RESOURCE ESTIMATES COMMITTEE

May 9, 1991

Dept. of Forestry and Agriculture

(Unedited)

The Committee met at 9:30 a.m. in the House of

Assembly.

MR. CHAIRMAN (Walsh): Order, please!

I would like to welcome everyone this morning to the

Estimates Committee for the Department of Forestry and Agriculture. Before

beginning I would like to welcome the Minister and his officials. Also I would

like to welcome Members of the Committee: the Vice-Chairman, the Member for

Humber Valley; the Member for LaPoile; the Member for Fortune - Hermitage; the

Member for Green Bay; and the Member for Pleasantville.

Before beginning I would like to just lay down some of

the ground rules on the way this particular Committee has worked. Of course this

is a committee of the House of Assembly and we will work under the rules that

exist for the House of Assembly. So our Standing Orders are in use this morning.

I would also like to advise the group attending with the Minister, his

officials, that all questions being asked today are being asked through the

Minister and by his leave he may, if he so desires, not only seek advice of

course but direct one of his officials to answer the question if he feels that

is a little more convenient. But just a reminder that all questions are through

the Minister.

With that in mind I would like to turn to the

Minister, Mr. Flight, for his opening statement. I remind all participants this

morning that for the sake of Hansard where our collective voices may not be

heard that if we are going to speak would we please identify ourselves first,

and then by all means begin with your answers.

The other format we have had is that we have gone ten

minutes, Government-Opposition, and in the last hour we have tended to double up

the time for the Opposition, Mr. Minister, thus allowing us hopefully to deal

with the estimates in one sitting and be able to do it all in the three hour

time limit. I might add also that the right to do that in terms of going for a

full twenty minutes on occasion is by leave of the Member who would normally

have the ten minutes. So if need be we may go back into the ten minute time slot

for the last hour as well. We have found that format works very well for this

Committee and we have been able to deal with virtually all our estimates within

the prescribed time limit.

With that, Mr. Minister, if you would like to have an

opening statement, the floor is yours.

MR. FLIGHT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First I

should say through you to the Committee that we are pleased to be here to meet

the Committee. We are putting ourselves in the hands of the Committee to have

our estimates questioned or scrutinized and we are pleased with that process.

Although most Members now have individually met the

various officials I should officially introduce them. On my immediate right is

Bob Peters, the Deputy Minister of Forestry and Agriculture; on my far right is

Dr. Hugh Whitney, acting ADM of the Department and representing the Agricultural

side; on my immediate left is Dr. Mohammed Nazir, Assistant Deputy Minister of

Forestry and Agriculture, again with responsibility for the Forestry side of the

Department; and sitting next, behind me and to my right, is Mr. Bernie McGuire,

our Financial Director.

So with that, Mr. Chairman, I do have a short opening

statement, I doubt if it is ten minutes, I hope it is not any longer than ten

minutes. I intend to read it and that will be my opening comment.

MR. CHAIRMAN: By leave.

MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Chairman, I would like to read a

short prepared statement as an introduction to today's discussion of the

estimates of the Department of Forestry and Agriculture.

The forest products industry over the past year has

suffered somewhat from the recession. Prices of newsprint and lumber have

remained under pressure, affecting the profitability of the industry. At the

same time newsprint markets are demanding higher quality. I believe our three

paper mills are coping satisfactorily with the situation and there are signs

that the worst is over for a while. The outlook for 1991 is just about full

production in this Province from the newsprint industries.

There are two achievements highlighted the past year

in the Forestry side of my Department. One was the signing with the Federal

Government a new cost shared cooperation agreement on forestry development for a

total of $64.3 million over a period of five years.

This will help ensure a continued investment in

improving the productivity of the forest resource. The second achievement was

that a new Forestry Act was passed in the last session of the House of Assembly

and proclaimed on April 15 of this year. This Act requires my Department to

manage the forest on a sustained yield and sustained development basis. it also

requires the Department to put in place a comprehensive system of management

planning. It also provides a reasonable protection to the land base for forest

production. These have always been the objectives and practices of the

Department but enshrining these principles in legislation is a major step

forward.

Now coming to the Budget estimates before you. The

total allocation for forest resource management in 1991-1992 is slightly higher

than the previous year. However in a number of areas the allocation of funds is

lower as compared to last year. For example, forest inventory last year included

a considerable amount of work in Labrador. That work was done as a result of an

amendment to the previous forest resource development agreement. With the

completion of that work this activity will be scaled down.

Similarly the reduction in the insect control

programme is a response to reduced insect infestations. On the other hand,

expenditures on silviculture development have increased by almost $2 million as

compared to the previous year. Similarly expenditures on forest enhancement have

been almost doubled.

The biggest programme in 1991-1992 will be the

silviculture programme. Most of this programme will be carried out under the

Canada-Newfoundland Cooperation Agreement for Forestry Development which was

recently signed. A smaller portion will be directly funded by the Province. All

the usual activities will be carried out: seedling production, planting and

thinning, as well as site preparation and stand reclamation. Stand reclamation

involves cleaning all the dead, broken and dying trees from a site. We plan to

thin about 7,000 hectares and plant approximately 4,000 hectares of current

cutovers. In addition some 2,000 hectares of backlog area will be planted. These

reforestation efforts will require the production of 8 to 10 million seedlings

per year. Under the Labrador Development Agreement operational trials will be

conducted which will include: site preparation, equipment trials, direct

seedling, with various species on different sites, planting trials and a fire

rehabilitation study.

The estimates show that the Province will continue its

forest worker training programme again this year. This is done through the

Newfoundland Forestry Training Association which is an incorporated, non-profit

association dedicated to the training of productive forest workers in

Newfoundland and Labrador. The other two members are Abitibi-Price and Corner

Brook Pulp and Paper Limited.

The Private Woodlot Management Programme, which has

been operating in the western part of Newfoundland, will be extended to the

eastern part of Newfoundland as well. The programme has three objectives: to

encourage landowners to become actively involved in wood lot management; to

create additional employment opportunities and to improve the long term

financial prospect of woodlot owners; and thirdly, to promote and foster an

appreciation and an understanding of forest management principles. We believe

that by improving the productivity of the private woodlots the Department can

increase the production of wood in the Province as well as employment

opportunities for owners of the woodlots.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Carry on, Mr. Minister, do not be

concerned with the time.

MR. FLIGHT: While the insect infestation has

declined considerably in the Province there are still pockets of hemlock looper

and spruce budworm. Of course, as the hon. Members will know, this week I

announced that we did not expect and will not be carrying out an aerial control

programme this year. However, intensive surveys will continue to monitor the

situation.

Under the forest inventory programme the inventory

work in Labrador will be substantially completed and work on the geographic

information system for the rest of the Province will continue. The Labrador work

consists of a compilation of an inventory of Labrador forest resources using

satellite imagery, conventional aerial photography and large scale digital

photography.

My Department will again be helping in the

Newfoundland sawmilling industry through considerable research and development

on harvesting operations, improved utilization, improved efficiency of sawmills,

and promoting the forest industry in Labrador. A number of innovative fire

protection concepts will be tested in our firefighting organization.

This year's budget allocation also included $1.3

million for access road construction which is now a totally provincially funded

activity. In the past this was funded through the Canada-Newfoundland

cost-shared agreements, since the roads programme is now totally provincially

funded this allowed the Department to increase expenditures on silviculture and

other areas in the new Canada-Newfoundland Cooperation Agreement for Forestry

Development.

Mr. Chairman, in agriculture we are also faced with

challenges that the whole country must face. The recession and increased

competitive situation are putting pressures on all Canadian agriculture that

were not there a few years ago.

Our industry in this Province is expanding and still

needs considerable development assistance to reach its full potential. Cash farm

receipts have fortunately shown an increase for 1989 to 1990 of $800,000 from

$58.5 million to $59.3 million. The majority of this comes from the livestock

sector, $43.3 million coming from the livestock sector with the remaining from

crops and the crop value is $8.7 million. In the livestock industry, dairy,

poultry, eggs and hogs have been the predominant commodities.

Our fur industry which increased rapidly in the late

1980s faced a world-wide price drop in 1988 which only recently seems to be

improving through increased prices and demand for silver fox.

Though we remain an net importer of food products we

are self-sufficient in fluid milk, eggs, and export blueberries, partridge

berries and furs. We have recently released the Task Force on Agri-Foods Report

which gives numerous recommendations on the future growth potentials in this

Province's agri-food industry. A senior review committee is looking over the

document and will be reporting to me shortly.

Agriculture in Newfoundland and Labrador will benefit

from the new Canada-Newfoundland Comprehensive Labrador Subsidiary Agreement.

New ways to develop agriculture activities are being examined in the hope of

broadening the economic base of that area.

In closing, Mr. Chairman, I would like to say that

even in times of economic difficulty we are constantly working on ways to

improve and expand the economic activities in agriculture and forestry for the

benefit of all the citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Now, Mr. Chairman, that is an overview of the

activities of the past year and our expectations for the coming year in the

Department of Forestry and Agriculture.

I should say to my officials that I am sure I read it

exactly as they wrote it but it does in my opinion give a fairly comprehensive

overview. You say the format is for a representative of the committee to

respond, I am looking forward to that. I am looking forward to any questions the

Committee may have with regard to the Estimates or any part thereof.

Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister.

We will turn now to Mr. Hewlett, Green Bay.

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Minister indicated that the three mills in the

Province appeared to be on solid footing for this year. I would just like him to

reiterate or expand on that because I know the mill closest to my District, the

Grand Falls mill, has a rumour on the go every second week that Grand Falls will

not see it through the next month or whatever and so far the rumours all seem to

turn out false and the mill continues on. Do you feel reasonably assured that

the three mills and especially the Grand Falls mill are in good shape?

MR. FLIGHT: Yes, we do. You are right, I guess it

is a month to month, year to year situation with any mill, given the situation

of the international market. There is an oversupply as you know. Abitibi-Price

announced long ago, and we have talked about it in the House, that they have to

take 200,000 tonnes of newsprint out of the marketplace. We have known for some

time that one of the options they had was to shut a mill and, of course, it was

in the past week that they identified that mill as being Thunder Bay. It is a

fact also that the international union went back to Abitibi-Price and proposed

that instead of shutting the mill, I can understand this approach, that instead

of shutting the mill and losing 400 jobs and devastating the economy of that

given area, one option would be to share the downtime, to take the 200,000 tons

out of all the mills across the system. The result of that was there was a task

force struck by company and union, from what I understand, a tax force was

struck late last week to report late this week on whether or not that was an

option that would be pursued. If it is an option to be pursued then the Grand

Falls management, the union, and whoever takes

part in that has to decide

whether or not they are happy with that. I have been questioned publicly about

it and my position is simply that it is a decision of the union. If this were a

case of downtime, purely to take 50,000 or 60,000 tons of paper out of the

marketplace my position would be that Grand Falls has taken its share of

downtime. We have had as high as nine weeks back in the mid 80s and in other

years. We took 40,000 tons out permanently last year when they shut down number

six machine, so the position would be that we should not take downtime under

normal circumstances, but if it is an arrangement to assure the operation of

another mill and if that is the way the union sees it, and the company goes

along, I am not sure if it is for me to support it but I would understand it and

if we supported it it would be on the basis that we would hope and trust that if

ever our own mill in Grand Falls were to get in the same situation that the

international union would give us the same consideration, and we think they

would. That is the situation presently with regards to downtime. Up until this

situation developed we were reasonably assured, to the extent you could, that

Grand Falls would have to take no downtime this year. They have taken downtime

as I pointed out. Their order book is full and there is no marketing problem.

