a temporary addition out back, and the fine arts

building.

Grenfell College is still a satellite of the St. John's

campus of Memorial University, and depends on the Memorial administrators based

in St. John's for their operating budgets. Mr. Speaker, this arrangement has

several limitations, and is not properly meeting the needs of the people of the

Province.

First of all, the space, as I mentioned, was designed for

only 650 students. The facility is now, in fact, accommodating over 1,100

students. The space is simply not big enough for the current program offerings

and the present enrolment. Students are cramped. In the last year or so, half of

the college cafeteria was taken away from students by being converted from

cafeteria space into offices.

The library has seating for only about 150 students and,

according to the librarian, typically, the library seats are fully occupied

early in the morning. Consequently, there isn't enough study space at Grenfell

College, and students are resorting to sitting on the floors in the corridors of

the college building to try to study between classes.

Mr. Speaker, the science labs are terribly inadequate for

current program offerings, and if there is to be any meaningful improvement of

Grenfell, there have to be new labs built.

For the most part, only first and second year Arts and

Science courses are being offered. This means that for the students who are

being accommodated, after second year, they have to go elsewhere. They have to

move to the Memorial campus in St. John's or go to the mainland, and that is

disruptive. Students tell me that because most of them are only at Grenfell for

two years, it is difficult to have ideal student spirit. It is difficult to

engender on the part of the student body a substantial involvement in planning

for the future of the college.

Mr. Speaker, for faculty, the limitations of offering only

first and second year courses are somewhat frustrating. The faculty are

extremely well-qualified. A high percentage of the Grenfell faculty have PhDs,

and they are not being challenged or fulfilled in their teaching

responsibilities in an optimal way. It would be much more satisfying for

faculty, not to mention a better use of their talent, if the Grenfell faculty

were able to teach some higher level, third and fourth year courses.

Mr. Speaker, in addition, by having a satellite status, the

Grenfell administrators do not have proper flexibility in making decisions that

are best for the needs of their student body and their faculty and staff. It is

not sensible to have day-to-day operations at Grenfell directed from St. John's,

as is being done now. It is not sensible for St. John's practices to be foisted

on Grenfell when they may not be at all appropriate for the campus in Corner

Brook.

Mr. Speaker, my motion calls for a substantial increased

investment on the part of the Province Government in Grenfell College, in

university education in Western Newfoundland, for western Newfoundlanders,

primarily, but for all people of the Province.

People might question my timing; after all, the Province has

major financial problems, and we are only days away from the dreaded minibudget.

People might ask, How reasonably can we expect the Provincial Government to

allocate millions of additional taxpayers' dollars for expansion and improvement

of Grenfell College? What is needed is capital expansion, building expansion,

but also, ongoing operating expansion. How can the Province afford to do this?

Mr. Speaker, how can we afford not to do it? Education is the key to the future.

If we are to progress, as a Province, if we are to advance as Newfoundlanders

and Labradorians, our people are going to have to become better educated. More

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are going to have to master sciences and

technologies as I mentioned, some of the government's own publications point out

the link between education and economic prosperity.

The Premier just returned from Ottawa, where he met with the

Prime Minister. The Prime Minister is presiding over a federal government which

has a massive budget problem. The federal government has a gigantic debt, a

gigantic deficit, yet the Premier asked the Prime Minister to borrow more, and

what we are asking the Premier is to borrow more and re-allocate, to invest in

expanding Grenfell College, to show faith in the future. What is this government

giving our people? What hope is the Wells administration holding out for

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians? All we hear from them is gloom and doom; to

have a healthy economy, we have to have a positive psychology.

I do not see any positive thinking around this government.

This government has shocked and scared people so that people with jobs and with

money are afraid to spend, they don't know what is coming. This government has

made virtually every public employee in the whole Province fear for his or her

job, and government looms large in the Newfoundland and Labrador society, so

what we have in this Province now is paralysis. The approach of the Wells

administration through four budgets has been cut and tax. Cut, tax and depress

and it is time for a new approach, it is time for the government to be positive

and give hope to people.

What better way to engender positive thinking than to pledge

a massive infusion of funding to improve university education by expanding

Grenfell College. Mr. Speaker, what I am proposing is simply what the Premier

himself promised when he campaigned for election in 1989. Now people might

quibble by saying you cannot really pay attention to what politicians say when

they are campaigning, the Premier probably got carried away in the heat of

emotion leading up to the election, what do you expect, he had to pour on some

promises fast and thick if he were going to have a shot at winning but, Mr.

Speaker, after he was in office, this Premier in his first Throne Speech made

the following statement.

It is a statement read on his behalf by the

Lieutenant-Governor: My government will expand post-secondary facilities to

allow more students in rural areas to participate in the development of their

careers without being penalized by the high cost of accommodation and

transportation. As a start towards this, the curriculum of the Sir Wilfred

Grenfell College in Corner Brook will be expanded to include third and fourth

year courses as quickly as they can reasonably be added and orderly expansion of

facilities will permit.

And then, Mr. Speaker, in the White Paper that I mentioned

earlier that the government published in 1990, the government mapped out a

timetable promising a start of construction of new facilities at Grenfell

College in 1991. After four budgets, approaching a mini-budget, leading up to a

next election, everyone knows the Premier has done absolutely nothing. He

reneged on his promises for expansion of Grenfell College the same as he

violated so many other promises.

Mr. Speaker, what the Premier is attempting to do now in

advance of the next election, before he has to go back and face the people of

western Newfoundland, is a token expansion of Grenfell College; he is now

talking to the university regents and administrators in St. John's about

essentially conning the people - adding a few third and fourth year courses at

Grenfell, but cutting enrolment in first and second years to squeeze in the

third and fourth year courses. What will he say a few years later if fifty

qualified students from the Corner Brook area are refused admission to first

year at Grenfell because there is not enough space?

Plan B is to build a $2 million or $3 million building. What

can $2 million or $3 million buy these days, Mr. Speaker? The Premier is

spending over $700,000 renovating his suite of offices and penthouse Cabinet

room - facilities that were completely and extensively redone a few short years

ago. The administration allowed the President of Memorial University in St.

John's to spend a quarter of a million dollars renovating his suite of offices

and had the Minister of Fisheries spend $2 million to renovate Exon House for

his offices and those of his staff, when they had new offices in the West Block

of Confederation Building.

Mr. Speaker, we need a significant, large, multimillion

dollar infusion of capital funding for expansion of Grenfell College, and then

ongoing increases in operating funding so that proper first, second, third and

fourth year programs can be offered in the Corner Brook university.

Mr. Speaker, my resolution calls for funding increases for

Grenfell College, and I say Grenfell College deliberately, because it is high

time that the government stopped providing Grenfell's allotment indirectly by

requiring that it come out of a block allotment made to the St. John's campus.

It is time that the administration provides directed funding, or a separate

budget, to Grenfell College, the same as it has been doing for the Medical

School and the Fisheries Institute.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, thank you.

This administration has some wonderful plans for Grenfell

College in Corner Brook. About a month ago, or maybe less than that, I had the

opportunity to visit Grenfell College in Corner Brook. I was extremely impressed

with what is going on there, Mr. Speaker. I met with the principal of the

college. The President of Memorial University attended the meeting with me, and

we talked about the long-range plans for Grenfell College.

