April 10, 2003 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY

PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIV No. 13

The House met at 1:30 p.m

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Yesterday, two points of order were raised after the oral Question Period

concerning comments made during the oral Question Period. The hon. the Minister

of Justice rose to state that he believed that the Leader of the Opposition had

made comments impugning his character. The Chair listened to the audio tapes and

with some difficulty was able to hear the words: Kelvin, you knew nothing about

it.

In speaking of the point of order, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition

stated, and I quote, "I heard the Minister of Justice in his interview last

night and he indicated that he knew nothing about it. I did not say in this

House today that he knew about it. You can take that to the bank. I certainly

did not say it, and I did not cast any aspersions whatsoever on the character of

the Minister of Justice. I stand here truthfully when I say that."

It is a well known principle and parliamentary tradition that one accepts the

words of a member in a matter, particularly within the knowledge of that member.

I refer hon. members to Beauchesne 494. In this case the Speaker must

interpret the words spoken as their plain meaning would dictate and accepts the

word of the Leader of the Opposition that he did not mean to impugn the

character of the hon. the minister. Therefore, it is not a point of order.

The Chair would also like to take this opportunity to remind all hon. members

that the recording equipment in this Chamber is very, very sensitive and it

picks up all the ambient sound. If there were less background commentary taking

place while members are speaking it certainly would enhance the ability of

members to follow the debate and it certainly would improve the general decorum

of the procedures in this House. So, I ask hon. members to refrain from

interjecting and allow the debate to take place without interruption.

The hon. the Minister of Environment rose on a point of order concerning

comments made by the Leader of the Opposition concerning the minister's

approval of a certain policy. The hon. the minister stated that he did not

advocate the policy. In the opinion of the Chair, the hon the minister was

clarifying his position on that question and therefore there is no point of

order. There is actually a difference of opinion between two hon. members

concerning a policy.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin-Placentia West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS M. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, it is with deep sadness today that I stand to

pay tribute to one of our long-term employees. Maurice Cheeke died yesterday

after a short battle with cancer. He was fifty-five years old.

Mr. Speaker, Maurice, or Reese as most of us called him, was an inspector

with Newfoundland and Labrador Housing in Marystown. We worked very closely

together during my council years and ever since my election to provincial

politics in 1997.

Maurice was a hard-working, kind and caring person whose devotion to the

people he served went well beyond the call of duty. Just prior to Christmas, I

called him to do an inspection in an attempt to find some solution for a family

in South East Bight. I was not aware that he was not feeling well at that time,

nor did he tell me. This assignment meant travelling a substantial distance by

road and water but he made the trip and went out of his way to try and find a

number of options. I was advised later that this was his very last day to work.

The manager, knowing Maurice was not feeling very well, had volunteered to do

this assignment for him but Maurice had graciously refused. That is the type of

individual he was, always obliging, forever putting everything into his work.

Maurice was a wonderful husband and father and a great friend to all.

I ask the members of this House to join with me today in sending condolences

to his wife Linda, his daughter, Deanna, and the rest of his large and wonderful

family, and also to the staff at Newfoundland and Labrador Housing in Marystown,

who are grief stricken by his loss.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. LUSH: (Inaudible) Lewisporte and I forgot to relay the information to

other members. It was only Cabinet I met with this morning. I apologize for

that, Mr. Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank my colleague, the Government House Leader.

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by thanking my colleagues on both sides of the

House for affording me this opportunity to make this statement.

On behalf of our children: Terry, Tina, Margaret and Kara-Lynn, I want to say

thank you for the expressions of symphony and condolences so eloquently

expressed a week ago Monday past, on behalf of all members, by all party leaders

in this House: the hon. the Premier; the hon. the Leader of the Opposition; and

the hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, on Jacinta's death.

We have had an opportunity to view and listen to your kind words; I assure

you that I speak for our children when I say thank you. Your support during our

time of loss has been a source of strength for all of us.

Additionally, I want to thank all members who personally sent cards and

letters of condolences, those who sent flowers, those who made contributions to

the Sunshine Garden that is to be built in Jacinta's memory at the Baie Verte

Peninsula Health Centre, and to those who were able to personally attend Jacinta's

funeral service at Baie Verte.

I want to say a special thank you to His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor for

his message of condolence and for personally attending the funeral service.

We want to say as well to the many former members of this House, colleagues

and friends from both sides, who sent messages of condolences, and the many who

personally attended the funeral service, thank you.

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians in their thousands - many who no longer live

in the Province - have been so kind in sending their condolences to our family.

We are grateful for your thoughtfulness and we shall hold dear forever your

expressions of your memories of Jacinta.

Perhaps the most touching of all the tributes that we received during the

past few days came from the hundreds of people who told us that they have never

met Jacinta in person, yet they felt touched by her presence in a crowd and in

the media. Such tributes from strangers cause us to realize how privileged we

were to have had such a special person as a spouse and mother.

I want to say a special thank you to the people of Lewisporte district for

their understanding, for their prayers both for Jacinta's recovery and for our

family to find the strength to accept her illness, and for the countless acts of

kindness sent our way during the past three-and-a-half years.

There have been many times during the course of Jacinta's illness when I

have been anything but a full-time representative for the district, especially

during the months prior to her death. Yet, almost without exception, the

reaction of the people of Lewisporte district has been understanding, prayers

and messages of support.

Jacinta loved visiting with me in Lewisporte district. From the peaceful,

tranquil nights on Exploit's Island, to the annual seniors' party at Loon

Bay, to skidooing with the Norris Arm Fire Department and the dozens and dozens

of other events that she attended - she loved each and every one of them. She

touched and was touched by all those she met, and even during her last visit to

Lewisporte in December past, despite the advanced stage of her illness, she

managed to make people laugh.

Jacinta would not want to be enlarged in her death beyond what she was in

life. She was a plain and simple person with her roots deep in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador. Yet, her greatness was in her simplicity: her love

for simple uncomplicated things; her love for her family; her generosity towards

others; her charity for anybody in need.

We shall remember Jacinta for all of these things and more, but most of all

we shall remember her courage in the face of adversity. She accepted her cancer

and fought it bravely until the end. She refused to give up until the end,

making sure that every family anniversary was celebrated, that every possible

hour that she could spend at Ocean Pond was enjoyed, and that every excuse for a

party and a "sup of wine" was embraced.

Her strength was reflected in the letters that she left to each of us, to be

read by us after her death. How could a person, staring their own death in the

face, be so concerned for those she was leaving behind, have the courage and the

strength to put those thoughts to paper and to give advice to each of us on how

to accept her death?

Yes, she was one of a kind. God threw away the mould when he created her. Yet

she lives on and will live on forever in the Sunshine Garden at the Baie Verte

Peninsula Health Centre, in the faces of our children, in every trip we make to

Ocean Pond, in every flower, in every whisper of the wind, and in every fibre of

our being.

To us, she shall live forever as a wife, a mother, a partner, a lover, a

confessor, an advisor, a campaigner, a moose-hunting buddy, and to me, most of

all, my best friend.

To those who shared her life and death with us, thank you very, very much!

[Applause]

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

MR. NOEL: Mr. Speaker, if I may have leave to make a member's

statement, please?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. NOEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

The new MacMorran Community Centre will be officially opened this evening. I

want to congratulate the community and their supporters for doing a great job of

developing facilities and services for area residents.

The MacMorran Centre is located in the Brophy Place area of Virginia Waters.

It serves some 450 families in the neighbourhoods of Brophy Place, Kelly Street,

Hunts Lane, McGrath Place and Blackwood Place.

Through the initiative of the St. Pius X Parish, the original Centre was

constructed in 1983 as the Mount Scio Centre, and dubbed the "little blue

house" by residents. Newfoundland and Labrador Housing assumed

responsibility for maintenance and operation in 1990. In 1995, it was renamed in

honour of dedicated volunteer Ruby MacMorran who contributed so much to the

lives of people in the community and the success of the Centre.

The new 7,500 square foot Centre, with improved facilities such as a new

medical clinic and gymnasium, will give it the capability of hosting large

events such as forums, learning workshops and recreational activities.

MacMorran is truly at the centre of the community. It provides access and

opportunity for all residents to participate in social, health, recreational,

educational and cultural programs.

Construction of the new Centre was cost-shared by the three levels of

government. I would like to acknowledge the support provided by the hon. Oliver

Langdon, minister responsible for Newfoundland and Labrador Corporation; Mayor

Andy Wells of the City of St. John's; and the federal government through the

Labour Market Development Agreement and HRDC.

Most of all, I want to recognize community volunteers and the numerous

partners who have given unwavering support and provided more than $125,000 of

in-kind contributions. I want to particularly recognize St. Pius X Parish and

the Browne family, which were instrumental in establishing the Centre and have

been a crucial element in its continuing success. I also acknowledge the Centre's

staff, Executive Director Mike Wadden, and the various NLHC employees who have

worked with the community over the years.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, all of us involved with the community realize the late

Jesuit Brother, Jim McSheffery, has been the foremost leader and inspiration the

community has known. I had the honour of his friendship from the time I became

the MHA for the community until his tragic passing a few years ago. He was the

truest Christian I have been privileged to work with, and a great example for

all of us. He will be forever remembered through the Brother Jim McSheffery Hall

constituting the heart of the Centre.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of the House to join me in congratulating the

MacMorran community on the official opening of their new facility.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this House to report on a literacy event I

attended this morning at Holy Cross Elementary School, Holyrood, involving the

Grade 1 classes of that school. I guess, Mr. Speaker, the Easter Bunny came a

little bit early this year to these children, but certainly in the person of

volunteers from the Aliant/Newtel Pioneers, the Tri-Con Chapter, bearing not

eggs but books. Each child, Mr. Speaker, was presented with a personalized story

book titled, A Book About Me , containing their name, the names of their

friends, their teachers and information relating to their school and community.

Following the presentation of the books, parents, teachers and guests were

invited to share reading with one of these students. It was an unbelievable

sight, Mr. Speaker, as you saw these excited young children reading to the

adults that were present. I cannot overemphasize the importance of highlighting

these literacy events and congratulate the Tri-Con Pioneers, their corporate

partner, the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 904, the Avalon

West School Board and certainly the school community of Holy Cross Elementary.

