May 27,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLII No. 5

The House met at 2:00 p.m

MR. SPEAKER (Dicks): Order, please!

I would like to welcome to the public gallery on behalf of

all hon. members, the successful candidate for Placentia, Mr. Nicholas Careen.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Oral Questions

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

MR. SIMMS: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, according to the Budget documents, the

Department of Social Services has cut funding for home support services by $3.5

million. Last year it spent $16.6 million, and this year it is planning to spend

$13.1 million. Now, this is the money that pays for attendant care and respite

care for severely handicapped children and adults, who are being cared for in

their private homes. I would like to ask the Minister of Social Services if he

believes that such a large amount should be cut from the funding that supports

people who most need our help, and I want to ask him specifically: Is it because

there are fewer people who need these services, or have the government

deliberately decided to reduce the level and quality of care for those

particular people? Which is it?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, first of all, with reference to

the amounts of money that were budgeted, the hon. member, were he to look at

last year's budget, would see that the amount of money budgeted for last year,

is the same amount budgeted for this year. However, in the revised expenditures,

he is correct, there was I think, maybe an excess of $3 million - $3 million was

spent in excess of what was budgeted. We realize this is a difficult area and

the difficulty the department is faced with here is allocating the amount of

monies to ensure that everybody who needs the care, the respite care and the

home care that he talks about is, indeed, offered, as opposed to maybe being a

little bit overgenerous. Because when we start these programs, sometimes we get

into areas where we ought not to, and last year we found that we certainly

didn't have enough money.

I can assure the hon. member that that area is going to be

looked into again. If the calls I am getting are any indication of what is going

on, I can assure the member that the department is assessing that situation to

ensure that anybody who desperately needs the care gets the care - that nobody

in this Province is without the care that is necessary for the sick, the

handicapped, whatever the situation might be.

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

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am delighted to hear

the minister make that statement. I presume he has given the answer in

consultation with his colleague, the Minister of Finance. Because that is the

very reason for my question. He did spend $16.5 million last year. This year you

are budgeting to spend only $13.1, therefore, there is $3.5 million that you are

likely to need again this year.

AN HON. MEMBER: More.

MR. SIMMS: The minister is even confirming it now, and

more. So that puts the Budget in even a more precarious position than it was

before. It is a trick Budget.

Mr. Speaker, let me ask a supplementary of the same minister,

if I might.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is having trouble hearing the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In case members

opposite don't realize it, these handicapped and these youth and adults we are

talking about here are those who have been placed in private homes and are

looked after by the families in those private homes. Can the minister confirm,

though, despite his answer of a moment ago, or is he aware that, in fact, his

department has issued guidelines to his local district offices to reduce support

to both the handicapped individuals I am referring to and to the people who are

providing the care? Is he aware of that, number one. Secondly, can he also

confirm, because we are now two months into the Budget year, the reality is that

the support being cut is being cut drastically? In fact, it is now being cut by

30 per cent for the remainder of the year in order to get the annualized savings

that the Minister of Finance has asked him to get.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MR. LUSH: I can tell the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition that the staff in every department - not only in this particular

division, but the staff in every division - have been asked to meet the

budgetary requirements for this year. Whether they have been asked to cut by 30

per cent, the percentage that he specifically refers to, I shall have to check

that out. I can only say that all divisions of the Department of Social Services

have been asked to meet the budgetary requirements but I say to him again we

have also asked to have all these programs assessed and evaluated and we will be

bringing a report back as soon as we have determined just whether or not these

monies can meet the requirements of the people because we want to ensure that

the sick, the handicapped and all the needy people in this Province are looked

after and that their needs are adequately addressed.

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

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the

response of the minister. The other point I want to make of course is that most

of the handicapped people that we are talking about in this particular question

and those that are looked after in private homes need constant care day and

night, as the minister would know, they cannot be left on their own at all.

In addition to the other help the department provides, they

also provide some respite care or time off for the care givers. Can the minister

confirm that his department plans to cut the annual leave that is provided to

these care givers in half, from thirty days for example down to fifteen days?

Can he confirm that that is their plan and is it also his plan to reduce funding

to the support workers as well who help out with the care of these handicapped

persons, can he confirm that?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, the latter question with respect

to people taking their annual leave, I will take that under advisement but with

respect to the cutbacks, again I will tell the hon. member that every effort is

made not to cut back in terms of people needing fulltime care. If people need

fulltime care than the department is going to do everything they can to ensure

that people who need fulltime care receive this care. The problem is determining

whether or not in a particular instance a couple of hours a day can be cut or

whether three hours a day is sufficient. What I can tell the hon. member is that

the whole thing is being assessed and evaluated.

MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the Leader

of the Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a final

supplementary question but it is to the Minister of Finance. Mr. Speaker, in

view of the admission now by the Minister of Social Services that the money

being provided for this particular program is not enough money - he clearly has

said that - I want to ask the minister again: why did he perceive to present in

this House last Friday or whenever it was now, a duplicate or a replicate of a

Budget that was already two months old, when in fact his own cabinet colleagues

presumably have been telling him that there is not enough money budgeted or

provided to look after the services that we need to give to the people of this

Province? What does this do to the minister's budget? This is the question which

we have been trying to ask for the last four or five days. Does it not turn it

into one big stinko mess?

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

MR. BAKER: I do not know which question to answer first,

Mr. Speaker. As the hon. member knows, who once spent some time as President of

Treasury Board, budgets are estimates and guidelines that we go by, and that at

the end of year we are over on some items, under on others. There are lapsed

balances at the end of the year and so on, and we all hope and strive for a

result at the end of the year that is compatible with the bottom line in the

Budget - that these amounts are simply estimates and we try to live within these

estimates. That is all a budget is.

I suppose the day after a budget is presented, if you were to

take one day's expenditure and extrapolate for 365 days you could make the same

charge, but the hon. gentleman knows that is a lot of nonsense.

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

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

the Minister responsible for Tourism and Culture.

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the minister is well aware that

libraries in the Province have been experiencing some severe difficulties over

the last few years due to government cutbacks. Could the minister now tell the

House, and confirm to the House, that the Provincial Library Board has a deficit

of some $900,000 and to add insult to injury, that they have been told to pay

back $300,000 a year for each of the next three years out of their budget to

cover it?

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

MR. WALSH: Yes, Mr. Speaker, the answer to the first

question is yes, and the answer to the second question is no.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Speaker, could the minister now confirm

to the House that his department has sent in a team from Treasury Board - and I

refer to the team as 'number crunchers' from Treasury Board - to complete the

final

chapter and close the book on smaller libraries in rural Newfoundland and

Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Tourism.

MR. WALSH: Mr. Speaker, the same answer. The first part

of the question, yes; the second part of the question, no.

What the department has actually done is that we have

realized that there is some $900,000 owing in actual fact to the banks, that the

board have built up over a number of years, and the banks are now on the hook

for some $900,000. Have we sent number crunchers in? Yes we have. When an

organization has been given a budget over five, six, seven, eight years, and

that amount of money is what they were expected to live with, yet in the

meantime they have built up a deficit with a bank to the tune of $900,000 it is

only prudent and proper that the people of this Province know what happened and

how they managed to run up $900,000 in deficit. So, yes, we have sent number

crunchers in there to find out what the situation is. With respect to putting a

final nail in a coffin, or something to do with closing small libraries, I think

you are on a fishing expedition and just fearmongering and nothing more than

that.

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

final supplementary.

MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Speaker, does the minister then realize

that libraries in the Province will now have to take money from their book

budgets in order to cover this $300,000 each year for the next three, and how

can he and his department rationalize on one hand promoting literacy in the

Province, in a Province where some 44 per cent of people are illiterate, how can

he on one hand rationalize that and on the other hand, Mr. Speaker, turn

libraries in the Province into what they call museums and not libraries? Can the

minister rationalize that?

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

Culture.

MR. WALSH: Mr. Speaker, it becomes extremely difficult

to, one, rationalize innuendo, and it becomes even more difficult to rationalize

fairy tales and to try to rationalize a set of numbers that absolutely make no

sense, and have no base of support from the public libraries board themselves.

How do I rationalize something that does not even start from a premise of making

sense? I do not know where you are coming from so you cannot expect an answer

from me that is rational when your premise is not rational.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Humber East.

MS. VERGE: Mr. Speaker, I have questions for the Minister

of Employment and Labour Relations. As the minister must realize it is harder

than ever for students to get summer jobs. Employers who have been hurt by the

recession cannot afford to hire as many students as they would like. Community

organizations who have lost government grant revenue cannot afford to take on as

many students as they used to, consequently there is more demand than ever for

government assistance for student employment this summer. Why then has the

provincial government cut funding for the student employment program, and by how

much has the government slashed the funding, by 25 per cent, from $800,000 spent

last year to the $600,000 stated in the Budget Estimates, or by 62.5 per cent

from $800,000 spent last year to approximately $300,000 officials of the

department told me?