What I see there, Mr. Speaker, some day, is a university

offering basic arts and science degrees, with maybe some specialities developed

which will be world renowned. Some suggestions are - and this has not been yet

formally adopted - that environmental science would become a field in which

Grenfell College would play a big

part in the role. So we have some great plans

for Grenfell College.

One of the things which the hon. member brings forth in her

motion is the fact that there is a lack of space in Grenfell College - and she

is absolutely right about that. The college was basically built for about 600 or

700 students, and now has an enrolment of about 1,100 students. So, Mr. Speaker,

she is right; there is a space requirement.

Now traditionally in this Province if you needed some space,

the thing to do was to rush out and start building - laying bricks and mortar -

without paying any particular attention to what else was available. It has just

recently been brought to my attention that there are three schools in Corner

Brook which have been closed. They have been closed down. I am not sure if three

are closed, or two are closed and one is about to be closed.

There is a school close to the college which may be closed

down in the next year or so, as the declining enrolment takes place at the high

schools space is becoming available in Corner Brook.

Now, the hon. member might suggest that we go and invest so

many million dollars in building a new school or an attachment to Grenfell

College. That might, or might not, be necessary. We might be able to find some

space. However, we do have to find some extra money to spend on labs.

So, we are looking at all of that. At the moment, Grenfell

College is a campus of Memorial University and that, Mr. Speaker, is where it is

going to stay for the foreseeable future. You see, the reason Grenfell College

is there is not that it is just a place to put some people from the west coast

who want to go to college, it is a place to put Newfoundlanders and Labradorians

to go to college to get a degree which will be recognized world-wide.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I could start a university tomorrow. I

could raise money. I could probably get a charter and I could start the Chris

Decker university, and I could offer PhDs on any topic under the sun but, Mr.

Speaker, they would be laughed at, because I would not have established the

credibility which is required for me to start conferring degrees.

I could buy degrees. There are mail order departments in the

United States where hon. members can, through the mail, buy their PhDs, Masters,

Bachelor of Arts, and I would suggest that there is quite a demand for those

degrees. But, really, the academic world does not take them all that seriously.

The reality is that in order to establish a university in

Corner Brook which will be recognized world-wide, it is essential that, for a

certain amount of time, at least, that college be a campus of Memorial

University.

Now, I don't know what will happen at some future date. It

might well be, at some future date, that university will establish a reputation,

maybe, in environmental science. Maybe, in some special area, that college, over

the years, will establish itself as being a renowned institution in delivering

an educational degree; then, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised, Mr. Speaker,

that it will evolve into a full-fledged, freestanding university offering its

own degrees. That might well come at some future date, five years, ten years,

twenty years, fifty years - Mr. Speaker, I don't know. It might never come. The

University of California has campuses all over California, but the degree comes

from the University of California.

So, hon. members should not get tied up in the independent

status of the college. That might come at some future date, and I certainly

would guess that, at some future date, it will, but, at the moment, the best and

proper place for Grenfell College is as a campus of Memorial University. So,

that, Mr. Speaker, is where it is at this moment.

Now, Mr. Speaker, in the 'WhEREASES' that the hon. member put

forward, some of them are motherhood. The economy of North America is becoming

increasingly based on knowledge. This administration, above all others, Mr.

Speaker, sees the importance of education to the future of the world, to the

continent, and especially, to this Province in which we live. We recognize the

global economy, we recognize what is happening world-wide, and we know that in

order for this Province to have a future in the world, we must have an educated

population. Therefore, we are putting emphasis on education. We are spending

$820 million this year in education. We are giving Memorial University $119

million - $7 million or $8 million of which is being spent in Corner Brook.

Now, if we were to fund that administration directly at this

time, there would probably be less of it going to programs than is going now. By

funding it through the university at this time, a lot of the top administration

can be carried on at the university - the role of the bursar, the role of the

registrar. A lot of the administration which belongs to the university is not

being duplicated, therefore allowing the vast amount of this $7 million or $8

million to go directly into programming.

So, it makes all the sense in the world for us to fund

Grenfell College, at this time, through MUN, notwithstanding the argument that,

at some future date, it may well become a freestanding university.

The hon. member, in the third

WHEREAS, says that Corner Brook

is the only university campus in the Province outside of St. John's. Mr.

Speaker, I suppose if you were to take every word literally, she is probably

right, it is the only campus outside. But the hon. member must recognize that in

addition to Corner Brook, the university is offering first year courses all over

this Province, Mr. Speaker. Up in Labrador West first year university courses

are being offered.

There is a tremendous take up of those courses, a tremendous

amount of interest in these first year courses, down on the Burin Peninsula, out

in Lewisporte, in the hon. Member for Lewisporte's district and in Grand Falls.

So, all over Newfoundland and Labrador, the university is reaching out. So when

the hon. member says that the only university campus in the Province, outside of

St. John's, is Grenfell, she is partly right, but that doesn't mean that there

is an educational void outside of Corner Brook and St. John's. There is

educational activity going on at university level all throughout the Province,

Mr. Speaker.

The hon. member talks about the degree. She seems to forget,

or deliberately ignores the fact, that you can already receive one degree from

the Grenfell College. There is a degree in fine arts which is being offered, Mr.

Speaker.

MR. ROBERTS: That is the only place in Newfoundland and

Labrador that offers that.

MR. DECKER: As my colleague from Labrador points out, it

is the only university in Newfoundland which is doing that.

Mr. Speaker, on my recent visit I also visited the Fine Arts

School, and I can tell hon. members that it is one of the finest Fine Arts

Schools in the country. That school started giving degrees when it had

established itself to the point where it could give a degree which will be known

worldwide and accepted worldwide. That is what is going to happen to the rest of

the college. When a degree is given from Grenfell College, it will be a degree

of such superior calibre that it will be recognized worldwide, Mr. Speaker. If

we listened to the hon. member, we would rush in and do something and deliver

degrees which nobody would notice. So that is the important thing, Mr. Speaker.

Now, I want to reiterate that this administration has a

tremendous commitment to Grenfell College to bring it up to par and make it a

full degree-granting Arts and Science University. That is what we will have.

Now, Mr. Speaker, when I hear the hon. member get up and

speak, and if I didn't know better, I would think she is on a brief visit from

outer space, because she is talking as if she doesn't know what has happened in

this country in the past few years. She is talking as if she just popped down

from Mars or the moon or somewhere. You would never know, Mr. Speaker, that she

was for ten years a member of an administration which went out and spent and

borrowed like a bunch of drunken sailors. You would never know, Mr. Speaker,

that she was a member of the administration which was picking the pockets of our

grandchildren, Mr. Speaker, borrowing against generations yet unborn, driving us

into the hole and into debt. You would never know, Mr. Speaker, that as a result

of the mess that her administration made it is taking us years to try and

compensate for some of the debt that her administration ran up. So she is

speaking, Mr. Speaker, as if we were flush with money, as if we could do exactly

what we like.

She is talking, Mr. Speaker, about spending $2, $3 or $4

million in the Grenfell College. I wish I had $2, $3 or $4 million to spend on

Grenfell College, Mr. Speaker. I wish I had that.

MS. VERGE: But you had it to spend on the Fisheries

Department's new offices and the Premier's office.

AN HON. MEMBER: How about this place?