The Principal, Mr. Speaker, Ms Florence Costello, remarked on the

significance of each child receiving their own personalized book and the

opportunity for teachers to use it as a teaching tool. The Pioneers, Denise

Lewis, Ken Russell, Doreen Russell, Lilian Crocker, Henley Crocker, joined Gus

French, President of the Tri-Con

Chapter for the presentation along with Marilyn

Connolly, representing the Operating Engineers and the local municipalities

represented by Mayor Dave Woodman from the Town of Harbour Main-Chapel's

Cove-Lakeview and councillor, Sadie King, from the Town of Holyrood.

The Pioneers are a provincial wide organization of active and retired

employees dedicated to not only literacy projects but to Hug a Bear Comfort Toys

for emergency workers, the Finger Puppets that are used in the hospitals, Heart

Pillows and Computers for Schools.

I would ask all the members of this house to join with me in offering

congratulations to the Aliant/Newtel Pioneers and the Operating Engineers for

their volunteer commitment to the children of Holy Cross Elementary School in

Holyrood.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WALSH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, late yesterday afternoon tenders closed for the provision of

sixty satellite phones for use in a pilot project on the Trans-Labrador Highway.

Officials from my department are presently evaluating the bids received and we

expect to be able to announce the successful bidder within the next day or two.

The use of these satellite phones for the pilot project will extend from

Labrador West to Happy Valley- Goose Bay.

Mr. Speaker, over the last few months my department has worked closely with

the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary and in particular, with the Labrador City-Wabush

Rotary Club to address communication issues along the Trans-Labrador Highway.

The portable phones will be available for pick-up at designated locations in

Churchill Falls, Labrador City, and Happy Valley-Goose Bay. This plan was

brought forth by the Rotary Club and from the time it was conceived we have

considered it very appropriate to the given situation. This appropriateness will

be more precisely determined upon the pilot project's completion.

The pilot project will begin once the phones have been delivered, expected

within the next four weeks. Through this pilot project we hope to achieve a

number of objectives. We hope to assess the impact of improved communications on

the safety of the monitoring of public transportation in the area and determine

if this arrangement is appropriate to address communication issues along the

Trans-Labrador Highway. We also hope to determine the applicability of the

concept to other remote transportation routes, such as northern Labrador during

winter conditions.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend the Rotary Club in Labrador City for

this idea and we look forward to our continued cooperation with local

organizations in Labrador. I am anticipating very positive results from this

project in how it will now and in the future benefit all who have to use the

Trans-Labrador Highway.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for a copy of his statement before we sat

today. Mr. Speaker, it is good to see progress being made on this issue and that

sixty satellite phones are going to be used for safety reasons in Labrador.

Labrador City-Wabush Rotary had a very good idea and it is good to see the

government follow-up on their suggestions.

Mr. Speaker, if safety is the issue then we have to look at the whole

picture. I expect a ministerial statement in the near future, Mr. Speaker,

regarding the Labrador Highway being able to be used in a safety fashion given

the experiences of this past winter. I would expect that the government will

take action on the Trans-Labrador Highway, given the snow situation this year,

and do something about it as soon as possible for next winter.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am a little surprised that the minister, in his whole statement, made no

reference whatsoever to the work of the Member for Labrador West. The minister

is usually more gracious than that, but it was the Member for Labrador West who,

for six months, pointed out the concern about the need for emergency phone

service on the Labrador Highway -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARRIS: - offered research and ideas to the former minister; urged

upon the minister many times the need for a solution. We are very grateful that

there is a short-term solution, Mr. Speaker, and I think it would do the

minister well to recognize that it was the urging and the work -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: - of the Member for Labrador West that had brought this

about.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services and Lands.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to provide an update

to members of the House regarding the Petroleum Products Pricing Commission.

The Commission was established in May of 2001 and began regulating fuels in

October of that same year. Since that time, the Commission has made monthly

price adjustments which has ensured price stability for consumers.

Following concerns about an unexpected jump in fuel prices this past January,

my department directed the Commissioner, Mr. George Saunders, to conduct a

review of the pricing model to determine if any adjustments were required.

This review took place from January 8 to March 7, 2003. Mr Saunders met will

oil companies, consumer groups, resellers, and other stakeholders, and presented

a report of his findings to government and the public on March 12.

This proved to be a very worthwhile activity, uncovering several areas which

required improvement. One initiative which was implemented following the review

process is an interruption formula. Under this formula, the Commissioner can

change prices by following set criteria which warrant a price interruption.

In fact, due to instability in world prices as a result of the War in Iraq,

the Commission has altered prices three times since March 15. These changes have

resulted in massive decreases in the price of fuel for consumers. For example,

since March 15, the price of Home Heating Fuel has been reduced by approximately

fifteen cents per litre. This accounts for a substantial savings when filling an

oil tank which can hold hundreds of litres.

This interruption formula has also insured the financial viability of small

local resellers in rural areas. In the past, the lack of price adjustments

during times of instability in the world marketplace put significant strain on

this group.

Other recommendations were also made as a result of the Commissioner's

review process. These reforms require amendment of the Petroleum Pricing Act. I

will table a bill before the House this spring.

I am pleased to report that my department is confident that the Regulation of

Petroleum Prices has been a worthwhile initiative which functions for the

benefit of consumers. The mandate of the Commission has been to provide fair,

stable prices for the public. I believe that this mandate has been met.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the minister for a copy of his statement before the House

opened today, but I assure the minister, as the new critic for Government

Services and Lands, that I, too, am taking it upon myself to examine all

services offered by that department. Of course, the Petroleum Products Pricing

Commission is one of those.

I have personally met with one group who is involved with the petroleum

industry, and plan to meet a number of others, because I believe when

half-a-million dollars of taxpayers' money is spent, we should be getting what

we deserve from that.

As well, on gasoline products, we have the petroleum tax, Mr. Speaker - the

highest in the country, I might add - and on top of that we have the HST. So

currently what we have is a tax on a tax. I am sure the consumers of this

Province are also concerned about that.

I can assure the members opposite, and the people of this Province, that

whatever we can do on this side of the House to keep prices as low as possible,

we certainly will.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

While the Petroleum Products Pricing Commission was designed to provide

stability in prices, the minister is claiming credit for the prices being

lowered three times since March 15. What in fact has happened, Mr. Speaker, is

that those prices can go up just as fast because the Commissioner is now

reacting more shortly to price changes, and the advantages of having price

stability seem to have been lost as a result of the recent changes in the rules.

So we really have to evaluate whether or not in fact we are getting stability in

prices from this result, or whether we are just following the prices up and

down, the way the market was before. So this needs to be further examined, Mr.

Speaker.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions this afternoon are for the Premier.

Mr. Speaker, last Friday, the Members for Kilbride and St. John's South,

and the Member for Windsor-Springdale and I, toured the Abitibi mill in

Stephenville and met with representatives from both management and the union. We

then met with a group of twenty-five community leaders to discuss some of the

challenges facing the mill, particularly the shortage of wood supply, escalating

hydro costs, and transfer of the Port of Stephenville to private interests.

Mr. Speaker, the immediate problem is the shortage of wood supply, which is

resulting in a shutdown of the mill and the layoff of most of the 300 direct

employees, and will also impact more than1,000 indirect jobs.

Mr. Speaker, my question for the Premier is: In light of the fact that

government has known of these shortages since 1990, and stated in its Forestry

Development Plan that if the wood shortage problem is not addressed immediately

and effectively, some portion of the existing pulp and paper industry will cease

to operate in the foreseeable future, why hasn't this government acted on this

problem over the last thirteen years, but instead allowed it to get to a point

where it is now threatening the entire operation of the Stephenville mill?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition, in one of his

preambles, said the government knew about this problem back in 1990. I have to

correct him on that. We knew about this problem back in 1980. When Abitibi-Price

signed a deal to operate the Stephenville mill, (inaudible) took this over, they

were promised a twenty-year wood supply; nothing less, nothing more. Since that

time, Mr. Speaker, a lot of things happened in the 1980s with regard to the

insect infestation. We lost over 20 million cubic metres of wood, enough for a

ten-year supply, AAC for the Province.

In the meantime, Abitibi announced just a few weeks ago, or a month ago, that

they would have some downtime in Stephenville because of a lack of fibre. Before

this, there was nothing the government could do about it. They were bringing in

40 per cent of their resource from offshore, their need for fibre for the last

twenty-odd years from the offshore. There are all kinds of reasons to give for

that, as the hon. member certainly must have been told on Friday. In the

meantime, we, in consultation and in conjunction with the Abitibi people, have

set up a task force of government officials and Abitibi officials to look into

what can be done, if there is anything that can be done. We cannot grow the

trees overnight. They knew back in 1980 they had a twenty-year supply. We cannot

grow them overnight, even though we have some of the best silviculture programs

in the Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister now to conclude his answer quickly.

MR. WOODFORD: We had meetings - I think it was the third meeting - with

the Abitibi people the day before yesterday and again as late as yesterday

evening, Mr. Speaker. Things are going very well. We are trying to address the

problem. We realize the importance of this mill to Stephenville, to Western

Newfoundland, and to the Province as a whole.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister now to conclude his answer, quickly.

MR. RALPH WISEMAN: So, it is very important that we do address it and we

are on the right track, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, what we need is an action force not a task

force, something has to be done immediately about this problem.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, Abitibi officials have informed us in

Stephenville that they want to develop a business plan that provides for the

ongoing operation of that mill for the next thirty years without any shutdowns,

not even for a day. They have a quality workforce. They have a quality product

and customers that are lining up a year in advance to buy those products.

Mr. Speaker, can the Premier please explain to the people of Stephenville,

and surrounding communities, why his government has ignored this wood supply

problem; why he has not done anything about it; and why he is already publicly

acknowledging that this mill should only be open for eight months of the year

when the company wants to make a full year, thirty-year commitment?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think what is more important in this debate is maybe the Leader of the

Opposition who did make a visit and expressed some concern, rightfully so, for

the circumstance in Stephenville. We are doing something about it, Mr. Speaker.

We have a task force with Abitibi Consolidated and the government that are

pleased with the progress they are making to date. We are trying to find the

answers.

