VOL. 3 PRELIMINARY UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR THE PERIOD: 2:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. TUESDAY, APRIL 4, 1978 NO, 16

April 4, 1978, Tape 517, Page 1 -- apb The House met at 2:00 p.m. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! PRESENTING PETITIONS MR. SPEAKER: The hon. •member for Baie Verte - White Bay. MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition signed by eighty-three residents of the community of Pacquet in my district. This petition, Mr. Speaker, is similar to one that I presented in this House a couple of weeks ago in that the prayer is that a new Pentecostal School be constructed in that community.

Now, Sir, in supporting the petition let me say that the present building that houses the Pentecostal Elementary School in Pacquet is totally inadequate to care for the educational needs of the students in that community. For example, Mr. Speaker, in 1978, I do not know if members would be surprised or not to be told that there are no washroom facilities attached to that old building that the children are using in Pacquet. They still have the outdoor toilets, in 1978, which most of us would find unbelievable.

I would submit, Sir, and the parents are submitting, that the state of the building makes it unhealthy and certainly unsatisfactory in that the building is old and not insulated and so on. The proper type of education cannot be provided for the students in that type of building. They also mention in the prayer of the petition, Sir, that it is not an insulated building in addition to the fact that it is old, so even though their fuel costs are very high the building is extremely cold during the Winter months. .,

April 4, 1978, Tape 517, Page 2 -- apb MR. RIDEOUT: The present building, the old building tha~ they are using is very poorly situated and we are always getting numerous complaints about the unsafe conditions, especially in Wintertime, of the access road to the school due to ice and snow control to that particular building. I understand from residents in the area, Sir, that Department of Health officials are very dissatisfied with the present state of affairs at that building and that they are strongly recommending that the students, for the sake of their health, be taken out of it.

The conditions that I have outlined are certainly unsatisfactory and they should not be tolerated in this day and age. I appeal to the Minister of Education, who is unfortunately not in his seat this afternoon, to take up this cause with the appropriate DEC and to use his influence to see if some sort of priority system cannot be established, Mr. Speaker, when it comes to allocating funds for the building of schools.

Certainly a school that is old and antiquated as this one, that is unsafe and unhealthy as is said by officials at the Department of Health, should not be allowed to operate any further and it should not be tolerated in 1978. Sir, I think the prayer of the petition is a commendable one deserving of support and I ask that it be tabled and referred to the department to which it relates. MR. SPEAKER: MR. W.N.ROWE: The hon. Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the petition presented so ably by my hon. friend and colleagu~ the member for Baie Verte - White Bay (Mr. Rideout).

In doing so, Sir, I am very cognizant of the fact that I had the pleasure and privilege and honour for eight years t .f ~­ L l ' t ·r

April 4, 1978, Tape 517, Page 3 -- apb MR. W.N.ROWE: continuously, to represent the district in which Pacquet is located, and I sympathize very much with the petition of the eighty-three residents of that lovely town, that lovely community who wish to have a new Pentecostal Elementary School. I realize, Sir, that it is not fully within the jurisdiction of this House, or even the government, to accede to that request since it is a matter which is a completely, as far as the allocation of funds is concerned, completely within the hands of the DEC's and in this case the Pentecostal authorities.

It is however, Sir, within our jurisdiction to this extent, that the DEC's are bound ultimately by the amount of money which is voted by this hon. House to them in a general way. In order to improve the quality of education in this Province there is a great need to increase the amount of revenue which the DEC's have for the purpose of school construction.

Therefore, Sir, I would like to go on record as supporting this petition, this very worthwhil~ worthy petition asking for one of the very bases of our life in society today, a decent school, an. elementary school for young, small children to go to to get their education in this Province. I support the petition wholeheartedly, Mr. Speaker. I ' ,

April 4, 1978 Tape 518 PK - 1 MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Terra Nova. MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I would like to stand and support this petition as well, and also say a few words in support of it, and in support of the several other Pacquets that exist in this Province which so emphatically emphasize the great inequalities which exist in education throughout Newfoundland,particularly in rural Newfoundland. It is a rather ridiculous situation, Mr. Speaker, when we view the kinds of circumstances under which many children in this Province have to get an education.

And I have great sympathy for the eighty-three residents of Pacquet, peiple with a school building that is certainly not in line with the kind of a school building that we should be having today in the 1970s. And again,as the Leader of the Opposition so capably pointed out,that the DECs are restricted in what they can do in the amount of monies that they can allocate for school construction, and certainly the onus is on the minister and on the government to come up with a better plan for allocating funds for construction of school buildings when we have so many throughout the Province.

So I certainly would urge the government and the minister to see if they cannot come up with a better plan, a plan that will enable schools like Pacquet,and various school boards throughout the Province that have so many Pacquets, to see if the proper school facilities cannot be solved. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for j ort au Port. Mr. Speaker, I too w• uld like to support the I MR. J. HODDER: petition delivered by the hon. member for Baie Verte-White Bay (Mr. Rideout). There are some grave questions to be answered regarding I t the quality of education in this Province.

And I would just like t to point out here that I understand that ~e government will be setting up a task force to look into the problem of declining enrollments in the Province. And I believe that this task force should be must broader in scope and should look at the whole of the education system in the Province. And I believe that if the task force were to look at all problems that we would get quite a surprise as to the real condition of education in the Province. There are schools of this

April 4, 1978 Tape 518 PK - 2 Mr. Hodder: nature around the Province, all throughout the Province, and not only do we have a problem with programmes, Mr. Speaker, but we also have a problem with school buildings, and it is horrendous when one considers that a school in the community of Pacquet would have outdoor toilets, that sort of thing went out - I would think that the general public of Newfoundland, or particularly the more urban parts of Newfoundland,would have trouble realizing this particular fact. But, Mr.

Speaker, I feel that this task force must look into all problems because I think perhaps we need a whole new reorganization of education in the Province, and we need certainly to look into just what is happening in Newfoundland schools. SOME RON • MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PRESENTING REPORTS OF STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Justice. MR. HICKMAN: Mr.

Speaker, I table as Minister of Finance the following regulations which have been passed during the last year~ The Retail Sales Tax Amendment Regulations dated June 24, 1977; The Retail Sales Tax Amendment No. 2 Regulations,l977 passed July 22, 1977; The Retail Sales Tax Amendment No. 3 Regulations enacted on the 21st. day of October A.D. 1977;~ The Financial Administration Salaries Of Comproller Of Finance And Auditor General Regulations enacted on the 2nd. day of December 1977, and various orders for the period January 1 to December 31, 1977 which have been duly gazetted. •

April 4,1973. Tape No. 519 Ali-1 :lR. SPEAKE:il: Hon. member of Forestry and Agriculture. :1R. ;.IAYNARD: l:r. Speaker, I would like to table the annual report for the Farm Development Loan Board for the fiscal year ending March 31,1977. HR.NEARY: l1R. SPEAKER: HR. NEARY: 0 0 0 A point of privilege, Mr. Soeaker, A point of privilege. Hr. Speaker, so far I believe I have over fifty qu~stions addressed on the Order Paper to the :linister of Health.

We have been in session now a month and I have not received an answer, a written answer yet from the ~!inister of Health 7and I believe,Sir, that is a breach of privilege of this llouse. Could 7our Honour take wnatever disciplinary is necessary against the minister? :1R. SPEAKER: The hon. minister. HR.

H ICKt!AJ.~: That is most assuredly not a point of privile ge of this House and I would most assuredly remind hon. gentlemen of the previous rulings by Your Honour that the greatest abuse of privilege is to abuse the point of privilege itself, There seems to be ver y little doubt in anyone's mind,including the mind of the hon. gentleman from LaPoile Q1r. Neary)~that this is certainly not a matter on which to rise on a question of privilege. NUlilber one,the hon. gentleman failed miserabl y to prove a prima facie case and seco ndly 7 it is not a point of privilege. :·lR.

SPEAKER: On that specific matter the authorities will indicate that failure to answer a question is not regarded as a breach of privilege. ~!R. SPE!U<ER: ORAL QUESTIONS t-IlL SPEAKER: Ron. Leader of the Opposition. XR. W. ROHE: First of all, Sir, by way of a

preamble to my qu~stion I would like to welcome the Premier back to the Province. :-m. NEARY: The best tourist we have. MR.'.; .ROWE: He is looking tanned, Sir, and angelic, an angelic look on his face. As a matter of fact, Sir, he does resemble an angel but only in this respect: Like the angels'visits to earth the '

Ap r il 4,197C AH-2 liR. \~. RO~JE: Premier's visits to tl1is Province are 3hort, Sir, and far between, }!R, SPEAKER: Order, please! I think I should point out to the hon. gentleman that, nere I quote Bueauchesne "Observations which :night lead to debate cannot be regarded as co~ing within the proper limits of the question and the rule with respect to

preambles." Han. Leader. HR.W.ROlolE: Well, Sir, everybody in the Province expected some kind of a Hinisterial Statement from the Premier today in view of the fact that the gover=ent is disintegrating before his very eyes. I will affort him the opportunity which he 30 obviously wants; he is there sitting, grinning like a Cheshire cat waiting, Sir, for me to walk into the trap obviously. I would like to ask the Prei:lier this, Nr. Speaker.

Have the Premier and the Hinister of Fisheries now resolved the problem mentioned by the Minister of Fisheries last week whereby the Hinister of Fisheries issued an ultimatum to the effect that if the deal or tLe proposal regarding Nordsee is not changed to give the government part of the action, some of the equity in that, five per cent of the equity, Sir, that the minister would find it difficult J l to stay in the government and woulu in fact resign, there would be trouble. Has the Premier now resolved that difficulty? MR. SPEAKER: Ron, Premier, ~ ' )'RE!'iiER MOORES: ~.

Speaker, if I may be percitted to answer the first part of the

preamble of being out of the Province, I was out Sir, as you,Your Honour,was yourself,so I am sure you will be forebearing , for four days. I did not quit cy seat and go to Paris. PR.El1IER HOORES: And as far, Sir, as this government disintegrating, I strongly recommend that the hon. Leader of the Opposition look around

Ap r il 4, 1978 . Tape No . 519 AH- 3 PRD!IER OO.RES: him and see where t he explo s ions are going to come from. The Fisheries question, Sir, if I may? NR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I think that the quid pro quo is now accomplished and that the rules should be in more strict observance.

PRE.'1IER MOORES: To get to the Fisheries question, Sir, regarding the statement by the Minister of Fisheries, I would like to say that this government has from the beginning said that we were in favour of foreign investment.And that was said at the First Hitiisters Conference by all provincial governments anc;i ):.he federal government. And as tlla ·t regards the Nordsee proposal that was something that this government has gone on record as supporting.

And the reason why, Sir, which the ~tinister of Fisheries also has stated on many occasions, was that we do need technology and ships and markets for local employment bot)l onshore and offshore as long as any sort of arrange!llent is done as a Canadi .an company and through Canadian regulations. .I !

.\p ril -+ , . 197::: Tao e 520 tc - 1 PRD~ IER !·!OORES : The fact is, Sir, that I think it is important that I do not mean to take up the time in this particular regard but I think it is important that the Province not ~ecome insular and parochial because foreign investment is needec in industry here as 1.;ell as it is elseHlc.ere in ::anac1a and 1-re ;:mst develop the resource. :7oH rega. rr1i!1~ t"-!e ~iordsee ~ronosal itself, t~at is s onething that the 'Unister of Fishe!"ies c?-n 1-:ell ans<Jer himself. The fact is tfJat he advised 1'\e of it before I left.

He had discussed it a fe1; months before in tl'-e context of the Crmm corporation which is mentioned in the Throne Speech, and to explain that possihly nore thoroug!· ,ly, Sir, the r:ro~-m cort'oration thP-t •;as seen to be set up along the lines mentionerl the Throne Speec:h and which •;ill be the subject of debate in this T1ouse,uas set uo for many reasons, one of which the llinister of fisheries has touched on.

But the reasons themselves were,first of all,a co-ordinating agency must be established if we are going to do what we have to do in this Province, both in the area of establishing ne1v marketing - there has to he a co-ordinatin r agency "tJhich helps to brin g that about; we have to have a co-ordinating agency to brin~ in new technology and to extend it to our fishermen and to our plant 1;orkers and to our marketeers anrl so on; "7e have to have a co-ordinatin i! agency to help set up, to assist the trainin g of our fishe~en as such: it has also been set up to take equity positions in companies, as I·Jas sugF;ested by the Minister of Fisheries, equity oositions where needed to stimulate that particular enterprise itself; it was set up to establish a distribution port or ports to support so-called inshore plants and offshore plants that are short of fish.

There are many areas of assistance, Sir, that are going to be needed if ;;e, in fact, are going to take full advantage of our fisheries. Regarding the particular Nord see position, I lvould ask the minister himself to co=en t on that. Some

April 4 , 1978 Tape 52'J FC - 2 PREMIER MOORES : six weeks ago I was in touch with the German company, asked them ~ow they would feel about particioation by the government and their not being in a majority position. They said that they would certainly be sympathetic to~ards any proposal. The Minister of Fisheries and myself discussed it before I left. It is something that, as I said to him, ~~e are going to have to look at and see if that is ,.,hat is required to bring about develonr.,ent or help to bring about development in the Province. ~ny misquote or any misstatement, I think, Sir, tvas one of understanding.