MR. DECKER: I only wish, Mr. Speaker, that I could put my

hand on the $24 million that the previous administration blew on Sprung. Think

what that could do for Grenfell College? Twenty-four million dollars: What an

expansion we could put on Grenfell College today. Twenty four million without

any approval from this House, done behind the closed doors of the Cabinet room,

refusing to accept the advice of top civil servants in their own administration,

refusing to accept their advice and went out and blew $24 million -

MR. FLIGHT: And most of it by special warrants, they

would not come to the House with it.

MR. DECKER: - and as they were taking this money which we

could well be using today for Grenfell College, they refused to open the doors

to the House of Assembly -

MR. ROBERTS: And the one in Central Newfoundland too

(inaudible).

MR. DECKER: - so that the people of the Province would

know what was going on. You would never know that this so-called visitor from

outer space, you would not think she knew anything about the bloated Cabinet

with twenty-three, twenty-four, what was it? - twenty-five, twenty-six, pick any

number, the Cabinet bigger than that of the United States and Great Britain

combined. That is the kind of Cabinet they were in, Mr. Speaker. Think of the

money they were spending, the high life, cigars were being handed out as if they

were candy cigarettes, stretch limousines at $2,000 a shot; hotels at $4,000 a

night; a $200 tip was nothing. Now, Mr. Speaker, $400 tips -

MR. FLIGHT: $400 tips, stretch limousines parked for

hours waiting for (inaudible).

MR. DECKER: - the list goes on and on, Mr. Speaker and

the hon. member who just alights from outer space as if she was not a part of

that, as if she does not know what happened and knows nothing about that, she

says: go out immediately, go out immediately and spend money to expand Grenfell

College.

MR. ROBERTS: What hypocrisy, what hypocrisy.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, what hypocrisy is correct. If

this administration only had the money that was wasted on cigars, we could put a

small lab in Grenfell College and it would not be all that small, let me tell

hon. members of this House. If we had the waste and the fat that were thrown out

with a bloated Cabinet, of which the hon. member was a part, yet she wants to

pretend that she is coming in now like some white, shining knight, from outer

space, alighting momentarily on this planet and saying: go ahead now and put

this college in Corner Brook, so the hypocrisy of this motion, Mr. Speaker, the

hypocrisy of this motion.

AN HON. MEMBER: Lunatics, lunatics, lunatics.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, history will show who the

lunatics are because I can tell hon. members in this House what the people of

the Province are already saying. The hon. members will know that when we took

over the government of this Province, we arrived here in the nick of time, in

the nick of time. They had used up our credit rating, our credit rating had

dropped twice under their administration; they had borrowed to the hilt, they

had put the sales tax to its maximum, they had spent everything they could get

their hands on, taxed everything that moved or that existed or that was; they

left a mess for us to come in and clean up.

Now we have worked wonders. We have worked wonders over the

past two years, Mr. Speaker. Not only did we have a mess to clear up, a major

mess to clear up, a disaster to clear up, not only did we have that but we were

also stuck with a recession. One of the deepest recession since the 1930s was on

our back; just look now where we are. We are being asked to build universities,

build hospitals, deliver educational programs. Yet the handicaps that we have

are, a mess which was run up by people acting like drunken sailors, a recession

which is worldwide, a recession which is extremely difficult for us to shake

off. Yet, in the midst of all that we are working wonders. We are working

wonders in this Province and I get upset when I hear members Opposite coming in

and telling us what we should be doing and what we should not be doing. Mr.

Speaker, the very members who caused the biggest part of the mess that we

inherited are telling us now, to rush out immediately and spend $8 or $10

million or $50 million or whatever it takes, the very administration which put

us in all this mess.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, in order to make this motion

reasonable I will be suggesting that we amend the motion and that the 'Therefore

be it resolved' be changed to read: THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the government

provide Grenfell College with capital and operating fund increases to equip it

as quickly as possible to offer the full range of first, second and third. The

word 'immediately', Mr. Speaker, would be deleted in the amendment I would

present.

This, Mr. Speaker, is our way of saying that we are as

committed as ever -

MS. VERGE: (Inaudible).

MR. DECKER: - to delivering degree-granting status to the

university in Corner Brook. We are committed to this, and we will do it.

However, the hon. member knows, as I said, in reality - I am only pretending

that she came from outer space - in reality, she has been here; in reality, she

was part of the problem; in reality, she was a major part of the problem, Mr.

Speaker, running up expenses.

Did you want a copy of the amendment, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: The amendment is in order.

MR. DECKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, at the risk of probably getting our own

backbenchers in an uproar, I am trying to protect the little bit of integrity,

the little bit of common sense of the hon. members opposite. Because hon.

members know full well that, considering the fiscal realities we find ourselves

in today, we just cannot rush out 'immediately' - this disturbs me, you know;

hon. members will come in one day and 'immediately' they want a building. This

very Chamber we are in was the result of someone deciding 'immediately' to do

something, Mr. Speaker, and we see the mess it got us in. This, like knocking

down bowling pins, set off a chain reaction, causing expenses in this building

to go up to $24 or $25 million dollars for work that could have been put off for

another ten years and it wouldn't have hurt matters.

The way hon. members opposite operated was to do everything

'immediately'. I understand that some members opposite - I believe, the then

Minister of Agriculture was one - went out to Alberta to look at some buildings

that were being offered out there, which might make good stadiums, Mr. Speaker.

This happened, I think, just before they were turfed out of office. It was the

Sprung people who were making this particular kind of fabric -

MR. ROBERTS: They would make great tents!

MR. DECKER: - which would make great tents.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the minister's time has elapsed.

MR. DECKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Speaker, when the Member for Humber

East, the other day, tabled this private member's resolution to be debated

today, I thought it right away to be a very constructive act. I mean this is

motherhood, as the hon. the Member for the Strait of Belle Isle just said. Most

of the 'WHEREASES' are motherhood issues. But yet, I have had to sit here for

the last twenty minutes and listen to nothing but rhetoric.

AN HON. MEMBER: You didn't have to.

MR. WOODFORD: No, I didn't have to. The hon. member is

right, I didn't have to, but I did, because I didn't want to miss out on any of

this. Because I am sure - What is the old saying? - Nothing instills something

in the memory like the wish to forget it. And I tell you, we certainly can't

forget some of the comments the Minister of Education has made.

Now, Mr. Speaker, right from the outside, I have to say, five

minutes were spent on the spending by the previous administration, on the

cigars, on the limousines, on the Sprungs of the world, on the new House of

Assembly. Mr. Speaker, I ask hon. members opposite to take a pen and a piece of

paper and I will give them five minutes to write down what they have done in the

last three-and-a-half years. They have done absolutely nothing except add to the

deficit. When they took over this administration in 1989, there was a surplus in

current account, regardless of when I was there, there was a surplus in current

account. I get into deficit. There was a deficit in capital account. Always was,

it was there when the hon. member was there thirty years ago and I ask the hon.

member before he leaves the house, how about Churchill Falls? Mr. Speaker - I

hit a sore spot. The hon. minister the other day talked about sellouts. We have

never had a sellout in this province, never had a sellout in this province, Mr.

Speaker, like we had with Churchill Falls. $872 million dollars last year went

to Churchill Falls Corporation, Quebec Hydro, $23 million came to this Province,

so when you stand up to debate sellouts you better debate apples and apples, not

apples and oranges, Sir. I can assure you.