Maybe the people of Stephenville would like to know whether or not the Leader

of the Opposition shares the view of his candidate in Happy Valley-Goose Bay,

who says the answer, as far as he is concerned, is: Close the mill in

Stephenville completely and open a brand new mill in Labrador next to where the

wood is. Now that is what his candidate is in the public domain saying. So, does

he agree with his candidate in Happy Valley-Goose Bay who says: shut down

Stephenville, there should never have been a mill in Stephenville? That is not

our position, Mr. Speaker. Our position is, let's find a solution and we are

going to do it together. He has to answer to the people whether his candidate is

speaking for a position that he supports or whether he has a loose cannon up

there that he has no idea what he is going to say from one day to the next, Mr.

Speaker. That is what the people of Stephenville would really like to know, what

is the position of that party because it is all over the map, quite frankly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier believes in free speech, why shouldn't I allow my candidates to

speak freely?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Earlier this session I questioned the many implications of this government's

continued decisions to remove significant sums of money from Newfoundland and

Labrador Hydro in order to finance government's fiscal mismanagement. The

removal of some $150 million over the last three years, including $50 million

this year, has resulted in layoffs of Hydro employees and a potential rate

increase for customers.

Mr. Speaker, my question for the Premier is: In light of the fact that this

continued bleeding of Hydro is also resulting in an estimated 38 per cent

increase in power costs for Abitibi, would he not acknowledge that his

government's financial mismanagement and depletion of Hydro's cash resources

could result in the layoffs of even more employees in the Stephenville area and

is hurting our Province's economy?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In dealing with the issue of free speech and free choice, again, the people

of Stephenville would like to know about their freedom to choose Mr. Ron Dawe or

not as a candidate. There is free speech for you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: The people of St. John's South would like to know about

the freedom of speech for the Member for St. John's South, who is publicly on

the record saying: I can't speak about that because the communications

director for our leader is not in the Province. Where is the freedom of speech?

That is what we have operating over there. That is the crew.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, to answer a serious question with a serious

answer. The Leader of the Opposition knows, and as a matter of fact the head of

the union knows, that the issues with respect to dividends have nothing to do

with operational costs at Hydro and have nothing to do with rates with respect

to Hydro. It is all regulated through the PUB. He knows that. The people

involved know that. If you want to try to pretend it is different, than you can

go ahead, but you will be misleading the people of the Province very badly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Profitability certainly has something to do with layoffs, Premier. You have

stated, and you continuously preach and your government preaches, about the

wonderful job -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, I remind hon. members, when addressing the House they ought to address

the Chair and not the individual members of the House.

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier and his government continuously preach about the

wonderful job that they are doing in creating jobs in rural Newfoundland and

Labrador, so let's talk about profitability.

If Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro is the gem, the crown jewel, of Crown

corporations, and if it is very profitable, in the words of the Premier, the

very words that he used in this House, could the Premier please explain how he

can justify the layoff of workers at Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador where unemployment is at its highest, from a

corporation that he admits is very profitable? What kind of example is that for

other profitable corporations in this Province, Premier?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible) his answer now, because this is (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The Chair will do that.

The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. NOEL: Mr. Speaker, I and the members on our side of the House

sympathize with everybody who loses jobs in our Province and everybody who has

their income reduced and everybody who doesn't get hired for jobs, either by

public or private companies in the Province. That is why this government is so

committed to creating jobs in our Province and that is why we work so hard at

that, Mr. Speaker.

As hon. members know, Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro is set up to operate as

a business. That is what is required under the legislation of the Province and

that is what is required by its regulator, the Public Utilities Board, which

this year as demanded that it reduce its spending by $2.5 million.

The Leader of the Opposition, himself, Mr. Speaker, just told us that he was

out speaking with the Abitibi Mill in Stephenville a short time ago and heard

their concerns about increasing hydro rates in the Province.

Mr. Speaker, I had a meeting, myself, with the representatives of the

industrial -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister now to conclude his answer, quickly.

MR. NOEL: - customers in the Province and they indicated the same

concerns.

We all know, Mr. Speaker, that the mandate of Hydro is to deliver electricity

to ratepayers at the best possible cost and as efficiently as possible. That

continues to be the mandate, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are for the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural

Development.

It would be my belief that all purchases by government for new furniture and

equipment for former Premier Tulk's home would have government purchase

orders, invoices, and delivery slips. These documents, Mr. Speaker, will clearly

show us who authorized the purchases; when the authorization was made; where the

purchases were made; when delivery of equipment occurred; and who delivered that

equipment.

I would like to ask the minister: Will she table today the documents for the

purchase of the desk, computer, fax machine, VCR, laptop computer and shredder,

that were brought to Mr. Tulk's home?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I have no trouble at all tabling those documents

when I get them. I would assume they are back in the department so we can

certainly make the inquiry and do that.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Placentia & St.

Mary's.

MR. MANNING: Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Can she tell us if all the

purchase and deliveries of equipment to former Premier Tulk's home were made

at the same time, and can she confirm, for example, that at least one item, the

fax machine, was purchased at Corporate Express Canada Inc. just days before the

former minister resigned from government and opened a campaign office to run in

the federal by-election of May, 2002?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I have not gone on a witch hunt in terms of what

the former minister did or did not do. Clearly there is an accusation, an

allegation, being made here. I will certainly inquire. I said I will table any

documents I can find with respect to where it was purchased and when it was

purchased.

Let me say right now that I thought the concern that was being expressed by

the Opposition was that, in fact, we get back the furniture that is presently in

Mr. Tulk's home, and we are doing just that. We have called. It will be back

within government in two weeks, which is exactly the concern that was expressed

by the Opposition about the fact that government assets were still in Mr. Tulk's

home. Within two weeks they will be back in government inventory.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the Member for Placentia

& St. Mary's.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: Mr. Speaker, the minister has not been on a witch hunt. She

has not been on any hunt. They cannot find the furniture.

Mr. Speaker, I realize from the minister's statements in and outside the

House that government employees move furniture and equipment in and out of

government offices on a regular basis. We realize that is true, but it isn't

every day that government employees are sent to the home of a former Premier to

deliver government-owned furniture and equipment and expropriate private

property. These government employees surely remember what happened that day.

I would like to ask the minister: Has she identified those government

employees, and has she asked those government employees about the situation, or

have they also been lost?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry Trade and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, let we start by saying: When you tell the truth,

you never have anything to hide from.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: I can guarantee you, when this minister stands to answer a

question, it is the truth you will get and nothing else.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, the furniture that Mr. Tulk had at his home, I

cannot imagine the member opposite suggesting it was expropriated. Nothing could

be further from the truth. What Mr. Tulk asked was to have the furniture stored

elsewhere. I would expect, if you are talking about a desk, a chair, a computer

and fax machine, and you are bringing more of that same into the home - I would

not have additional room to store it. As a courtesy to the minister, I am told,

at the time -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS FOOTE: I am telling you what I have been told, that he asked to have

it stored, so it was stored at his request. Now, where it was stored, I do not

know. I do not care. I do not care if he ever gets it back, to be quite honest

with you, because my only concern here was to make sure that government's

assets were returned to the Province, and they will be - every single piece of

equipment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are to the President of Treasury Board.

The Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development said in this House

yesterday, and I quote, "Because, Mr. Speaker, they have not been able to

track down the former Premier and minister's equipment and furniture, for this

reason a decision was made by the Deputy Minister to leave Mr. Tulk with the

furniture and equipment in his possession until his own could be returned to

him."

It is my understanding, Mr. Speaker, that a deputy minister cannot authorize

the disposal, the loan or the lease of government assets. It is also my

understanding that a transaction of this sort would have to go to Treasury Board

for approval.

I want to ask the minister if there was a submission to Treasury Board

seeking authorization to allow Beaton Tulk to retain the publicly-owned Crown

assets that had been placed in his home?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think members opposite, and all people listening, would recognize that a

government has all kinds of employees, all kinds of offices, and every time

equipment is moved from one office or another, or Human Resources and Employment

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Let me finish, I would say to members opposite. I am not

sure if you really want an answer or if you are going to continue on a witch

hunt. I think it is an important answer to the question, if I am able to make

it.

I would say, Mr. Speaker, that in all of the times when offices are opened

and closed and changed, Treasury Board is not the one consulted. In fact, in

many cases the work orders would go through Works, Services and Transportation,

if there is equipment moved or anything along those natures.

In fact, I have to say that departments, we do give our officials discretion

to run departments. In fact, they do act as CEOs of the departments and our

deputy ministers do in fact run departments as it relates to equipment and

government business as the policies are determined. So, I would say to the

member opposite that most of the equipment change, most of the day-to-day

operations do not run through Treasury Board and I would think that most of my

colleagues would think-

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the minister to conclude her answer quickly.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: - that Treasury Board has a long enough handle on what

is going on without having and showing as little disrespect to our deputy

ministers and others that you would require them to send every request to

Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Ferryland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we are not talking about moving government equipment from one

office to another (inaudible). We are talking about moving government and public

equipment into a private home. That is a different matter altogether and outside

the jurisdiction of any deputy minister in this Province, I say to the minister.

Now, that minister admitted in her statement yesterday that there is no

record that private property was removed from Mr. Tulk's home. In fact, there

is no inventory and they can find no place of storage.

I want to ask the minister: Has there been any official investigation to

verify Mr. Tulk's charge that private property was removed from his home? And,

if Mr. Tulk swears an affidavit, as the minster indicated he would, that private

property was removed from his home, will the minister request a police

investigation into Mr. Tulk's charges?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, this is an absolutely new low for even the members

opposite - a new low.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: The members opposite know that it is not unusual for Ministers

of the Crown, premiers, and in fact deputy ministers and other officials, to

have government equipment in their homes. That is not unusual.

Member's, for instance - we tend to work in the evenings and on weekends so

we tend to need the use of that kind of equipment and furniture in our home

offices. That is not unusual. It is not unusual at all. The fact that Mr. Tulk,

at the time, asked to have his furniture stored somewhere because he could not

accommodate it in his home, because he was being told he needed more modern

equipment and furniture to carry out the duties of Premier, at the time, then

that is not an issue for us. The issue for us is getting back government owned

furniture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister now to conclude her answer, quickly.

MS FOOTE: That was a concern that was expressed by the members opposite,

the fact that someone would have in their home assets belonging to the

government. Well, we are getting them back. That is what you said you wanted.

They are coming back.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister now to conclude her answer, quickly.

MS FOOTE: Let me say again, Mr. Speaker, that was going to be brought

back long before the member opposite brought it up as an issue. Long before!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS FOOTE: Maybe we should ask where all the furniture is that Brian

Peckford bought just before (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A question to the minister -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Loyola?