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

Labour Relations.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I certainly appreciate the question from the hon. member

opposite. I'm sure in our estimates on Tuesday morning we'll examine that matter

in detail. However, I can tell the hon. member and everyone present in the House

and through this medium to the public, that our budget number for student

employment programs for the summer is exactly the same as it was in the Budget

last year. Last year this government budgeted $600,000 for a student employment

program. This year we are budgeting $600,000 for a student employment program.

The details of what exactly we spent last year and how it got to be $800,000 at

the end of the day, I'll go into that in the estimates when we have more time to

explain it, rather than a short question like now. Whether or not we will spend

$600,000 or more this year will be determined between now and the end of the

summer, but right now we have budgeted for student employment initiatives

$600,000, none of which has been expended to today's date.

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

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Supplementary to the

same minister. The minister and his staff have given very little information to

the public about this year's student employment program. The minister sent

literature to Opposition MHAs about the program just last week, on the eve of

the deadline for applications. I understand over 600 applications have been

received, nonetheless. Will the minister allow more time for employers and

others in the Province who may be able to take advantage of this program who are

just now finding out about the opportunity? Will the minister provide fair

treatment for people throughout the Province so that everyone has the same

chance to participate?

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

Labour Relations.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you again, Mr. Speaker. Yes we will. It

came to my attention just a few days ago in terms of the letter that I signed

after I returned from the election. Because normally, as everyone here would

understand, our planning and the distribution of applications and material and

information about a student employment program would have normally happened in

May month. Those things didn't occur because there was an election on in the

Province at the time and we didn't want to predetermine any decisions in case

some other result may have occurred in the election. Someone else might have

liked to have done something differently. We didn't think that we should put in

place in April the plans that would have been made closer to the end of May.

When I returned the documentation was done up with the normal dates on it,

suggesting that a reasonable closing time would have been about mid-May. By the

time I signed the letter that wasn't picked up in the letter. There were only a

few days difference, but everybody has been notified that applications are being

received. None have been processed to date.

This program continues on, by the way. Because under our

student employment program, even students who are high school students going

into post-secondary next year, are eligible under the provincial program. Some

of these applications are not processed until after the end of June for the last

two months of the summer. So there is still room for applications. They are

still being received. None have been processed yet to date.

MR. SPEAKER: Final supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Humber East.

MR. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A supplementary to the

minister. What criteria will the minister who, evidently, has the final say on

application approvals use to rank applications? The information process, in the

eyes of members on this side of the House, wasn't fair. What reason is there to

believe that the selection process will be fair?

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

Labour Relations.

MR. GRIMES: I can only suggest, Mr. Speaker, that this

government has run a student employment program for four consecutive summers, a

fifth one about to start. There's never been a suggestion made to my knowledge

that there's been anything other than fair selection to students. Because we

work on the premise that all of the students are basically equal in terms of

their need, because they all have cost and expenses. They are all eligible. That

all of the employers make application because they're willing to pay half the

cost. The only thing that's limited our program in each of the four years has

been less than an amount of money required to meet every application. That will

probably be the case again this year.

There is in fact a situation whereby we'll try to our utmost

to make sure that there's a fair distribution in all regions of the Province

based upon student population numbers and the need in those areas, particularly

when they're matched with the number of opportunities in the areas that are

taken care of by the federal programs which are funded through the seed and

challenge. So we try to match up the two and make sure that we're not

duplicating the federal programs and putting all the money in the same areas. We

distribute it evenly so that every student has the equal opportunity no matter

where they live in the Province, to the best of our ability.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford -

Kenmount.

MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, last year the government

budgeted $121 million for the operation of Memorial University. That was cut to

$118 million, and again this year the budget is $114 million.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HODDER: That's a cut of $7 million over the last

several years

and because of inflation and other costs, the University says

it is short $11 million, money that it needs to maintain the integrity of the

programs. I know that the University has kept the hon. the minister informed of

how it plans to cope with the shortfall, and I would like to ask the minister if

it is true that tuition fees are going to be increasing again this year, they

have increased 46 per cent over the last four years, is it in fact -

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HODDER: - that an increase in tuition fees would be

used to address the shortfall in the University's funding?