They have a full order book for 1991 and they have been making a profit this

past three or four months, so everything else considered, we do not have reason

to believe that Grand Falls will suffer any downtime or any major setbacks this

year.

MR. HEWLETT: I have another question, Mr.

Chairman.

Recently the forest management office at Springdale

Junction had a meeting of local foresters and indicated that of the

approximately 300 loggers who earned their living on Crown limits in Green Bay

that over the next year 200 of these jobs will be phased out because they are

slowing down the rate of timber harvest on Crown limits. The Minister also

indicated that there is a significant silviculture program on the go as a result

of the Federal-Provincial agreement. I do not know whether or not this is too

detailed a question to ask but do you have any idea with regard to silviculture

activities in my district and that area because we are fast running out of trees

and the word 'green' has become an almost historical description of the district

rather than a realistic one?

MR. FLIGHT: The whole Green Bay area is one of the

problem areas of the Province with regard to wood supply. The Member knows this

as well as I do, and probably better, but it is the old cliche of too many

fishermen chasing too few fish. There are too many sawmillers or loggers chasing

too few trees in Green Bay. As I understand it local foresters have indicated to

the various operators that there will be a cutback in their annual allowable cut

to the extent that they can stand it. I cannot specifically tell the Member, but

I can get the information and deliver it to him today, as to whether or not

there is a silviculture project planned for the hon. Member's district.

DR. NAZIR: I think the hon. Member's question is

more related to the loggers company lands. Is that correct? - to the people who

are not on Crown lands?

MR. HEWLETT: I talked with the Chief Forester, Mr.

Joy, on the phone. What I heard about it on the radio, I could not attend the

public meeting, was that there was going to be a cutback in the number of small

independents operating on Crown limits, in terms of their attack on timber on

Crown limits, so I was wondering in terms of an offset, to what extent would

Green Bay be getting any silvicultural activity this year?

DR. NAZIR: In that case, the Minister's reply is

correct, that there has been some direction, but in the meantime the

silvicultural operations we have designed for that area, will continue at their

usual level and we have a plan, which the Minister has which will involve the

projects, but the individual projects, at what level, that will be known in the

next few weeks.

MR. HEWLETT: So it is not finalized yet whether

fifty or sixty people will obtain employment in thinning or planting and that

sort of thing?

DR. NAZIR: We can get that information for you.

MR. HEWLETT: Okay, thank you.

MR. FLIGHT: I would say to the hon. Member also,

that the company of course, the major silviculture programmes in the Province,

are carried out by the company on their lands and we would not necessarily know

at this point in time, just what the company's plans are in that whole area on

company lands.

On Crown Lands, we are responsible as you know, but

the company undoubtedly, would be carrying out some silviculture via thinning or

planting in the Green Bay area.

MR. HEWLETT: One other, Mr. Chairman, in this

round if I might, the Minister indicated they had just scaled down their

inventory operations with regard to Labrador especially, and I am just wondering

what are the successes, or prospects of success to date?

My general understanding is that there is an excellent

supply of timber in the Goose Bay region that desperately needs a harvester of

significant size, before stuff just dies of old age. I know during the former

administration, there was always an effort on the go to find a pulp mill or a

major saw mill operation or something, to utilize forest resources going to

waste. Is there any progress in that particular area?

MR. FLIGHT: Not much has changed really. I am

aware of the efforts made over the years by the previous administration and we

are making the same efforts. We have identified, and the Member is right by the

way; there is a magnificent, not unlimited, but a magnificent supply of black

spruce in the Goose Bay southern Labrador area, south of the Churchill River.

We have identified and have come to an understanding

with a company which proposes to establish a mill in the Goose Bay area that

would produce about 25 million board feet of lumber per year. Of course, it goes

without saying that we are looking for 100 per cent utilization, so the sawn

logs will be exported.

We have come to an arrangement with the company and

the ball is now in the company's court in the sense that we have indicated. The

concessions, for want of a better word, that we would make, we have co-operated

to the extent that we have made a commitment to provide ten years access roads

and spending approximately $1 million a year, that will only be done on the

basis of need.

Of course if the company only operated one year then

(inaudible). We have provided up to $1.5 million forgiveness on RST for capital

equipment and that is basically the major concession.

MR. HEWLETT: So you are waiting now for them to

say whether it is a yes or no.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes. We understand they are revising

their package. That particular company spent a lot of time over the years in

researching and doing their thing and we are waiting, really.

MR. HEWLETT: What size of an operation in terms of

employment, are you talking about fifty or 100, 200 people or -

MR. FLIGHT: We are talking 200 to 300 people. The

mill itself will produce 25 million board feet, I am not sure what the numbers

will be in there but then the logging operation, supplying the mill and the

shipping and the rest, we are looking at a fairly major - are we figuring on 300

people overall Bob?

MR. HEWLETT: So it is another Come By Chance sized

operation?

MR. FLIGHT: Yes. The thing is getting it done;

what we are waiting on now, is for the company to actually make the first move.

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That is it

for now and you could turn to someone else.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Langdon?

MR. LANGDON: Between Bay d'Espoir and Bishop's

Falls there on the northwest Gander River there was a major fire some years ago,

and a lot of the old burnt wood is still standing. I was wondering if there were

any plans this year to do any major reforestation around that area or to cut

down the old burnt timber. A lot of it has been cut down by people burning wood,

but there are massive amounts still standing.

MR. FLIGHT: Would that particular land be company

lands?

MR. LANGDON: It is company lands, and I understand

that there was enough wood burnt there to keep the mill in operation for five

years. Glen Petton, who operated the camp at Miguels Lake, moved out of the

area.

MR. FLIGHT: The hon. Member would know that

Abitibi-Price and Corner Brook Pulp and Paper have, over the years, made a major

effort to harvest the budworm infected wood. I am not sure if they harvest

fire-kill wood. They do not use fire-kill in the mill, so the only reason they

would cut that wood is if it was for site reclamation - if they decide to go in

and do a site reclamation. We do not have any plans for a major harvesting. We

would encourage any domestic wood cutter desiring a major operation to sell, to

go in and cut it, we could probably work out something with Abitibi-Price. It's

lifespan is good for four or five years after the fire passes through and you

still get good quality lumber, but basically I think the answer is we do not

have the resources to go in and to site clear. We did it on the Trans Canada

Highway, as the Member for Springdale will know, somewhere in the Catamaran Park

area, as a job creation project and it worked really well, but the resources are

not there to make a major effort all over the Province.

MR. LANGDON: Last fall, if you remember, as part

of job creation, there were a number of people working along the highway to cut

brush back from the sides of the road. The areas that have been finished are

well done, and obviously there is better vision for people driving there to

abstain from hitting moose, but there are still large tracts that were not

finished. Are there any plans of having that finished this year?

MR. FLIGHT: That particular programme, wherever it

was done in Newfoundland, was done under the auspices of Social Services, they

provided the funding. The Department of Transportation has jurisdiction over

three or four hundred feet from the highroad. I think that Social Services

provides the funding and I guess the Department of Transportation provides the

approvals, but it is not an initiative of the Department of Forestry. There has

been a debate for a long time because people looking to cut wood on the sides of

the roads normally will come to the Department of Forestry on that belief. But

at this point in time we have not been involved in those kind of programmes.

Whether we should or should not as a Department of Forestry, because they are

cutting trees is another question, but at this point in time it is purely the

initiative of Social Services in conjunction with the Department of

Transportation.

MR. LANGDON: Another question following up on the

comments from the Member for Green bay: I was listening and reading the other

day some comments where the Abitibi group of companies said that instead of

taking 200,000 metric tons out of the system, they have now elevated that to

250,000 or 275,000. I think I am correct in what I am saying. The loggers from

the south coast got a letter from their union saying that they would go to work

on June 3rd, and they would be guaranteed nineteen weeks of work. I understand,

when I was home on the weekend, that that date has now been pushed back to June

17th. It might be pushed back to an even later date, even to July 1st. Could you

comment on that?

MR. FLIGHT: No, other than to tell the hon. Member

that that comes as a surprise to me. I have had recent conversations over the

weekend with all levels of management, particularly with the development in

Thunder Bay. My understanding was that it was 200,000 tons production to come

out of the marketplace. If they would have closed Thunder Bay, that would have

had the effect of taking out approximately 150,000 tons, then there would

obviously have been 50,000 tons left to come out across the system. I was aware

that the loggers had been notified they would go to work early in June. Was it

June 7th?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: Yes. I am not aware that there has

been a change in that. The people I talked to over this past week would have

been mill management as opposed to woodlands management, but I will follow up on

that and find out if that's -

MR. LANGDON: (Inaudible) people over on the coast

are thinking about. Apparently they are in contact with the mill because they

are anxious to go to work. It looks more like the 17th rather than the 7th.

MR. FLIGHT: (Inaudible) if that is as a result of

a late spring, road conditions, as opposed to a decision coming from the mill?

MR. LANGDON: I am not sure. That could very well

be but I am not aware of that. But the snow has melted quicker then they had

anticipated so probably the roads are bad and that could very well be the case

for it. Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Langdon.

I have a quick couple of questions, Mr. Minister. You

mentioned in terms of the downtime of the possible arrangements that could be

made by the management-union committee that has now been formed to deal with

Thunder Bay. I am wondering if you or some of your officials could advise the

Committee with respect to downtimes that have been experienced by Abitibi in

Newfoundland prior to this. There was a direct reference to one where there was

nine weeks. During that nine week period, could you tell us whether or not all

Abitibi mills were affected at that point in time? Or was Thunder Bay fortunate

enough to keep on producing at that time and we here in Newfoundland bore the

brunt of it?

I certainly feel for the residents of Thunder Bay in

terms of any downtime that they may experience, or a closure. But at the same

time I am wondering if we here in Newfoundland have been carrying the load

successively, shutdown after shutdown. If the offer now is being made to not

only the workers but to the people of this Province, was that made in the past

or are we now, as my grandfather would say, the big warmhearted Irishmen, or

whatever, willing to open up and say: well, we will close for two months of the

year, which is eight or ten weeks, if need be, and we will share with some other

mill in Newfoundland the same kind of downtime so that we can keep Thunder Bay

going?

Has your Department done any investigation with

respect to the history? I think that maybe the decision that Newfoundlanders may

have to make should be looked at in terms of history. I am just wondering if

anything has been done that way.

MR. FLIGHT: I am not sure whether the Department

has actually done any research, Mr. Chairman, back over the years. But coming

from the Grand Falls area myself and having been very closely associated with

the mill operation I know it has been a major debate over the years. When

downtime came you would hear people saying: are we taking more than our share

here in Grand Falls?

I do not know at what point the government would

intervene. But certainly the union in Grand Falls would because they are all

members of the CPU. But the unity in Grand Falls will certainly be a factor in

helping to protect these jobs and in making sure they do not take any more

downtime than they have to take. If you were to make that request we can

certainly provide the downtime that has been experienced, oh say, going back

this past ten years, in the Grand Falls mill and then get a comparison with the

downtime that has been experienced in other mills in the Abitibi system across

the country.

But you know there is the fact also that in Grand

Falls' case, Grand Falls makes a specific type of paper with specific qualities

and grades. There are newsprint companies in the world that will not buy

anything else but paper from the Grand Falls mill as long as it is available. So

in the event of downtime and (Inaudible) oversupply of newsprint, if the company

was depending on the Grand Falls type sheet, then certainly it would not make

sense for Abitibi-Price to take the Grand Falls Mill out unless for a very short

period of time because the mills in Thunder Bay, Iroquois Falls, Chandler, or

wherever could not provide the quality of sheet that a major newsprint company

in Europe or Germany is buying from Abitibi-Price.