You talk about what universities can be put around this

Province today, I was one of the so called children back in the sixties,

although it might be young, I was young. I was one of the so called children,

now it is into the grandchildren, now it is into my children and it goes on into

my grandchildren. We will never see a cent, not a copper, from Churchill Falls

in this Province. We are only getting enough to keep the office open for

Churchill Falls Corporation, in Churchill Falls. That is all we are getting. So,

if we are going to get up here and talk about what a certain party done, certain

administration done years ago, we better start talking about apples and apples.

Not apples and oranges. Mr. Speaker, you talk about sellouts. Mr. Speaker, let

us not get caught up in political rhetoric. I just want to make a few

constructive comments, try to make a few constructive comments pretaining to

this resolution. Everybody knows, and deep down the minister knows and the

administration knows, especially members from the west coast and I was expecting

the member from Humber West for sure and more specifically the Premier.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WOODFORD: They probably will, rightly so, especially

the Premier, speak on this resolution and tell us. One of the questions I would

like to have answered is why, three-and-a-half years ago everything was down-pat

and documentated, why six months after office, everything was in a white paper,

for the former hon. Minister of Education, everything was documented then in a

white paper and then all of a sudden three-and-a-half to almost four years

after, we got absolutely nothing to show. Now if there was ever a watered down

educational institution in this Province today it is Grenfell College in Corner

Brook. It is as watered down as you are ever going to get in an educational

facility in this Province. How can a facility that was built for 600 try to

cater to 1161? Two hundred and three hundred people turned down for residency

every year, can't get classes - the White Paper, as the former Minister knows -

20.3 percent versus 30.2 percent differential between urban and rural centres

when it comes to attendance at universities. Why is it? Again it is written in

here, the reason is because people from rural areas find it hard to adjust,

because of the expenses and so on, to an urban centre, whether it be Corner

Brook, whether it be St. John's or in any other institution around the country.

Now in Corner Brook today I have prime examples and, in fact, personal examples

because my daughter attends Grenfell College in Corner Brook, this is her second

year. I tell you it is sad, they don't want to leave home, none of them wants to

leave home. When I say home I mean home as regards to the west coast versus

central or versus east coast or whatever. But you go down there it is $875.00

for tuition. Nineteen hundred dollars to stay in the residence and get 5 days of

meals.

Now this year, to add insult to injury, out of this $l900.00,

rather than put it up to $2200.00, they have no cooked breakfast now at the

university in Corner Brook. You cannot get a cooked breakfast. You go in and you

get your cereals and so on, and maybe that is a good thing, in a way, when you

look at the health part of it. Anyway, $1,900 for that. Then you have $200 or

$300 for books. Now, more than ever before, people out here, or someone living

right in Corner Brook - what have they got to pay? Eight hundred and

seventy-five dollars tuition, and a couple of hundred dollars for books. That is

$2,000 from people in your district, my district and other districts who have to

go, even to Corner Brook, and that is per semester. For the Fall and the Winter

semesters that is $4,000 over and above any other expenses anybody else from

outside has. Well, out here it would probably cost you more. It depends on the

rental rates.

Mr. Speaker, this was identified previous to 1989. It was

identified by members opposite in their campaign manual in 1989. The question I

ask is: Why wasn't there anything done? I mean, I could understand if they had

to start in 1989 and 1990 and say: Well, we are going to do the consulting work,

we are going to do the engineering work and we are going to have some work done

in 1990 or 1991, but there wasn't anything done. Absolutely nothing!

The former minister had references in his White Paper. In

fact, specifically on the last page of the White Paper - what did it say? It

says: 1990 -1991 engineering plans for Central Newfoundland campus and Grenfell

College expansion. Now, I can understand the minister, if at that time, after a

year or two, he couldn't get the funds to put a new campus in central

Newfoundland, because a new campus costs a lot more. That is understandable. But

a campus that is already there, the infrastructure in place and so on, to me,

Mr. Speaker, there is absolutely no excuse for it. There should have been

something done with it. The plans were there, the engineering was supposed to be

in place, and today, in 1991 - 1992, construction begins for Grenfell College

expansion. Well intentioned, Mr. Speaker, but the road to hell is paved with

good intentions.

I say to members opposite, especially the Member for Humber

West and the Premier, that when the next election rolls around, whether it be

next year or next Spring or next Fall, I will guarantee you they are going to

have to answer for it. They are going to have to answer for it on the west coast

of the Province. Those questions are going to be asked time and time again. They

are asked now. It is no good to come up with excuses. It is no good to say:

Well, the previous administration left us in the hole and we have got no money

for this and no money for that.

I ask the hon. the Minister of Education: Why is it, just a

few weeks ago we got a list of fourteen new projects to go to consultants in the

Province, fourteen names of all capital works projects valued at some $234

million, and not one word in it concerning Grenfell College in Corner Brook, not

one?

There is the Member for Bay of Islands, the Premier, sitting

there and the Member for Humber West sitting - well, the Member for Humber West

is not in the Cabinet now, but the Premier is there. I mean, they could have a

say in it, if there are any monies going to be allocated for capital works for

Grenfell College. Why wasn't it done? Give us one good, logical reason. If there

was absolutely no money promised to be spent on capital in the Province and

absolutely no money promised to be spent on any new capital projects, well then

I could understand it.

AN HON. MEMBER: Planning.

MR. WOODFORD: Right! Right! Planning. And the planning

was done previous to 1989. The planning was there when hon. members took their

seats in 1989. That is my question: Why wasn't it even added to this list? Why

wasn't it? A great project!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. WOODFORD: Yes. Some of the names on that list, yes,

Mr. Speaker, were there, but I think there was one taken off, and that is the

Grenfell College. My question is: Why was it taken off? Because that was one of

the most beneficial - I mean, it is not only for Corner Brook. We must not

forget that it is not only for the City of Corner Brook, it is for the whole

west coast, northern peninsula and Labrador. Every week I go down there I talk

to students from down the coast, the northern peninsula and I talk to students

from Labrador. Every Sunday night I am in Grenfell College in Corner Brook and I

talked to a lot of students, ten or fifteen of them, as I was going through or

coming out, whichever. I asked them where they were from and they said, from

Labrador or Cow Head, or Roddickton and so forth. And they can get home on

weekends - the beauty about it is that they can get home on weekends and so on.

But to get back to what I was saying, they are paying big money. If they had to

pay the same money and go to the University of New Brunswick, or come out here

to Memorial University in St. John's, they would get their courses. The problem

I have with it - even today, we are only - it is one thing to talk about a new

capital project, it is another to talk about what we already have. They can't

get the courses they want.

We have second year students now in Corner Brook who cannot

get a math course and could not get a science course in this semester. Now,

that, to me, is ridiculous! That, to me, is nothing short of ridiculous. When

you have a second year student at a college of a campus of Memorial University

in this Province who cannot get a math or a science course in their second year,

that, to me, leaves a lot to be questioned. It leaves a lot of questions.

The reason? I asked some of the professors at the college in

Corner Brook: 'We cannot refuse anybody into university.' I said: You can't

refuse anybody? 'No, whoever comes in, we must take them. We don't have the

space to put the classes in; we don't have the lab space;' and they haven't,

because I went through it. They don't have library space. They do not, because I

went through it. They don't have the residence space in that particular

institution. What we have is nothing short of a watered-down educational system

on the West Coast of the Province. No question - nobody can argue that we have

not - we have. We have a watered-down educational system.