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

AN HON. MEMBER: Long question (inaudible).

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. DECKER: - as the hon. member will know we are in a

very difficult fiscal time in this Province. I could go into the reasons. There

are a whole lot of reasons, Mr. Speaker, one of the reasons is the seventeen

years of mismanagement that the hon. member will know about but there are other

reasons as well.

Now the University is not exempt, they are going to take

their responsibility like other parts of government will. Now in dealing with

the University, Mr. Speaker, we recognize the autonomy of the institution and

instead of telling them what they should do or what not to do, we gave them

their budget and they have the leeway to deal with it as they see fit. In talks

with the president of the institution over the last number of weeks, he

suggested to me that one of the things that they are looking at, Mr. Speaker -

one of the things, there are many they are looking at - is a possibility. Now,

Mr. Speaker, that is very vague, is it not? One of the things they are looking

at - there is a possibility that they may indeed increase tuition. At this

moment, there is no definite decision made but there is a possibility that they

might indeed have to raise tuition.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford -

Kenmount.

MR. HODDER: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

Last year, for the very first time, first year enrolments at

Memorial University declined. Can the minister confirm that the University will

raise entrance requirements from a passing rate of 60 per cent to 65 per cent

this year, and to 70 per cent next year, and can he tell the House if there are

any other actions taken by the University or proposed by the University, to

limit enrolments and therefore try to address their shortfall in funding in that

way?

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member will know that

the decision of the University to increase the requirement for entrance from

sixty to sixty-five, and eventually to seventy, has been blasted in every

newspaper and ever media in this Province over the last six months, I mean, that

is public knowledge which has been said over and over again.

In discussions with the University, Mr. Speaker, I have been

told that this has nothing to do with controlling enrolment. The reality is that

only one student in six who goes into the University with a mark below seventy

finally ends up with a degree so it is done for academic reasons and even that

one, Mr. Speaker, in most cases, ends up having to spend about one in six. Your

chances of getting a degree, if you go in without a seventy average, is very,

very slim and even the people who do get it tend to be in university in excess

of six years, so it is strictly for academic reasons, Mr. Speaker.

Notwithstanding that, there are still ways that people without the 60 per cent

mark can get in. For example, the mature student is still allowed to enter with

a lower mark than that, so I would tell the hon. member, do not blame that on

any attempt to control enrolment. It is simply facing the reality that it is

extremely difficult for a student without a seventy average to come out of the

institution with a degree.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford -

Kenmount, a final supplementary.

MR. HODDER: A final supplementary.

Mr. Speaker, decisions have been made, as I understand, to

reduce course offerings at the University. Is the minister aware that some

students will have to wait probably two or three years in order to get the

courses they need to complete their degree programs?

Is he also aware that some teachers in this Province have

been granted leave to return to university and now find that they cannot get the

courses they need to complete their programs? Can he also confirm that one of

the options being considered by the University is to suspend new admissions to

the Faculty of Education for at least one year?

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, that is a barrage of questions.

I am not aware of any decision to stop enrolment in education

for at least a year. I will have to take that part of the question under

advisement and have it checked out - whether or not in excess of one year, Mr.

Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. DECKER: I have forgotten the first part of the

question. Really there were three questions.

MR. HODDER: (Inaudible) university will be cutting

courses, and some people who need these courses for their degrees will not be

able to get them.

MR. DECKER: Oh yes.

No, Mr. Speaker, I think it is a little bit of hyperbole when

people have to wait three years. Now it is a fact of life that all students

cannot go into any university in the world and get the course offerings they

want at any given time. That has been a fact of life ever since Aristotle taught

Plato, or Plato taught Aristotle, whichever way it was. So these things happen,

but a two to three year wait is highly unlikely. I will have to admit that every

student cannot get all of the courses that he or she wants at a given time, but

the situation at this university is pretty well similar to what it is in all

other universities around the world.

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

Bay.

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for

the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

I contacted the minister's office this morning to find out if

there were any funds available this year for the road from Purbeck's Cove to

Westport, on the Baie Verte Peninsula. It is only a five kilometre stretch of

road, but I can tell you, after the election experience, that I travelled it

twice and to say it is deplorable is an understatement.

Is the Minister aware that the school in Purbeck's Cove will

close at the end of this year and all the students will have to be bussed to

nearby Westport, which is only five kilometres away? In view of that fact, will

the minister have the condition of the road assessed and see if he can find some

money to at least bring it up to a standard so that the safety of the students

is taken into consideration?