The Thunder Bay situation is different. There is going

to be a decision to either close the mill probably permanently and 400 people

will lose their jobs and that is the end of that mill. The unions have decided

they would ask the company to look at the option of taking the 200,000 tonnes,

approximately, out of the marketplace by sharing the downtime equally.

Now, we do not know at this stage if the Grand Falls

or Stephenville mill will be affected. Maybe Abitibi - Price will decide to take

it all out of the mainland mills because of the fact, which I have just stated,

that Abitibi-Price, Grand Falls, have their orders booked for 1990-1991 to their

existing customers. The decision the company would have to make is that if they

shut Grand Falls for two or three weeks would they be able to supply that

quality sheet to the customers of Abitibi-Price?

I would also point out something regarding the issue

you raised on downtime. I was privy to a meeting held some time ago where it was

made very clear to Abitibi-Price, long before we knew about Thunder Bay, that in

the event we went into a downturn in the paper industry with the possibility of

downtime because of oversupply, new capacity coming on stream et cetera, it was

pointed out very strongly to the company - I am talking about the top management

of the company - that we would not expect Grand Falls or Stephenville to take

any more than its share of downtime.

This is a very vague answer, I realize, but I can get

the specific information if you wish.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister.

One other quick question from myself and then I will

certainly move on to one of the other Committee Members, it concerns my own

district to a very strong degree.

On Bell Island we are facing a major problem. As Mr.

Hewlett mentioned earlier happening in his own district, there are a tremendous

number of people now burning wood and the timber stands that do exist on Bell

Island are very small. Because the trees are disappearing we are facing very

soon, certainly in the next five to ten years, the additional problems that go

when you are without trees, in terms of the grounds ability to retain water and

all the other factors that go with it, probably preservation of some of the best

farmland in Newfoundland as well. Are there any plans this year or is there

anything on the drawing board to look at specific areas like Bell Island which

may need reforestation for reasons other than for the timber stands for the

various mills? Is there anything in place? Maybe you could elaborate on it for

us?

MR. FLIGHT: I guess the blunt answer is no, as to

our considering reforestation for the purposes that you alluded to. We are

concentrating on the reforesting of the parts of Newfoundland that supports the

pulp and paper or the sawmill industry. I can qualify that on this basis, we

recognize the need that you are talking about, urban forest, community forest,

wood supply forest, that kind of thing. We have the capacity by way of seedling

production. We really do not have the resources to do as much silviculture work

as we want to do on our traditional forests, the forest that provides the jobs

in the mills and to the sawmillers and that kind of thing, we do not have

adequate resource for that, but we are cognizant of the need and we have

cooperated and will continue to cooperate with any community groups. If a

community group from Bell Island for instance wished to get into a planting

programme to provide firewood forests over the years or urban forests or forests

that serve the purpose to control runoff and that kind of thing, we would

cooperate on the basis of providing seedlings. We would probably try to do it at

a cost recovery but as a Department no, we are not into that, but we are

prepared to work with any group or any town that has that kind of need.

MR. CHAIRMAN: As a final question, Mr. Minister,

directly related to that - as Chairman I rarely say anything but you hit a

couple of things this morning that I pick on and Hansard people do not have to

worry about me saying much in these meetings but I duly noted that they wished

me to be identified as well.

If a rural development association for example on Bell

Island or the town itself or some other organization, were to come forward with

a plan where they would, through some other sources find the employees that

would be required, am I to understand that the seedlings would be made available

either free or at cost recovery?

MR. FLIGHT: Certainly at cost recovery.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Would the Department also provide

the expertise to these people to make sure that the job done was a job well

done?

MR. FLIGHT: No question. We have the resources,

the technicians and the specialists, and we would make them available to help

Bell Island or any other community to see that the job would be done right.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister.

Mr. Noel.

MR. NOEL: I always thought we could grow a lot

more food in this Province than we do. People who do it seem to do it profitably

and in lots of cases they make a business out of it. We seem to have lots of

land that is not being used at present. Is there any possibility of making a

significant advance in what we can grow? Transportation is a big factor in the

cost of agricultural products I would think. It can create a lot more jobs in

this Province. I know it is often talked about. Everybody thinks that we should

be doing more but nothing seems to have happened very much over the years. Do

you see any significant advance in the near future?

MR. FLIGHT: We have made some significant advances

in certain commodities. I say to the hon. Member that we have become

self-sufficient in milk over the past six or seven years. We are self-sufficient

in eggs. We are approaching self-sufficiency in, well that is not quite right,

but we are moving toward self-sufficiency in broiler production for instance.

Root crop production, vegetables: We do not have, contrary to what the hon.

Member just said, we do not have a very big land base in Newfoundland. That is

the biggest problem, an agricultural land base to provide land for farmers who

can compete, because with potatoes, turnips and cabbage the volume is what

counts, I guess. We are at a disadvantage in the sense, and the hon. Member

might know this, that the market by and large is St. John's, the Avalon

Peninsula. The best potato ground certainly in Newfoundland, and maybe anywhere,

is on the West Coast of Newfoundland and there appears to be lots of it in a

sense, but under our present rate structures and subsidies to farmers there is a

subsidy to move potatoes from PEI to St. John's but there is no subsidy to move

potatoes from the West Coast of Newfoundland to St. John's. That is the way it

is structured so there are problems.

MR. NOEL: Is the subsidy for potatoes from PEI a

federal subsidy?

MR. FLIGHT: A freight subsidy.

A lot of new people have been getting into vegetable

production and various other commodity productions. We have a long way to go

before we get self-sufficiency in certain commodities. I guess it is possible to

give the hon. Member the figures but there is no question that Newfoundland has

increased its production of various commodities in the past ten years. We have

got to a point where we are self-sufficient in milk, and self-sufficient in

eggs. We are moving up the production in broilers all the time. We are not

self-sufficient in hog production. There has been a major expansion of the

strawberry industry in Newfoundland in past years and I would not be surprised

if we may be getting very close to self-sufficiency. Of course there is a narrow

window there but there are a lot of commercial strawberry producers establishing

and expanding on the present farms. Not far from St. John's we are producing

first class celery. We have farmers getting into Chinese vegetables and

providing the Chinese restaurants. We are producing broccoli and we have major

farms within a fifty mile radius of St. John's, which the hon. Member might be

interested in, which when looking at them are miles and miles of turnip and

cabbage and they are major, major fields of top grade production. One of the

problems also for our farmers is they have to market the day they harvest

because we do not have major storage facilities for potatoes and turnip and that

kind of thing. That is one of the problems that has been addressed in the task

force report. We are getting there, and given the limited land base we have, and

the level of support the Province can provide for funding, more and more people

are becoming involved in farming and making a good living at it.

MR. NOEL: I know we do not have a lot of land but

there is a lot of land that looks to me as if it could produce goods, which is

not being used, and you say we are getting closer to even self-sufficiency with

strawberries and people grow potatoes and turnips and stuff like that, and seem

to make money with it. So I and other people look at this land and all the

people unemployed in this Province who you would think could be doing things to

grow food. Just in my own district, Brophy Place, in the middle of St. John's

now, we are trying to get a piece of land from either the Pippy Park people or

the Department of Transportation so that the people from there can have a plot

where they can grow their own vegetables. But when you think of all the people

on social services and things like that, has there been any talk between your

department and the Social Services Department about the possibility of maybe

setting up even some Government farms or something where people could be

employed productively instead of collecting welfare and doing nothing as they

have to now?

MR. FLIGHT: In rural Newfoundland, the initiative

is there, it is traditional, the hon. Member for Fortune - Hermitage will know

this, and every Member here will know it, that if the initiative is there, every

individual in Newfoundland can find a way to grow vegetables. I mean if there

was a level of Government support required we would look at it, but in the cases

of family plots there is no need for Government involvement. I suppose it is a

case of hard work and getting the seeds. Hundreds and thousands of Newfoundland

families are indeed growing their own vegetables. One of the problems we have

and one of the complaints I get is from bona fide farmers mainly on the Avalon

Peninsula who are farming for a living. Harvest time comes and hundreds of

little family farms in the St. John's area, or at least on the Avalon Peninsula,

hit the market with their produce. It is simply a sideline for them, but they

hit the market with their carrots and turnips et cetera, and we get complaints

from the farmers who have big investments and see it as a way of life and want

to expand their business, but this is undercutting them, and they say we should

stop it. This is one of the problems that the commercial farmers are

experiencing. But apart from right in the heart of the city, I am not aware of

any impediment to any Newfoundland family to grow their own vegetables or at

least the kind of vegetables that are easily grown such as carrots, potatoes,

and turnips. My own father is 86 years old and up until five or six years ago he

produced enough vegetables for all the family. We do not play a role, that I am

aware of, in any Government assistance, financially or otherwise. If requested

we probably would do so to the extent we would provide technical assistance or

advice or brochures or that kind of thing. We are encouraging it to the extent

that we have the finances to do it. The livestock producers in Newfoundland, as

the hon. Member for Humber Valley will know, would be a lot better of if they

could grow their own or buy in the Province their own forage, and we are putting

a fair amount of research and money, and again it is one of the recommendations,

and we do have the land base, and we find we can produce the quantity that is

needed and the quality that is needed if we can get the farmers interested in

getting into forage production, and we are encouraging that. We are encouraging

people to get into vegetable production and any representation we get to the

department from somebody who wants to get into the production of vegetables,

whether it be potatoes, celery or whatever, we encourage them to the extent that

we have a programme to assist them financially. But again the Newfoundland

farmer growing potatoes, for instance, is in a very competitive market. They

have to compete with P.E.I., and New Brunswick, whose volumes are major compared

to ours. There are transportation advantages for these provinces that depend on

vegetable and potato production. But there is also evidence that Newfoundlanders

might be prepared to pay a little more for locally grown vegetables.

If you want to see what we are capable of producing -

I am not sure if the hon. Member did this or not but I would advise him to do it

next fall - right in the St. John's-Avalon Peninsula area, the Food and

Livestock Show, it is unbelievable. I doubt if there is a livestock show or a

display of vegetables any more attractive and more bountiful than we have at the

show. The quality is unbelievable. So there is proof at that Livestock show that

Newfoundlanders can produce quality vegetables.

Whether we can produce it in the quantities that would

cause somebody to make major investments and get the kind of return that would

be needed is another question. But there are a lot of people growing a lot of

vegetables and making a lot of money in Newfoundland right now. We are

encouraging the expansion of that.

MR. NOEL: See that is the problem that I have.

There seem to be a lot of people who are growing a lot and doing it successfully

but we still have a lot of land that is not being used. I do not mean a lot in

the sense of the percentage of land in the Province, but there seems to be a lot

of land that could be used to grow things. But it is just not happening enough,

and the kind of impediment I am thinking about - you are saying that there are

people who have land and if they have the initiative could be growing more on

it. But I am thinking about poor people who do not have the land but they would

be prepared to work. They could make their positive contribution to our economy.

Is there anything that Government can do with Government land to facilitate

that?

MR. FLIGHT: That will be noted, I say to the hon.

Member. I know exactly what he is saying. You want to remember this though, that

as you drive out through the Goulds and Kilbride and the farming areas of the

Avalon - and I do it all the time - and on the west coast - you should drive

through Codroy Valley if you want to see open land. And you wonder. This land

was cultivated for hundreds of years. Its absentee ownership now - it lies

fallow and the fences are falling down. But there are acres and acres of it. But

that is private land, that stuff is private. When you drive through the Goulds

and see great fields and say: well, why can we not grow vegetables here? I just

want to make that point that the chances are that that is private land and for

whatever reason - it may be pastureland or it may be land that is just cleared

and the owners are not using it.