I understand the :-!inister of Fisheries this morning has made a press release whic~ more than covers the situation,certainly to my satisfaction. ~ 'R . H. N. RO\\'E: ?':11 .• S P F ~JCP.: o f t he Opposi t ion. ''tl. H. 'T. ROhlF.: ~l r. Speaker, a supplementary. A suppler.~entary, the hon. the Leader I tvas sitting there tvaiting , Sir, thinking that the '!inister of Fisheries, as the Premier indicated, was going to leap to his feet and indicate ~-that had gone on and what now the position of the government is. Sir, I would like the Premier if he Hould to ans Her the question I asked.

The question I asked was, Has the Premier reconciled himself with the Minister of Fisheries over the public position, Sir, taken by the ~inister of Fis~eries to t'te effect that if this Province,as a government,does not have an equity position in >:orclsee, so that there can be control of the equity by local interests combined ~nth the governll'.ent, t'hat there t;ould C>e trouble? And I read it and everyone else in the Province read it as a resignation by the minister, obvjously with a breach of solidarity. ~loH what is the position, Sir?

The public of this Province has a right to know if the government has solidarity or not on this very important issue. ~'!'.. SPF~\TZ ER: The hen. the Premier. P !'tE~~ I ER mORES : !'r. Speaker, I am only too glacl to ans1-rer th at. Firs t of al l, t 11er e Ha s no ul ti;-,a tu:n issuerl as su c'h to l!le . It -ts unfortunate t hat t!-!e T"eader of the llpposi t ion 'Y•lieves "!veryt'cing

- J P!'.E:IER ::OO!'.ES: he reads because by the time e gets co the ca cl: ;:age of the paper h<:! is in ~.is lea~ue . O.ut the fact , Sir , very simply is cat ~ t ere is not a dis a ~reernent. It is a subject ~e are ~ oing co ·ave a discus sion on, i t is a subject t~at is very impo rtant co t his P rovince , it is a principle t!lat •· e a re establis~bg t~at if it is nee ded is a sort oi c 'li!: ~ that, as I sill , t :\is ro·.;n corporati on ·;as ,o i :1g :o be sec up ~o r.

The re is no grea t .isagreemen t as far as am cor:.cerned Sir . ~e fact is that ;1e a re l> och interested,anf! t!1e :'inis ::er of Fishe ries :!.s intere s ted , in do in sornet!1inF" fo r t he fish eroe:1, f or the people of t.ds Provin ce , and t:ith the opp ortun it; we have in the fisher; vith co-operation from Otta1 va ue :.;ill ri 11. thO!t abo ut . r . Speai·er, a furtheT supp emen ter] . The hen. the Lea<lc r of ::he Cppositio n, a fur t he r supplementary . A further s up plemen tary, Si r, on the gener al sub j ect of lack of soLidarity apparent ly a nd pUblicly 'by t he governmen ·t. ill t'le.

Premi er indi cat e lihethe. r he has received the resigna t ion of the member fo r :>!askaup i as Parliamentary ,\ss istant to the Pre1Dier? ' I t t '

A!Hil 4, l97b Tape 521 DW - l MR. SPEAKER: Hon. Premier. PREHIER MOORES: Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon. member that I have not received any resignations nor any tnreat of resignations,that there is sol;i.darity on this side of the House a great deal more than there is in some other circles and, Sir, if this government goes down it will go down on principle and not the political hypocrisy that the han. Leader of the Opposition was associated with for so long. SOME l:l.ON. EEMBERS : Hear, Hear: MR. W.N.

ROWE: I am urged, Sir, to raise a point of order concerning the Premier's use of unparliamentary words, Sir, but I have come to expect it so I am not going to bother witn it, I am too interested and eager, Sir, to get some information for the han. House and the public generally. In view of the fact that the member for Naskaupi has not tendered his resignation, Sir, may I ask the Premier whether the Premier has indicated to him that he is going to become a minister of the Cabinet as he so richly deserves ? SOME HON • MEMBERS: Hear, Hear: MR. SPEAKER: Hon. Premier. PREHIER :t-IOORES : No, Hr.

Speaker, and I find it for the first time today I agree with the latter of the hon. member's question. MR. W'.N. ROWE: HR. SPEAKER: HR. w.:ll. ROWE: Further supplementary, Sir. Hon. Leader of the Opposition. As I understand it the Premier has not invited the member for Naskaupi into the Cabinet and the member for Naskaupi has not yet resigned so that should be a very interesting scenario for the next few days.

Let me ask the Premier on this general subject, Sir, of lack of Cabinet solidarity, will the ?re:nier indicate whether he has been notified as to wnether or not the G.ember for Ferryland district is going to

April 4, 1~78 Tape 521 J.M- 2 MR. W.N. ROWE: resign as president of the party to which the Premier belongs and is the Leader of, tn~Progressive Conservative Party? HR. SPEAKJ::R: The hon. Premier. PREHIER HOORES: Maybe, Mr. Speaker, I can answer the next two questions as well;neither the member from Ferryland, neither the luember from Green Ilay 1neither the member from haunt Pearl,neither the member from Henihek- MR. FLIGiiT: ~onavista South. PRE~liER MOOR.t!:S: - nor the member from Bona- vista South,none of these people, Sir, have told me they nave resigned. NR. w.N.

ROW.Ii.: Further supplementary, Sir, if I ruay. NR. SPEAKER: Further supplementary. HR. W.N. ROWE: Has the Premier then indicated to the member for Ferryland district that he will be awarded a seat in the Cabinet since the member for Ferryland district indicD-teci quite clearly publicly that unless he went iiltO the Ca~inet he was going to resign as the president of the PC Party ? MR. SPEAKER: PREMIER HOORES: never said that, Nr. Speaker , - ~iR. w .1\. ROW!!:: the Province': PP~}UER MOORES: Hon. Premier.

To my knowledge the i10n. member dow do you knowlHe was not evea in and there is no intention of enlarging the Cabinet at this time. HR. SPEAKER: de Verde. HR. W.N. ROWE: if I may. J:.R. SPEAKER: Hon. member for Trinity - Bay Sir, one further supplementary !\supplementary if the hon. member yields. .t '

April 4, 1978 Tape 521 DW - 3 MR. F. ROWE: Yes. MR. W.N.

ROWE: Can the Premier indicate to the House and to the public of the Province, Sir, how when one of ids minister~ ,namely the Minister of Tourism,the former Minister of Highways - Transportation and Co==ications,uhen a minister indi- catea publicly that he was going to resign from the Cabinet if the fifty - fifty deal which the •anister of Transportation llas now agreed to with Ottawa,if that deal went through he was going to resign from the Cabinet,how can the Premier in keeping with 3ritish traditions of Cabinet solidarity a~d secrecy and some kind of aura of security and responsibility given to the 'public of this Province, how can the Prime Hinister of this Province,tne Premier,consistent with that,keep this han. gentleman in the Cabinet 1 ?

Can tne Premier indicate to the House how he can do that, Sir, consistent with his conscience and principle? HR. SPEAKER: Hen. Premier. PREMIER HOORES: Mr. Speaker, I understand tl~t in this House yesterday during the Question Period,and I arrived unfor- tunately shortly after in the building-during the Question Period rather,that the minister~a~a,or the explanation that was given was one that is the government position and whi.cn he supports.

The tact is that the bon. minister in question had for a long while fought with Ottawa on a principle that this government also believes in and that is the fact that this Province deserve3 a great deal more tnan the other Atlantic Provinces because we have suffered in the field of transportation under federalaegis for far too long,anCi the fact that the Sullivan Co=ission is going to be a factor in any transportation agreement or policy that we have in the future,~ the fact .. that that is the case which was from the beginning.

I think possibly that once again the Leader of the Opposition is totally misinformed in that the minister did not say he was going to resign if that was not the case. ' ~ •.

Apr il 4 , 1973 Ta pe :~o . 522 ~:ll - 1 ~IR. ~l. ~. RO:-IE: One final supplementary, Sir. l!R. SPEAKER: A final supplementary. HR. NEARY: No courage. <!R. W. :L RO\-IE: The t~hole question of threatened resignations and real resignations and disintegrating governments and evaporating ministers, has the Premier, Sir, in view of the fact that he ~as the minister who has resigned from his Cabinet, the mei;J.ber for Grand Falls (:·Ir.

Ltm.drigan) sitting in the House at the present time, has the minister notv agreed to meet tdth the conceraed zroups in Grand Falls as they have publicly asked for, regarding the possibility of hospital expansion going ahead in the Grand Falls hospitan Has the Premier indicated a time and place of meeting to the people who tds!t to meet him over this issue, Sid HR. SPEAI~ER; The hon. Premier. PRE:·!IER !!CORES: The answer is ;1.o 1 I have not, !Ir. Speaker. I got back, as the hon. Leader of the Opposition knows, yesterday afternoon. The telegram was on my desk this morning asking for such a meeting.

It is something I will be giving consideration to and advising the people in Grand Falls. ::R. NEARY: A supplementary, Hr. Speaker. NR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, and then I will recognize the hon. member for Baie Verte - White Bay. NR. RIDEOUT: l•!r. Speaker, I wonder if the hon. the Premier would indicate to the House, Sir, just what his reaction is to a statement that was t:Ja.de by the Hinister of Fisheries a short while ago, that he would not leave the Cabinet even if the Pre~ier told him to leave: Hhat does the Premier have to say about a statement of that kind by one of his ministers? }!R.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER HOORES : It just goes to show, Mr. Speaker, the extreme loyalty I have from my ministers over here. smm HON. HEHBERS : Hear, hear!

April 4, 1973 Tape No . 522 :m - 2 :IR. SPEA..'{ER: The han. member for Trinity - Bay de Verde. MR. F. ROIVE: ~1r. Speaker, I have a question for the Premier. In view of the fact, Sir, that the Minister of Fisheries is quoted publicly as suggesting to the Premier in very strong terms that the Nordsee proposal should be revised so that Nordsee would have forty-eight per cent, the government five per cent and Ocean Harvesters forty-seven per cent, has in fact the ~Unister of Fisheries put that to the Premier in strong terms?

And in vie•·r of the fact as well that the ~linister of Fisheries has sug2;ested that the Pre::J.ier is leaning to~rard the revised formula or proposal, would the Premier indicate whether or not that is so? ~'{. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PRE!lER ~lOORES : :!r. Speaker, as I :>aid ~efore, it is something that the :linister of Fisheries and I discussed in the past, not as it applies to ;\orc!see specifically l::ut as a general approach to Nordsee or any other type of arrangei!lent, vhether it be training or fishing or processing or whatever.

Regarding the c.Jordsee proposal itself, I have been in touch with the Hinister of Fisheries regarding that, we have discussed it, we will be discussing it in Cabinet as to see the merits of such a proposal. I think there are a lot of merits for suci1 a t~roposal and if it is tile right thing to do the government will do it. :·IP.. SP EA.'{ER: A supplementary. NR. F. ROI-ffi: Could the Premier indicate, Nr.

Speaker, whether or not there have been representations made to Fira by the Premier hi;nself, the lfinister of Fisheries, or any minister of Cabinet prior to tile public statements recently made by the tfinister of Fisheries. :.m. >PEAXER: The han. the Premier. PREHIER :·IOORES: I am not sure I got all the question but to my knowledge - HR. F. ROWE: I will reword the question, :'lr. Speaker. The question asked is, prior to the public statements made by the Minister of Fisheries regarding the revised proposal for Nordsee, prior to that, !1as any nember of

,\pril 4, 1978 Tape ~:o. 522 :~r - 3 HR. F. R01.ffi: the Cabinet, the Prenier or the !linister of Fisheries, or any other Cabinet minister, have they made any representations or proposals, or had any discussions with the Foreign Investment Review Agency in Ottawa? MR. SPEA.'<ER: The hon. the Premier. PREI-!IER l!OORES: Hr. Speaker, and you are not referring, if I may just to get a clarification - :·iR. F. Rmm : To cTordsee. PP.E::IEl'. :rOOF.ES. Nordsee but to the formula of participation or to ~l ordsee generally. ~'R. F • RO\.JE : Right, ~ordsee generally or specifically.

PRElfiER NOORES : As far as Nordsee generally is concerned, yes, Sir, ~;e have ;nade representation to Fira. Our officials have appeared before t:~em and discussed 1.rhat the provincial conditions ,,,ere, the conditions that were discussed in this House previously. I personally have talked to a fe1< Cabinet ministers regarding the same thing in a general sense and what we put a degree of importance on, the approach to this sort of foreign investment but as far as any specific shareholding proposal is concerned the HR. F. ROWE: A further supplementary, Mr. Speaker. !·IR. SPEAKER: A further supplementary. HR. F.

R0~·1E: Did the Premier indicate that he did not bring up the subject of fifty-{)ne per cent o1mership by :<ordsee? The question of investment, control, 01mership was not brought up 1.rith the Foreign Investment Revielv Agency, is that 'Nhat the Premier is saying,that the whole question of foreign investment, or private investment 1.ras not brought up IVith the Foreign Investment Review Agency? HR. SPEA.'<.ER : The han. Premier. PREJ.'1IER HOORES: Mr. Speaker, the percentage that was involved was not the facts before Fira. It was the principle of why there should be foreign investment at all.