The sad thing about this, is that a lot of the parents who

send students off to Grenfell - I will use Grenfell in Corner Brook - because

the students are taking five courses, for instance, whether it be history or

geography or political science or psychology or sociology, or whatever, think

that it is a great thing, it is wonderful. Now, if that is what the student

wants, taking general studies, so be it; but a lot of the students that I talked

to are paying the biggest kind of money and they can't get what they are

supposed to be getting. Now, the parents are paying the bill. The students are

down there taking something they don't want to be taking, and what do they do?

When they come out they have to go for an extra semester or an extra year to try

to get something in math or science, once they come out here.

Now, the sad thing about this, to add to it, is that they

have to come out here, or go to the University of New Brunswick or PEI, without

a science or a math course, if they want to switch. If they want to make up

their mind, for instance, to take a Bachelor of Nursing - no science, and so on.

What do they do? It is nothing but a waste, money down the tube, as far as I am

concerned, and what parent in this Province today can afford to spend that kind

of money and have the student come out not having what they should have, and

what they thought they had paid for? That is a real problem.

I don't know who - I think it was the hon. the Member for

Humber East, mentioned a separate budget for Grenfell. Now, the Minister of

Education talked about the independence of Grenfell campus. That is not the

question. I am quite satisfied, as an individual living on the West Coast, for

Grenfell to be a separate campus of Memorial University, but I would suggest

that it have a separate budget - a budget directly to the Grenfell College in

Corner Brook so that they can put something in place; deal with their own

administrative problems there with regard to the infrastructural part of it at

least, and make some decisions locally pertaining to residences and so on, and

how many students should go into science, math, or whatever. But there certainly

should be a separate budget for the Grenfell College in Corner Brook. The

independent status the minister talks about, yes, I agree; though as far as I am

concerned there is absolutely nothing wrong with what is there now with regard

to that - but a separate budget - yes.

Mr. Speaker, when I am talking about the Grenfell situation -

you can talk about the university as a whole - what I am running into in the

district is that a lot of students, for instance, in their third year of

engineering, cannot get on a work term. They cannot get any company to take them

on a work term. In fact, I had a couple of calls the other day, one from a

fourth-year student and one from a third-year student, who are just going to

call it quits. My hon. colleague from Harbour Main, I think, had several calls

pertaining to the same problem.

MR. DOYLE: Right on.

MR. WOODFORD: They can't get work terms and they are in

their third or fourth year. What do they do? They are going to pack it in and

just leave, and that is wrong. I can understand, probably, to a certain extent -

because the employment situation in the Province - a lot of companies are out of

business, a lot of companies are going out of business, a lot of the engineering

companies don't have any work; therefore, I suppose, if they have no work, they

can't really hire an engineering student or any other student in any particular

field.

I would like to refer to the student loan program. The

minister, in answer to questions from my hon. colleague from Ferryland today -

yes, I agree with the monies pertaining to the federal part of it, there should

be more; the limits should be raised, every student in this Province, regardless

of his status, as far as I am concerned, in a post-secondary institution, should

have access to a student loan. But it comes down, now, to another problem, and

that is the processing.

I have had forty-seven calls in this semester from students

with student loan problems - and members opposite have had them, I know they

have all had them. And student appeals - appeals are another thing.

Next Wednesday in Corner Brook, December 2nd, the semester is

over. On December 7th, they start their exams, and a lot of the students don't

have their loans approved - haven't had the first loan approved, much less the

second appeal. I had a couple now and I suppose there were some extenuating

circumstances pertaining to the first part of the loan, but the appeals, they

should be out long ago so that the student knows exactly where he or she stands.

So, Mr. Speaker, I would support, without hesitation, the

resolution from my hon. colleague for Humber East and I would say that as far as

I am concerned, it is incumbent upon this administration to make sure that

something is started, and if it is immediate, let it be immediate, especially

when it comes to engineering. A lot of the engineering work is done, the

consultants, in fact, some of them, are in place. There is no reason whatsoever

why something can't be done immediately, especially now. Because, by the time

you get it together and put it in place, spring is going to be here, and it

should be ready to start construction by next spring. And that, alone, would

send a signal to the people that something is being done - when the backhoes dig

their teeth into the ground, then something has been done. And there should be

not $1 million or $2 million -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. WOODFORD: There should be something put in place, I

agree, but when it is put in place, there should be put in place the right

amount of money to do the job and do it properly, not only to address a

degree-granting status, but also to address the problems that are there today,

and there are many.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber West.

MR. DICKS: First of all, Mr. Speaker, I am delighted that

my colleague from Humber East and long-standing friend was kind enough to put

this on the Order Paper. Today it is a private member's bill.

The question of the expansion of Sir Wilfred Grenfell College

is a proposal that concerns all of us in this House of Assembly and throughout

the Province. A mistake we sometimes make in seeking to address it, is thinking

that this is a proposal that affects only Corner Brook and possibly

constituencies on the West Coast such as those of my learned friend from Humber

Valley, the Premier, and my learned friend from Port aux Basques, Stephenville,

and so on. That is not the case, and I commend the hon. member's resolution to

the extent that she has a limited view and has enlarged it somewhat beyond the

West Coast to meet the needs of the people of the Province, but I suggest, Mr.

Speaker, that even that, in itself, is insufficient to give us a proper vision

of what type of institute we could have at Sir Wilfred Grenfell.

Perhaps, before moving to discuss the aspects of the

resolution which members should consider and which have been in the public

domain for some time, I would like to address some comments made by my

colleagues here this afternoon. The Member for Humber Valley referred to a

watered-down system of education and I think he is largely right, at least in

respect of the secondary education system that has developed in the Province.

One recurring concern that keeps coming to me from constituents is the fact that

we now have a four-year system in place of a three-year system. The curriculum

that is in place is not challenging to those students who have a greater degree

of ability than average, and there is also a sense that perhaps we are not

putting stress and emphasis on the key academic subjects, particularly core

people should be learning - let alone math, sciences, that really seem to be the

key to economic development, not only in the Province, but in the country and

elsewhere in the world.

My colleagues have both mentioned the separate budget for

Grenfell. This is not a novel idea. It is one that has come up repeatedly. The

experience in Corner Brook, unfortunately at Sir Wilfred Grenfell, is that when

Memorial is in the midst of a freeze, it is often asked in Corner Brook that a

bigger bite be taken than the across-the-board freeze. I think this could be a

problem that would be addressed by a separate budget. I have discussed it with

my learned colleague and friend, the Minister of Education, and I know that he

is receptive to the idea and is reviewing it. Whether or not, at the end of the

day, that will seem to be, or be seen to be, the best course of action remains

to be seen. But I have every confidence that the idea is under review and that

an appropriate and proper decision will be made by the minister and my

colleagues in Cabinet.

There are other issues which have been touched on - student

loans. I think the minister dealt with that fairly well, and pointed out that

the concerns that are expressed are not ones within the Province's domain - that

to the extent that the Province is responsible for administration, we have coped

with that. There is a person on the West Coast who is now looking to deal with

local complaints. There are problems, perhaps, with not moving appeals through

the system as quickly as we would like, but certainly, steps are being taken.

Nevertheless, the overwhelming problem is the lack of funding for the system,

and that falls back to the Federal Government where the levels have been frozen

going back to the early 1980's, and if my memory serves me correctly, perhaps

even 1978.