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

Transportation.

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, I am aware of the condition of the road out

there and the circumstances surrounding the school.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: My plan, Mr. Speaker, is to, in the very near

future - hopefully within the next two or three weeks, depending on how long the

House is open - to visit that particular area and to see for myself, and

hopefully over the near future we can take a look at the seriousness of the

condition of the road and see what can be done to address the concerns of the

people in that area.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the

Minister of Health.

Provision was made in the 1992-'93 capital budget for $1.1

million renovations to the Golden Heights Manor in Bonavista. The renovations

were to make it possible for the facility to accommodate level II and level III

long-term care patients. The planning work for the renovations has been done,

but the construction has not yet started. Will this project be funded in this

year's capital budget?

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

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, what was in this year's capital

budget will be proceeding, so there is no question about that. I guess what we

should do is to check out with the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation just how things are going with respect to that particular

development.

I have not checked up on it recently to see just how far it

is along, but what is in the capital budget we will proceed with, and what is

not in the capital budget we will not proceed with.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HARRIS: My question is also to the Minister of

Health, who on Tuesday said that he was not an avid follower of the Telegram,

but perhaps he has now been briefed by officials of his department on the

situation with respect to the finding of a blood transfusion bag in or near the

St. John's water supply. I wonder could he tell the House whether or not he or

his department have any concern about either the safety and the disposal of

medical equipment or medical supplies in the Department of Health or in the

hospitals or concerns about the St. John's water supply as a result of this

finding?

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

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is all excited

about nothing, absolutely nothing.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

DR. KITCHEN: Let me say what happens to blood. First of

all blood is purified before it is injected into whoever gets it. That must be

looked at very carefully and so that must be taken into account, that any blood

is pure, so there is no danger of contamination. The second thing is that once

the blood is used the blood bag is sterilized and then it is placed as a sterile

in the regular garbage and it goes out into the landfill in Robin Hood Bay. Now

then, the latest theory is that perhaps a sea gull from Robin Hood Bay might

have picked up and dropped this into the water supply but let me say though that

the Windsor Lake water supply has been tested daily since this and everything is

satisfactory. So there is absolutely no grounds for concern. I understand that

we will not be bringing in Dave Winfield to have a go at the sea gulls.

MR. SPEAKER: Question period has expired.

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Special Committees

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

Labour Relations.

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table in the

House the Annual Report of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Tribunal for the

calendar year 1992, and if I could, Mr. Speaker, just make a couple of comments.

The report highlights the fact that in the calendar year

1992, ending in December, there was, indeed, an increased caseload at the

Appeals Tribunal which handled the external appeals of the decision of the

commission. It went from 100 cases to 293 that were filed with the Appeals

Tribunal. There was an increased number of decisions rendered by the Appeals

Tribunal. They rendered ninety-seven decisions in the calendar year 1992 and

they managed in that past year to decrease the time frame, even though, from the

time of the notice of appeal to the conclusion of the report, sometimes it takes

as much as eight months, from the time the thing leaves the Workers'

Compensation Commission until it is finally disposed of at the Appeals Tribunal.

Once the Appeals Tribunal, itself actually is seized of the case, they have

tried to give a commitment to restrict their time frames to ninety days, and

they have made a lot of inroads in moving towards that, although they don't meet

the objective every time. They have recognized that there is more work to be

done and they have started on some re-organization and restructuring to better

facilitate the work of the Appeals Tribunal. This is referenced in the report,

Mr. Speaker, which I commend to the members for their reading. I take this

opportunity to thank the Chairperson of the Tribunal, Judge Seabright, who is in

the gallery today with the administrative secretary, Miss Marlene Norman, who

handled the bulk of the work at the Appeals Tribunal. I table the report, Mr.

Speaker.

Notices of Motion

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

DR. KITCHEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce

a bill entitled, "An Act Respecting The Control Of The Sale Of Tobacco To

Minors."

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo - Bay

d'Espoir.

MR. GILBERT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will on tomorrow introduce the following

resolution:

WHEREAS the traditional cod fishery on the South Coast has

deteriorated, due mainly to mismanagement by the Federal Government; and

WHEREAS the people involved in the fishery along the South

and West Coasts of this Province are unsure of their future; and

WHEREAS the compensation package announced on April 23, 1993

is not yet meeting the needs of the people involved in the fishery;

BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly call upon the

Federal Government to take immediate action to implement a fair and equitable

compensation package for the people of the South and West Coasts of the Province

and the Labrador Strait.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Answers to Questions

For which Notice has been Given

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

Agriculture.