I can tell you, there was an experiment in Grand Falls

a few years ago - and I am just speaking from memory now - where somebody - it

may have been the Department of Agriculture at the time - went about a mile

outside Grand Falls towards the golf course going west, and developed, set

aside, a block of land, and made plots available to anyone who would want to use

it and I think they provided fertilizer. It worked for a while but then it just

petered off, and this was available for anybody who wanted to go in and get a

fifty by fifty foot block and set carrots, turnips, and look after it

themselves. First when it started people were very enthusiastic about it. But it

seems to me - and I am only speaking from memory - that is no longer a going

concern.

But the Member is right. The principle he is espousing

is right, that maybe we as a Government could go out and identify some Crown

land, clear it and say: come in and grow your own vegetables and we will assist

you to the extent we can.

MR. NOEL: Maybe even look at some of this private

land to see if we could buy it if it is particularly good land, or expropriate

it even if it is just lying there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. NOEL: What is happening with all the land that

is frozen around St. John's? That programme has been in place for some time to

preserve the land for agricultural purposes. Is there any evidence that it is

getting used for those purposes as a result of it being reserved? Is there any

new thinking about that kind of programme?

MR. FLIGHT: The only thinking would be is whether

or not it would be necessary to take a look at the boundaries again, and whether

or not there is land in there that should really come out because it will never

be for agriculture. When they established the zone back in the early 'seventies,

the government of the day, or the department - just painted with a broad brush

and everything was taken into the zone. As the hon. Member knows there have been

revisions to the rezoning, periodically, and a lot of land has been removed. It

was identified that it did not make sense to keep it in that context.

One of the biggest problems I have today is the desire

by people who have land in the zone to have the land taken out of the zone, and

it is good agriculture land. We offer $4,000 an acre, we buy that land under

what we call a Land Consolidation Programme and the price we pay is $4,000 per

acre.

MR. NOEL: Do many people settle for that?

MR. FLIGHT: Oh yes, but less and less; you know

that the same land on the private market is worth $20,000 an acre or $25,000,

and it creates a terrible problem because you have families in the Goulds for

instance, and Kilbride, who now have sons and daughters who are in the housing

market to buy or build a house, and they feel they have a right to have their

son or daughter build on their farm land.

The purpose of the freeze is to protect the zone,

protect the agriculture land, so it is a very difficult situation with which to

deal, because people feel that they are -

MR. NOEL: But aside from the questionable land,

you know, land that people might argue about on the border line and that sort of

stuff, but the good land that is being preserved, is there any evidence that,

because it is being reserved it is being used more for agricultural purposes?

MR. FLIGHT: Yes. Most of the land zoned on the

Avalon Peninsula, certainly the visible land, Kilbride, Goulds, is by and large

dairy, that kind of operation, where you can drive by and there is a great

expanse of field and nothing appears to be there, but if you come back three

hours later, the herd may be down there grazing; that sort of thing.

Here is what happens: I think last year in the

estimates we had $500,000 to purchase lands, $600,000 I think last year, it is

down this year by $100,000, it is down to about $500,000 or $400,000, we will

get to it when we -

What happens is, we offer that land for resale or

lease on the condition of course that it can only be used for agricultural

purposes; there is always a great interest in leasing or buying the land to

either expand existing farms or to start new ones, that kind of thing so -

MR. NOEL: There is also the land that you have

around the city, now being used liked that, being leased or do you have very

much that is not being used at all?

MR. FLIGHT: That we own, that the Government has

brought back?

MR. NOEL: Yes.

MR. FLIGHT: I cannot be specific, but it seems to

me that the Department would not be sitting on very much land. What happens is,

if we buy land under the consolidation programme, then as soon as all the paper

work is done and everything else, we would immediately advertise publicly and

call for proposals on that land, where there is a major amount of interest in

it.

The minute it happens you get people coming in wanting

to either start farms or expand farms, but the key of course is, that whether

there is interest or not, that has been identified; if we bought that land back,

it is identified pretty well as prime agricultural land and under legislation

and the guide lines, it cannot be used for anything else, so, we would not

permit it to be sold for any other reason other than farming.

MR. NOEL: Mr. Chairman, I will pass for now.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Woodford?

MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Chairman, I would just like to

follow up now, while it is fresh on the Land Consolidation Programme.

Did you say the total budget was reduced this year? I

never looked at it.

MR. FLIGHT: I am letting myself get into trouble

by drawing attention to page 135.

Last year we had 600 -

MR. WOODFORD: Yes, land development.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Just as an interjection; if we

should be referring to anything from the estimates themselves, for all those who

have the books and are trying to follow, the Chair would certainly appreciate

your identifying the page and the item number with which we are dealing and that

allows everyone to zero in on it quickly and follow through together.

MR. FLIGHT: I understand, Mr. Chairman, and I

appreciate your point. Anyway, just for that particular discussion, I referred

to the fact that the funding under the land consolidation program was reduced

this year and that is indicated on page 135, Land Development.

MR. WOODFORD: Yes, 3.1.05.

MR. FLIGHT: Last year we spent $500,000 in the

purchasing of land from farmers under the Consolidation Programme; this year we

are proposing to only spend $400,000.

MR. WOODFORD: Where was that land purchased,

mainly on the east coast of the Province?

MR. FLIGHT: I would guess, and again I can get the

specific figure for the Member, but generally speaking I am pretty confident in

saying it was all in the Goulds, Kilbride area, totally on the Avalon.

MR. WOODFORD: Is that programme only applicable

now to the Avalon?

MR. FLIGHT: Yes, it is only applicable to the

Avalon.

MR. WOODFORD: It is. It is my understanding that

there is a clause in those agreements that if the land is ever re-sold, that the

person who sold the land in the first place would be reimbursed for the total

fair market value at that time.

MR. FLIGHT: We pay $4,000. If the guy who buys it

sells it for $10,000 -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: My deputy confirms that that is a

fact. Of course what the Member would remember is that it can only be sold -

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister, I was wondering if you

could lean forward for Hansard.

MR. FLIGHT: The Member would know anyway, because

I am aware of how knowledgeable he is about this particular issue, the land can

only be sold by the person who bought it for agricultural purposes. Whether you

would get an increase in land value based on farming, that is another thing.

MR. WOODFORD: I do not know how factual this is,

but I heard that if it is ever re-zoned or anything like that -

MR. FLIGHT: Yes, right.

MR. WOODFORD: - that can be -

MR. FLIGHT: Exactly.

MR. WOODFORD: There is a clause there that

protects the original owner.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes, if the land is taken out of our

zone, if the land is bought under our programme or sold by a farmer under our

programme for $4,000 per acre, and if five years hence that land is taken out of

the zone, commercial or otherwise, then when it is sold the original owner gets

the right under legislation to be compensated for the difference in the

transaction.

MR. WOODFORD: So it is there now.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes.

MR. WOODFORD: Has there been any thought or

suggestions given to the possibility of extending that land consolidation fund

to other parts of the Province, mainly the west coast?

MR. FLIGHT: I have not been party to any

discussions that would. Again, as the Member knows, the Task Force deals with

land on the west coast, and the Task Force recommends that all agricultural land

in Newfoundland, recognizing the limited amount of good arable soil there is,

that we would look at not necessarily the (inaudible), but certainly protecting

the agricultural land whether it is in Cormack, Codroy Valley or St. John's, and

they go to lengths to point out that the best land is on the west coast of

Newfoundland. But I am not aware there has been any consideration.

I can take note if the Member is recommending that we

should look at that, I can take note of it and have it pursued. I would point

out to the Member that the problem, of course, is the availability of funds.

There are probably three reasons why we are reducing the amount this year. One

is the financial situation we find ourselves in, the financial restraints which

we are operating under, which is probably the major one. But interestingly

enough the demand to sell land has been reduced, and I am told that might be for

two reasons: one, we are not advertising. When the Consolidation Programme came

in first I am told it was a fairly well advertised programme; we are not doing

that. And the other one, this is difficult to determine, but I suspect that with

the ever increasing land values in the metro area in the St. John's area,

Goulds, and Mount Pearl, people are very reluctant to sell land for $4,000 that

they know is commercially worth $20,000 or $25,000 per acre, and they probably

live in hope that one day it will be re-zoned and they will get the full

commercial value, but it is a difficult programme for the Government to defend,

any government, but then again, you recognize that we have to retain our

agricultural land base, that we have to protect the land.

I received a note from my officials and they say that

the land consolidation programme is approved for the St. John's zone only, we

have established that. But it could be expanded if pressure on agricultural land

in other areas were to require it. But as the Member probably knows at this

point in time that does not seem to be the case.

MR. WOODFORD: Well, the main reason for that

programme was I suppose because of the fact that the limited so-called

identified agricultural properties in and around the St. John's Metropolitan

area were in danger of being chewed up I suppose by urbanization and other

reasons. But there is another side to it that should be looked at. As you know

we are all first-and second-generation farmers here in this Province. Very few

are any more. The main cost of developing a farm - if you look back at the ALFI

agreement, if you look back at any other agreements that were signed over the

years, regardless if it is the so-called plot or a dairy operation, which is one

of the bigger operations - is developing your land and getting it into

production.

I suggest - maybe it is something for the Minister and

his officials to look it - that it is better. Not because there is, I suppose, a

pressure on an area such as this but to look at areas like the west coast of the

Province, that has land that has already been cleared. I suggested it to the

Federal officials over the years. They were willing to come in and give, say for

instance, $400 an acre to clear land, and it will cost the farmer another

thousand, but they were not willing to give a farmer $400 an acre to buy already

cleared land. It was stupid, for want of a better word, it did not make sense.

They give him $6,000 for instance towards clearing

thirty acres of land but here is a fifty acre farm with thirty cleared but they

would not give him $6000.00 to buy it. It did not make sense. Didn't then,

didn't when I was there, and doesn't today. I do not have to tell you what it

is, and how many dollars were spent under the ALFI agreement for that particular

reason. Millions! And it just does not make sense. It is over there now. It is

one thing to put in an agricultural development zone, it is another thing to

police it and it is another thing to get the municipalities involved to police

the regulations that keep them in (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: The Member would know better than me

in this case, but if the land consolidation programme was extended outside of

the Avalon to the west coast - particularly the Cormack area, Wooddale, central,

Codroy Valley - I do not where the figure $4,000 per acre came from. I guess it

was determined by using land values or whatever. But $4,000 an acre would be

exceedingly high for land anywhere in Newfoundland, wouldn't it, outside of the

immediate St. John's area where the economic and developmental pressures have

driven the land up? But $4,000 would not necessarily - in other words, I guess

what I am saying: if the Government were to look at land banking or protecting

agricultural land west of the overpass for instance they probably would not have

to look at providing $4,000 per acre.

MR. WOODFORD: Well, your budget there for $500,000

now could save you probably in the long term over a period of four or five years

probably another, to throw out a figure, probably another $1 million or $2

million in land development. I can see that just in my community at Cormack. The

other thing is that if you have a good developed farm of a couple or 300 acres,

cultivated, ready to walk in to, you are doing it now in the White River road

area, with regards to leasing back to the farmers land that has been surveyed by

the Department of Agriculture. It is a good thing. It is in a good area as well.

The only thing about that land, it is still not cleared. But you do have pockets

of land there that are cleared and people who are willing to sell now, and for a

lot less price than what you are going to pay (Inaudible) for 100 or 200 acres

of land in here, and some of them could be put into production pretty well

overnight.