You cannot improve a system, Mr. Speaker, without sufficient

funds in it, and the problem of student aid has little or nothing to do with how

the appeals are processed, so much as the fact that there are insufficient funds

to go around; and that problem will remain as long as the Federal Government

does not have, as the prime item on its agenda, looking after the educational

needs of the people of this country, young and old alike.

My friend from Humber Valley touched on engineering, and

students being unable to find work terms. Let me enlarge on that for a moment.

One of the problems that he may not be aware of is the lack of jobs that are

presently available for people in the professions. I was told by a student who

graduated from Memorial last spring, in Engineering, that 90 per cent of that

engineering class were not able to find positions. I am not surprised when he

says that people are unable to find work terms, but I would suggest to him that

the problem is not with the educational system. The problem is with the economy,

and that it is more than a provincial matter that can be resolved. It is a

national and an international issue, and some of the causes are ones that we

cannot address. I also happen to know that of last year's - and I do not mean

this spring past, but a year ago last spring - 75 per cent of that graduating

class from law school at Dalhousie did not have positions.

So what you are seeing, Mr. Speaker, is not a flaw in the

educational system, but rather a deep economic malaise which has not been

Mr. Speaker, I would like to deal directly with the

resolution that we have before us. I have had three meetings with the people of

the college, particularly Dr. Katie Bindon and her staff, since last spring. I

have had occasion to review the academic planning for that institution, which is

critical to any proposed capital needs and operational needs for the future.

Those meetings have been very productive. I think Dr. Bindon is particulary to

be commended for her insight, her ability to grasp the issues, as well as

articulate them, and to do it in a manner that is nonpolitical. The information

that Dr. Bindon has made available to us, I know my hon. colleagues have shared

in, and I think it is helpful to us in formulating public debate and seeing

where that institute should go.

I have every confidence in the staff at Sir Wilfred Grenfell,

under Dr. Bindon's leadership, being able to bring that institution to a third

and fourth year level, degree-granting status, and I would hope to have,

eventually, other schools there beyond the School of Fine Arts, and perhaps

even, in due time, post-graduate courses.

So, Mr. Speaker, let us first of all say that there is a

great deal of confidence in the staff and faculty at Sir Wilfred Grenfell, and

that they have the capability and capacity to teach university level courses

that could and should result in degree programs.

Let us look at the resolution as worded, and let us see if

this is one that should be supported as proposed or as amended - and I would

suggest that the latter is the one that should be followed.

First of all, it says that the economy of North America is

becoming increasingly based on knowledge. That could be expanded and you could

say the world economy. What we are seeing right now in North America and

throughout the western world is a shift of mechanized industry away from the

traditional places in North America to the third world were labour is cheap,

that is immediately adjacent to resources. If we looked to future development,

clearly where we hope to see some improvement in our economic fortunes is in the

knowledge based industries, computer software's.

The silicone valleys of San Francisco, northern California

and Ottawa are the places where the intellectual knowledge will be found that

will hopefully be the key to prosperity. Not all of it, Mr. Speaker, and let us

not neglect the fact that in Newfoundland we still have a very resource based

economy which is shown by our current problems in the fishery but we do have a

mining sector which hopefully will improve, a forestry sector which surprisingly

has remained strong given the international problems with the pulp and paper

industry. As well, as my learned friend says, an incredibly well known and

respected Minister of Forestry and Agriculture is no doubt responsible for that.

Let us look at it and say that it is not the economy of North America which is

becoming an increasingly knowledge base which justifies an expansion at Sir

Wilfred Grenfell. It is an international phenomena that unless you are producing

wealth of an intellectual sort, you are going to fall behind. You will have the

fifty-cent per hour jobs in Mexico doing work perhaps that will not be done in

other parts of the world because it is unacceptable. The high paying jobs, the

ones that are in the thirty, forty and professional range are ones that we

should be looking to establish here.

So, let us expand that somewhat, at least in terms of our

concept if not in the actual wording. Should Newfoundlanders and Labradorians

become better educated if they are to advance economically? Surly, a self

evident proposition, Mr. Speaker, no one is going to dispute that.

Whereas, the

Sir Wilfred Grenfell College in Corner Brook is the only university campus in

the Province outside of St. John's: not entirely accurate, Mr. Speaker. It is

perhaps the only university campus but we also have to acknowledge the fact that

university level courses, first year, are offered elsewhere in the Province. We

have them in Grand Falls, as the member may know, Lewisporte, Labrador and in

other parts of this Island. So, Sir Wilfred Grenfell is not the only university

availability outside the Avalon Peninsula and St. John's in particular.

Nevertheless it is the most prominent one and it is the only one that offers

first and second year level courses. Which, as I suggest, where and why the next

immediate post- secondary educational facility should be expanded in this

Province. I think it naturally falls to Corner Brook to be the place that that

should be done.

The next part of the proposition is largely correct, and that

is that Grenfell College is only offering first and second year arts and science

courses and is not even able to meet the needs of first and second year

students. That is incorrect, Mr. Speaker, the needs are being met. The facility

is expanded beyond its earlier capacity and frankly the staff there are doing an

excellent job of meeting the needs. That is not to say that they could not have

some gravy, that they could not do a little more with a better capital facility.

Let us not try in this resolution to undermine what is being

done in Sir Wilfred Grenfell College. The calibre of education is excellent. I

am just concerned with this part of the proposition that it might suggest that

the needs are not being met. I want to assure colleagues, from my experience,

that any student obtaining first and second year courses at Grenfell is

receiving a first class education in this Province.

The shortage of science laboratories, library facilities,

classroom and other space and personnel, Mr. Speaker, I fully endorse the

proposition that we should enlarge it. There is a need but again, I just want to

reiterate that at the present time there is first class education and of the

highest calibre that the students are receiving at Grenfell.

The last part of the proposition or the resolution itself is

that government immediately provide Grenfell College with capital and operating

funding increased to equip it as quickly as possible to offer the full range of

first, second, third and fourth year arts and science courses to meet the needs

of the people of the Province. Interesting, Mr. Speaker, the first point that

should be made is that Grenfell cannot now immediately move to third or fourth

year level courses. Simply for the reason that the academic planning is not

completed. It shortly will be but if you were to have whatever funds necessary

to do that expansion, Grenfell could not tell you as of this moment, what

exactly should be done.

AN HON. MEMBER: Because they are slack.

MR. DICKS: No, the hon. member should not throw comments

across the House that may be misinterpreted by the public. There is at the

present time the academic planning, and as members may know, if we are going to

expand to third and fourth year level courses, you have to determine what

courses you are going to be able to teach in order to determine what facilities

you need. Part of the problem with the current facility at Grenfell is that they

built a building without having a clear academic plan. If you survey university

institutes across this country, one very common mistake is to build a building

and later try to decide what you are going to put in it.

Now, I want, having said that to commend my colleagues across

the House, some of whom were in government when the Fine Arts College was put in

Corner Brook. That Fine Arts College was a good investment, I think. I think in

retrospect, the money might have been better used in expanding Grenfell to third

and fourth year courses, given the amount of money that was spent. Nevertheless

- and I have heard some criticisms of that building - it could have been better

planned and built had there been a clear idea of what academic courses were

going to be taught there. So let's, first of all, say that if were going to

immediately move, that would not be immediate, but would have to be as soon as

reasonably possible, taking into account what the courses were that were

eventually going to be taught there.