MR. SULLIVAN: It is unusual to have government equipment in private

members' homes. Unfortunately, minister, this is not an isolated incident. The

AG has reported substantial losses of artwork from government offices which have

never been found.

I want to ask the minister: How many thousands, or even millions of dollars

worth of government assets are in private homes and private businesses as a

result of negligence and incompetence of this government?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I must say we really strongly feel and believe, as do, I am sure, the

people of the Province and others who are here today, that there are more

critically important issues facing and confronting the people of the Province

today than this matter. Everyone of the forty-eight members here, more so than

anyone else in this Province, would understand the use of the private home as an

extension of your office to do your work. I would ask the members opposite to

stand up and name themselves, those who have never had a fax machine purchased

from the government, from their constituents allowance or otherwise, to help

them do their work at home?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER GRIMES: You might be one. There are two of you. Okay, that means

there are eighteen who have them.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a well known tactic, and our eager friend from Placentia & St. Mary's

fell into the trap. He is willing to betray the rest of his colleagues because

he knows that the others have this equipment at home. It is normal practice, Mr.

Speaker. The issue is not to take the lead of the Leader of the Opposition and

send the police in. I know the Member for Ferryland was embarrassed to ask the

question, but he was doing it under direction -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the Premier now to conclude his answer, quickly.

PREMIER GRIMES: - because he had to take the lead of the leader, Mr.

Speaker. It is normal practice. The issue, as the minister rightfully pointed

out, is to return the equipment that is no longer properly in the hands of the

former member, and that is being done, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Premier.

The Premier's statements this week that his plans for long-term care in

Corner Brook are not privatization are totally unbelievable. When a private

corporation builds, owns, operates and makes a profit for providing services,

that is privatization. It is no less privatization than a private hospital like

those proposed by Ralph Klein in Alberta, where, regardless of standards, the

public will pay and a private corporation will take a profit.

I ask the Premier: How can the people of this Province believe that providing

long-term care services to the private sector for private profit is not

privatization?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am sure if the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, the Leader of the NDP,

would take five minutes to listen to exactly what is being said, he would

understand it completely and clearly and totally.

The fact of the matter is that access to the system in Corner Brook, that we

are talking about, will be the same in the future as it is today. It is

controlled through the public system, through a common entry assessment

mechanism that has been in use everywhere in the Province. The charges and fees

that are associated with it are exactly the same as they are today. No change.

No ability for whoever runs it or operates the facility, as a physical entity,

to make any changes in that. That is done the same tomorrow as it is being done

today.

Also, Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that the staffing levels are all

there guaranteed and only permitted by the government to meet national

standards. It is not that it is private and the operator can decide what level

of care they are going to offer. None of that applies. It is fully controlled,

fully regulated, fully accredited, fully determined in terms of access and

charges by the public system.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer.

PREMIER GRIMES: It is publicly funded health care, publicly run health

care, with an opportunity to get it done at possibly a savings to the taxpayer

of the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It has also been revealed this week that government is unwilling to replace

the provincial recreation centre, despite its claim of intending to develop a

wellness strategy, stated in the Speech from the Throne, which also pointed out

that 60 per cent of the Province's residents are not active enough to achieve

health benefits. This government's only solution for a provincial recreational

centre is a privatization scheme where the public pays, once again, for private

profits.

Can this government no longer determine and plan priorities? Why isn't this

government doing something creative and forward-thinking such as considering the

redevelopment of the Memorial Stadium site as a provincial recreation centre?

Why aren't they doing that, Mr. Speaker, instead of, once again, going to the

private sector and pretending that this is a solution for real planning and real

proposals?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, in the response that I have given to the sports

governing bodies, with whom I have met, I have been very clear to point out to

them that in going out and looking for expressions of interest to replace a

provincial training centre, that I was willing and interested in looking not

only to the private sector but also to the not-for-profit, to the volunteer

sector, to any partners who are out there who would like to take this

opportunity to come forward with suggestions for ways that, in partnership

together, we can provide for training needs for more elite athletes in this

Province.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that in Newfoundland and Labrador we

are somewhat unique, even in the past, in having had a provincial training

centre at Torbay Recreation Centre. There is no other province in the country

that has a provincially funded training centre for sports athletes. The only

other ones are funded by the federal government.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the minister now to conclude her answer quickly.

MS BETTNEY: So we are looking, Mr. Speaker, to the private sector and to

the not-for-profit centre, including Memorial University and others.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Tourism, Culture and

Recreation.

When The Rooms is completed next year, the Art Gallery at MUN will be

transferred to the new $48 million facility. Obviously, we are quite proud of

our Newfoundland and Labrador artists, and we acknowledge their expertise in

managing our galleries; however, we are a small but growing part of the Canadian

and the worldwide art community. As the minister knows, we must try to obtain

the real or long-term value for every dollar we spend as a Province.

Will the minister confirm that she and some of her officials have recently

travelled to London, New York, and Paris, to visit these large art galleries?

What was the purpose of this travel, and why was it deemed necessary to visit

these specific galleries?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, I can confirm, first of all, that I did not

travel to London, New York, and Paris, specifically to visit art galleries. I

did travel to London to meet with officials of the Government of England to look

for their co-operation with us, with our government, in being able to share

exhibits when The Rooms opens so that they can work with us.

We have, with The Rooms, a $50 million facility that will bring together the

museum, the archives and the art gallery. It just so happens that, given our

archival documents, as well as documents within the museums in both of those

countries, that we could benefit from being able to share exhibitions, to

display, to even loan and to copy from the archives. I actually accompanied, at

the request of the Francophone Association -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister now to conclude her answer quickly.

MS BETTNEY: - visited Paris and to Bayonne in the Basque country in

France to try and achieve some of those co-operations.

Mr. Speaker, if I could have just -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS BETTNEY: Fine.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has ended.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Youth Services and Post-Secondary

Education.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, youth and youth-related issues are of high priority to the

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. Young people in our Province are making

valuable contributions to our social and economic development; contributions

which are providing valuable input into the many policy changes of government.

Today, I am pleased to table the 2001-2002 Annual Report for the Department

of Youth Services and Post-Secondary Education.

Mr. Speaker, I am also pleased to table six reports for boards and agencies

associated with my department, namely: the College of the North Atlantic, the

Student Investment and Opportunities Corporation, the Provincial Apprenticeship

Board, the Private Training Corporation, the Council on Higher Education and

Memorial University Pension Fund.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, today it is my pleasure to table the 2001-2002 Annual Report for

the Department of Health and Community Services, along with the reports for our

fourteen health and community services boards. I want to point out to hon.

members that the department has also prepared a CD-ROM containing all of the

reports, and this is attached inside the back cover of the departmental annual

report.

This afternoon, Mr. Speaker, I am also tabling copies of the Annual Report

for the Premier's Council on Social Development. As you know, the Premier's

Council advises on implementation on the Strategic Social Plan and other social

policy issues. All of these reports are in keeping with government's

commitment to openness and accountability and highlights our work and

achievements during 2001-2002.

I look forward to working with officials in the department, the health and

community services system and the Premier's Council on Social Development in

the coming year as we continue to move forward with health and social

initiatives for Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WALSH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On March 19, 2002, government made the commitment that annual reports for

departments and agencies would be tabled during the sitting of the Legislature.

Government is and will remain open and accountable to the people of this

Province.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased and honoured to table the Annual Report for the

Department of Works, Services and Transportation for the fiscal year ended March

31, 2002. The report details many of our achievements and accomplishments for

the department over the year 2001-2002. The report shows that our staff have

worked diligently to provide safe, efficient and sustainable transportation and

public works infrastructure for the people of this Province.

Thank you.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to table in the House today the Annual Report of the Department

of Environment for 2001-2002. This past year saw the Department of Environment

make progress in a number of areas related to its mandate. The provision of

safe, clean drinking water for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador continues

to be a priority for this government. As the lead government agency on drinking

water safety, the Department of Environment made public its action plan on

drinking water quality when we released the Source To Tap document two years

ago.

Working with the Departments of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, Health and

Community Services, and Government Services and Lands, we implemented the

Multi-Barrier Strategic Action Plan. In the 2001 Speech from the Throne, this

government committed to the development of a long-term provincial strategy to

address solid waste management. In that year we appointed a Waste Management

Advisory Committee and that Committee conducted public consultations throughout

the Province and provided its recommendations to government in the fall of 2001.

This work provided the foundation for the Newfoundland and Labrador Waste

Management Strategy which was released in April, 2002.

These key areas only touch the surface of the initiatives of the Department

of Environment but they are representative of the commitments made and the

commitments kept by this government. The Annual Report for the Multi-Materials

Stewardship Board, Mr. Speaker, was previously tabled in December, 2002.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. NOEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I wish to table the 2001-2002 Annual Report for the Department of Mines and

Energy, and the 2001-2002 Annual Report for the Bull Arm Site Corporation. The

2001 annual reports for the other six agencies which report to my department,

namely: Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro; Churchill Falls-Labrador Corporation

Limited; Gull Island Power Company Limited; Lower Churchill Development

Corporation Limited; Twin Falls Power Corporation Limited, and the Canada

-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board, were tabled in the House last year. I

will be tabling the 2002 reports for these agencies within a few months.

The Department of Mines and Energy was very active in fiscal 2001-2002. First

oil was produced in the Province's second oil project, Terra Nova. The White

Rose project was sanctioned by Husky Energy and Petro Canada. The offshore

boundary arbitration with Nova Scotia moved forward, negotiations resumed with

Inco to develop the Voisey's Bay deposit in Labrador, and negotiations

continued regarding the development of the Lower Churchill River.

The department also worked on increasing exploration investment through

promotional activities, meetings with key stakeholders, attending national and

international conferences, strengthening our incentive programs, developing new

mineral and petroleum data bases for the exploration community, and generally

making our Province more attractive to investors.

Mr. Speaker, I invite members to review our accomplishments in fiscal

2001-2002. This report documents the very successful efforts of the dedicated

and extremely competent people in our department. They are accomplishing a lot

in serving the citizens of our Province well. We will continue doing that in the

years ahead, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to table the 2001-2002

Annual Report for the Department of Labour, which highlights the activities of

the department for this fiscal year.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table for the hon. members, two additional

reports for agencies which report to my department. They are: the Annual Report

of the Labour Relations Board, and the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation

Review Division Annual Report. These reports are tabled today as part of

government's continuous commitment to be open and accountable to the public.