Because that is the problem. Dairy for instance today

is big business. You are talking something like $8,000 per cow unit. So if you

have 100 cows on your farm automatically your farm is worth $800,000. That is

how FCC banks their figures and makes their recommendations on. That is big

business. It is not, like you were saying earlier, fly-by-night operations any

more. You have to run it as a serious big business. The land is there, the

opportunities are there, and I think that is probably something to look it, just

extending that. Because I know there is no blame - I am not casting any

aspersions or blame or anything like that. It is just something I had been after

my fellows when I was there for years, to have a look at it, and look at the

economics versus something short-term.

I would like to get back to the silviculture, forestry

part of it. The agreement you just signed stresses silviculture vis--vis

planting and thinning, you do stress the thinning which as far as I am

concerned, I said in my reply, is a good thing. I think that is where we can

really gain with the thinning as I have seen some of the examples over the

Humber Valley area over the last few years. When would those programmes be let

for this year, is there any indication within the next two or three weeks or

month or whatever, so that they can get on with their work?

MR. FLIGHT: Most of the work, as the Member would

know, except the work on the company limits which they will do on their own

schedules, but on Crown lands I am in the process of starting to sign contracts

now. We have already called tenders for planting programmes in certain areas

that we have identified as where we have decided we will plant. Certain

contracts have already been called and I am in the process of awarding contracts

for the planting.

The thinning, Dr. Nazir, how soon will we be looking

at issuing (inaudible)?

DR. NAZIR: On the Crown Lands, as the Minister has

indicated, the contracts for thinning as well as deforestation will be appearing

in the newspapers within the next few weeks. One contract he has already signed

for 300,000 seedlings. Most of the thinning on the West Coast is carried out by

the Corner Brook Pulp and Paper Company under a cost-shared agreement with the

Crown. The agreement has been finalized for this year. It is ready to be signed.

Once it is signed they will be calling the unionized people to carry it out. Any

work on the Crown lands we carry out through the Government union, NAPE,

whereas

any work on Corner Brook Pulp and Paper or Abitibi-Price, that is carried out by

their own respective unions. We are ready to sign with Corner Brook Pulp and

Paper, there is a little more work left with Abitibi-Price. So, they are

slightly behind Corner Brook Pulp and Paper.

MR. WOODFORD: So, your programme with regards to

thinning or silviculture: there was a training programme in last year, I

believe, was that 80-20 or something?

DR. NAZIR: The training programme will continue,

both companies plan to carry out approximately $1 million each. Crown: last year

we had approximately $1 million, this year we intend to spend more than that, we

may be in the order of $2 million on Crown. The major thrust last year was on

the Northern Peninsula and Bay d'Espoir area, this year we may be extending into

a couple of more areas. There were 177 people employed last year in that

training programme. I believe sixty at Abitibi-Price Limited, fifty-four at

Corner Brook Pulp and Paper, and the remaining on Crown Lands. This year there

will be additional workers on Crown, twenty-four to forty-eight more workers, in

addition to the 177 that we had last year because it is a 2 years training

programme, so the people who were hired last year will continue this year. The

people who start again this year they will continue for another year, next year.

So, the programme will be ongoing in fact at an expanded level on Crown areas,

about the same level of the company lands but at an expanded level on Crown

lands.

MR. WOODFORD: Would you at this time be able to

identify the other areas that you are talking about outside the Northern

Peninsula area where the programme was instituted last year?

DR. NAZIR: We are not quite ready because it

involves a lot of planning and talking to the local people, affirming the

unemployment situation, talking to the federal people who have to put in most of

the money, so we are not in a position to say which areas.

MR. WOODFORD: Was there any thought given to the

amount of monies paid? That was a big problem last year. I remember a couple of

contractors, one in the Parson's Pond area and one in the Pollard's Point area

where there was a big problem with the hourly wage that was paid by the

contractors themselves. That was a big problem and I do not know if they

overcame it. They must have overcome it after.

MR. FLIGHT: With the training program?

MR. WOODFORD: No, I never heard anything under the

training program because that was further North but the silviculture one was

carried out at Pollard's Point and the Parson Pond, Cow Hear area.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister.

MR. FLIGHT: It may have been a problem that he

become aware of locally but we did not receive, as a Department, or I was not

aware of any difficulty or any problem with regards to the level of pay of the

contractor. This was an non-unionized contractor I would presume?

MR. WOODFORD: I would say, yes.

MR. FLIGHT: If they were non-unionized contractors

then I suppose they would determine the level of wages and the employees would

have to decide whether or not they were prepared to work for those kind of

wages. Certainly they are governed by the minimum wage but we were not aware in

the Department, or at least I was not aware, that there were complaints to the

extent that we would have a concern.

MR. WOODFORD: I think what is happening is that

some of those contractors are going into it probably for the first time, even

the second or third, and they are not bidding big bucks, so what is happening is

they get the contract and they cannot afford to pay under the dollars they get.

That is the problem we are running into.

MR. FLIGHT: Let me tell the Member, that over a

period of two or three years this has probably become the most competitive

business in Newfoundland. It is unbelievable. There are a lot of people involved

now, particularly in planting, and it is unbelievable the number of people

wanting to get into the business and the competition for contracts. The Member

is exactly right, I am aware that contractors have got themselves in

difficulties because they have bid too low, or they have been trying to access

the work, and not having that much experience get themselves in some difficulty.

I have talked personally to contractors who have been in this business since we

started planting and with new people coming in they say it is getting almost

impossible to be sure they will get a job based on the price they tender,

because there are new people coming in all the time. The Member is right, it is

a very competitive business.

MR. WOODFORD: The contract is let for the Chouse

Brook area and they have been in there working. Is there any indication from the

contractor when they will, I know it depends on the weather, a lot depends on

the weather, but is there any indication when they will finish?

MR. FLIGHT: We are hoping to have the first access

by sawmillers into the area by mid-Summer. That was the idea for pre-tendering

as the hon. Member knows. Of course, road conditions and weather conditions are

all factors and it is easy for something to take two weeks longer than it should

have in that kind of situation. We are aware of the need and we are aware of the

pressure for sawmillers to allocate in the Chouse Brook area. The pre-tendering

and everything else that was done was done on the basis of making that wood

accessible as quickly as possible. I remember telling people that we expected to

have them in there by August.

MR. WOODFORD: What is new on the Main River

besides what I am hearing out there regarding Kruger? Have you had any update

from Kruger on what their intentions are for Main River this year?

MR. FLIGHT: Dr. Nazir.

DR. NAZIR: It is my understanding that Kruger

plans to harvest their over mature timber in upper Humber first before they

harvest the timber in Main River area. Therefore their plan is still not to go

to Main River on a large scale this year. They will probably continue their

presence on a very small scale as they have done the last few years. But their

plan is to go into upper Humber in a large way and harvest that timber before

they move to Main River.

MR. WOODFORD: When they are talking about the

upper Humber now, how upper are they going?

DR. NAZIR: How long will they be there?

MR. WOODFORD: When you say upper Humber now, I am

familiar with the upper Humber, but where would they be going? Just up of the

Humber River itself, the main river part?

DR. NAZIR: They will be below the Main River

watershed.

MR. WOODFORD: Below the watershed.

DR. NAZIR: The area which drains into upper Humber

in the river. That is the part. So there are two distinct watersheds. So the

areas sloping down, or south, that is the area.

MR. WOODFORD: Because I understand that they have

some contractors ready to go in there already. One is Weir from Springdale or

Baie Verte?

AN HON. MEMBER: Moores.

MR. WOODFORD: Moores. Yes. It was my understanding

that they were ready to start. Are you going to have a break now? We might as

well stop for a break.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Woodford. Mr.

Minister, we are going to take a break now, and I would like to extend an

invitation to you and your officials to join us in the Common Room. We have

coffee and tea and we will be back here at approximately 11:10 a.m. or 11:15

a.m.

AN HON. MEMBER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Recess

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

Gentlemen and Miss Murphy, welcome back to our last

hour and a bit. I think we will move into our normal format now which is by

leave of course. We are still in the ten minute format but we have tended to

allow the Opposition Members of the Committee to take a little longer if they

need it. So hopefully, as we said earlier, we will have an opportunity to deal

with this Department in one sitting. I will, needless to say, certainly

acknowledge any of the Government Members who may wish to have questions. So,

just so that we are familiar with the format and the fact that it is by leave.

Mr. Woodford, did you want to finish off?

MR. WOODFORD: I will yield to my colleague there

now first, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Hewlett.

MR. HEWLETT: The Minister in a statement in the

House yesterday was I suppose pleased as punch that his bacteriological spray

programme appears to have worked out okay over the last couple of years, and he

did not foresee the need even of a major spray programme this year, let alone a

chemical one which would be a more devastating assault I presume on a massive

infestation. Last year the Minister did - and I must for the record say this -

participate in some herbicide spraying to kill deciduous growth in a regrowth

pulpwood forest. Is there a programme in areas of the Province again this year

in that particular area? And philosophically I suppose I should go on the record

as asking the Minister: if he is so happy that he does not have to use chemicals

to kill insects, why isn't he distressed that he has to use chemicals to kill

nasty deciduous trees - alders, birch, aspen, et cetera - that have a tendency

to crowd out a regenerating pulpwood forest?

MR. FLIGHT: I thank the hon. Member for his

question. I might have expected it.

MR. HEWLETT: One of your colleagues was indicating

we are being too civil. So I thought I would turn up the heat a notch.

MR. FLIGHT: Okay, and you have succeeded.

MR. NOEL: I must say I did not indicate they were

being too civil. I was surprised by how civil they are able to be at times.

MR. FLIGHT: To try to deal with the issue, the

hon. Member knows that I would rather as an individual, as I am he would as I am

sure every Member in the House would, not have any spray programme at all,

including a herbicide programme. However, the facts are that we have major

planting programmes in Newfoundland in areas that do not naturally regenerate or

regenerate as quickly as others we identify and consider planting.

It is a fact that when these plantings are done the

deciduous trees, various shrubs, and that kind of thing, blueberry bushes, I

suppose, grows a lot faster than the seedlings. The herbicide spray programme is

designed specifically to give the deciduous tree seedlings a chance to get up to

where they can compete with the -

AN HON. MEMBER: Give them a leg up, so to speak.

MR. FLIGHT: Pardon me? Yes, give them a leg up.

That is the spray programme that he is talking about.

The answer is that we will continue that programme this year at about the same

level as last year. It is really a minute programme compared to the regular

spray programme where we will spray in the vicinity of 3,000 hectares all over

Newfoundland.

There is a little dilemma in the sense that the paper

companies in particular, and we do it on Crown lands, but in particular the

paper companies spends a lot of money in plantations and they think they are

entitled to the right to protect that investment. There is no question about the

effect and the success -

MR. HEWLETT: Environmental concerns there and

philosophical views put aside it is, you contend, a very effective forest

enhancement treatment?

MR. FLIGHT: I would invite the Member or anyone

else if we could stuff them into a helicopter to come and look at a plantation

that has been sprayed with a herbicide and one that has not. It is like apples

and oranges. The Member probably has seen one, I do not know.

MR. HEWLETT: I am about to go on a trip to my

district pretty soon now and I think I might take a little foray into an area

that was sprayed last year because presumably the deciduous growth in King's

Point area that was sprayed last year will not be budding out or leafing out

this year. The carnivorous growth I guess will continue to green out as Spring

continues, but I will I think see it first hand on the ground so to speak

without the use of a helicopter.