Now, you might be interested in knowing what some of those

courses were. I was particularly intrigued by a recent meeting with my

colleague, the Minister of Education, and Dr. Bindon and Dr. May, where we

discussed the possibility, for example, for science degrees at Sir Wilfred

Grenfell. Now, I have no background in science other than having taken a week of

physics in first year university and deciding that perhaps I would enjoy history

much more, having done a lab with rather dismal results. Not that I regret that

decision - well, I won't get into the field of astrophysics. We will leave that

aside for the moment.

Just let me say, Mr. Speaker, that the field of science, for

those of us who are not part of it, is becoming an intriguingly complex one.

What we normally understand as science, the hard sciences, chemistry, physics

and biology, is changing. There is a greater mixing of disciplines. To give you

an example: Dr. Bindon was quite eloquent in looking and describing the

potential for science degrees at Sir Wilfred Grenfell, and she said: We could

have a science degree at Sir Wilfred Grenfell that took into account the unique

ecological systems of the west coast. It has been often said by my colleagues,

who have been variously responsible for tourism and development in the Province,

that the west coast is indeed unique. We have the archaeological sites at Port

au Choix and in Red Bay, Labrador, we have the interesting geological formations

and the natural beauty, as well as the flora and fauna of the national park, and

we have the fisheries.

What Dr. Bindon was speaking of was a science degree that

would bring together all these intriguing elements of the west coast,

geological, biological, ecological and environmental elements, and bring them

together in a different type of science degree format that would be particularly

relevant to environmental studies. Now, it is a great idea, Mr. Speaker, and one

that I am sure my colleagues hearing this will be wildly enthused about.

I notice my colleague, the former Minister of Education, Dr.

Warren, nodding his head. It is one that he is aware of, having met with Dr.

Bindon. Let me say at the same time, that if we are to offer that type of

course, which will be unique not only in this Province but possibly elsewhere in

the country, and that will attract people here, not only from the Province but

from outside this country, what do we need to teach it? Do we need one physics

lab, or should we be taking that money and putting it into actual field trips to

other parts of the west coast to fully develop and appreciate the ecological

significance, and to give people a variety of experience that they could use, in

a way, for their degree.

So, Mr. Speaker, I point to some of the concepts that have to

be worked out before the expansion can take place. Let me say that that is well

in hand. I expect that in the not too distant future that academic planning will

be complete, and that the college will be able to present to my colleague, the

Minister of Education, an orderly plan for the expansion. The physical planning,

the capital, is being done by a private engineering firm in Corner Brook and

that is well underway as well.

Let me say that I fully endorse the proposition, with the

exception of the word immediate. It is not possible to immediately expand. As

well, Mr. Speaker, in this day and age, with resources being as limited as they

are, I accept the priority of going immediately ahead with it but, as a

responsible member of public life in this Province, I think we have to look at

the possibility of using other facilities. There are three schools in the

immediate area which are vacant, and I think we have to look at the question of,

can we productively use those and still deliver a high quality of education to

students.

I was encouraged, from the last meeting with Dr. Bindon and

Dr. May, that the capital cost has been brought significantly down from the

figure of $25 million and $50 million that confronted us when we first went into

office. It is now being said that that expansion could take place for a capital

expenditure somewhere in the order of $6 or $7 million. It surprises me that it

could be done, but that is an expansion of approximately 40,000 square feet

which would address some of the concerns raised by my colleagues here today. I

am hopeful and I am expectant, knowing Cabinet's commitment to high quality

education to Grenfell as a four year degree granting institution, and the

Premier's personal commitment to the people of Corner Brook and to the district

and to education, in particular, that that proposal when it comes forward would

be given top priority.

My colleague for Humber East laughs as she often does of

course. I would be not be so querulous as to inquire as to what may be the

subject of her laughter, but I would comment, Mr. Speaker, that we on this side

take the matter seriously, that when we talk about expanding Sir Wilfred

Grenfell we do not try to make political hay of it, we are going ahead, we are

doing the academic planning, we are looking at the capital cost. The minister

recently met in Corner Brook and we are intent on that path. I am prepared to

say that my colleagues fully support this, that we do intend to go ahead with it

and that we do hope to have those courses in place as soon as is reasonably

possible, given the factors to which I have alluded.

Let me say toward the conclusion of my remarks that beyond

the efficient use of resources, let us look at the economic potential as well as

the educational potential. The institutes of higher learning in this Province

create jobs. They create them in a number of ways; they create them indirectly

through creating a pool of well-educated people who have talents and abilities

that they can use in their quest for jobs and eventual employment. As well, they

create them through the people who work in the institutes, but beyond that,

there is a factor where, if we are offering something valuable and unique, we

will be able to attract people to the Province who would not otherwise come

here.

If you look to the universities in the immediate Maritime

area and if you start going south through Nova Scotia, you will get St. Francis

Xavier and Acadia, St, Mary's and Mount Allison. All of these institutes have

developed over a period of time great alumni associations and affiliations

throughout the United States and they have been able to use that as a method to

enhance their universities, having an enrolment of about 2,500, through alumni

contributions, so we should look not only to servicing our own needs but also to

creating a first class institution of post-secondary learning that will attract

people from other parts of this continent and perhaps the world, because we

offer something unique and valuable in Newfoundland and Labrador that does not

exist elsewhere.

Having met with the staff and knowing so many of them so

well, I can assure the hon. House that that is a real and distinct possibility.

We have at Sir Wilfred Grenfell College the potential to fully realize a good

liberal arts college, if we could call it that in the short term and maybe

beyond that, a first class institute not only of post-secondary learning but

leading up to M. A. and doctoral levels as well and I do not think we should

limit our vision solely to the four years before us.

I am drawing near to the end of my time, Mr. Speaker, and I

do not want to go beyond it. As I said earlier, I am glad that this is on the

Order Paper, it is a matter which deserves public debate and we need to address

in particular the question as to how quickly this can come about. For the

remarks and given the thoughts that I have left with you and the information I

have, I think the word 'immediate' does not justify passage here today. I think

the minister's amendment suggests that we will do it as soon as is practical, as

soon as reasonably possible and taking that into account, I believe that we

should pass the motion as amended rather than as proposed.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fogo.

MR. WINSOR: Mr. Speaker, if I understood the member, was

that an amendment to the resolution? I did not hear an amendment to the

resolution.

MS. VERGE: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: Oh, that was on earlier, was it?

MS. VERGE: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: Okay. Mr. Speaker, I want to have a few words

on this resolution because it is of some interest to me living out in central

Newfoundland or in the north-east coast because the minister a while ago alluded

to the fact he did not want to make political hay out of the talk of building

university campuses -

AN HON. MEMBER: No.

MR. WINSOR: Yes, Mr. Speaker, he talked about he did not

want to make this political hay as he referred to it. In 1989, in the famous

manifesto, the Liberal Manifesto, Mr. Speaker, here is what the Liberals had to

say about universities: To achieve this we will expand the curriculum of

Grenfell College in Corner Brook to include third and fourth year courses. So

that in time, bachelor degrees in the basic arts and sciences disciplines can be

obtained at Corner Brook. A Liberal government will start immediately. Now, Mr.