The mandate of the Department of Labour is to foster a positive labour

relations climate which is conducive to economic growth, competitiveness,

prosperity, and to promote and ensure safe, healthy workplaces.

The annual report shows that we are working hard and successfully to meet

this mandate. We are seeing a continual decrease in the loss of time claims

accepted by the Workplace Health and Safety Review Commission. This is extremely

encouraging, as employment within the Province is also on the increase.

I am pleased to present the 2002 Annual Report of the Workplace Health,

Safety and Compensation Review Division. This reports provides an overview of

the activities of the review board throughout 2002.

The continuing efforts of the division are a reflection of government's

commitment to injured workers and employers in Newfoundland and Labrador. The

dedication and hard work of the staff of the division is evidenced in the fact

that there is no current backlog of cases within the WHSCRD and we currently

have the shortest waiting period on workers' compensation appeals in Canada.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to present the Annual Report of the Labour

Relations Board. The Labour Relations Board is a quasi-judicial board

established to adjudicate and mediate disputes under the Labour Relations Act,

the Public Service Collective Bargaining Act, and the Fishing Industry

Collective Bargaining Act and others.

During 2002, the board continued to work closely with employees, unions and

employers to respond effectively to the challenges and opportunities presented

to the board. I would like to commend them on their initiative and look forward

to working with them in the future.

Mr. Speaker, the Department of Labour will continue to work with industry

stakeholders on major initiatives designed to improve workplace labour relations

and health and safety. Building on the progress of our strategic approach, the

Department of Labour will continue to respond to the challenges and

opportunities that lie ahead for us.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: In accordance with the Internal Economy Commission Act I

hereby table the Report of the Commission of Internal Economy for the fiscal

year April 1, 2001 to March 31, 2002.

Answers to Questions for Which Notice has been Given

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

MR. WALSH: Mr. Speaker, I stand today to present a report of a question

from the Member for Labrador West regarding details with respect to funding

provided by the Labrador Transportation Initiative Fund for projects that took

place in Labrador under the heading: Other Labrador Initiatives.

The question was basically centering around the activities from 1997-1998, up

to and including March 31, 2003. The question was made to the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board. Also, that such schedules should

include the date and approval, the amount approved, the location of each project

and the description of that work.

I table that information now.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to provide just a little more

information to the question that was asked me during Question Period with

respect to The Rooms, because I think it is important that people of the

Province understand that in the past, because of the state of the facilities we

have with the museum, the archives and the art gallery, that we have not even

been able to receive exhibitions from other provinces or from other countries.

The state and the condition that we would have to hold them in was such that

these countries and other provinces did not wish to loan us their exhibitions.

It is very important now, with the new facility coming on in 2004, that we be in

a position to take advantage of these resources; to share our culture with them

and to help share what they have of ours with people of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, there is one other piece of information which I think people

will find interesting. When I met with the government officials in London, one

of the things they were able to provide my officials and I with, at the time,

was an exhibition of plates, very old photographic plates that dated back to the

Grenfell days in Labrador. They had them there, that somebody had donated to the

Government of England. The Government of England, as a result of my visit,

offered to return them to this Province. So, that is one very tangible outcome.

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the discussions that we had with the Government

of France, we have since learned, since my return, that the Government of France

has already contributed $15,000 towards the Francophone celebrations in 2004

here in this Province. They will be contributing $15,000 towards the building of

chaloupe, which we see as being a very important part of our Francophone

history. I am very pleased with the outcome of those two trips.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday the Member for St. John's East asked me about the selection

procedures for candidates applying for the international Baccalaureate

scholarship for those students that we are going to give scholarships to, to

attend Holy Heart of Mary next year. I have that information. I would like to

table it.

Petitions

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

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to bring forth a petition to this House from residents in my

district, certainly residents of this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. In

particular, from the residents of the Marysvale and Georgetown areas, addressing

the conditions of their roads. In particular, a road in Marysvale, Ryan's

Road.

I would just like to read to you the petition. The prayer is that they

certainly need improvements to the conditions and physical state of Ryan's

Road in Marysvale. They have to use the road on a daily basis to gain access to

the only variety store, convenience store in the area. They are asking, if

possible, to make sure this road is upgraded, perhaps paved at best. The

drainage problems need to be properly addressed. The bottom of the road should

be taken care of through pavement, regardless, to prevent future problems.

Certainly, they would thank the members of this House and the government for

listening and doing something about it.

This is an extension of a previous petition to this House. Again, it is a

petition that is necessary because this particular road, Ryan's Road in

Marysvale, leads to the only convenience store in the area; that is the Hilltop

Video and variety store.

This particular stretch of road, this Ryan's Road, has been problematic for

the customers and the residents using this road. Problematic, not only at

certain times of the year, but almost all times; especially when you get any

deluge of rain or snow. The point of it is that this is a gravel road and it

needs upgrading. It should be taken care of by the maintenance of the local

depot, but in consultation with the depot I came to the realization that they

are hard pressed, I suppose, to come forth with the materials required to carry

out this job. Namely, even the very basics of Class A gravel that is necessary

to bring this road up to a standard that is acceptable.

The thing about it too is that this convenience store, being the only store

in the area, certainly there is a great volume of traffic back and forth over

this road. We have complaints from these customers that they are tearing

mufflers off their vehicles, they are tearing up their tires, scraping the

bottoms of their vehicles. In general, customers are virtually saying that on

bad days when this road is in a bad state, which is just about every second day,

they are bypassing and going -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HEDDERSON: By leave, just a minute to finish up.

In finishing up, Mr. Speaker: The petition certainly is brought forth by

these people. They would like, again, for the minister to make a commitment, not

just to put it on the list but to make sure that the money is available to allow

the local depot to upgrade this road to a standard that is acceptable for the

safety of the motoring public.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, rise today - and we spoke yesterday, also, for two hours in this

House - to present a petition, again, on behalf of the residents of Harbour

Round in my district. I will read the petition first and then have a few

comments.

We, the undersigned residents of Harbour Round, in the District of Baie

Verte, do hereby petition the House of Assembly to upgrade and pave our roads.

The deplorable and unfit condition of the roads in our area makes traveling to

and from school unsafe for our children, as well as jeopardizes the safety of

the residents and the traveling public, hurts economic growth opportunities and

depicts government's lack of commitment to rural areas of our Province.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday we spent two hours of debate in this House talking

about road conditions throughout the Province. Each member on both sides of the

House, from all areas of the Province, talk about the situation we are facing

this year, probably the worst ever, as we see the list of bad roads grow

throughout this Province, of over 1,500 kilometres of old pavement throughout

the Province, and, on top of that, 900 kilometres of gravel road on the Island

portion and hundred and hundreds of kilometres on the Labrador portion.

Mr. Speaker, year after year, day after day, especially rural members - I

know I have presented a number of these petitions. On behalf of the people of

Harbour Round today, who last week, Mr. Speaker, when we saw a little bit of

spring, which should be good news for most people - it is bad news in that, as

one parent described it, it is the end of the season of winter pavement. The

roads are starting to thaw out and we are starting to see the old pavement break

up and chip away. Worse again, in this particular area of my district, Mr.

Speaker, the people in Harbour Round have the gravel roads to contend with.

As many of them have said many times - and these were school children mostly,

who were so upset last week. When we did see the good weather and it was

starting to get a little bit warmer, with these gravel roads, as they are

described over and over, driving over the potholes is like driving over - what

is the word they use when they scrub the -

AN HON. MEMBER: Washboard.

MR. SHELLEY: Washboard, that is right. One of the members used it earlier

today. It is like driving over a washboard time and time again, especially when

they see these roads day after day.

Mr. Speaker, the point I make today is for the students. I have talked to

many of those students day after day. As a matter of fact, I sat on a bus with

some students in Woodstock just a short while ago. They asked me to sit in the

back of the bus and see what they had to face every single morning going to

school and what they had to face every evening coming home.

As many parents know, it is a chore these days, lots of times, to keep

encouraging children to go to school with all kinds of other problems. When you

have to look at a bus ride - we have to remember, after the school reform, the

distances that these children have to travel now are further than they were

before. They are traveling over long distances on deplorable road conditions,

and it is certainly not encouraging to have you child get up every morning and

face that, and then after a long day in school get on those buses and head back

home again.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, these are the types of petitions. People

throughout the Province with these road conditions are asking this government to

finally live up to what they should do with the deplorable road conditions in

our Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition on behalf of approximately 1,000 students

in the Conception Bay South and area, I guess all around Conception Bay. It came

about, I guess, as a visit from my colleague from Harbour Main-Whitbourne and

myself to Queen Elizabeth High in Foxtrap. I will just read the prayer of the

petition, Mr. Speaker.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of the Province

of Newfoundland and Labrador ask for the House of Assembly to accept the

following prayer:

We, the undersigned citizens of Conception Bay South and Holyrood area, wish

to bring to your attention the lack of programs available for students to travel

to Labrador on exchange trips;

WHEREAS it is the duty of the provincial government to encourage cultural

exchanges within our Province of Newfoundland and Labrador; and

WHEREAS programs have been cancelled that allowed for interprovincial

cultural exchanges;

THEREFORE your petitioners ask that government provide the necessary funding

to allow for these cultural necessities.

As in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Like I said, Mr. Speaker, I have almost 1,000 names there. I guess this all

came about because of an industrious teacher by the name of Lynn Verge, a

teacher of mine, actually, back in Queen Elizabeth.

AN HON. MEMBER: Lynn Verge?

MR. FRENCH: Lynn Vatcher, sorry.

She developed a theme, uniting Newfoundland and Labrador through the eyes of

Actually, Mr. Speaker, they read a novel entitled Whiteout by Mr. John

Houston, and they became extremely interested in the Aboriginal culture. Through

their learning, they came to realize exactly how ignorant they were about the

Aboriginal culture, especially the Innu of the North.

These students actually had a negative opinion of the Innu until, Mr.

Speaker, they got into their studies and actually found out what it was all

about. Of course, it is all because of negative stereotyping, as we know, and is

certainly not surprising considering the media attention that has been given to

Davis Inlet and Sheshatshiu for the last number of years.