No~, Sir, just to get one thing absolutely straight, at tC!a t :'ir s t ?·linist2rs' Conference it ,.,as very nearly deciC::ed to do away

April 4, 1978, Tape 523, Page 1 -- apb PREMIER MOORES : with the Foreign Investment Review Board entirely because if you look at the economy of Canada, and if you look at the value of the Canadian dollar you will realize we better get some foregin investmentinto this country because we find that the little old ladies are not emptying their banks accounts to do what has to be done in this Province, or in this country. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary. Perhaps I should indicate that this be the final supplementary.

It will not preclude the hon. gentleman from coming back to it but I have to use discretion and I do recognize that other members are endeavouring to get in. The hon. member for Trinity r Bay de Verde. .,, MR. F.B.ROWE: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I am trying to get something quite clear here. We are not against foreign investment on this side - that is my

preamble what I am trying to find out from the Premier of this Province is whether the representations made to FIRA was on the basis of foreign ownership or simply foreign investment without control? There is a heck of a difference between control and pure investment. What I ~~ trying to ascertain from the Premier is were the representations along the lines of those contained in the Private Member's Motion by the member for Harbour Grace (Mr. Young) requesting 51 p~r cent NORDSEE investment, in other words, foreign control? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Premier. PREMIER MOORES: That was the original proposal. Yes, Mr.

Speaker, that is what our officials and ourselves have supported from the beginning. 1- ~ . I l L 't ~ l '

April 4, 1978, Tape 523, Page 2 -- apb PREMIER MOORES: I thought I made that very clear in the first part of the question, Sir. AN HON. MEMBER: No. PREMIER MOORES : And I thought we made it very clear in this House previously. The fact is that if it helps either internally at home to l;lring about a successful venture that is acceptable and more desirable to the people, and there is a way to do that, of course, that is what we are here to do, Sir. We are not here to have stringent positions just for the sake of taking stringent positions, but I thought I made that clear to the hon. member well before now. MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. member for St. John's West. DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Mines and Energy. Wednesday two weeks ago in a speech that the minister made, he referred to two proposals that had been made to the federal government concerning; one to DREE for the funding of a major study of all aspects of the Trans-Labrador Railway and Port Labrador, and then another one on February 1977 in co-operation with NORDCO, 85 pages. My question is, when I asked the minister,in a letter of March 23, for a copy I have had no response to that.

I am just wondering will he be allowing me to have copies of these? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Mines and Energy. MR. PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I saw the hon. gentleman's letter this morning at about 9:15 a.m. and I will be responding in the usual manner. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary. DR. KITCHEN: My supplementary is I understand that these proposals have not been received in Ottawa. Could the minister also assure the House that these

April 4, 1978, Tape 523, Page 3 -- apb DR.KITCHEN: proposals will in time be sent to Ottawa? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. minister. MR. PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I do not necessarily agree with some of the assumptions or presumptions that the hon. member has put forward 1 one of which is that the proposals have not reached Ottawa. I just do not know where the hon. member gets his information from and whether it is the same as where I get mine.

I indicated to the hon. member through a spee,ch that I made in the House that two proposals were put before DREE for funding under the planning subsidiary agreement and were rejected in turn, first one and then the other. Now whether rejection of a proposal means that the proposal when it was first put is passed back tangibly, concretely, hand to hand from a federal person to a provincial person and that that is the reason why it did not reach Ottawa, I do not know.

All I can say is that we presented two proposal~ both of which were turned down by the Federal Liberal Government who then turned around and hypocritically supported a proposal by a Liberal Delegation to a Policy Convention in Ottawa contradicting their former rejection. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for LaPoile followed by the han. gentleman for Eagle River. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, a question for the hon. the Premier, Sir, in connection with a question that was already asked by hon. colleague the Leader of the Opposition.

Yesterday, Sir, the Concerned Citizen's Group from ~rand Falls met with their M.H.A. and the chairman went away quoted as saying that he was pleased with the meeting. What I want to know from the Premier - just a simple yes or no answer - has the government altered its ' 1 . '

April 4, 1978, Tape 523, Page 4 -- apb MR. NEARY: position at all in connectic>n with the Grand Falls Hospital? MR. LUNDRIGAN: Get your .f;acts r:i.ght, MR. NEARY: I have the ;facts right, Sir. MR. I.iUNDRIC#rn : It was th~ admin:i.strator of the hospital. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Premier. The hen. gentleman had an opportunity to answer questions as a I!li.nister and the hen. gentleman has reneged to take advantage of that opportunity. My question is to the Premier - a s:i.lnple yes or no answer - will the construction of the extension to the Grand Falls Hospital be going ahead this year or will it not? A simple yes or no.

April 4, 197 8 Tape 524 PK - 1 MR. W. N. ROWE: Yes or no? MR. SPEAKER: The hon.the Premier. PREMIER MOORES : The position of the government - I have not met with any of the people from Grand Falls and I have not talked to the hon. member for the district at any time for the last few weeks, Mr. Speaker. And as far as I am concerned the position on hospital construction as outlined in the Budget has not changed. MR. NEARY: A supplementary. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, would the Premier indicate whether or not he has received a request from the Concerned Citizens Group in Grand Falls either orally or in writing to meet with the group AN HON. MEMBER: He has already answered that. MR. NEARY: No. I am asking the hon. gentleman if he has received a request? SOME RON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! PREMIER MOORES: Mr . Speaker, I have already answered that question today. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Premier. PREMIER MOORES : I have already answered the same question. MR. NEARY: A supplementary then, Sir. MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, would the hon. the Premier indicate whether or not either the Premier or the Minister of Health have received any letters of protest in connection with the $3 rate that is charged on beds in hospitals, and the $2 service charge on the childrens' dental programme? Have there been any protests over these two charges? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER MOORES : I personally have not received any. I will check and see if therehave been any in the office and advise the hon. member, Mr. Speaker.

April 4, 1978 Tape 524 PK - 2 MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Eagle River followed by the hon. gentleman for Terra Nova. MR. STRACHAN: Mr. Speaker, I hate to change emphasis but a question to the Minister of Health. In Labrador,the people who are not employed by government or people who are not on welfare have to pay for transportation to hospital especially,for.instance,emergency cases of a person being a stretcher case, they have to pay as much as three seats on Eastern Provincial Airways.

I have here since August complied information in the Happy Valley-Goose Bay area of Lake Melville Hospital of people paying up to $1,400-$1,500 per patient to be transferred out, plus the cost of a nurse, plus the cost of the nurse's expenses and their journey back.

Could the minister indicate to us whether he will be looking into this discrimatory situation for people who are sick in Labrador, who unfortunately ' sometimes cannot use the government air ambulancej and who have to If I', pay sometimes tremendous costs as high as $1,500, again I say, for the transfer to the Island part of the Province to be treated in a hospital? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Health. MR. H. COLLINS: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, the problem to which the hon. member alludes is a very real one, and the way to deal with that, the most practical way to deal with it, and the most benefical way to ~ ' deal with it is to improve the hospital situation in Labrador, hopefully , { to be able to attract the proper spec~lities into the new Melville Hospital in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. It is not a different situation, Mr. Speaker, from a person residing in Corner Brook who might have to be referred to St. John's or indeed a person in St.

John's who may have to be referred to Montreal or Toronto. · It is a problem down there and it is being reviewed. But the answer to it is developing the specialities in Labrador. MR. STRACHAN: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to that. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary. MR. STRACHAN: I totally disagree with the minister in that it is the same as Corner Brook or anywhere else. We face already in Labrador

April 4, 1978 Tape 524 PK - 3 Mr. Strachan: the highest airfares in Canada - in Canada! - and someone who is sick on a stretcher who has to pay for three seats of an EPA flight from Goose Bay to St. John's at $102 return that is a cost of $378, $400 each way plus escort charges, plus nurses charges, it is entirely different from somebody being sick in Corner Brook. I am asking the minister to indicate - AN HON. MEMBER: Shame! MR.

STRACHAN: - to us whether the people, not the welfare people who are paid by government, not the MOT people who are paid also by government, the different branches of government, but the ordinary person in Labrador who is suffering from illness, can the minister indicate to us that he will end this discrimination and allow these people to be transferred out of Labrador instead of having to pay these high costs themselves? SOME RON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Health. _MR. H. COLLJ:NS: I said, Mr.

Speaker, that is under review, and it is my opinion and the expressed desire of the department, of the government, and the best advice we can get from the medical profession is that the way to deal with this problem, the most practical way to deal with it, and the most beneficial way in terms of being in the interest of the people in Labrador is to develop the expertise at the hospitals t in Labrador. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Terra Nova. MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Premier.

The Leader of the Opposition alluded to a couple of the time-tested principles by which British Cabinets operate, mainly Cabinet solidarity, and collective Cabinet responsibility, and secrecy and so on. I am wondering can we assume from the recalcitrant action and the unorthodox behaviour of the Minister of Fisheries and the Minister of Tourism,actions that were quite out of line with these two principles, and I wonder if we can assume from this that the Premier has dispensed with following these time-tested principles and

,\pril 4, 1978 Tape No. 525 ~ !R. LUSH: plans to run a Cabinet that is guided by intimidation and threats and resignations _? . MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! SO~JE HON. }fEHBERS : Hear, hear! }!R. SPEAKER: I must point out that the wording of t he question sometvhat stretched the rules. The hon. Premier. The answer is no, l·Ir. Speaker. A su p ple ~enta ry . Hr. Speaker, I would like to aa k - On a point of order. • u~ . SPEAKER: A point of order has come up . l!r. Speaker, may I suggest that t here canna t ~e a suppleQentar y to a question that has been ruled out of order. SO:!E nON. c-lE:·IBERS: Oh, oh: HR.

NEAltY: ------ }!r. Speaker, as usual t he han. :·!inis ter of Justice is not listening to what is goir.g on in the House, Sir. The han. the Premier answered the question. I want to direct a supplementary question - :-:R. 3PEAKER: Order, please: I think I do have to make sane reference to the points brought up by the hen . the House Leader. The question is whether a question tvhicl1 is out of order can have a supplementar y . The definition of a supplementary in our Standing Orders is that, "A suo plementar y arises out of the repl y to a question .

" And I suppose if there is a reply then a question can arise out of it, as far as I can see. PREMIER ~ !OORES: Hr. Speaker, can I just say that my reply was also out of order to see if that helps, Sir. HR. NEARY: In keeping, Hr. Speaker, tdth British Parliamentary tradition where men of stature and men with qualifications and ability are invited - :,rn.. l·l.u. Rmm: Integrity. ; " ·f t I

AprU 4, 197 8 Tape :-lo. 525 :-1:·1 - 2 :.:F.. NEARY: - and integrity are invited into Cabine ts, wUl t he hon . gentleman indicate wheth er the member for Bay of Islands (Hr . t1oodrow) has been invited into the hon . gentleman's Cabinet? SO~!E l!O~ • MEHBE<tS : i:iear , hear! ?!R. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. ?REmER t!OO:R£3: The answer is, as I said earlier, }tr. Speaker, that there ~a s been no people latel y i nvited into t~e Cabinet .

The business of integrity and how to behave or.e s elf in Cabinet or ~~i t hou t ,the stretc hing of that credib ility by t:1e hon . a,ouse Leader opp0sit:e is something tha t we all behold in t~o n der , Sir . ORDERS OF THE DAY: ~:otion, the hon. the m.r.i ster of Rehabili tat ion an:d Recreation to introduce a bill, ".\n Act Respec ting The Rehabilitation Of Disabled Persons, " carried. (Bill ~o. 17) On motion, Bill no. 17 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion that the House resolve itself in to Commit t ee of cae ~•!hole , :!r. Speaker left the Chair. HR.

C'dAim!At<: Order, please ! l-!lL HI ~IAN: Department of Mines and Energy , MR. CHAIR: WI: ~lines and Energy , number Xl, page 73. 1101-01 • ~ ! t ·' ' .. f • .. I I .. ! • •·

:.pril 4, 197g ~!R. PECKFOP.D: ~~. CRAIR?~~~T: (Dr. Collins) lflt. PECKFORD : Tape 526 EC - 1 Hr. Chairman. The hon. the :~inister of Mines and Energy. I have a few brief comments to make on presenting the estimates for the Department of c ~ines and Energy for this hon. House Committee. ~~r.

Chairman, I guess it is pretty much of a cliche to say that sone of the najor issues f~cing the Province in t~e last number of years, now in 1" 78 and om>arc!s into the future, into the next decade - ten years from now - come under the Department of ~ ·l ines and Energy and a lot of industria.!. policy will be dependent largely upon how we handle the energy side of it. .~ lot of fiscal policy will be decided on the basis of hm• successful He are both on the energy and industrial side based on energy and on our offshore hydrocarbon resource and whet,her in fact we Hill be able to exploit and find commercial finds of that resource, and of course, }!r.