MR. FLIGHT: Well, the reason I raised that the

Member will know that most of those plantations are pretty well out of sight and

out of mind and they are inaccessible. There are some, of course, that are and

if the Member knows one that is that is fine but there is no question about the

efficiency and the effectiveness.

The other point that I should make in defence of the

programme is that we in the Department of Forestry and Agriculture's case apply

to the Department of Environment to use the herbicide, as does Abitibi-Price and

as does Kruger, there are rigid guidelines placed on that permit and we adhere

to those guidelines. Herbicide spraying using the vision that we are using in

Newfoundland is an accepted tool in forest management across Canada. It has been

approved by the various environmental agencies. It is a fact though there is no

other option.

The other problem with the spray program is that when

we were using fenitrothion or maticil or whatever there was an argument as to

which was the most effective. But at least Bt was an option, a little bit more

expensive and under certain conditions maybe not as effective but generally

speaking it was an option. Environmentally there is no option. Some people have

said to do it manually but that is madness, impossible, it cannot be done. So,

there is no option. It has become a little controversial but we see it as a

means and a tool that can be done safely and we intend at this point in time to

continue. Hopefully, there may become available another option, maybe there will

be a Bt that will be developed that you can use for this purpose.

MR. HEWLETT: So to paraphrase the Minister, I

guess, vision helps you to see green.

MR. FLIGHT: That is right.

MR. HEWLETT: Okay. A couple of other points I

wanted to touch on. I have an industry in the Springdale area that is

struggling, a secondary wood products operation producing hardwood flooring,

panelling, logs for prefabricated cabin packages, etc. In a number of

conversations I have had with the owner of that particular operation, apart from

the fact that he is struggling to develop markets because he is operating well

below capacity, the frustration he notes all the time is that Newfoundlanders

have a tendency to cut birch for firewood, quite often very large mature birch

trees. I have heard him mutter and sputter many times when he sees a truckload

of birch junks driving past his particular facility, birch which, when you look

at the individual junks, are clean, white, solid, right through the heart which

would be prime birch lumber for use in his particular operation. From his point

of view it is akin to taking a prime fir sawlog and using it for firewood. I

wonder if the Minister cares to make a comment on that, about the utilization of

lumber grade birch as firewood which I guess is fairly commonplace throughout

the Province?

MR. FLIGHT: The Member is right. If you have an

operator using birch then that obviously galls him, but there can be all kinds

of arguments made for using birch for firewood. The Member also knows we are

between a rock and a hard place in the sense that we are trying to discourage

people from cutting softwoods for firewood and directing them to what was

considered for some time as a non-commercial species. Birch, aspen, and alder,

if it is big enough, have very low volumes of the spruce budworm. In recent

years more and more commercial operators have been looking at using birch for

commercial purposes. The hon. Member, for instance, has probably one of the most

successful in Newfoundland in his district, that I am aware of and all I can say

to him is the theory is right, the argument is right. If the gentleman he

referred to were to identify a spot of birch for argument sake that could

sustain his operation there is no reason that I am aware of where the Department

could not look at saying, okay, that is allocated to that particular operation.

There is no reason why we could not entertain that kind of consideration. I am

not totally sure what the guidelines are right now but I would be very receptive

to whatever the situation is, identifying, earmarking, and reserving onto him

the right to cut that particular field. We are trying more and more now, and

this is a new phenomenon, more and more to direct firewood cutters into low

volume stands of birch and smaller birch because we recognize the potential for

birch commercially is growing. It is still difficult and we are going to stop

them from cutting softwood. We have to sort of educate them into cutting the

lower stand birch.

MR. HEWLETT: Just one further question, Mr.

Chairman. There have been a number of operations over the last number of years

that have been developed either to generate electricity, I guess, in one area of

the Province or as ancillary heat or electricity generation for another

enterprise in regard to wood chips. Are there any new developments in the

burning of wood chips on the go in the Province? I know that particular

operation I mentioned in Springdale burn their sawdust and chips as a source of

heat for their kiln for drying wood. Are there any other projects on the go, or

planned in the Province, with regard to chipping and burning that as a source of

heat or electricity?

MR. FLIGHT: I cannot be specific but we have done

studies on other areas but it is still not economic to use chips, or at least

our study shows that it is not economic to use chips for electrical generation

although we have a major hydo plant in Roddickton as the Member knows. Are we

aware of anything new with regards to heating?

MR. HEWLETT: One of the hospitals uses it. I think

Gander hospital uses it.

MR. FLIGHT: Gander hospital, Grand Falls and

Corner Brook, the major hospitals and the hardwoods plant, but that was all put

in place a few years ago and there is nothing new. My Deputy Minister points out

there is a committee, a research and development committee that is looking at

all possibilities, but we have not identified a new user for our birch to

generate the heat at this point in time or for chips, not birch.

MR. HEWLETT: I will finish in a second, Mr.

Chairman. One of the other comments of the gentleman who owns the secondary wood

products firm in Springdale is concern that wood which may have higher

commercial value would be used in chipping operations and it might be more

economical and efficient to take a large tree and turn it into chips, but at the

same time, you are then taking a large tree out of production for other uses, so

I just throw that cautionary note in there.

MR. FLIGHT: I can tell the Member, my Deputy was

whispering that, that is discouraged. We would discourage that. We frown on it.

As a matter of fact, if it became obvious that if it was happening and our

instructions were being ignored, we would probably move to stop it.

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Hewlett, thank you; thank you,

Mr. Minister.

Mr. Woodford?

MR. WOODFORD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Getting

back to the announcement, Mr. Minister, I think it was yesterday, pertaining to

the Insect Control Programme for this year.

MR. FLIGHT: The day before yesterday.

MR. WOODFORD: Yes, sometime this week. Last year

the hemlock looper and the blackheaded budworm were the problem; this year it is

just the looper, if there is a problem there it is just the looper.

What was the big difference this year in the

blackheaded budworm, because I think it was up to something like 90,000 hectares

last year which were infected, why would that be wiped out altogether in the

past year?

MR. FLIGHT: Well there are two things. The advice

we get from CFS is that the blackheaded budworm is into a natural decline, but

in any event, we do not have a means to combat it; well in the case of

chemicals, fenitrothion and Bt, and neither is registered by Forestry Canada to

use against the blackheaded budworm, so we do not have a means of spraying it;

we did, last year, use the Bt to test it.

We did an experimental spray programme on blocks where

the blackheaded budworm was the major defoliator and it did not work. The

results were not that good so we do not have anything we can use anyway against

that particular pest, but there is research going on by CFS and ourselves to

identify something that can be effective in fighting the blackheaded budworm and

as I started saying to the Member, the evidence is, that the blackheaded budworm

is in natural decline anyway. Let us hope it is.

MR. WOODFORD: So they are saying it is a natural

decline but at the same time, where there were 90,000 hectares infected last

year, we do not have a figure - is it just a natural decline or, is there a

problem there?

MR. FLIGHT: There was a difficulty last year and

there will always be a difficulty in the sense that the blackheaded budworm was

found in the same areas as the looper, there was over-lapping, so it was

difficult to determine exactly what was doing the damage, whether it was the

blackheaded budworm or the looper.

There were areas where it was just the blackheaded

budworm, but when the Member says 90,000 hectares, that would not have been

90,000 hectares of high or severe infestation levels, that would have been the

range of -

MR. WOODFORD: Moderate and severe category.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes.

MR. WOODFORD: The looper forecast for this year

predicts that 19,000 hectares would be infested and out of that 9,000 hectares

would be in the moderate and severe category, and yet last year there were

27,0000 versus 10,000, that was considered important.

Why would not 20,000 versus 9,000 be as important to

spray.

MR. FLIGHT: Because the indication I guess, as in

all spray programmes you make a decision as to what level of infestation you

will actually spray against and there are two factors.

One is that there is every indication that the looper

is again in decline and that 8,000 to 9,000, some of that is in low volume

stands that probably we would never harvest anyway, it would not be harvested

commercially. So therefore even with a spray programme you might not have

sprayed that particular area because of its non-commercial value. So those two

explanations combined are the reasons I guess that basically we chose that it

was not necessary to spray against the looper.

MR. WOODFORD: Is there any indication, was there

much lost last year that you know of, of your silviculture programmes? Or from

the year before, or whatever, from the looper or from the infestation?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: No.

MR. WOODFORD: So you are pretty well saving your

silviculture programmes.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes, hopefully. But the outward

indication is that there was no recognizable damage to our plantations and

hopefully that continues.

MR. WOODFORD: On the mill in Grand Falls, in the

announcement in 1989 I think it was where they were closing and shut down the

machine and laid off 250 people, the company at that time said that they would

be considering a new hydro power project to increase the generating capacity of

Grand Falls. What is new on that? There does not seem to be any movement

whatsoever there publicly. I do not know, maybe there is something going on

behind the scenes. But could you give us an update on what has been happening

there?

MR. FLIGHT: Well, an update I guess is, as the

Member knows, Abitibi indicated an interest and an announcement I guess that

they intended to develop the hydro potential on the Exploits River. At the time

then we knew of course it would take them a while. Because simply what they told

us is the process they intend to use: they intended to identify a joint venture

partner; there had to be feasibility studies done; and obviously environmental

studies. They undertook that. The estimated cost was in excess of $200 million.

So for the first four to six months the company went out and did their thing

they would have to do - the feasibility study, the identifying of a joint

partner, that kind of thing.

Then the economic situation changed as the Member

would know. The recession started to take hold, the paper companies went into

difficult times. I think I recall Abitibi making a statement that everything

would be looked at on the basis of the financial markets or the business

atmosphere and the rest. But I can tell the Member that it is an ongoing

project, that the company is still interested in developing the project. They

are still in the process of identifying means of doing it - joint partnership,

joint venture. They are talking to Newfoundland Hydro. I have in recent times

deferred specific questions relative to the development of that plant to the

Minister of Mines. Because it is purely a hydro project really, so (Inaudible).

MR. WOODFORD: I am rather surprised that they did

not proceed with it. Newfoundland Hydro is sort of begging for someone to come

in - and in fact they have an incentive there now for anybody under ten

megawatts.

MR. FLIGHT: I can tell the Member that

Newfoundland Hydro is very much and has been very much involved in negotiations

with Abitibi-Price on the development of the new power source on the river. As I

said, I see it now as purely a hydro generating facility (Inaudible) when it

done but under the auspices of Newfoundland Hydro. It is an issue really for the

Minister of Mines and Energy to (Inaudible).

MR. WOODFORD: One of the big points that I would

like to stress here, and if you are ever talking to him - certainly I can not -

they must have looked at it because it is a way of enhancing the viability of

the Grand Falls mill. You have guaranteed sale for something, and Hydro can -

because only for ERCO shut down Long Harbour, Newfoundland Hydro would be in

desperate need for power today. Not even tomorrow but today. That is all that

saved them. So it would be a great opportunity to enhance the viability of the

operation in Grand Falls.

But pertaining to the sawmill part of it, and

especially the wood chips, and I suppose specifically too, so-called hog fuels

that have been talked about a lot. The Roddickton plant: Any problems

experienced down there with regards to that plant and the supply to it?

MR. FLIGHT: No, I do not think there is a problem.

I am fairly sure there is not a problem (Inaudible) been brought to my attention

with regards to a supply of wood chips to the plant. I really cannot comment on

the hydro aspect, the efficiency of the plant or that kind of thing. But in as

far as providing the wood chips, I am not aware that there is a problem. There

is not, to my knowledge.