Speaker, 'immediately' the one they just removed from the -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh no!

MR. WINSOR: Yes, Mr. Speaker, a Liberal government will

start immediately on the construction of a small university campus in central

Newfoundland to develop there as Grenfell has in Corner Brook. Now, Mr. Speaker,

how can you be so hypocritical, the same party who said we will do it

immediately, now says, we cannot do it immediately, we have to have time as the

Member for Humber West said, for academic planning.

Since 1987, I think, the academic planning started. In 1991,

in the White Paper, construction was going to begin on that campus. Now we have

been told today that planning still has to take place. I think we have been

deceived.

AN HON. MEMBER: ((Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: No, this might have been the beginning. The

President of Treasury Board, the Minister of Finance, who came in, I think he

was the -

AN HON. MEMBER: He was the instigator.

MR. WINSOR: - the instigator of removing the word

'immediately' from the construction of the small university campus.

AN HON. MEMBER: It was definitely the (inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: It was the Premier? No, I think the President

of Treasury Board in central was the one, because I think when the bids were

done, Gander did not get the campus. It was going to go to Exploits or

Lewisporte, and I think he called a halt to it. Mr. Speaker, for once I

supported him. I supported the Member for Gander in his bid to have the campus

constructed there.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to get on to talking about some

important things because I believe, as most other people here said today, that

if Newfoundland and Newfoundlanders are to develop, then it is through a sound

education program.

Mr. Speaker, having close contact with numerous university

students, I feel that we are letting them down. In fact I talk to students on a

regular basis because I take them home on weekends from the university. Many of

them end up doing three and four courses - and you know why they do three and

four courses? They cannot find a course to do at Memorial University.

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. WINSOR: Cannot find courses to do at the university.

The waiting list is so long, they cannot find courses. Now that is at Memorial.

I can imagine the situation at a smaller institution built for about half the

students that it presently serves, how difficult it is to get into a science

program.

Now the Member for Humber West said that it is not true - one

part of the resolution is not true - that students are not able to find courses.

He says they can. Yes, Mr. Speaker, perhaps they can find courses, but are they

the courses they want? If you want to do chemistry and you have to do sociology,

is that the course? Is that the kind of education that you want?

MS. VERGE: Or need.

MR. WINSOR: Or need? If you want to go to medical school,

or if you want to be a physicists, or if you want to do whatever you want to do

- an engineer - is that sociology course the one that you are being forced to do

because you cannot get any other course, the right course? Because that is what

is happening to our students. They are being forced to take courses they do not

want to do. Even at Memorial five year programs are now becoming six year

programs, because students cannot find the proper courses to allow them to

graduate.

If that is happening - and it is - then we fail the most

important people in our Province - our youth. We failed, and failed them

miserably.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who did?

AN HON. MEMBER: You.

MR. WINSOR: You and any government who is party to it.

Mr. Speaker, it is four years. We are now into the fourth

year when this government promised changes, and I have no doubts that the former

Minister of Education - I suspect there was a good reason why he resigned,

because he was genuinely concerned about education in this Province. He spent a

lifetime in a classroom and in the halls of university. He saw how crowded it

became at Memorial - classes that used to contain thirty and forty students

suddenly being moved to lecture theatres and having to teach 150 students. Mr.

Speaker, the same thing is happening on the west coast. The same thing is

happening in our community colleges.

Mr. Speaker, how people can play with words. I had to smile

when the Member for Humber West said that:

WHEREAS Grenfell College in Corner

Brook is the only university campus in the Province outside St. John's, he went

on to say that there were more. He went on to say there were more university

campuses.

No, Mr. Speaker, there are not. There are some small

community colleges that accommodate eighty, ninety and one hundred students, Mr.

Speaker. They are not universities. What we were talking about here is the

construction and expansion of a degree-granting institution in the City of

Corner Brook. That is what we were referring to, the construction and expansion

of an existing college so that students who live on the west coast, and perhaps

students who live on the east coast, Mr. Speaker - I think we might have a

tendency in Newfoundland to be a little parochial sometimes and say that

students who live on the Avalon have to go to Memorial, students who live on the

west coast have to go to Corner Brook and students who live in Labrador have to

go to Labrador. Perhaps, Mr. Speaker, we need to expand our horizons a bit and

not look at it as a college for the west coast, but look at it as a college for

the Province. As the resolution says at the end, "To meet the needs of the

people of the Province," because that is what we are talking about.

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to note - and, in fact, I

heard yesterday, since we were talking about the overcrowding - that we see some

strong evidence of that at Memorial. I have been told that presently Memorial

University will not accept any more applicants this year, for the January

campus, because of budgetary restrains. I don't suppose these same budgetary

restraints are the ones that are preventing the City of Corner Brook from having

Grenfell College completed. Mr. Speaker, it is a shameful indictment on any

government that fails to provide the means whereby the youth and, in some cases,

Mr. Speaker - not only youth because we have reached the stage now where many

middle-aged and older people have to go back to university to train because we

are not competent in the technological world that is around us. So, Mr. Speaker,

it is incumbent on this administration or any administration to build sound

educational facilities throughout the Province.

Mr. Speaker, the former minister, the Member for Humber West,

when he spoke talked about 90 per cent of a class unable to find jobs and then

75 per cent of another class, another class in Dal, I think he said. He blamed

it on the economy. Mr. Speaker, the question has to be asked: What are we going

to do, shut down the educational system until the economy improves? Is that what

we are going to do? Because if that is what he is suggesting, Mr. Speaker, he

has missed the boat completely. He has no idea how we are going to get out of

the difficult situation we are in. If there is any means of improving the

standard and quality of living of Newfoundlanders it is through an education.

Mr. Speaker, sometime in the late 1980s, I think, a survey

showed that 44 per cent of our adults were functionally illiterate, a full 20

per cent higher than the national average. If we do not improve on that, then I

fear that for years and decades to come Newfoundland will not improve because we

failed them from an educational perspective.

Mr. Speaker, I think the former minister was right when he

started to look at the secondary level of education, not post-secondary but at

high school level, and made some advances that, I think, were positive advances,

to improve the quality of the student who is graduating from high school, so

that they can go into post-secondary education improved on, and be better. Now,

Mr. Speaker, that is good and I think that is the right start. But you can have

the best students in the world graduate from high school, if they don't have a

place to go after. Mr. Speaker, that is what is happening. We are turning off a

number of students. We are sending the best students that we have out of the

Province. They are going to universities throughout Nova Scotia, throughout

Quebec and throughout Ontario because of the shortcomings and failures of our

own educational institutions.

Now, Mr. Speaker, it just so happens that these are the

brightest people, in many cases, that we have in our Province. Do you think they

will come back to our Province? Once they graduate, do you think they are coming

back? Not a chance in the world, Mr. Speaker, will they return to Newfoundland.

They will stay where they have received their education. They will climatize and

adapt to that lifestyle where they have lived in that city. It is a brain drain,

Mr. Speaker, that is taking place of some of the very best, because of the

failure of our educational institutions to give them that quality of education.

So, Mr. Speaker, how can you not support this resolution, and immediately begin

the construction of a campus - a full, degree granting campus in the City of

Corner Brook? It is a motherhood issue, and I fail to see why the resolution had

to be amended. This administration has had four years, four budgets, in which it

had time to address this problem.

Mr. Speaker, I fear that what has happened in education i