Chairman, the traditional mineral resource and the importance that it still has and will continue to have in the ongoing employment opportunities and economic activity in the Province. In the past I guess there has been a fair amount of attention paid to the traditional role of the depart~ent and the traditional resources,primarily your base metal, your iron ore and your copper and lead and zinc and asbestos and fluorspar right up until this past year, and the great contribution that that activity makes to the Province.

That has been somewhat enlarged now in the last decade •d th hydro power in Labrador and the development of the Fpper Churchill, the possible development of other hydro sites in Labrador, the ongoing development of hydro sites on the Island, like,for example, the beginning this year of the Hinds Lake project. So the whole scope of the department and of energy in general has enlarged a lot. And then, of course, on into oil and gas activity offshore. On the mineral side, Hr. Chairman, as most hon. gentlemen recognize, we have had a rather troubleci year, ••hat with the closing of St.

Lawrence fluorspar property hy Alcan, by the -

April 4 , 1973 Tape 52E J:C - ::! ~IR • PECKFORD: quite likely no1~ - closing of the Buchans operation ~hich has been alive for so long and wnich has contributed so atUch ::o the economy, not only to the Buchans area but to t he Province as a whole, one o f t he major lead and zinc ore deposits in the world over the last several decades and a very interescir~ geological formation which has taken up the attention of r.la:'!Y aca demics in the field of geology arour. :t the 1rorl d - still does to t his day .

So the miner al side of it - t he lead and zinc side, t he fluorspar side- minerals in general as it relates co operations in exisce:~ce has been a troubled one. ::e ~ve had so~te br ight spots in ~;e Provi~ca; albei t trey have not fully reAlized therr.selves <IS yet i:'! CC i'lines , '·ut 11e have "ad ;; fairly sisnificant l i •f f

April 4,1978 . Tape No. 527 .:lli-1 UR. PECKFORD: the Port aux Basques area, LaPoile area and a fairly significant lead discovery in the Eampden area, in the White Bay area,both of which are seeing a lot more exploration activity in those two areas. As a matter of fact,it was those two particular areas that had not i1ad all that much exploration activity until these discoveries occured.

So it has meant a..• increase in activity in those areas as it relates to mineral exploration and hopefully 1978 will see additional discoveries of gold in the Port aux Basques area and lead in the Hampden area so tuat additional mines can come on st:.:eam. _i·JR_._N_E_AR_Y_: __ G_e_t your ;;;eo?;raphy straight . Off Isle a ux Harts or near llurut Island. }JR. PECKFORD: I know. The Burnt Island property is usually referred to. l1R. NEARY: The han. gentleman i ~ad it up in t he Codroy Valley (inauciible). HR. PECKFORD: No. I did not.

As a matter of fact I will challenge t he hon. member for LaPoile (Mr.Neary) now to put his Newfoundland geography on the line and I will put mine on the line and we will see who knows the geography of Newfoundland er of this Province better. So ~en the han. member for LaPoile(Mr.Neary) is ready we shall dispense with the estimates for the Department of Z.lines and Energy and get into geography. Anyway, Mr. Chairman, to continue~The major eighty-five per cent of the mineral production of the Province of course comes from the Labrador area of our Province, from the Wabush and the Labrador City deposits.

The wi1ole iron ore industry is not in all that good a shape right now both from a labour point of view as it relates to strikes ongoing, but more importantly and in the longterm from the steel point of view worldwide there is a fairly depressed state right now in the steel industry in the United States, Europe and Japan. The Labrador City operation depends to a large degree on Europe and Japan for its markets while the Wabush area .depends more largely on the North American market,but in any case both operations are very vulnerable now given the fact that they have increased their capacity a lot over the years

... April 4,1976 Tape ~o. 527 AH-2 l1R. PECKFORD: and now find themselves competing very savagely with some new sources of iron ore in the world, in the underdeveloped world especially where labour costs are a lot lower and where therefore they can put a product which is just as high grade, just as good quality as what is coming out of Labrador. The longterm prospects remain very bright though for the iron ore industry and for the steel industry.

Once the economy starts to pick up again, the world economy I mean, it is quite likely that we will see some additional expansion in the Labrador area on the iron ore side. And as •~e have :.J.entioned in a resolution presently before the House, a private member's resolution, it will be the intent of the Government of :lewfoundland to try and insist that these companies do additional processiug,when they expand, with their raw material in Labrador or in ~~e Province rather than shipping some of it out. In any case, ti1e whole mineral sec tor of t:le department and of the economy is in a state of flux right no~.

It is interesting to note that since our new mineral acts have gone through the House, our new approach towards ~xploration rather than the concession system, a freer and open one, that there has been a higher level of exploration activity. Claims staking is way up and this is of course the reason why we had the discovery that I referred to in the LaPoile area,or the Burnt Island area,and in the Hampden area, because of this higher level. And we are going to make even a larger step, Mr.

Chairman, this year towards trying to bring additonal mines onstream rather than just having these close downs which have to occur especiall) in the Buchans sense _.:,ere the ore is all gone. In the St. Lawrence sense,of course,there is still some fluorspar t:,.;,re and that is a very unfortunate - HR. FLIGHT: (InaudibL:) ore at Bucilans (Inaudible) l>IR. PECKFORD: I cia not mean it as an absolute statement, I mean it in relati~e terms, from a commercial point of view right now. But in any case we are going to make a major step and on the Order Paper right now, l!r.

Chairman, there is a bill before us which is going I ~ • I 'l ..

April 4,1 9i 3 Tape Xo . 527 .\G- 3 .!R . PECKFORJ:I: co say co che companies Yhicn have large traces of land foz.- mineral exploration, either have them for pe:rpetuicy or for long periods of time. , tbat company A or company B,yo u have this land under a standi ng agreement; we are saying to you through this act cnac you must relinquish that acreage over a graduated basis or pay a tax on it if you want to keep it,or start doing some exploration on it . lf you do your exploration on it t i1en of cour se. your taX i s reduced or eliminiaced , a epenciing o~ ho\. much you do.

So that the whole purposo: and intent: of t he legislation is to increase t he e."\.-ploration effort on acreages now held in t he concession system for long periods of time or for perl'etuity . \~e do not care who necessaril y d oes the exploration as long as someb ody does i t so that if the existing company that has t he concession ! '

April 4, 1978 Tape ~lo. 528 Nil - 1 HR. PECKFQJID: through this legislation is forced into doing the exploration sobeit. But the whole point of it is somebody has to do it. They either do it themselves or face heavy taxation, especially in the fifth year from now, or relinquish same of it so that a lot of the other campanies,in the Province and outside the Province, who are interested in coming in can have a crack at it.

Some of the best mineral acreage in the Province is held by these large companies and \·Ie have to get it released and open so that t~e can continue this very successful claiLls staking syster.1 \vhich Has brought in by this Adminilltration. So nll is not lost and I think we are in a sort of a down-tum now both from world economy point of view and from some of our ores being depleted, but the future looks bright and is bright as it relates to ongoing discoveries and on~oing r.1ines in my vie~1. And it stlll contributes in a real big way to the economy of the Province and will continue forever hopefully to do so.

The area of the department that gets perhaps the most visibility and the most print is on the energy side.

Of course as lle all recognize that is for a whole bunch of reasons, not the least of 'lhich is that ·,;e ~ear both nationally and internationally of the energy short<>ge, of the depleting oil rese~ves in the v:orld, of the problem with large projects of gas pipe-line down the nacKenzie Delta, because of the Arabians now and the Arabs are able to tie up about seventy o~ eighty per cent of the kno~m reserves of ail and gas in the •wrld and the largc,massive increases that occurred in '73 and '74 by the Arabs to give them some additional money.

So it is a fairly high profile subject in the world, not only in the Province. And of course what makes it even more high profile for us arP. two :naior things. on~ Labrador hydro pow·er and the possibilities of oil and gas offshore. And these are very interesting, large, capital intensive projects if they ever get off the ground. f i ' .. '·

April 4, 1978 Tape :-lo. 523 llR. PECKFORD: On the Labrador power side, most Newfoundlanders, and I suppose most hon. people in this ~ouse,recognize what this present Administration is trying to do as it relates to Labrador power development. We have initiated court action as it relates to the Upper Churchill contract, Upper Churchill lease in the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and that is ongoing. And you know that court situation is one vThich none of us I guess are happy with but the court ~~orks slow and lawyers have their points to make. It takes a long while.

Considering the fact that Quebec is putting just about every obstacle they can in the way of an expeditious route through the courts fcir it because I think they recognize that there are problems there. llr . Chairman, it is very interesting to note that lrst year in this hon.

House ~~hen the estimates were being consi*red for the Jepartwent of tfines and Energy, one of the main attacks that the Liberal Opposition threw acros s the House was the fact that ••e Here being extremely stupid, to say the least, and shortsighted in our approach to the whole question of the Upper Churchill, to the whole question of getting a better deal on the Upper Churchill, to the whole question of the power contract, the 1-1hole question of our dealings with Quebec and that the sensible, sound policy fo~ this administration to take was as Saskatchewan had done, and impose a resource tax so that you could capture very quickly a lot of revenue from that very unfair contract.

Otir response 1-1as, :.fr. Chairman, and is recorded in Hansard for ar.y to see, that we said, :::<o, Hr. Chairman, no "e would not do that because our legal advisers, both provincially and internationally,have told us that this resource taxation now presently in place by t he Saskatche.,an Government was exteremely dubious jurisdictionally and that there was a case presently before the Supreme Court of Canada challenging the right of the Gover~~ent of Saskatch6van to impose that kind of taxation. Of course we all know what happened. The Supreme Court of

A;>ril 4, 1978 Tape No . 528 ~r:r - 3 ~!R . PECKFORD: Canada ruled in favou r of the fede ral governmen t, against the Saska t dtet>an Governmen t and there are appeals underwa y now of course . HR. STRACHAN: Hhat happened? :!R. PECKFORD: There a re appeals underway now. Le t :ne finish and then the hon. oe:nber for Eagle Rive r (~!r . Strachan), t ha t :;rea :: authol."ity on legal matte rs deelin:; with contraccs,1.rill have a change to aive his side of the s :ory. Suffice it to say, llr.

Chai= , now tha t a ~::esource cax, r:osr -no t most - all legal people that t<e cal:<.ed to a re co:w~.nced t:!:lat this is :tct the 11ay for us to go, that our oes t chance is t!te way ... e are now going, that He are n011 i n court, that 11e al."e re~xaoining aga!n any kinds o f thin6S that are existant in the lease agreement: that mi:;ht !:>e in t he ?OI;<!r contract that could ey.pedite s ome other legal route fo r getting at dte • ..,;,ole ques:: ion of :::te vpper c;~c::chill. Let us not forget that, t: 1>­ r f L I I l .J ~ t ' j

Ta~e 52'l rr. - 1 ~'R.

PECKFOTlD: but that is onp.oinp at this present moment - Ail !tml. '~IJlEP: Hear, hear! that this l•.ind of revie~• is onr;oing ri;:;ht now, so that <Ve are just not putting all our ep:gs in the one basket anrl loo l-in r; to say that somebody who gave us a legal opinion t'-lrt>e ye,rs ago in their ::1arrow legalistic u?.y of lool:ins; at things is the vie~• that we take Hithout question and as gostJel noH. :-'e can continually revie~> '-!ith other lawyers t-7ays and neans "hy uh ich we can get a better deal legally through the courts either on the pm;er contract side or the lease agreement to try to break that very unfair situation as it relates to the t'pper Churchill contract.

By the same token, ''r. \.hairv. .. an, He do not stop there: c!e are still talldng to the Province of Cluebec about the Upper Cl-lurchill, about Labrador pmver development in total to see whether we can work out some agreement v7hich is both satisfactory to the Province and will expedite other developments beside the Upper Churchill. That is ongoing. He are also, of course, talY:inp- to the federal government to get their assistance for it. And thirdly, we are also, as I indicated last year - it has not changed at all, it has bee~ accelerated tf anythin~ - He are talking to industry. So what we are trying, ~rr.

Chairman - it gets rat'her complex re,_lly - is He are trying to find the hest route to develop T,abraC'or po~:er - route in the '::lroad sense, not in t!-!e sense of a route through 0uebec, but the avenue through w!lich soTTte r•ay can be fo und to develop Labraclor po~ver development ~•ithout jeoparc!izing r;hat are the legitimate concerns of everybody in the Provinc~,that we do not sell out again and that we do not necessarily close the Hhole 'Upper Churchill problem as well.

And it is not an easy one to resolve because at the same time as '"e are tryin!'! to "o those things and that everybod:,• is crying out , 'T'o not sell out' anrl ':Jo the best thin(! for ,_ b " r

April 4, 1978 Tape 52° EC - 2 NR.

PECKFOFD: the Province', simultaneous with that kind of very provincial, local, legitimate concern by citizens of the Province you have them on the other hand saying, 'I want a job nm~. 1 So that is a real dilemma for the government and for this government particularly more than any other government in the history of 'Tevrfo1.mdland for quite some time, that we are caught in that l~ind of a C,ind - on the one hand, everybody \·rants to see emploYT".ent f!O u-p tomorrm1 morning, because 1i1e have such a hi?1-t unemployment rate - and how much the nation contributes to it and ourselves and all the rest of it - and at the same tire they are saying, 'You came to power on the throes of saying that there will be no more sell-outs on the ~pper Churchill, that there will be a real good deal - this kind of approach.