MR. WOODFORD: And they are doing what they are

supposed to do with regards to when they are cutting, when they get their

permits, the Northern Development Corporation and those other contractors who

have the contract for it makes sure it is done under all environmental -

MR. FLIGHT: As far as I know (inaudible) -

MR. WOODFORD: Clear cutting more or less.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes, clear cutting, but the Member

would know though, of course, that it is not economical, at least it has not

been in the past few years, to ship pulp wood, for instance, small wood to

either one of the existing mills. We would prefer to see that happen, and there

are people looking at trying to do that and make a dollar, so what is happening

is the saw logs, by and large, every saw log is going to Canada Bay Limited

Company, or one of the companies (inaudible), and there may well be what would

normally be considered pulp wood being chipped for the hydro plant because there

is no market for the pulpwood or it is too expensive to get it to the mills.

What we are encouraging, obviously, is the slash, the low volume stands, that

kind of thing, but I will just be up front with the Member and tell him that

because of the difficulty in identifying a market for pulpwood, it is just not

economic at this point in time to ship to the existing mills.

MR. WOODFORD: The markets were there. I mean

Abitibi is crying for wood -

MR. FLIGHT: The market is there, but -

MR. WOODFORD: It is the distance. I understand

now, though, that Abitibi has taken quite a bit of that wood down there. In fact

they are putting things in place down there that they did not have to before and

trying to (inaudible) because I mean the Roddickton area is a gold mine when it

comes to timber resources.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: The Member is right, I was speaking in

a general (inaudible), but last year we were aware, and the Member would even be

aware of the operator, work the dealer or negotiate an arrangement with Abitibi

and the sawmills, and is in the process of supplying something like 5,000 or

6,000 chords and trucking it down from the Roddickton area, which is great -

MR. WOODFORD: To the Stephenville mill.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes, to Stephenville. And we

(inaudible), we encourage that.

MR. WOODFORD: As the Minister is well aware, the

ALFI agreements that were signed, I think it was five years ago, the ALFI

agreement and the Agri-Foods agreement, but pertaining to the ALFI agreement

itself, that is up. My understanding is that here in Newfoundland all the funds

under the ALFI - the Atlantic Livestock Feeding Initiative programme has been

committed. Is there any indication that something will be forthcoming? It is

also my understanding that they are now negotiating with the Federal Government

through ACOA for an extension to that agreement. Is there any indication that

something will be forthcoming on that particular (inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: Well, the Member is right. The ALFI

agreement expired - the existing agreement expired this year. There is, again,

in these estimates the money that was left over from the agreement, I think ball

park figure around $300,000, a little in excess of $300,000 at this area in this

budget, and we are, as the Member indicated, talking to the Federal Government

through ACOA because if not all, most agreements these past few years have been

funded through ACOA and we are looking for an extension to the ALFI agreement

that would carry us over until we have negotiated another full fledged ALFI

agreement. That is happening, and I guess that is about all I can report. We are

confident that we will get that extension, we need it.

MR. WOODFORD: It is also my understanding that the

other Maritime Provinces have enough money there to pretty well look after their

funding issue under the agreement, but Newfoundland is the only one. There were

some suggestions that the federal Minister responsible for ACOA at that time was

not in favour of taking the money out of ACOA to grant an extension to the

programme, so I do not know what has become of that now every since Mr. Crosbie

took it over.

MR. FLIGHT: I am not aware of any new developments

since Mr. Crosbie took over. I am sure that Mr. Crosbie understands the

Newfoundland environment and would be sympathetic to Newfoundland needs under

any agreement. I cannot verify that what the Member says is right, that the

previous Minister of ACOA, Mr. MacKay, expressed an (inaudible) or interest or

was not prepared to take money out. My information is that we have been well

aware that the agreement was running out, started negotiations for an extension

some time ago, and as negotiations are continuing, and I am not aware of any

problem with negotiations, of course Ottawa has to agree, Mr. Crosbie or the

Federal Government and ACOA, and hopefully they will.

MR. WOODFORD: As the Minister has stated on

several occasions now over the last couple of years, and I can remember one

specifically -

AN HON. MEMBER: Once (inaudible).

MR. WOODFORD: -one specifically in Humber Valley,

namely in Cormack, one night that he would definitely not sign an agreement with

any less money than was in the previous agreement. Does the Minister still stand

by that?

MR. FLIGHT: Is that still the Minister's position?

MR. WOODFORD: Is that still the Minister's

position? Because that was very enlightening for the farmers in the area at the

time and I am sure that they would like to know if the Minister still stands by

that statement.

MR. FLIGHT: The Member is taking great liberties

with what the Minister actually said. There was no Hansard, there were no

recording facilities at the particular meeting. No doubt I recall distinctly -

and the Member was present; that I recall distinctly too - that I did say that

the agreement seemed to be a very paltry agreement, that it was not enough

money, that obviously the Federal Government and maybe the Province did not put

much priority on agriculture. I said all those things. But I doubt very

seriously and I will stand and say I did not say I would not sign an agreement

unless it had more money. I am going to go for more money, but I may not have

said that I would not sign if it contained less than $8 million. I do not look

forward to signing. I will spend a lot of time arguing before I sign. We want an

enhanced agreement. I am amazed that the hon. Member was prepared to sign that

kind of a paltry agreement.

MR. WOODFORD: I am sorry, Mr. Minister, but I did

not sign that paltry agreement. And I did not agree with it, by the way. But I

do have another 149 people that heard what you said, so that is good, it is 150

against one. But the main thing is that you are aware of it, and you are aware

of the fact that they need more money because of the developmental stage that

agriculture is in in this Province.

Why then under pay -

MR. FLIGHT: On a point of order. I want to be

serious here because I want to leave on the record that I appreciate any level

of funding. I think the case was being made and I think the hon. Member agreed

that that was not, it did not appear to be, the kind of funding that an industry

like agriculture in Newfoundland that was a growing industry with lots of

potential - appeared to be - compared to the other agreements like forest

(Inaudible) $50 million, $60 million and all the other agreements. But I do not

want to indicate that we are not grateful for any agreement. However the point

was being made that we all thought that that was not enough money to recognize a

need in Newfoundland and that we would be seeking a higher level of funding and

believe that agriculture should have a higher level of funding.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: I wanted to say that for the record

(Inaudible), I am sorry for interrupting the hon. Member.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister, we appreciate your

added explanation for it. We are running a little less formal than with points

of order and so on, but I appreciate the fact that you wanted to make the

position and clarify the situation so that a sound explanation was placed in

Hansard. On a lighter note though I must readily admit that the fact that there

were 150 to one in the room, and knowing that you were the one, it sounds to me

like it was still a fair fight.

I go back to Mr. Woodford.

MR. WOODFORD: I was going to say thank you, Mr.

Chairman, but -Mr. Minister, on page 143 of the estimates, 3.6.02, under the

Agricultural Initiatives - ALFI. With the agreement gone and pretty well out,

why would there be such a high increase in salaries for this year?

MR. FLIGHT: One of the major reasons I would say

to the Member is that, as he pointed out earlier, the ALFI agreement expired

this year. There was money left in the ALFI agreement that had to be used.

Positions were funded under the agreement and the money has to be spent this

year. So what is happening is we are taking advantage of the fact that we have

to spend that money this year, and so therefore the vote is up from last year.

MR. WOODFORD: Primarily for salaries.

MR. FLIGHT: Primarily for salaries.

MR. WOODFORD: But what would they be doing? If the

agreement is out and finished, why would you want more positions and more money

for salaries if the agreement is gone?

MR. FLIGHT: One of the salaries in here is the

coordinator for the school milk programme. That would account for a fair amount

of the increase, the salary and any expenses relative to salary.

MR. WOODFORD: That was my next question, exactly

that. What is the status now, your position, with regards to the school milk

programme? Because you know it is stated even in the report and previous to that

that in Canada now Newfoundland is the only province without the school milk

programme. I will go back to 1989, blow my own horn a little bit, although it

was just before an election, it was just rather ironic because - that is, I must

stress that to the Minister, and I was only there a short time - but I had it

pretty well put in place with regards to an initiation anyway or a start, some

start, to a school milk programme. Which I thought would be beneficial both to

the industry for the increased milk consumption and production, and to the

people of the Province, especially the children of the Province and in the

schools. Very important that the nutritional level be kept up.

What would the status of that be now? Because I notice

in the Agri-Foods report as well that they stress the funding of approximately

$300,000 - no! The $300,000 annually pretty well now is coming from the

producers. They have initiated something. What would be the Department's stand

on that now?

MR. FLIGHT: Well, let me say, number one I support

and commend the dairy industry. They have instigated a school milk programme. I

think the level of funding committed to that programme is $600,000 now.

MR. WOODFORD: Yes, from the processors as well.

MR. FLIGHT: From the processors and the producers.

Let me say that I support totally a school milk programme for all the reasons

that the Member indicated. Both from the nutritional point of view, from a

desire to have milk available to our children in schools; from the producers'

point of view it expands the market and therefore helps to secure the future of

the dairy industry. We support and encourage the programme that the producers

and the industry have put in place.

I cannot make a commitment with regards to financial

commitment by the Government obviously until a position is determined and

approved, but to the extent that I can say to the Member, I support the

programme. I know that the committee or the organization that is responsible for

administering this $600,000 has indicated that they intend to come and talk to

Government about a Provincial contribution. At this point in time I can only say

that of course I will meet them, hear their arguments, listen to their case and

do whatever is possible. However, the Member will understand that I cannot at

this point in time make a commitment of any particular amount of funding. Again,

it is difficult for us and for me and for Government to have to deal with this

particular item in the financial reality that we find ourselves in.

But there is no question about the value and the level

of support and that we will do what we can do to make sure there is a successful

school milk programme and that the industry is supported in its initiatives.

MR. WOODFORD: Is this coordinator put in place

now, working in conjunction with the committee or...?

MR. FLIGHT: I am not specifically - have you

(Inaudible)?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: I do not think the individual is in

place. The policy has been accepted, it has been announced, I think it has been

announced as a six month programme, but I do not think the individual himself is

in place at this point in time.

MR. WOODFORD: I am trying to get the - the

Department is not putting any money into the school milk programme itself, but

yet they are setting up a coordinator, a coordinator to do what? Work between

who? Because there is a committee in place now working with the processors, the

consumers, and I understand that the Department has a representative on that

committee as well.

MR. FLIGHT: Oh, there's a committee of - I think

the Department of Education -

MR. WOODFORD: Department of Education.

MR. FLIGHT: There are several committees, now,

there's certainly there is -

MR. WOODFORD: Department of Health.

MR. FLIGHT: Department of Health.

AN HON. MEMBER: We are leaning towards (Inaudible)

being hired by the industry rather than be hired by us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: The explanation to the hon. Member is

that we are leaning towards having the industry hire the individual. But we

would provide a portion of the salary funding and that is reflected here.

MR. WOODFORD: And that will come out of the ALFI?

MR. FLIGHT: That will come out of that particular

agreement, that particular vote.

MR. WOODFORD: Will you say that is for a period of

six months?

MR. FLIGHT: It seems to me, yes, it is six months;

I am drawing on my general memory from conversations with the Milk Marketing

Board in particular.

MR. WOODFORD: Because with an extra $135,000 in

salaries this year it would lead me to believe there is a lot more involved.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes. I think what I will do, Mr.

Chairman, for the hon. Member, is to undertake to provide him with the details

on that, immediately after this committee rises, within the next - probably

during the sittings this afternoon or certainly tomorrow, because I cannot

indicate exactly what that increase covers and I will see that the members of

the committee have the information immediately upon the rising of the committee.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Noel.