Mr. Speaker, these students felt that unless they could experience the

culture first-hand, they certainly would not be able to deal with the

stereotyping. Of course, that is what they are hoping to do. It is interesting

to note, and this came up not by prompting by me nor my colleague from Harbour

Main-Whitbourne, but they said the first time they had followed the media on the

Davis Inlet issue was the first time they discovered the $25,000 ad campaign

that the government opposite was conducting at the time. They thought that,

because of that, there should be, obviously, some money available for cultural

exchanges.

This group of students, I guess, Mr. Speaker, consider themselves, or they

explain to us that they were the forgotten ones. They are not able to avail of

scholarship programs because of their levels in education. As well, Mr. Speaker,

they are not all-star athletes.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FRENCH: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) to clue up.

MR. FRENCH: Just to clue up, yes.

As well, Mr. Speaker, they are not all-star athletes, and they certainly do

not have the resources to partake in expensive sports.

There are a number of goals, as well, that these people have planned for

themselves and they certainly would love to do an exchange with the people of

Labrador, students of Labrador, where they could go and experience their

culture.

Mr. Speaker, this is a government that talks about three members from

Labrador. It is the first in history where two Cabinet ministers are from

Labrador, and I suggest to them now to step to the plate, lobby the other

Cabinet ministers and restore cultural exchange programs in this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, before calling the motion that we will be debating

today, I would like to move first reading of Motions 4 to 8 inclusive. Those

are: Order 4, Bill 5; Order 5, Bill 6; Order 6, Bill 7; Order 7, Bill 9; and

Order 8, which is Bill 8. Motions 4 through 8, Mr. Speaker, I move first

reading.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to

introduce the following bills, carried:

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Income Tax Act." (Bill 5)

A bill, "An Act to Amend The Income Tax Act No. 2." (Bill 6)

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Health and Post-Secondary Education Tax

Act." (Bill 7)

On motion, Bills 5, 6 and 7 read a first time, ordered read a second time on

tomorrow.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services to introduce a

bill, "An Act To Revise The Law About The Practice of Optometry,"

carried. (Bill 9)

On motion, Bill 9 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs to

introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Emergency Measures Act,"

carried. (Bill 8)

On motion, Bill 8 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. LUSH: Motion 1, Mr. Speaker.

The motion is, "That this House Approves in General the Budgetary Policy

of the Government." We are resuming the adjourned debate.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion 1.

The hon. the Member for Ferryland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think I can safely say that I do not support this motion, that we approve

the budgetary policy of this government. In fact, we do not even know what their

plans or policies are. How can you approve what they do not even lay out?

The minister tells us they are going to balance the Budget 2008, and does not

even give us any plan. Then she goes out in the media and says: Oh, we have a

good plan. People agree with our plan.

Whenever we ever find it, maybe my colleague from Placentia & St. Mary's

- I hope he finds that plan because we have not been able to see it. We have not

been able to see that plan at all.

The last day when I adjourned debate, on Tuesday - yesterday being Private

Members' Day - I was in the process of going through the different items in

the Budget Speech, and I think I got as far as page 30 in the Budget book. There

is a lengthy Budget Speech, a long speech that did not say a whole lot for the

number of pages. I think it could have been condensed into two or three pages,

but I feel an obligation to comment on it. I think I stopped on page 30 the last

day.

I was speaking about the Municipal Debt Relief Program, and it is important.

Over the past number of years there have been municipalities that have been able

to avail of a program to get a debt burden lifted from them. I know of several

municipalities in my district that had a tax burden that was too high. They had

$700,000 or $800,000 of burdens on infrastructure, water and sewer, that they

could not really meet the interest payments and there was no hope of ever paying

off the principal.

The program did work in several communities, and I am sure all around this

Province there are numerous other communities that had an opportunity to have a

certain amount of that burden lifted. They were left with an amount that was

felt they could adequately support, a debt level they could support. Of course,

with a certain tax structure to ensure certain revenues coming in, basically in

line with their budget, they could meet these. Since that, some have been able

to do it with reasonable comfort, certainly with no excess funds but they have

been able to meet their debt obligations, and other communities have had to

struggle.

There is one particular community I know that has had to struggle to meet

that, because, with the declining population, declining tax base and revenues

coming in, it is kind of difficult to be able to meet that debt requirement.

Now, we have seen in this Province, there is a significant deficit of

municipal infrastructure. We are talking about water and sewer, and there are

also roads. The roads in our Province are in a bad state, and there are some

municipalities that cannot afford to participate in a 50-50 cost-share on roads.

I have spoke to many municipalities in my district that cannot come up with the

$10,000 that is needed to cost-share the $20,000 expense on a municipal or

council road, we will call them, or a town road.

So, it is kind of difficult to do that when you are a small community. In

fact, one community in my district is so small that it only has a handful of

taxpayers, only has about forty taxpayers, twenty-some residents. It is a town,

it constitutes a town, so they cannot afford it. How do twenty-some people with

no business base support an infrastructure program? It cannot be done. There are

other communities even larger than that, with a few hundred people, that are not

able to meet the ongoing needs for infrastructure.

So what is happening with roads now within towns? I am finding town roads

right now are full of potholes. Some of them are in worse shape than if it was

gravel road. The only consolation they have in spring thawing is that we find

that at least there is some pavement to maneuver around the potholes. In other

areas there is a lot of damage. People reported damage even on highways, with a

lot of potholes and a lot of work needing to be done.

Towns do not have that money in little communities, and there are many of

them around my district. I am not going to get into naming all of the

communities. Some of them have made representation. They would love to be able

to do the work, but they cannot do it unless they can come up with their own

share of money. So if they can never cost-share it, what is going to happen?

Year after year the condition gets progressively worse and there is just no

money there to be able to do it.

We have seen around our Province there has been a significant amount of money

pumped into roads over the past number of years. The former federal minister,

John Crosbie, negotiated a deal in the Province here to spend, I think $800

million is the figure to be used on roads over a period of fifteen years, from

1988-2003. This year we are seeing the end of that road infrastructure program.

We are in bad need now of negotiating with the federal government an

infrastructure program for roads in our Province. When the railway went, we got

an infusion of money. The roads have been able, at $800 million, for the

Trans-Canada and trunk roads, to put a significant infrastructure in place. Now

we have to be able to maintain that and there are still some areas that need to

be done.

I have spoken with people in different parts of this country - people who

have come here to visit - and the roads that have been completed in the last

fifteen years have been in very good shape. It has been very positive and

tourists comment on that, but other areas are bad. If only we could negotiate

another road infrastructure program with a federal-provincial to hopefully be

able to do other areas of the Trans-Canada and trunk roads, because the trunk

roads system - even in my district I will make reference. In my district, from

Witless Bay area, within the town, back to the Witless Bay Line needs to be

done. That is only a short

section about a couple of kilometres in length. It is

not significant in length. Then, another

section between Cape Broyle and

Ferryland needs to be done, and then just south of Ferryland. In a lot of areas

of that main highway there are a lot of potholes.

As I was going up to Trepassey on Saturday, I took note of the many areas you

have to navigate around potholes and so on, on the highway. I guess, fortunately

in one sense, for driving purposes, there is not a huge amount of traffic in

that area because we have seen a declining population. It is fortunate, from the

driving perspective, because when you are not meeting somebody you can move

around those potholes, but there is a significant deterioration of our roads and

our structure. We need to have a significant input into it.

Also, even here - and I understand there is a problem dealing at the

municipal level on the Goulds bypass road. One of the ramps on the Goulds bypass

road - two years the road has been constructed. It is finished and it has not

opened. I understand there were concerns in getting the city to address the area

of Goulds Elementary School there, or the primary school in that area, to be

able to address those concerns in that particular area because there are no

sidewalks and kids are going to school there. People are contacting me,

indicating that there is ramp, an access to that particular road, put in place

and it is not even opened up two years later. That is the only ramp off that

road from the time you leave Bay Bulls Big Pond until you get into the Ruby

Line, and it has not been opened.

What is happening is, you are not moving as much traffic off the Goulds road

as you normally would. If that was open, any traffic that has a destination to

the Goulds area could be using that particular ramp, coming off that ramp, and

they have not been using that. I have had numerous requests about that.

Hopefully, it will be put in place this year that the city - if that is still

the delay. The last time I checked, I spoke with people in the Department of

Works, Services and Transportation, and that was the concern at that time.

Whether it is planned to be rectified now, I am not entirely sure, but I made

that inquiry when I had a lot of calls from people on it.

Mr. Speaker, we need an infrastructure program to continue the effort across

the Province, because a good portion of our Trans-Canada now, I must say,

significant work has gone in out of this federal money, this influx of federal

money. On trunk roads, there are many nice highways now. If you go down to CBS,

even the Goulds bypass road, out to CBN and those areas, which I drive on some

of these roads reasonably frequently, I find that they are in good condition, I

must say. They expedite traffic. They keep traffic from going through the

communities. It was really a major problem. If you had to drive from St. John's,

down the Roaches Line, go to Carbonear before Harbour Grace, it was a nightmare

with all of those communities. I know Mr. Speaker would certainly be familiar

with that area there. Now, with Veterans' Memorial Drive, I think that is the

correct name of that road there, I had an opportunity there just a while ago to

drive that and it certainly makes things a lot easier. It moves traffic off the

other areas in those communities, and makes it a little bit easier for people to

move about within those communities.

The same thing will happen with the Goulds area too. I think traffic on the

road in the Goulds area will be lessened somewhat because people who would

normally be going from my district into the Bidgood's Plaza area there, who

now have to go out through the Goulds area, will be able to come down Doyle's

Road area when that is completed. That will move traffic off that main road

going through the Goulds, and expedite things there. However, it could cause

some problems to the Doyle's Road area, and hopefully that will be resolved to

everyone's satisfaction very shortly.