So the government is caught in that kind of a bind. On the one hand, if it holds out for ~•hat it considers to be the kind of deal that everybody wants, there are no jobs; on the other hand, if you create all the jobs you are on the horns of another dilemma because then you can be accused of speeding up too fast, going ahead too fast and selling out the Province. And from, you know, a pretty pure economic point of vie10, it is a real proclem.

So what we are trying to do, Hr. r.hairman, is to move ahead on all f'ronts simultaneously to see <·7hich of the three or four alternatives that IVe are following, one, talking to Quebec; tlvO, talking to the federal government; three, tall:'i:t? to industry ancl still looking at revie1·1ing the !.'pper Churchill and having that as the pinpoint around ,.rhich all the rest operates to see 1-11-tat l>e can put together and stil\ not sell out, and yet create jobs as soon as rile can. That is quite a tall order, ~'r. Chairman. That is q nite a tall order.

And "lence, that is Ph at '·'e are do in~. llut there are no great miracles here, }!r. Chairman. There are no panaceas here. There . ~ is no great one answer that is going to be the salvation of ~;eufoundlancl on this score quickly, nu!"ber one; .:md number two, even if there Has, ::r. c:1airman, unless you get reca~ 1 provisions uncler the lease agreement

AprL 4-, 1?73 Ta pe S:!O _c - 3 ~:ft . PE Ck'FO~D : so that you can get sorne of the Uppe r Churchill back, you are not going to get any cheap ene r gy any = r e, unless,like I say, conclitional upon the Gpper Churcl-till recall -ot her t an that you are not . Rinds Lru:e is t ~ irty mils IJhen it cow.es on ; You are tal '.ing a ':lout ·ull Island, if it was transported to the r rovince,of around ~~e~ty-eight mils today Bay Jat:~es.

And Say James is c':\e saP..e t!-ting . ~\ e day of cheap pm~er is gone. 1he only salvation we have is if, because of that court action we have now taken on the Upper Chu.rc· ill, that •.;e ca.n recall that th ree and one-half mil power and that •.¥ill not 'O:le three and one- ' al!' mils tmen it gees here co the Island, beceuse we have to transport it and t a t has co be paid for . So t:-.at is, you know in general terms where •re: are on that . This year, as most people know, .!r. Chait"'lla1l, we are going ahead trlth Rinds Lake.

There are going to be 40C or 500 jobs befo re September of this year -new jobs, const ructi on jobs that are so badly need .ed. ' ext llear t~ere 1>ill be about 1,000 people on the Hind,s Lake project " t . i j· I ' r } l .t ~~ ,

April 4, 1978 Tape 530 PK - 1 Mr. Peckford: near Howley about 1,000 people working. The other major point, Mr. Chairman, before I sit down on introducing this, especially on the energy side, is our ongoing negotiations with the oil companies as it relates to our offshore regulations, As most people know we have been successful in getting the Shell Texaco Group to apply, hopefully they will be drilling next year, and if they do, Mr.

Chairman, and they have committed themselves to do so in their application, they will be setting the world's record, they will be drilling in 5,000 to 5,300 feet of water, The deepest part of the world, the deepest well drilled yet is in water of 4,300 feet. So they will be extending the world record almost 1,000 feet deeper. That is pretty, pretty deep water.

We are still talking to Eastcan, we are still talking to Imperial, we are still talking to Mobile,who are the other major federal permit holders that are sort of eligible in this first round, and we hope shortly to be able to have deals negotiated with those companies as well on our terms so that we can get on with the exploration effort because it will mean a lot, and in the whole nation energy policy it means a lot because,remember,the federal government is about to introduce,perhaps in the next week or two, a new policy guideline as it relates to supplementing or , not only supplementing, but replacing gas, putting gas where oil used to be, in other words, because of the shortage of oil is so great, and now there is a surplus of gas in Canada, in the world right now, and will be for the next couple of decades that it is in our own national interest, both economic and from a political-national interest to replace with gas.

And that will, you know, hurt us and the exploration effort off here if that gets off the ground in the next five years before we have commerical finds of oil because then you have the whole gas infrastructure in place which would have to be changed over again. So it is very important that we get on with the offshore exploration effort, hopefully on our terms. And with those few brief remarks,many of which,others,I will make as we go along, I would like

April 4, 1978 Tape 530 PK - 2 Mr. Peckford: sit down on this, and to see what some other people have to say. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. member for Eagle River. MR. STRACHAN: Mr. Chairman, in opening I would like to touch briefly on some of the points raised by the minister, and probably as the discussion deepens we will get into some more specific items, especially the Churchill Falls question in which a very superficial attempt to pawn off our attempts last year to try and introduce a resource taxation was discarded, but we will get into that later on.

First of all let me address myself to the question of the oil and gas exploration, and I am not particularly addressing myself here to the economic argument, and the argument with the oil companies, and the debate· in particular, but what I would like to look at is the whole environmental question. As the minister has stated the companies will be drilling in a record 5,300 feet of water. It is a good 500 or 800 feet deeper than has been drilled in the world, it would be a world record. And that concerns us. It concerns us very deeply.

I will leave the economics aside, and I understand there must be a balance between economics and environmental and I do not want to be totally environmental, but I am looking at the whole future of the fishery of this Province. We have in Labrador the Hamilton Banks which is regarded as being the mother ground, the spawning ground, the bed for the whole Northeast fishery. The minister has in his power the ability to declare a moratorium on drilling on certain grounds.

And I believe the minister should right away ask or put into force a moratorium on the drilling on the Hamilton Banks because should there be a spill or should there be a blow out,any problem at all,on the Hamilton Banks, let us say occurring in October, or early Novemher nr ·I .. October,then there could be for eight, nine months of the vear a continuine ~. blow out, and do not say it cannot happen, it did happen, it happened in the North Sea on a well which at the surface of the water blew out and it

April 4 , 19i8 Tape 530 PK - 3 MR . STRACHAN: c·oo k three weeks to put out. !iere we are d.iscussing the Labrador current which . if a blow out at 5,300 fee t or any trouble in deep water - MR . PECKFORD: You are confusing your facts now. ~tR . STRACBAi'l: The minister similarly confused his facts about the resource taxation, ~ can co=ect me later on. I will continue on first. My whole point is this - MR. PECKFORD: Fifty three hundred feet is ooc of f, it is not near the 'Ham:l.l·too Banks . Tha t i s whac I am crying co say co you . MR. STRACHAN: I understand that. I understand t"hat perfectly .

It is not near it. Of course, it could not be. It would not be a Hamilton Bank if :l.t was 5, 300 feet . ' R . NEARY: The minister doe~ nnt kn~ aPV h~tter . MR . STRACHAN: I went to sea fo r year s . My arg~ent is basically this- le t us look at the Hamil ton Banks firsc , and then extrapolate on - now even j r t t · ~

April 4, 1978, Tape 531, Page 1 -- apb MR. STRACHAN: in shallow water where this William Carson was sunk can they put a submarine down to film the Carson let alone try and put something down to the seabed to plug a blowout. So basically their argument is this, that even on the banks they cannot do anything with it in the Labrador current, and do not have the technology to do anything with it.

Our argument is,therefore, that at depths like this off Labrador, or depths like this off the Island part of the Province, we could face dangers, economic dangers, not only environmental - and let us leave the environmental question aside - economic dangers, because what we would be do ing is wiping out the whole fishery. I noticed that the minister's environmental report stated essentially that we do not have to worry about it because the preva i 1 i ng wind is Westerly it will all go out to sea anyway. MR. PECKFORD: That is not what I said. MR.

STRACHAN: I only understand what I heard coming over the radio in Nain and the connotation given by the press, and they may be wrong but I can only go on that, was - MR. NEARY: MR. FLIGHT: MR. STRACHAN: The minister did not deny it. Quoting the minister, eh? - quoting the minister - was that if the wind was prevailing Westerly there was an offshore flow and that generally,therefore, we would not have to worry,that is would not be as severe as we originally thought. Regardless of that 1what I am stating here is that there is a deep question in our minds and I would like to see the minister address himself to that.

First of all, on the Hamilton Banks themselves there should be a moratorium because what we are envisaging

April 4, 1978, Tape 531, Page 2 -- apb MR. STRACHAN: is wiping out the whole Northeast fishery. There will be no more Bonavista fish plants, or Fogo, or LaScie, or St. Anthony, __ or Labrador Coast, they will all be wiped out, or could be potentially wiped out, exactly the same as is happening in France at the moment with the inshore fishery there. MR. NEARY: Hear, hear! MR.

STRACHAN: We could see a blowout which could continue on for years and years and years because the technology is not in place to be able to handle that at these kinds of depths or in those kinds of currents, as witnessed by the great difficulty in trying to get down to the William Carson. In the best time of the year, in August, they still could not get down even to do a simple filming because of the dangers. What we are asking for is some serious application there.

We understand full well that encouragement must be give to drill elsewhere but make sure that environmentally it is safe, and as well that it is safe economically, that we are not going to wipe out the fishery of this Province which is the whole basis of the economy of this Province and will be long after the oil and gas are out and gone. We will still have fishermen fishing, it is a renewable resource and it must be protected at all costs.

I will not get into a discussion with the minister on the oil and gas question since I fundamentally differ with some of the line of attack or the way the oil and gas regulations were brought in. I think it is an excellent job, the oil and gas regulations as they are. I think I have a great deal of respect for Cabot Martin,who has done some tremendous work there. Obviously, he has studied it well, researched it well and has done a very, very good job. I basically

April 4, 1978, Tape 531, Page 3 -- apb MR. STRACHAN: disagree with the philosophy since I have always felt that instead - and I understand full well that we are getting away from the whole concession idea, concessions are old-fashioned, they are outdated. Not even the companies want to deal with concessions these days, they feel it is a handicap on them. We have progressed on from there and looked at a number of other systems and came out with what Cabot Martin has distilled out as being one of the best systems and I would fairly agree that he has obviously done a fair bit of work.

My basic argument has always been that if we are going to fight with Ottawa over who owns the seabed, and our argument basically is that we own the seabed, then if we fight with Ottawa to own it we should maintain ownership at all times.

We should not by any form or other, whatever way we will not allow it, distribute that out to any oil companies even if it is revenue producing for us. our basic argument should be that the seabed belongs to us and therefore the companies can come in exactly the same as they do in some c-: the Arab countries, they can come in there, explore, t1ey can take the oil out, but essentially the oil coming c~t belongs to us as well because it came from our seabed. This is the basic argument we have. Those differences in opinion, or differences in direction than some of the ' ·ways we are thinking there.

However, I feel seriously that,leaving the economic argument aside, the first points I raised here I would like to hear the minister address himself to. I do not think that we have done enough. Environmentally I think that the whole thing looks to me , superficially, and I admit that I have not studied .,

April 4, 1978, Tape 531, Page 4 -- apb MR . STRACHAN: it or read it , I have just come back in from Labrador and I have not stud.ied it or read it in depth, but it looks to me as though it is very superficial, it does not get down to the root of the problem, and we must first of all protect what we have first and then move on from there. So I £eel very strongly that the minister should invoke bis powers and call a moratorium on the Hamilton Banks, prevent any further technology- any further drilling and situations in which we do not have the technology at this point to handle it. r ' ':· . • I:·

-~pri:. 4, 1978 Ta;Je "'o. 532 :.R. STRAC'dA:<; This is probably one of the hardest areas in the world, certainly by the sounds of it far harder than the North Sea which at that time ~~as thought to be one of the hardest. It is certainly far harder than the Beaufort Sea operations in which they are drilling in fairly shallow waters, with different situations altogether. And \ve should make sure that what we do is protect our environment and protect our fisheries because that is the ,r:•ole future of this Province. Getting on to the energy question.

Zy the way, the minister mentioned there, on the iron ore question he said we were suffering from depressed markets and the twrld situation and that is obviously agreed, I was in Labrador City and Habush early this morning at one o 1 clock, ttw o 1 clock this morning having discussions with some people there and I should say that \-labush is still producing. And the minister says th.:y are effected by the ~orth Acerica situation, that is correct. But i~ is also '1ell known that Wabush mines has only four per cent of its production up for sale. HR. FLIGHT: On the open market. :IR.

STRAC:L\.."': Ninety-six per cent of it is contracted, contracted to their own subsidiaries, their own companies, thenselves. In other words,they have contracted with themselves. Only four per cent of :~abush ore is open and so therefore they are producing and they are in a different situation from the rest of them.

So the mini3t~r I' questions there a situation ::hat 1\Tabush has been hurt; in fact I understand from last night that Habush is producing a tremendous amo~~t at the moment because of the Stelco situation with the pipe-line,and since it is all contracted ore, the world ~~rket virtually in tcis situation is not hurting them the same way as it is some of the other areas. MR. fl.IGHT: Using it to meet the ore requirements. MR. ROUSSEAU: (Inaudible). They can only stockpile it so long (Inaudible).