MR. NOEL: There is that question of land

utilization that I brought up earlier, has given an immediate problem for me. As

I indicated, residents of Brophy Place have been trying to get a piece of land

to grow some of their own produce and a lot of people in that area are

unemployed or disadvantaged in some way, so they are interested in doing

something for themselves, and so I talked to the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation, to see if we could get some of his land up there and he says

that he does not have any that is available and suggested that we talk to Pippy

Park.

I have just had a call from Pippy Park and they said

they do not have any suitable land available and they referred me to the

Minister of Agriculture -

MR. FLIGHT: They may have referred you to the

right Minister finally.

MR. NOEL: -so I said that I have him right where I

want him, but this is the kind of problem - we have a group of people who are

interested in doing something for themselves and growing more things for the

Province and, out of all the land around this city, can we not find a piece of

land that - I am not saying it is your responsibility to provide it, I

understand that -

MR. FLIGHT: Well, to the Member, it is obviously

my responsibility to encourage the production of agricultural products. As I

understand it, what the Member is suggesting, he has constituents in this case,

in the Brophy Park area who do not have land available for vegetable and we are

thinking in terms of production for home use as opposed to - okay.

What I will do and I guess all I can do is to take

this issue under advisement, and discuss the possibility with my officials. We

do have, obviously earlier in the estimates, we have identified that we buy land

and we then lease that land out to the industry.

We may well have land, that we are trying to lease and

have not been successful in doing that and if the purpose was, purely to grow

vegetables, I cannot think, off the top of my head, of any real reason; I may be

able to give the Member twenty reasons after I talk to my officials, but right

now I cannot think of any reason why I would not support that kind of an

initiative.

MR. NOEL: Sure, and I expect that you would, but

the kind of a little problem that we have here, is that, those people would like

to find a piece of land close to where they live; many of them do not have their

own -

MR. FLIGHT: Where, exactly is Brophy Place?

MR. NOEL: At the top of Bell's Turn, a sort of

last housing area you will see if you look in that way; it is a group of town

houses, and the ironic thing is, that they are very near some really good

agricultural land, the Thomas farm up there and land that has been acquired by

the Province for the Outer Ring Road.

You know, the Minister said yesterday or a couple days

ago that it might be thirteen years before the Outer Ring Road goes ahead, so

why could not those people have access to that land and of course, obviously

this is something I am going to have to take up with him as well, but maybe you

could give me a hand in that, because we have, you know, people who are

interested in doing something -

We have good land very near where they want it, but it

seems that red bureaucracy is standing in the way.

MR. FLIGHT: I generally agree with the philosophy

that the Member is indicating and we will talk about it and we will look at it.

MR. NOEL: I know that it will be more appropriate

to talk about it afterwards, but, I just thought it would be useful to bring it

up at this meeting to illustrate the kind of thing the Province should be

looking to do some more with -

MR. FLIGHT: I agree.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Are we ready for the question?

MR. WOODFORD: Oh no, no.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, I understand.

MR. FLIGHT: I thought the Member for Kilbride - I

was going to welcome him first but I thought he would keep looking down and

reading his paper and miss the question.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I make light of the moment, I want

to welcome the Member for Kilbride who decided to join us this morning. I am

cognizant of the fact that he would like to ask a question and I thought I would

catch him off guard just for that moment and bring him back to where we are.

By leave of the Committee, if there is no one who

wanted to ask a question immediately and following through with the normal

format that we had I will offer the floor to Mr. Aylward, if you would like to

ask a few questions.

MR. NOEL: A point of order.

I can see the Member clearly but I assume that the

Chairman is making sure that he is not unacceptably decorated in participating

in this meeting today.

MR. R. AYLWARD: (Inaudible).

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member was being very kind to

the Chair and the only problem with being properly attired is that in this

particular forum the Chairman of this Committee could have a problem with the

attire simple because the Chair is at leave to allow the Member to ask

questions. I would not want to see attire causing a problem of other Committee

Members wanting to keep the questions going. The Chair goes into a dilemma. I

would think that out of our long-standing relationship that goes back to my days

of being, and I want Hansard to be careful with this, a chicken plucker and

having many successful meetings with the Member, knowing that there is a ruling

anticipated on that particular subject from the Speaker of the House that the

Member might allow this Chair not to have to deal with this issue, and leave it

for a ruling this afternoon.

MR. R. AYLWARD: May I make a comment on that.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Certainly.

MR. R. AYLWARD: I was quite willing to allow the

Chair not to have to rule on that but, Mr. Speaker, when we have a committee

Member who wanted to point out the fact that we should be allowed to express our

views in the Assembly and we should not be muzzled by being restricted in

expressing any views, I felt that I had to put back on the lapel pin which is

totally in order according to the rule books. Now, it might not be according to

the Speaker's ruling today.

Just for the Chairman's sake, Vice-Chairman's, and

Committee Members sake so that you can get on with your work I shall put it away

for now.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I appreciate that. I would also like

to say that the Chair might have inadvertently set a stage for that lighthearted

question to be asked simply by doing what I did in terms of jokingly wanting to

move the question, knowing full well that the Member would be welcomed and

certainly would be entitled to ask questions by leave.

Now, then I will go back to the hon. Member for

Kilbride and allow him to ask questions.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I do not have a lot of questions. I just want to ask

the Minister, I have been looking through the Estimates here and I cannot find

the heading for the Land Consolidation Programme within the agricultural zone in

St. John's. You might point out the heading to me so that I might have a look at

it.

AN HON. MEMBER: Page 135.

MR. CHAIRMAN: On the bottom, 3.1.05. There was

some discussion earlier with regard to that, Mr. Aylward, your colleagues might

be able to answer for you unless there is something specific you wanted.

MR. R. AYLWARD: It is a hard job for me to find it

when I have the 1990 Estimates.

I apologize; I have to check my Estimates first.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, again I see the amount has been

reduced from last year's expenditures again by another $100,000 - is that 3.1.05

Property, Furnishings and Equipment -

MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes. I appreciate the question, Mr.

Aylward, but I am going to say that if you had a number of items that you wanted

to discuss, we dealt with that earlier, and I have no problem dealing with that

again, but your colleagues were well versed in that a little earlier. Again, I

say I am more than willing to have the answer again but if there were items you

wanted to cover, other than something we already covered, I want to make you

aware of that, but the question is still valid.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Chairman, I realize that my

colleagues are quite versed in this and they are pretty well versed in every

aspect of all that is going on in the Estimates but my reason for bringing it up

again is because I was not able to attend earlier so I did not hear the answers

and we will not have the printed copies of these until sometime next August,

September or October. This directly affects my district which is the reason why

I came here. Mr. Chairman, I notice that again there is a reduction in the Land

Consolidation Program funds. I think this is the third year in a row that the

Minister has decided to reduce these funds. I know they were at least $750,000 a

year at one time so I wonder if the Minister could give an explanation for the

reduction? Is it that we have all the desirable agricultural land bought up now

in this area, or might it be that he is not as strong a supporter of this

program as were some of the former Ministers who occupied his position might

have been?

MR. FLIGHT: To the hon. Member I would like to

think I am as supportive of that program as any other Minister. The obvious

reason is the financial restraints we find ourselves in. It is a budgetary

problem. The Member knows that and we can debate that all day. The Department of

Agriculture had to take its share of the financial -

MR. R. AYLWARD: This is not a current account

expenditure. It is a capital expenditure.

MR. FLIGHT: It is a capital expense, however the

fiscal situation we find ourselves in is reflected in the capital account as

well as in the current account, but I would say to the hon. Member that there

are probably other reasons. The Member knows better than most people that first

when that program was announced and became a policy it was well advertised, and

of course people were aware of it probably to a greater extent than they are

today, but we do not advertise it, number one, and it has been suggested to me

that is the reason why we may not be getting as many requests as we did

initially. Another reason is, as the Member knows, we pay in the vicinity of

$4000 per acre for land removed from that zone under the consolidation program.

I am told, I have not had it verified, but I accept it, that land is probably

worth in the vicinity of $20,000 if it were on the open market for industrial or

commercial use.

MR. R. AYLWARD: That would be zoned as

agricultural.

MR. FLIGHT: Not while it is zoned as agricultural

but the people who would normally take advantage, and I am trying to tell the

Member why there may not be as much pressure or as many applications these days.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Does the Minister know that he has

applications on file that could not be dealt with last year because he never had

enough money, so you cut the money back this year so you would have more

applications on file next year?

MR. FLIGHT: But there are not as many applications

on file as were on file in the past. There are applications on file where we

offered $4000 and they said, no, thank you, so when we talk about the

applications on file there may be twenty applications on file and we dealt with

some and the other individuals when told they would be paid $4000 said, no,

thank you, and the applications stayed on file and were not acted on. I am just

suggesting to the Member that one of the reasons why some of the applications

are on file is because they are just not going to sell at this point in time and

are probably hoping that the land will be removed from the zone or whatever and

they will get full commercial value.

MR. R. AYLWARD: But the Minister will agree that

there are applications on file from individuals who wish to sell their land, who

wish to negotiate a price and sell their land, and because there was not enough

money last year in the Budget they couldn't and it happened every year. I am not

saying it was just last year but in the last three years we have reduced the

Budget.

MR. FLIGHT: I cannot specifically identify it, but

I have no doubt that what the Member is saying is right, that there were more

applications on file than we could fund. Be that as it may the fact is that we

only saw fit this year to put $400,000 into the land acquisition program and

that is the level of funding. It does not indicate a lack of support for the

program.

MR. R. AYLWARD: It does not suggest an increase in

support for it, certainly.

MR. FLIGHT: It just indicates a recognition of the

realities, financial and otherwise.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Well, the realities are that we

have 2 per cent of our land base that we can grow food on and quite a bit of it

is being wasted in this area. It is not being used.

MR. FLIGHT: In 1989, we budgeted $500,000 for land

acquisition. In 1989 - 1990, there was $350,000; in 1990 - 1991 there was again

$500,000. Now, the Member was probably responsible for 1989 - 1990.

MR. R. AYLWARD: No, Sir, I was not. It was

$800,000 and something in 1988 or 1987 while I was there. I was not there in

1989, I was in the Department of Forestry, I believe, at the time.

MR. FLIGHT: So, there is not that major

difference. We are with the trend, if these figures - and I have to accept the

figures - are accurate in 1988 - 1989, $500,000 was budgeted, $620,000 spent; in

1989 - 1990, $350,000 was budgeted and $350,000 spent; in 1991 $500,000 was

budgeted and $500,000 spent; and in 1991- 1992 we have budgeted $400,000 and I

suspect we will spend $400,000, but that is $50,000 up from 1989 - 1990.

MR. R. AYLWARD: That is $100,000 down from last

year when you did not have enough money last year to cover what the demand was.

MR. FLIGHT: And we probably never will, as the

Member knows.

MR. R. AYLWARD: The only point I am trying to

make, Mr. Chairman, is -

MR. CHAIRMAN: Gentlemen, please.

I appreciate the fact that we have two individuals:

one with a thorough background and knowledge from a previous Government and one

with a thorough background in the current Government. I can appreciate that you

are both trying to reach a point here but I would suggest that we will never

reach the point if as one is making a statement and the other one is

interrupting. The point I am making goes in both directions gentlemen. I am more

than happy to entertain questions and listen to answers but if the jousting

continues in both directions I do not think we shall really get the answer or

the question out properly. So, I would ask that we offer each other a little

courtesy in both directions.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I

apologize.

I would like to ask the Minister one final question:

Could he give us some figures on the land acquisitions over the last two or

three years, the acreage of the land that was purchased? Does he know if all of

that land has been released to farmers to be put back into use? Is that figure

available?

MR. FLIGHT