We have seen a fair amount of road work done. We look in Labrador, for

example, the Trans-Labrador Highway, where we received a chunk of money from the

federal government in lieu of taking over the ferry system to Labrador. The

ferry system, to run it here, this Island to Labrador, costs a fair amount of

money. They had projected that the cost would go down as the road got completed,

and the traffic volumes would go down and so on, but, what has happened? That

did not happen. The cost had gone up to over $20 million. I think it was in the

$22 million range, the difference between the revenues they take in and their

expenses. Along with trying to do the highway, the pot of money would get

depleted and you would use it up. In the next several years we would find that

the money would be run out and then we have to face meeting that shortfall out

of provincial funds forever, actually. Forever! Still we do not have the funds

to complete the highway. It is imperative, too, that we see a link between Happy

Valley-Goose Bay, Lake Melville area down to Cartwright, where the new road

begins to connect it down to Red Bay - which was isolated before. These

communities were isolated. People had to depend on other modes of transportation

to get there, either fly there - wintertime. People operate, and still do, by

snowmobile in the wintertime. It is important to have an appropriate system of

transportation because transportation is vital, Mr. Speaker. It is vital to

businesses operating. It is vital to the efficient moving of goods and services,

and for people. Also, to encourage people to spend their money. If they move

around more there is more business generated, the mobility and so on. This

isolation is being eliminated with the Trans-Labrador Highway, and that is the

very positive step, I might add. It is great to see it. It is great to see

everybody getting hooked up to that particular link.

Even St. Lewis, a decision was made after on that. Pinsent Arm, I believe,

was raised in addition, I understand. But, the main highway certainly is well

along and, hopefully, over the next while we will see some work and a strong

inroads made between Cartwright and back to the Lake Melville area. I think it

is vital for communication. It is vital to bring the people of Labrador closer

to the Island portion of the Province, not only physically, but in all aspects.

It is important. We are part of one Province. We want people there to feel a

strong part of our Province. I think we have to do things that would bring us

closer together, not facilitate the movement of goods and all services through

Quebec into our Province. The more we can bring it together, the more positive

it is for our future and the future of Labrador; and the needs, too, of

Labrador, in particular, because it is a particularly expensive area to visit.

It is expensive for people there. Thank God, traditionally, most people there

have had good paying jobs or employment was very high especially with mining

towns there and people were able to have a decent standard of living.

As we find out, as the workforce shrinks at those mines and more automation

and equipment occurs, we are seeing a decline in populations there. I know at

one time there were thirty-some hundred people working at IOC. To my knowledge

now, it is down to about half of that amount approximately, which means there

are less employed directly there with automation, new advances and so on. It is

important to stay competitive there. We understand those things but what that

means is there are more areas - there is a higher chance of unemployment then in

those areas and there is a higher reliance, I think, on other services, whether

it would be under social programs in our Province because of that.

So, a healthy workforce, a high participation rate in the workforce and a

high employment rate are all conducive to the health and economy of our

Province. There are strong indicators of the fiscal ability of a Province to

prosper and grow. We cannot just look at factors like the GDP and say because

our GDP is going up that things are great. Well, things are not great just

because it is going up.

I heard the minister making reference there also that: look, we have been so

successful - she said in the media yesterday - at growing our provincial

revenues. One thing they have been more successful at, Mr. Speaker, is growing

our debt. Because our debt, compared to provincial revenues, was $235 million

two years ago; 235 per cent of provincial revenues. The projection now is that

our deficit is 258 per cent. So, the debt has gone up significantly in terms of

our revenues. Our debt is now 258 per cent of the revenues that we are taking

in, when it was only 235. How can you say we have been successful at growing our

revenues? If you are, you have been more successful at growing our debt. It is

all right to grow provincial revenues if they are going up. But, Mr. Speaker,

when the debt goes up faster than the revenues, there is something wrong. That

is telling us we are getting deeper in debt. There is a bigger problem

occurring. There is a problem we are passing on to our children.

The goal of this government should be to reduce that from 258 per cent, the

debt, as a source of provincial revenues and get it down. Start that downward

trend because that means we have an economy that is more prosperous. That shows

why we may be making more money. That is like the person who goes out and gets

an increase in wages at $10,000 a year and goes out and spends $15,000 more

because they got a $10,000 raise. That, to me, Mr. Speaker, is not fiscal

responsibility. It is not what we should be doing. That is not addressing the

concerns of our Province. That is turning your back. That is telling people in

this Province today - the children there - that you are going to have to assume

a higher debt because of our irresponsibility.

What are the people saying to the government and telling them? Young people

are telling government: we do not want your debt. We will go out and take the

debt in Alberta where we can get a job where it is a lot lower; or Ontario or

some other part of the country. Any other part of the country is not as heavily

indebted as the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Economist will tell you

that. I have references here which I will get to a little later, on another

topic, where we are fiscally. I will talk about that and some of the statements

that were made yesterday a little later this afternoon.

Mr. Speaker, I was talking about the Trans-Labrador Highway and

transportation, but another important part of this whole thing in Labrador is a

ferry replacement program; not only for the people of Labrador. People of this

Province, too, depend on the ferry service. Close to St. John's there is Bell

Island. In particular, other large populations use it in Fogo Island and also a

much smaller population on Change Islands. There are others right across - in

different areas of the Province, from the south coast. We had one - in fact, it

was just a resettled community there that was depending on the ferry service. So

we have ferry services depending on many parts of the Province; St. Brennan's

and others. There are numerous ones out there.

We are finding that this government has been saying for a decade - I do not

know but more - they have been saying: a vessel replacement program. They have a

plan to replace the ferry system. We are seeing an aging fleet of vessels in our

Province. It is going up. The ages are going up immensely. Some are beyond their

lifespan, in the high thirty years of age. What did the government do to try to

alleviate it? As my colleague for Cape St. Francis says, they went over and

hired a rust bucket in Estonia, that does not meet any standards, for $500,000

U.S. At that time, in the ballpark of $750,000 or a little more Canadian. Now

the figures are about $8 million and climbing. Well beyond the halfway point of

getting a brand new vessel built that could have been built here in our

Province.

We are putting all these things on the back burner and it is taking its toll,

Mr. Speaker. We are putting in a roads program that is only half what is usually

spent from a provincial budget. Our roads are in desperate shape in most parts

of our Province, as I have just addressed. The federal money that came has

improved the Trans-Canada. This pot of money that came, with the Trans-Canada

and the trunk roads agreement, has improved those areas, no doubt, but in other

parts of our Province, we can't get to them fast enough. They are way beyond

their time, to where it is causing a lot of damage to vehicles and people. There

are a lot of complaints because the roads are in such terrible shape. Sometimes

there is no identification there to tell you, you are coming up to a pothole

that you might even get lost in, or ruts and so on. Some of them are there and

people are not even aware of them. In fact, people have been cut back, staff

wise, and I guess they can't keep ahead of it. One of my colleagues said: If

you had to keep putting them up wherever they are to, it would be easier to put

up a sign saying, there is no pothole on this stretch, because it is getting to

that point in some areas.

Ferry replacement is important. They are going to consider replacing it. That

is what the Budget said: We will consider replacing the Hamilton Sound .

That is pretty good news in the Budget, to say we are going to consider

something. It is not a very concrete or very compelling thing to tell people who

are depending on an aging ferry system. We have seen trouble in the past. I

think my colleague from Baie Verte made reference to one before. They had the

boat in the water and it kept going around and around and around. It was like a

spin top. They had tremendous trouble in the past with some of these vessels.

So, it is important that something be done, because we are at the point now

where we are going to have to spend tens and tens of millions to get us back on

an even par to where we were ten or fifteen years ago on the ferry system. We

are going to have to spend millions and millions to get our road system back to

where it was ten or fifteen years ago. We are going to have to spend millions

and millions on other infrastructure to get us back to where we were to.

What we are doing is, we are allowing a depletion of assets where there is an

infusion of money needed. We have gotten to the point where we have not been

managing our expenditures, controlling and making decisions. We have done a lot

of patch work and band-aid approaches that waste money. We have got to use it to

get something there of greater permanency, so that, Mr. Speaker, our

transportation system, our ferry system - there are a fair number of people in

this Province who depend on a ferry system.

MR. REID: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Pardon? There are a fair number of people who depend on a

ferry system in this Province, on the South Coast and the minister, who just

passed a comment there across the House, in his district too, on Fogo Island and

in the Twillingate area. There is a strong dependancy on it there, too, I might

add.

We can see that an efficient service is important, one that is accessible.

There are significant numbers who live there. I am not sure of the number, but I

think in the vicinity of 3,000 people, probably, on Fogo Island. I think there

are a couple of hundred or so people, in that range, on Change Island, on the

north end of the island, who depend on it. There are traditionally numerous

other areas. Bell Island is another fairly populated area. So, efficient service

is important, and a service that is competitive.

If you want to talk about transportation in general, across the Gulf of St.

Lawrence: People come here, but a lot of people turn around in Cape Breton with

the costs there and getting the availability and getting traffic through. If

someone has just a week of vacation left, they don't want to spend a day or

two waiting to get a crossing at a higher cost. They will see Cape Breton and

see other areas.

Now, we have been successful in increasing tourism here because people who

come here, see what is here. They see what we have to offer. They have something

special in Newfoundland and Labrador, they have a people. One of things people

comment on most - it is not just the beautiful scenery or certain aspects they

like, whether it is areas like my district, archeology or historic premises or

whether it is in Bonavista, or Barbour House, wherever it is. Every district has

a lot of things to offer. Things that people remark to me a lot about are the

people. The people are different. You know, they are friendlier. They are more

hospitable. They can drive down a road in rural Newfoundland and someone will

speak to you, and chat with you and so on. They are a friendly people because

people grew up that way.

People in rural Newfoundland grew up, and in urban areas, and knew each other

in the neighbourhoods and so on; not like big cities. People did not go to bed

and lock their doors. They left their keys in their cars, and things of that

nature. Now we are seeing a little change from that to a degree, but still,

there is something about rural Newfoundland, especially when you look at the

elderly people, the friendliest. Hopefully, it will be passed on to future

generations so people in the future will be able to offer that as probably one

of our best attractions, our people here in the Province.

So, these are some of the things, but people need to get here. With the

increasing cost of transportation - the cost of flying here is becoming

expensive. It's fairly expensive now. At least there is a competition out

there now. Other areas are offering reasonably cheap fares to get from here to

Halifax, or Toronto or wherever. Competition in the industry is important. It is

healthy in industry. People in Labrador know about transportation and the cost,

and the lack of competitiveness sometimes that drives up fares. Competition

keeps businesses down. It keeps fares down for people. It drives you to a more

competitive business. You need to run a more efficient business with competition

there. So, that is all a part of it. They look at cost cutting. They look at

dealing with what the consumer wants, and sometimes they may reduce consumer

demands in what they offer in flights to get cheaper fares. There are a variety

of things that are happening with competition in the industry there.