April 4, 1978 Tape ~o. 532 :21 - 2 HR. STRACHA.'h Oh yes, I understand perfectly. I am not talking about some kind of layoffs.3ut the argument here was that in effect Wabush contracts its ore to itself through its o~ro groups and so on and therefore have absolutely captive customers and in fact the whole Central Canada ._ and Labrador iron.ore has us in its grip and we have got to play the tune, whatever the tune they call essentially we have got to play it. On the question of Churchill Falls, or on the question of hydro, I would like the minister to indicate a couple of points to us.

He stated initially with a discussion with Quebec that the co-development of the rivers in Labrador was the bargaining lever, and I l!R. PECKFORD: Hhat? HR. STRACHf,.'<: - was the bargaining lever, and these are the Premier's words, is the bargaining lever to opening up the Churchill Falls contract, having a look at that Churchill Falls contract, and proceeding with this. There will be no, if we remember correctly, there will be no development of the five rivers or the four rivers, whatever rivers we get into, no development of these rivers until the Churchill Falls question was settled. }JR. FL~ HR.

ST~CHAN: Hear, hear~ Our basic argument is this, that it was a "onderful attitude to have and the minister again talks here about our situation there, our bargaining levers, our five rivers, our co-development, but it ~•as agreed to with Levesque when Levesque ~-1as dmm there, that we ~vould set aside the ,.mole Churchill Falls question - MR. PECKFORD: No. M!L STRACHAN: - set aside the ,.mole Churchill Falls question and proceed with talks on the co-development of five rivers. :<m~ . '

April 4, 1978 Tape :~o. 532 'T'-1' _ ... .~. - 3 : :Il.. S TriACHA..'< : if you are going to set aside the C•urchill Falls question how can the five rivers be a bargaining lever? You have given away your bargaining lever. No wonder Quebec puts in obstacles in our course because Quebec ''ants this thing to drag on and drag on because for every year it ~rags on Quebec is benefitting and we are the losers.

So basically we are being put in the position, in our feelings, suckers in a position like this, because we are ::,eing bullied, cajoled by a very clever man,who many of us L-1 Labrador, although t·re have no feelings towards Quebec at all, feel that we often wish that he was on this side, because his bargaining powers, his skill, his tenacity, his toughness, is something that ti'e should be emulating and v;e should be, if admiration ·- tvhat is it - initation is the finest form of admiration, then t.re should be doing it. :·IR. ~EA...'l.Y: He has got leadership, something that this government does not have. HR.

STRACHA.;.": We should be tough minded about this. IVe should get at it, and this is the whole argument we brought up last year on our resource taxation. Now the minister tried to put it down because Sasl~tchewan's resource taxation was overruled by the Federal Supreme Court. We said that last year. Blakeney himself has indicated to us that his legislation very likely was going to be overruled because it was legislation brought in in 1973 in t.rhich he felt that there were some technicalities with it. ;·/hat i 0

April 4,1978 Tape No. 533 AH-1 :·tR.

STRACHA..'I: he did have, and we stated last year,was retroactive legislation that should the federal government or the Supreme Court overrule it, he had retroactive legislation right behind it to come in to make sure that the $550 million, the half a billion dollars that he has taken from the C.QIIIIpanies, oil co~panies and the potash companies in Saskat~hewan, the money, the revenue he derived through what was later an illegal tax by the Supreme Court, that the retroactive legislation would be put in place which •.;ould legalize the method of taxation.And what happened?He never had to pay one penny back.

The oil companies in fact changea their attitude towards him and sat down and started saying 1 "Well ,let us face it. We have to live with this tax so let us talk now of co,...operation" and in fact are living with him and are continuing to pay the tax. Our basic argument therefore was still the same;we understand that the initial legislation was legislation which could be overruled in the Supreme Court. I am no lawyer, I do not intend to be, I have no idea of it,but I am very fundamentally interested in some of th~ positions we are taking.

And what we are stating is that recalling 800 megawatts of power or any power is not the route this Province should be going ia Churchill Falls. We do not need the power,we need money. We cannot even develop Gull Island because we do not have a market for that power let alone take back 800 megawatts from Churchill Falls. What we need in this Province is money situation.

Give us th~ money first and we can develop the rest. · What we are talking about are vast s~s of money, At 10 mils we are talking about $300 million, at 20 mils we are talking about close to $700 million coming back in this Province as revenue from Churchill Falls and we are still giving shem some of the cheapest power. Our argument is not the contract,which this government always wants to point out to; what we are stating is put in a resource taxation which is totally out with the contract. ' l­[ i- ,_ ' t t ·I

April 4,1973 Tape ::o, 533 AH-2 A ...... HON. t·JE:l3ER: You cannot do it. MR. STRACHA.J." : The contract makes no uifference. If I sell a car to somebody - and it is a very simple analogy- but if I sell a car,then how I sell the car, under what terms the car is sold and who bought it is immaterial. ~ve still have to pay our sales tax, and the sales tax, all it neees tO knoW is fundaJLentally oiOW much you sold the car for. \Vhat ~erms and what way it is done is totally none of the sales tax department's business; all they want to know is how much are you going to pay.

Exactly in this situation here,•~hat we are saying is we are talking about ~nvok.ing a tax which is outside the contract; the original contract has nothing to do with it. :·!R. FLIGHT: He does not understand. He does not understand. SOHE HON. MENBERS: Oh, oh! ~!R. STRACHAN: You can argue your point.

The minister last year,who pooh-poohed our idea, in September and October 1when the House was not open, and I cut out the clippings ,stated that tl1e tax that we proposed last year, last year ••e stood up in this House and argued it- we were communists, we were socialists , we were Banana Republic people because we were going to pull the switches and all the rest of it! That is what we were accused of, accused by the government here, And in September and October,I have the clippings, in which we find out that the government said it is legal, it can be done.

The7 were running us down for being Banana Republic people for mentioning it last ~larch and then in September they said it can be done, it is legal but it would be immoral of this Province to invoke a tax on Churchill Falls power. That was the statement, it would be immoral,And I can get the clippings and put them in the House here and table them. Immoral! That is what they said. Wnat is immoral about the position of this Province here,being one of the poorest in Canada, what is immoral about Quebec gaining revenue from us out of the Churchill Falls power because of the sudden escalation of energy costs.

And we have obviously got a

April 4 ,19 75 Tape No. 533 AI:!- J HR. STRACHAN: route :l,n which we can apply - at least we believe we can apply-a mechanism to get our just and fair rights and our fair return in money; in dollars, in cash to this Province, I cannot see what immorality ·there is in this Province, walking aroun .d in our bare feet. It is a foolish position so probably now what we are going to see is that the governme.D.t who first of all last ye~ told us it was illegal to do it, Banana Republic people, Socialists, r.ad, foolish ideas,and then six months later came around to the idea that it was legal.

I remember the big arg\ll!l.ents we had last year in whicl1 the Department of Justice was called and the lawyers were called and they stated tha.t it could not be done, And then six months later we find out that it could be done. Our basic aruument then is that we feel that what we should be looking at is getting a return for our dollar, get some money back i I t i :;· -

April 4, 1978 Tape 534 EC - 1 ~fR. STRACHAN: from Churchill Falls, never mind the power, never mind taking them to court - in essence taking ourselves to court, remember, because we bought out Brinco; so essentially we are taking ourselves to court in t.he first hand.

This government, its right hand is taking its left hand to court, CFLCo~·,.ho in turn of course, go through Quebec Hydro, So ••e are taking ourselves to court to get the return of 800 mega"atts of pm·:er ~y, I believe, October, 1983 1 since, if ••e got the pmver or it ~1as alvarded to us, in order to get a transmission line in place to get delivery of that power and bring it to the Island we would have to have the decision by 1976 or knm.; we were going to get it and \ve would have to start work on the tra.'lsmission line in orc'!er to take delivery in 1083. In other lmrc's~ue are creeping uo years.

Even if He got the 800 megalvatts of pow·c·r tomorrow from Quebec and we won our court case tVe could not take delivery of it anyway. Levesque 1-tas us. ~l HON. lrrt!BEF.: Right. mt. STRACHAN: Levesque has us. A.'i HOcT. MP-ffiER: Right. 1-:P,. STRACEl1N : The man is obviously clever and he will give us 800 megawatts of power back when James Bay comes on in 1983 because he will then have a surplus. ~ 'R.

PECY.FORD : He will not have a surplus. ~IlL STRACHAN: Ee possibly <vill h<ve a surplus ,and he is clever enough to know that even then James Bay is on stream and he has other developments moving and he will therefore not need it the way he needed it now. Hear, hear! :rn.. STRACIIAl'! : Our bargaining lever is now. Forty per cent of the power for the Province of Quebec is produced in this Province and we are getting no returns on it because we do not have the guts to put a resource taxation the same as Blakeney did in Saskatchewan, the same kind of threats that Lougheed used with turning

April 4, 1978 Tape 534 rc - 2 1!-!R. STRACHAN: off the pipe-line to Sarnia Refineries in Ontario and stating to them, 'Pay, or else!' -and he never got as far as doing that, because they gave in. AN HON. !tE.ffiER: Hear, hear! :m.. STRACRAl!: And yet here we are in a weak-kneed position looking for 800 megawatts of power, which if ''e get it anyway from the courts He cannot tal:e delivery of it. The ".rhole question ':legs the issue, T~e whole angle of attack as far as •,re are concerned is basically wrong and '·re feel strong:ly thi'.t "•hat is neecl.ert is irnpositton of a tax.

Let quebec ar3ue the legality of it. Let us argue the legality of the ta:{ He e,re il!lposing. Let Quebec argue the legality of it. '11-tere is Quebec going to ar~ue the legality of it? The only ~lace it can argue t~e le~ality of it ~sin the Supre~e r.ourt of r.anada._\nd ~u~~ec does not even recogntze Canada, Levesque does not recognize Canada, so how can he take this Province to the Supreme Court of r.anada to argue that our tax is illegal and we are bullying quebec? The whole thing is nonsense. It cannot be done.

He has no sympathy, no sympathy 1vhatsoever, and what 1·re should do is we should impose the tax, let Quebec t~en argue t~e legality of it and then we would be in the Clriving seat: we would be in the position of using our strong weapons, our bargaining levers. He can be flip and say, 'Pull the switch' or 'Shut it off' or all the rest of it.

I agree it is flip, I agree it is eye-catching, I agree it is a Honderful thing to think about) and I suppose there is not one person in this Province who 1muld not like to be in the position of turning off the s;ritch and watching }1ontreal shut dmm and the Forum - the middle of the game at the Forum in ~lontreal, the ranadiens are playing Boston Bruins and all of a sudden because this Province has pulled the s1vitch there are no more games, It would be wonderful to think that and everyone 111ould like to be in that position. SOHE RON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! ~·1R. r.RAI~'AN: (Dr.

Collins) The hon. member's time has elapsed. Could I just wrap up my remarks - just t~irty seconds before the minister comes back? . f . ! ,. ' ' '

April 4, 1:!78 Tape 534 !'C - 3 MR. CHAIRHA."': (Dr. Collins) noes the han. member have leave? Agreed. ~. STRACF.A!'!: So what we are basically arguing then is that we should impose something like t~is. We should have the guts to impose something like this. He should move it instead of trying the til!lid approach that He are trying now and letting Levesque play around with us, stall us, put us off, and as t2e minister says, keep putting obstacles in our path, Hhicr. he stated here, :.n order to c'elay it all, because the longer he delays it the more quebec makes in general revenue.

AN lWN. !·lEHBETt: (Inaudible) to begin Hith - HP.. STRACFI~A.N: That is not the point. Hear, hear! The lc.on. the 1\inister of ~(ines and Energy. :1R. PECKFORD : ~1r. Chairman, the hen. member from Eagle River talks about the weather conditions and the isolation ~There he happens to live, which is extremely true. One would think it would give him time to do some research and present a few more pieces of evidence than he has presented to date over the last year or tv!O as it relates to this whole Upper Churchill question. It is the most simplistic, elementary argument!

A four year old could concoct as good an argument as he concocts for implementing a resource tax. Last year, "fr. Chai=an, nemhers on the other side had indicated to do immediately ·.rhat Saskatchevlan had done ancl. •~e had indicated that it would be proven unconstitutional. It was so proven. They have .. now introduced other legislation. I ·l I ·

pr il • , 1~7!1 Tap e 535 Dl~ - 1 MR..

PECKRORD: The hou. member for Eagle River fails to mention that there are no existing lease agree- ments and power contracts wtU.ch explicitly say in words in English that the Governinent of Newfoundland, that no other agency in Newfoundland can levy any kind of taxation, can levy kind of ne'ILcnarge against the power t .hat is being sold. · There are existing lease agreements in place,there are existing power contract in place which are entirely different from the situation that he tries to compare it with in Saskatchewan.z:t is not the same; he is not comparing apples and apples, it is as simple as that.

Sec.ondly, as I have indicated last year,have:Lind~at:~d :n:my times"- MR.. NEARY: Mr. Chairman, I move the Committee rise, and report no progress and that the government not be ~iven ~eir est~tes, Sir, and that we have no confidence in· the present administration. SOME ROi.'l. MEHBERS :. 1-!R. CHA!ru!AN: Order, please! It has been moved that the Committee rise, report progress. SOME liON • MEI-illERS : Oh, Oh! HR. CJ:JAilUl,AN : All those in favor signify by saying "Aye", SOt!E HOl'i. MEM!iERS: "Aye" HR. CHAIRMAN: All tnos:e contrary signify by u~ay". · SOME HON. MEMdERS: "Nay 11 i MR..

CHAIRMAN: I rule the "Nayes" have it. ·~ ,. ) NR. i~EARY: Mr. Chairman, a standing vote, Sir. MR. CHAIRMAN: A standing vote. I

April 4, 1978 Tape j35 DW - 2 t!R. NEARY: A standing vote. MR. CHAIRMAN: Three minutes,and those members presently in the House will vote as the question has already been put. MR. PECKFORD: A point of order, Mr. Chairman. Can you have a standing vote in Committee? SmJE i:lON. l'lENBERS: llh, On! MR. CRAIRHAI.'<: The Chairman votes against. The motion is reporting progress. Those in favor,please rise. Those against,please rise. The count is 13 for and 13 against. The hon. Hinister for ~tines and Energy. }!R. l'ECKFORD: SOHE tiON • HEl'lBERS : MR. PECKFORD: Thank you, hr. Chairman. Oh, Oh! Hr.

Chairman, once again when some- body on this side of the douse, Mr. Chairman, starts to get into some­ thing which might be embarassing to the other side-as was indicated a few minutes ago,this is one of the tactics they use.Iney used it, Mr. Chairman, on me just a week or so ago, They triec.l to filouster and use every tactic they could to eliminate the time I had left to speak but, Hr. Chairman, I shall pursue~! shall move on and say, }fr.

Chairman, that the hon. members on the other side if they can provide some evidence,not just hot air like the hon. member for Eagle River likes to do because it sounds motherhoodish,because it sounds and is a popular notion-because it is only a notion.·You can nardly classify it as a sound idea;it is a great nction to go around this Province or through this House indicate to the people of i~ewfoundland, rum the switch turn it all off tell those Quebecois that they are no longer going to get power from our development, ·-institute resource taxation-fantastic terminology,>resource taxation,' Hr.

Chairman, fan­ tastic.! mean,you know,because the Province of Saskatchewan can do it in different circumstances,and yet to be proven whether the new stuff, the new legislation is yet valid within this Confederation,to go ahead

Ap r il 4 , 19i8 Tape 535 Dl~ - 3 MR... PECKFORD: and make those kind of state- ments without any back up, Mr. Chairman, without any substantiation- I have not seen the Leader of the Opposition, the former l.eader of the Opposition,the p..:esent member for Eagle River or anybody else opposite produce evi4~nce, documentation, opinions,analysis of the lease agreement, analysis of the power contract,which could contribute to a new idea . - HR. :iTRAC!iAN: You are government. Are you: ~JR.

PECJ::.FORD: as it relates to - not re-ue .gotiatiou; resource taxation baving some validity,some angle in one of those things~the lease agreement or the power contract,which would indicate a way out. As I indicated earlier, Hr. Chairman, we are continuing monthly to review both the lease agreement and tqe power cont t act to find some other way . ~d I to tall)' agree with the non. member !dr Eagle River that the first priarity should be,if we can do it,is to try to get more dollars

April 4, 1978 Tape clo. 536 ~r;r - 1 HR. PECKFORD: as well as more po~•er. No•1 ~,re might try to have it both ways, this is the other problem with it. Everybody is crying out for lower power rates. You know energy is going up too high, here is a Province with all kinds of water and yet ••e have got to pay the highest kinds of power rates and all this, that kind of argument. But let us face it now, ~1r. Chairman, ~,re cannot have it "!:loth ways.

Hy view is that if we can renegotiate the Upper Churchill contract, now or in a couple of years time or ''henever, if we can get a better deal because we can use Gull, :Muskrat and the five rivers as levers, if we can do that, that •vould be a fantastic victory for :;e,,foundland. A one mil change on the Upper Churchill contract would mean $33 million a year into the provincial coffers, just a one mil change, from three and a half nils to four and a half mils, would give us that much more. And I recognize that as a high priority way to go for the Province. \Je must move in that direction.

And whoever suggested that we had recently, in our meetings with Hr. Levesque and with the Quebec Government, acknowledged that we no longer want to consider the Upper Churchill as part of the whole package, has got his head in the sand because this government has not said that we have relinquished the whole Upper Churchill development, and to go ahead with Gull and Muskrat and five rivers without it. We did not. ~lR. FLIG:IT: They did it. They did it. MR. PECKFORD: We have not caved in, !·1r.

Chairman, and our position is that the Upper Churchill is very much a part of any deal we strike with Quebec, if in fact we can strike a deal with Quebec. I ;·Te are trying desperately to persuade the federl'l government to l become involved in a real way on the whole question of Labrador power development. We are still talking to industrialists around the world who might be interested in using 'cheap pOoler', which ~rill be not three mils or five mils or ten mils or fifteen mils; it will be closer to twenty or twenty-five mils. On site Gull Isl&~d is fifteen mils. And some people, I do not think, Nr.

Chair:1an, recognize

April 4, 197S Tape ~o. 536 ~;-r! - 2 ;.:ct. :'ECI~:FORD; it is essentially a ~yta outside of the Upper Churchill, that hydro power today is cheaper power. In the United States of America, the past two years, ~vo or three years, a number of companies have built power plants~ electrical plants over coal fields and have generated electricity from that coal field at fifteen and sixteen mils, ••hich is fantastically cheap power today, fantastically cheap power today, fifteen or sixtee.n mils. 'T'oday, right today, Gull Island on site >1ill be arou."ld fifteen mils.

The Pickering ;~uclear Plant near Toronto, which is one of the earlier nuclear generating plants in Canada,is producing electricity at eight and nine mils, eight to nine mils. Now the new nuclear plants that are coming on are far more expensive. They ran into a whole bunch of problems and they are going to be far more expensive but they are still going to be competitive. They are still going to be competitive. A."ld it is only your big,large projects- I mean the evidence is so overNhelming it is not even funny.

Wheu one looks at Hinds Lake, I mean it depends on the scale that you a~e going into it in order to make it competitive now. James Bay is competitive because you have got 16,000 mega~vatts, three Upper C.;urchills in one development,and yet it will come in over twenty-five mils. And there is nc surplus of power in the Province of Quebec even after James Bay is all on stream, contrary to what the han. member for Eagle River (Mr. Strachan) is saying. There is, and c-7ill be, in 1985 and '86 a demand -for additional electricity in the Province or then perhaps of Quebec, in Quebec, in Quebec itself.

And that has been acknowledged. Has the han. member for Eagle River read the recent first phase white paper that the Government of Quebec put out on energy1 Has the han. member for Eagle River, or anybody on the other side, read the latest C.D. Howe Institu~e ~eport on the vulnerability of Quebec in the energy field:

April 4, 1978 Tape :!o. 536 :!R. STRACHA.'l: Has the minister? HR. PECKFORD: Yes. Absolutely. I •Jould not make such a statement or ask such a rhetorical question unless I, myself, had already taken on that effort. These documents, •Jritten by reputable - written by themselves in one instance, their own energy strategy, their o'Jn "hite paper, concedes the point. i, '

April 4, 1978, Tape 537, Page 1 -- apb MR. PECKFORD: This is why the Province of Quebec is into the nuclear business which they hate, which they detest with a passion. They have already cut back because of their separtist leanings, their great vulnerability on uranium because they do not have any. Does anybody, Mr. Chairman, understand that the Province of Quebec - that is all it had, really, or has, hydro power. It has no uranium. it has no oil, it has no gas. It is completely vulnerable on all those fronts.

James Bay will be totally on in 1984-85 and you have to start planning now if you are going to bring any new energy projects on for 1986 or 1987, and they must look,being pro-hydro, being very close in geography with Labrador across the border - they are already getting a lot of power--at that area for additional power. Now what do we have to offer them?

We have Gull Island,l600 to 1800 megawatts, number one; number two, possibly Muskrat - that is what they are looking at enviously - which is around 600 megawatts; we have the five rivers,three of which would be competitive in 1986. the other two of which look like they would be competitive in 1990 - 1992,another 2200 megawatts. That is for starters. They are anti-nuclear both in attitude because of their history and also because of the vulnerability on the uranium side. They hate nuclear for those reasons. They are vulnerable on the oil and gas side.

And here they can look just on the East of them again and see some great hydro possibilities in which we will be competitive, and once built do not escalate. High capital,low operating, clean environmentally, which nuclear is not. The only other alternative they have, Mr. Chairman, that Quebec has, and let us not forget it, is to make some kind of deal for this replacement business, to gas,to extend the pipeline, Mr. Chairman, on ' ,_

April 4, 1978, Tape 537, Page 2 -- apb MR. PECKFORD: from where it is now in Ontario, into Quebec and dm.,n to the Maritime provinces. Now if anybody, Mr. Chairman, has read anything about the whole question of energy in Canada in the last six months they will recognize this, and this is how they are so vulnerable, that the proposed gas pipeline extension on into Quebec and the Maritime Provinces is somewhat of a carrot that is being thrown about by the federal government now in this whole question of energy. It is not viable.

It is not economically viable either through Quebec, because Quebec needs it, on into the Maritimes or through Maine into the Maritimes. It is not economically viable to do. There would have to be a massive subsidy from the federal government on it. ! Now,surJly Quebec,in its vowed intentions to separate from Canada and move toward that kind of policy,would not want to be so vulnerable as to have to find hundreds of millions o£ dollars in order to make possible a gas pipeline, which they would have to do. So they are pretty well strapped and are extremely vulnerable on the energy side.

It is a total myth to think that their hydro developments are so great and untapped that they can still move on with other James Bays; they do not have any more. James Bay is totally used in 1985. They have a couple of other hydro sites in Northern Quebec which are not as competitive as Gull Island. The best hydro site left is Gull Island. It is the first one and it is the most competitive one, technologically and from every other point of view,and they would like to have it, make no mistake about that, Mr. Chairman.

So my view is that our position vis-a-vis Quebec is much stronger than it is perceived in the popular mind, that we have a far better position, we are bargaining from a position far stronger ~· t .. j i. i

April 4, 1978, Tape 537, Page 3 -- apb MR. PECKFORD: than a lot of us think, far stronger given all those factors in there. ' [ ~ ,,

April 4, 1978 Tape 538 PK - 1 Mr. Peckford: Now, Mr. Chairman, if we could find a way legally to get at the Upper Churchill situation we would implore the han. member for Eagle River (Mr. Strachan) and anybody on the other side, anybody anywhere in Newfoundland or the world,to give it to us, to suggest it to us, to show us the way because we will do it tonight, we will do it imme~iately, tout de suite. MR. FLIGHT: What happened to the Anglo-Saxon route that is going to bring the power down (inaudible). MR. PECKFORD: Now if the,hon. member wants to talk, I will mention the Anglo-Saxon - that is another.

I want to thank the han. member for Windsor-Buchans (Mr. Flight) very much for reminding me of that because it was in my mind to bring up in line with the whole Quebec situation. That is the other lever that is still there. The Anglo- Saxon route is not a dead idea nor a probability. Right now the Anglo-Saxon route,according to most experts,would put the cost of power in Nova Scotia or in the Maritimes about five to ten mils- give or take, you cannot nail it right down,obviously more expensive than going through the Province of Quebec.

But with the increase in expertise on cable technology that is taking place very quickly - MR. STRACHAN: It is not competitive. MR. PECKFORD: It is taking place right now. The costs of transmitting power by cable is coming down because they are getting better at this whole business of transmitting electricity by cable. I think I have indicated, Mr. Chairman, in this House before that between Norway and Denmark there is a cable now over seventy miles transmitting electricity. MR. STRACHAN: PEI and New Brunswick. MR. PECKFORD: Well PEI and New Brunswick is a very short one.

I am talking about sixty and seventy mile cables, which is the kind of range - AN HON. MEMBER: The Scandinavian countries. MR. PECKFORD: Yes. ~ I I

April 4, 1978 Tape 538 PK - 2 MR. PECKFORD: Which is the kind of range. So, Mr. Chairman, the whole question of our dealings with Quebec primarily, and the kind of leverage we have should recoginze these other facts that we are not without some good levers, with negotiation. And the Anglo- Saxon route can be very much a part of it as well; and it is not completely out of the question. MR. FLIGHT: Would it not take all the power of the Upper Churchill to warrant the Anglo-Saxon route? MR. PECKFORD: No, it would not. No, it would not.

The cable as a matter of fact as it relates to Gull Island in bringing power to the Province, and a tunnel versus a cable, if you could - the question with a cable across the Straits,of course,is the ice scour and so on, and that is why the tunnel is a preferred route. But the cable, if there was no ice involved would save close to, I think, $200 million. So the whole cable situation does not need that high amount of power in order for to make it viable. So the question is not that ·so much as ice scour, as the cable loss, the power loss that you have through the cables, this kind of thing which is being refined.

So, Mr. Chairman, you know, the hon. member for Eagle River (Mr. Strachan) is being extremely simplistic, is not presenting any evidence· or substantiating his ideas,which in theory are great but which in actual practice does not bear much resemblance with the realities of the situation. DR. FARRELL: Hear, hear, 'Brian'. MR. CHAIRMAN: The hen. member for Eagle River. MR. STRACHAN: Let us get back to something practical. The minister seems to think the only people who can pass opinions or discuss these kinds of situations intelligently are people who read C.D.