Of course, we know today that there is trouble in our major carrier in

Canada. They filed for bankruptcy protection. That puts the future - it raises

certain question marks there. Although most people, I think, believe that we are

going to see a continuation of our major carrier here in the country but other

areas are stepping up and providing the competition to allow people to be able

to avail of cheaper flights. That is positive in terms of tourism because if

there are limitations, especially in the summertime, it is vital that we have

sufficient numbers. That is why our transportation and tourism ministers - I am

sure they are cognizant of that and will be working together to reduce the

barriers that are preventing people from coming here, spending their money and

adding to the coffers of our Province; coming here for certain attractions. Our

Province has a lot to offer under these particular areas.

Transportation is one of the most important factors in operating a business.

The cost of getting goods and services, not only to the business but getting

them to the market is vital. I know a little bit about that, having spent twenty

years in business moving products and services to different parts of the world -

from Japan and the UK, the United States and other areas in Europe and elsewhere

- that transportation is important. We are dealing with different transportation

modes. We are dealing with different currencies. We are dealing with other

areas. But, transportation is vital. If we do not have competition on these

routes we are going to find that it is more difficult to do business. So we have

to move toward tearing down barriers in transportation. I know with the tariffs,

for example - my colleague from The Straits & White Bay North has talked

about it. He talked about the importance of reducing tariffs for the export of

products here. Shrimp, for example, is one particular one. Why are they going to

come back here to process it and pay a 20 per cent tariff on that? We need to

remove barriers.

In the UK, for example, you could not completely - when in business - skin

the fillet and take the bone out and send it there because of tariffs. So you

had to sell it with the skin on. You had to fillet it and send it with the skin

on. The market, of course, wanted that to a degree but also because there were

certain prohibitive tariffs that prevented moving goods and services into

countries.

The European Union has moved, in light of a global economy, to tear down

barriers within countries of the European Union. We need to do that between us

and the European Union. We need to do it as done between us and the United

at the time, moved forward. That was the Mulroney government. They said: free

trade is important between Canada and the United States for opening up boarders.

There is a big market in the United States. If we could move into that market,

which is ten times the size of ours, there could be new opportunities. There was

resistance that it would destroy our economy; it would have an adverse effect.

The Prime Minister of the day stood and opposed this. As soon as he got in and

got elected, he wanted to expand it to North America; take all of North America

into it because they seen that there were positives. The Ontario manufacturing

industries and other spin-off industries. We tore down barriers and we opened up

new doors for exports around North America under this particular agreement. They

seen the benefits of that.

I do not want to get into it, but there were also a couple of other promises

that came at that time. It was not on transportation, so I will make quick

reference to them. That is the time when they talked about what they would do

with the GST if they were elected. The Prime Minister: When we get elected the

GST is gone. Was that the one Sheila Copps resigned over? After she did a poll

and found out she would get re-elected, then she resigned and got re-elected to

keep her commitment. When they got in the GST stayed, of course. They figured

they needed that revenue on GST. Of course, the helicopters, they scrapped that.

We have a force that needs, or is in bad need of helicopters. Now they have to

go back and do it again because they left a gap without having sufficient

resources there. So, we are dealing with the same problems.

You have to look and think, they must be of a political nature, those types

of things, because you do not agree with them when you are in Opposition, but

when you get in you agree with them. There are lots of things. I think we have

to move beyond political things. If you realized something and you got in power

and said: look, it can work better this way. I think the flexibility and the

commitment to change is positive, and it is important.

Sometimes everybody do not have access to all the facts. When you get them

you might change your opinion. You might change an opinion when all the facts

are laid on the table. I believe that we have to look at things in the full

perspective and make the best decisions. Governments have reversed decisions in

the past the same as that. Why do you stick with it, if you think a decision is

wrong? The way I look at it, if you are in business and you think you are doing

something wrong and hurting your business, you cut fast. You would cut your

losses quick and move on to something more positive. That is the same way it

should be with the taxpayers' money. You should do the same thing. I think it

is important.

A Future of Jobs and Growth in the Province: Of course, the Strategy for Jobs

and Growth, we all have seen that and looked at it. There has to be an overall,

not only a strategy but a direct and strong effort made to increase labour

productivity in our Province. Labour productivity is important. Labour

productivity is one of the markets of a successful economy, and a measure of the

fiscal performance of a Province.

Employment, unemployment, marks your fiscal performance in a province. It is

very important. And, of course, when you look at how a province is doing, are we

doing well? You have to look at a lot of factors. You have to look at our tax

structure and our taxation. We are one of the highest taxed individuals in the

country, our Province, the highest taxes.

If major companies want to put offices here, and their employees are getting

a fairly good income, would you put it in an office where the personal income

taxes are higher or lower?

I know of an individual who told me he is living in an area - I will not name

the place - that has a lower taxation, in Europe, rather than here. He could

even live here, because when you are offshore it does not matter where you live.

He is living there because of the really low taxation. It is enticing. He said:

I do not want to lose $20,000 or $30,000 of my income on taxation. I can provide

a better life for my family. I have more income, much more access to major

centres of the world from where they are living, because taxation does drive

businesses to locate in areas.

Not just business tax, I might add. Personal income is a very important

determinant in where businesses develop and the rate that you would charge. That

is important. Of course there are other factors, and I am not naive enough to

think it is the only factor. There are numerous factors: closeness to market,

closeness to supply and so on. There is transportation, access to

transportation. That is why I say in this Province, and I made reference to it

earlier, transportation is a impediment in this Province to carrying on activity

and the movement of goods and the provision of certain services. It is

important. We have to minimize. We can never eliminate our geographical barrier

in terms of some businesses, but we can reduce the handicaps there, or we could

look at our location as positive in some other area. While it may be a handicap

in a certain business, there are positives that it can have in other businesses.

It is away from the main stream. It is quieter, more peaceful, an attraction to

tourists. In today's market, with the high access to technologies today,

business can be carried out in different parts of the world. The location

sometimes is not the particular determining factor in a lot of particular

provisions of certain services.

One of the references made here in dealing with that is Payroll Tax Relief.

Up to now, it references here that it will increase to $600,000 or less, you

will be exempt from paying the payroll tax. Above that, between $600,000 and

$700,000, you are going to pay a decreasing amount in that particular category

depending where you are. There is a phase approach between the $600,000 and

$700,000, and beyond $700,000 you pay the full rate of payroll tax.

Most of the payroll tax, you might not realize, or most people might not

realize - I know people close to the situation realize - the payroll tax that we

take in, in our Province, if you look at, even here in this Budget, I will just

make reference to the amount for the benefit of knowing how much we are really

taking in, in payroll tax, it is $88 million we are proposing to pay in payroll

tax. Forty-two per cent of that is paid by ourselves, to ourselves. That is an

in-and-out item. Forty-two per cent of $88 million, so that is, I guess, in the

mid-thirties. Forty-two per cent of payroll tax we pay ourselves, to ourselves.

Really, only 58 per cent of the payroll tax - about $50 million of that $88

million, really, in that ballpark - we get from other sources, and 1.7 per cent

of that or 1.8 per cent of that comes from municipalities. Municipalities in our

Province pay a per cent of that. The federal government pays about 9.5 per cent

of that tax. If you look at it all, governments are paying about 53 per cent.

Out of the $88 million of income tax, 47 per cent is coming from business. That

is less than half of $88 million,. You are looking at about $42 million to $43

million that is coming from businesses. The rest is coming from government,

municipalities to a lesser extent. To a great extent the bulk of it, then, out

of the rest, is coming from our own Province. We pay $35 million into our own

coffers and then we take it out. That is not even a figure, basically, that

affects our bottom line, where it is an in-and-out item.

AN HON. MEMBER: He said (inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Forty-four per cent of $88 million, I say to the minister.

If you want to work it out, I said around 42 per cent.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: I said provincial. Forty-two per cent of $88 million, I am

sure he could work it out. I would say it is in the vicinity of about $36

million, if I had to take a quick guess at it.

Mr. Speaker, with small businesses in particular trying to get off the

ground, they struggle. I think it is important, and certain incentives are

needed. In act, the minister states here - and I will just finish on the payroll

tax - in the minister's Budget Speech she said this would remove, by

increasing up to $600,000 and then have it phased in between $600,000 and

$700,000, this addition this year will remove160 employers from the tax roll,

saying there are 2,200 employers now who do not have to pay the payroll tax

since 1998. There is an additional 120 employers who will benefit from a tax

reduction, because there were 120 employers who came within the range, I guess,

of between $600,000 and $700,000 of payroll income.

Whatever way you look at it, this tax, a payroll tax, is a tax on payroll, a

tax on salaries, and salaries are paid to people who work. It is a tax on jobs,

so payroll tax is a tax on jobs. There is no doubt about it. When you put a tax

on jobs, what does a company do? What does a small business do, if they have

enough employees to have a payroll where twenty employees, for example, could

end up paying tax easy enough? If you have twenty or twenty-five employees and

you are at the level now that: Look, I am about $600,000 and my payroll is going

to go over $600,000 - between $600,000 and $700,000. Before, I guess, they would

said: If I have an extra employee, I am going to go over on that and I am going

to have to pay a payroll tax, so we will get by with one less. We will get by

with a payroll that is just slightly less, and the efforts would be made to keep

the payroll down. That might be extra work, where you might reduce an employee.

Now, by putting it in between $600,000 and $700,000, well, at least it says to

an employer: If it goes to $620,000, at least I am going to get a break. A

marginal break is going to decrease on that extra difference. So that sort of

eases your way in and says: Well, it is not a big amount. It is only those that

are $700,000 now who are ones that are going to have to pay the full shot over

the $700,000 payroll. So you can see it is a carrot to dangle for those that

fall into that category, no doubt about it.

We have seen small businesses in our Province get a lower rate, basically, on

their corporate income tax, the corporate income tax of 14 per cent. Small

businesses now have said the small business threshold - I think the small

business one was 5 per cent, the reduction in what constitutes a small business.

The minister said that, the threshold of income now, above which a corporation

will pay tax at a much higher rate, is set at $200,000. Then she goes on to say:

It will increase by 50 per cent over the next four years.

Well, it will, but this follows on the heels of the federal government

because the federal government has announced that small business is going to be

from $200,000 to $300,000, so it is kind of impractical to have our Province at

one level and the federal government at another. It can