Howe's book, and this book, and that book, and who have a whole --- - -department behind him to provide him with all kinds of information, legal expertise, all kinds of expertise, engineers, scientists, everyone feeding into that department so the minister can stand up as the head of all of this and spout forth; and anyone else who talks, and anyone

April 4, 1978 Tape 538 PK - 3 Mr. Strachan: else who deigns to beg leave to address him is ignorant, is lowly because they do not have the information, and they do not know, and they are very simplistic. MR. NEARY: The minister does what Burneau tells him to do. That is the real boss,Burneau. MR. PECKFORD: I met him about once or twice. MR. STRACHAN: Should I say that - MR. NEARY: The minister read a paper he wrote here just before the House rose for Easter. MR.

STRACHAN: Should I say the minister states that because we live in isolated places we have all the time to study in the world, in fact, apart from CBC Hear and Now if we did not get that we would not even know in Nain in Labrador we belong to this Province. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. STRACHAN: We get so little information, and our newspapers and so on are three weeks late. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) can·you read? MR.

STRACHAN: So obviously then the minister's attitude is - as far as I am concerned the minister's attitude is that no one has the ability to put forth any other argument other than the minister. MR. PECKFORD: (Inaudible) I see. MR. STRACHAN: The minister has argued against himself in a number of situations. Of course, like he says, the Saskatchewan deal we cannot argue because it is not apples and apples. That is a difference between politics and law. Law - or I should not say in fact in law, many cases it is

interpretations, legal argument and

interpretations. What we are talking about politically, is that politically we are taking legal arguments and we are bending them and moving them and making use of them. That is exactly what Saskatchewan did.

April 4, 1°7~ Tape 519 r:r - '!. YLR. STRACP..AN: If Saskatchewan for three years can earn $55'1 million with an illegal tax, granted an illegal tax, from oil companies through the sa~e arrangcnent He are proposing with Churchill '~'alls, sure it is not apples ar.d apples.

It is up to this Province - not us here in this Opposition - it is up to the goverru;:ent there ''ho have the e:~ertis~ anC the po~·!~r to do it to do t,--:e researc~ and put i~ sor.1e fom of t"xation process u'lich Hill :1olri, or at least if it '7ill ::cot hold ,;e can at least go and let Quebec argue intelli~ently that it 'vill not ho1.c. .\n<' our basic arg=ent is that n~1at ''!e are C'.oint! is self-defeating. He are arguing our case against ourselves Hhen ' :e should be leavin~ it to Quebec to argue the illegality of the law.

This government, the acl~istration,is arguing that it is not legal, I that ~·ou cannot ill'po;;e th~t kinr. of tax - it is not legal, there is this case and that case, this contract and this chapter, this clause ~;hich states it is not legal, so therefore we cannot do it. Blakeney in Saskatchewan did not say, 'It is not legal' or 'This clause says it is not legal' or 'The companies can take us to court on this and t;1ey can go and appeal to Supreme Court on that clause: :1e iid not say that. Re had the guts to say, 'Apply it.

Get the taxation, make it so they pay the tax imnediately and let them take us to court.' And that is basically what l"e are saying here. And try and get it back if you can. : ·~ . STi'.ACH.\:T: Let then try to get it back.

Basically that is t•.e argument that Saskatchel~an gave and meanwhile within three years collected SSSO million realizinR full ''ell that they !Jould have therefore in the process, that if there were any loopholes in the taxation method they had applied ,that they must \ shore up these loopholes and make retroactive legislation so that if Supreme Court ruled against them then they would have some form of legislation which came in. But the interesting argument is that the oil companies, althoug~ they r '

April 4, 197 3 Tape 539 EC - 2 HR.. STRACHA.'<: are appealing the situation, have reached the situation <rith Blakeney of Saskatchewan of saying, 'Okay, we will accept the tax,' and they have stated, 'Let us continue. lie will discuss it. Now let us get into a co-operative situation ~vith you instead of this old conflict situation.' ,\nd they are continuing to pay the tax and now they are not even looking for their $550 million back and they are continuing on. ~Tow that is with companies - oil companies~ the hard nosed oil companies. !'hat lve are basicall y saying then is why do lve not try this kind of route of 1·1hatever

interpretation, lvhatever 1~ay it is done. I do not know, I am not a legal expert. All I am stating is a simplistic idea. Sure, it is a simplistic idea. It has been mentioned many years before. ~l:R. PECY.F01ID : I have never seen any water but I know hmv to swim, is that what you are saying? HR. N'EAl'.Y : He is expert at it. ~ . I MR. STRACHAN: Expert, he is. The arrogance of it, you know, the arrogance of it. He struts and frets. :IR. !-!ODDER: lie onl y knov s what Cabot ;<artin tells him. ~1R. PECKFORD: (Inaudible) 'A tale told by an idiot full of sound and fury signifying nothing.' ?!R.

STRAC!Wl: The minister learned it - he o ~ vio~sly ~earns well - I quoted it to him last l<ednesday and the minister obviously learns well. He makes a good pupil. YR. PECKFOT'm: The best pupil 1·Till teach. :<R. t:ODDER: He knows vhat Cabot ~~art in tells him. )JR. STP.ACI'&'l: lt.'hat ve are arguing basically is that the route on which you are going is totally wrong. He feel that it is totally wrong. vlhat you are arguing is you want to recall the pmver ancl you have even put in that you want that po1ver back by 1983.

But even if you lvere given the concession tomorro•• and given it bad~ and the courts rule in your favour, you could not take deliverv of j

. p:r:i.l 4, l 7f: .. ape 53? !:R-3 : fF.. STHACI'C.\..:< : it anyway . It is foolish . The argument is that quebec is 11Ulnerable, chat He ha ve Quebec. . Tile argume~t is Quebec. needs our po,~er . Sure 1 t hey love to h ave our power. Tney co not need it, desperately need it. There are other areas of :Quebec. ~.ffiic.h do have potential, hydro-electric potential. ~ :R. FEGK:FOR!J: Name them. ~m.. fieorge !'aver and Great Fhale ltlver. 0!: , ! am not sure of t~e f<:c.ts .

I do not 'la11e ~ut I c~ n t:e! ~ ou that reo r::e T"'_i .re~ ends at ••o se , a :e. 1 do no 01a11e t he fi res in f ront of e. e rloes not have a staff ~-or::in!!! or ~i as he ~on . ~ini ster does . !'u t there a=e ot!1~r :~rE'aS. Due :_.e fac. t is Ouehec. is in a <Teak position, t hat Que bec. is vu.lnerable , t~at ~re ax:e in t he driving chair, the driving seat . r.-tat is total y J wron g . Quebec is blackmailing us . ' '!'hey are ho l dinF: us at ransom and ::.he:r •:ill c.onti,ue to do so . ( r.oying d. th us .

"'~ey are uttin g o stac.les up in our pa t !! an they are continuing to put obstacles ~Pin our _path and they will continue to do that ecause the lon ger it goes, t"ten the .better the benefit to t 'lem and the more o.sses we 'lave . ·!hat :e are statin g is r:hy no t try t .is route, why no t att!il!'Pt sm~ pat~, so~:e sort: of taxation esour:ce li! ·e this, attempt it. e mi~ster in one ques.ior. · e a ns<:ere-1 t que stion Period a sho t ~ hile ago said t"tat the• " ad a t ree prongeo:l at tac k on the •mole r.hurc.hill f alls question uith I

April 4, 1978 Tape No. 540 RT-1 MR. STRACHAN: Quebec, and one of them was financially they were looking at routes for obtaining additional funds, or sources, in the near future from Churchill Falls. I wonder whether the Minister could tell us what that financial route is? He stated it in Question Period, now he is stating that the financial route that we are proposing is total nonsense,so maybe the Minister has another way of financially getting some returns from Churchill Falls in the near future, not waiting for 1983. We would like to hear them. This one of ours is very simplistic.

Last year it was not simplistic; it was dangerous, totally dangerous. Now it is paid off as being extremely simplistic. The purpose here, surely, of this Administration and Government using all its expertise should be applying a taxation form and blending it the best way possible to suit the situation and suit the contract situation. I would say there is a contract there in the present situation. Obviously, you cannot take a Saskatchewan deal and apply it directly to the Churchill Falls question. One has to blend it, change it, move it, whatever way it is. That, surely, is the ~ art of politics.

And that is basically what we are questioning here. ' . ' We still say that what we are doing is giving away our bargaining lever, and the Minister states that there is no question that we are going to discuss Churchill Falls. The statement given after Levesque was here quite clearly, as I recall it, stated that we have set aside the ( question of the Upper Churchill because it is before the courts and we are now discussing the co-development of the other rivers. The statement before Levesque's visit here was that we were using the co-development of the rivers as a bargaining lever for the Upper Churchill. HR.

NEARY: Hear, hear! UR. PECKFORD: You are concocting that. That is not what was stated at all. MR. STRACHAN: I am not concocting that. j

April 4, 1978 Tape No. 540 RT-2 MR. NEARY: They shift the ground MR. STRACHAN: You shift and shift them back and forth, constantly shifting. We ask questions one day of the one Minister and we ask questions the next day of another Minister and we get totally different answers. Continually shifting. That was definitely stated that we set aside the Upper Churchill question because it is before the courts, we agreed to disagree. MR. PECKFORD: That is what you wanted to happen. MR. STRACHAN: Not at all~ What we want to happen is to have some guts and do something about it. MR. NEARY: Rear, hear! MR..

STRACHAN : It would be interesting to see what occurs down the road. Possibly at election time ~ybe we will see that there will be another blast and another way of doing something, getting at it - MR. FLIGHT: If we do not get the power back we are going to take it then: That could be the issue, a mandate to pull the switch. MR.

STRACHAN: Meanwhile, I notice that the ¥.inister has not stated or replied or given me any answer on the initial questions I raised way back on the moratorium on the Hamilton Banks and then some of the dangers, environmental dangers, and the fact that as they stated, since everything is offshore . and it is a 1¥esterly wind, we do not have to worry because it is all going to go out to sea anyway.

Basically, I would like to get the Minister to expand on that theory and see whether we can manage to get down to some detailed work on what is going to happen to protect the Fishery, the economy, the basic economy of this Province, and that has to be done right away. So I would like the Minister to address himself to some of these questions and get back without the playing down, to indicate to us the three-pronged attack he stated that they are going to take on the Churchill Falls question and the financial source, the way they are going to gather the additional revenue in the near future.

He did not say, wait until 1983 for delivery of power. He stated the financial - the method they are

April 4 , 1978 Tape No. 540 RT-3 MR. STRACHAN: going to get the return froa the Churchill Fall~! in the nea,r future froa Quebec:. I would be very interested to see if it is a different method froa ours. Maybe ours is very simplistic: and maybe the Ministe .r has some other way which is 'D1UCh aore c:oillplic:ated, lllUc:h JD.Qre devious and aaybe c:an hold water aore than ours, and aaybe c:an stand the test of tiae. Maybe Levesque will not be able to take thea to the Suprem.e Court of Canada and prove that it is illegal,sinc:e he cannot do it anyway. It is all pantollline anyway.

But I would like to hear and see what the Min.ister is going to say an some of these questions. MR.. NEARY: Mr. ChairD!all. MR. CHAIRMAN: Ron. m.ember for Lapoile. MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman, I, too, will be looking fC!rward to the answers to TII'J colleague 1 s questions by the Minis te:t. The Minister has i .gotten up so far, Sir, in his forty JD.inutes that the bon. gentleaan has taktn so far to outline the Governaent 1 s energy policy and I sat in my seat far most of the bon. gentleaan's reaarks, and

April 4, 1973 Tape ~!o. 541 .r.f - 1 :,:R. :·TEARY: I think I am more confused than ever, Sir. I said in this House a year ago that this government has no energy policy and I am more convinced than ever, Sir,that they are flying by the seat of their pants. l!R. H.N. ROHE: ~o energy. ~.ffi. NEARY: l·lell they have run out of energy but every year so far since this administration took ov~r we are getting a different statement of policy. They keep shifting their ground and >ve just cannot keep track of etem, :rr. Chairman.

And the minister again this year in introducing his estimates has failed in my opinion to outline any realistic energy policy for this province. }ir. Chairl!lan, the han. gentleman has made no reference at all to the possibility of developing the remaining streams and rivers on the Islan~ part of this province. He has made no reference at all to nuclear po~1er. He has made no reference at all to solar power. He has made no reference at all to cdnd power ,although ~1e have heard a lot of >vind. There is an experiment going on down here at the university where they are using these - what do you call these things?

Hind chargers. There has been an experiment going on down here for some time but no reference to any of these things at all, Sir. Yet if >·le had a wind charger on the han. gentleman's lover lip today '·7e would have enough energy, Sir, to keep this province going for the next fifty years. MR. RIDEOUT: Put one on his arms too. -------- HR. :lE.r:\.-.'R..Y: ------- P~d on his ar~,that is right. The han. gentlenun has been over negotiating with ilydro-Quebec too