MR. FLIGHT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to provide answers to questions asked by the hon. the

Member for Ferryland in yesterday's Question Period. I refer to a fire in the

Cape Broyle area. On May 19, we received notice of a fire in the Horse Chops

area of the Southern Shore. A CL-215 water bomber was dispatched to the area and

the action of the water bomber and forestry officials resulted in the fire being

brought completely under control on that day.

The fire occurred in barren and shrub, which is to be

expected in the area in which the fire occurred. Seven hectares were burnt over

and there was no damage to property and no threat to communities. The closest

community is Cape Broyle. No commercial timber was burnt, and the fire was

apparently caused by a person burning brush and foam seats from a chesterfield.

The hon. member should speak to this constituents. The person was burning

without a permit and will be charged.

In the same question, the hon. member indicated he had

difficulty finding the salary details in the provincial Budget for our fire

suppression program. I tell the member that the details he is looking for are in

the 1993 Estimates, Salary Details, Page 87. It indicates that the total Budget

for forest fire suppression is $1.2 million budgeted for this year, out of which

$889,000 is paid to seasonal fire fighters. Mr. Speaker, he also wondered about

staying within the Budget, and I would point out to him that in order to stay

within the Budget, and with regard to the weather conditions, his region hired

eighteen out of thirty fire fighters. They are stationed at Paddys Pond,

Whitbourne, Hearts Delight, Hearts Desire, Clarenville, Southern Harbour,

Southern Bay, Winterland, and covering the Avalon, Bonavista, and Burin

peninsulas. The weather situation is monitored on a daily basis and if the

situation warrants, the other twelve fire fighters will be brought on

immediately. The system provides for flexibility should it become necessary to

extend the employment of fire fighters beyond the end of the fire season. In

summary, the Eastern region currently has fire crews on the Avalon, Bonavista

and Burin peninsulas, available to respond to fire calls seven days a week.

The last part of his question was: he was concerned that a

constituent of his had applied for a job as a temporary fire fighter or seasonal

fire fighter. I will provide the hon. member with this information. It was an

internal competition. There were five applicants. One was screened out because

of lack of experience; one didn't show up for the interview, at all; the

successful applicant was given the job because of his competence and his

qualifications. Mr. Speaker, he got the job on his merits. I regret to tell the

hon. member that his neighbour and friend didn't qualify in this particular

competition.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, could we, first of all, deal

with Motion No. 2, which my friend, the Minister of Finance, will move in the

absence of the Premier, who, as we know, is at Bull Arm on public duties.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. MURPHY: He was supposed to be out there a month ago.

MR. ROBERTS: I can only assume the Premier has the

permission of his parliamentary secretary.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MURPHY: No, no. (Inaudible) permission from the

Leader of the Opposition who - the Premier was supposed to be out there a month

ago and the (inaudible) Opposition stopped it.

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

MR. ROBERTS: Can you protect me, Mr. Speaker, from -

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair can protect from one side of the

House, but not one's own.

MR. ROBERTS: I am asking protection from both sides, Mr.

Speaker. They are coming at me from every direction. 'Bring back Baker' will

soon be heard again in this House. When we have done that we will go on -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Let's get on with business.

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, when we deal with Motion 2,

which I understand is expected to be a relatively short period of time to

debate, I would ask Your Honour to call the Budget, which is Motion 1, and my

friend from St. George's will carry on.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion 2 on the Order Paper is as read: that

Wayne Mitchell, of the district of Pleasantville, be and he is hereby appointed

as the Commissioner of Members' Interest pursuant to subsection 34(2) of the

House of Assembly Act as amended.

The hon. the Minister of Finance.

MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Very briefly, this particular motion is one in a series of

major reforms that this government have undertaken in the last few years. It is

one in a series of very significant reforms in the system as we know it. One of

the things that we committed to was the new Auditor General's Act, and we have

brought in the Auditor General's Act and given the Auditor General a great deal

more autonomy than previously. The Auditor General is no longer reporting to the

Department of Finance, as previously, but is a servant of the House and reports

to the House.

Then, Mr. Speaker, we introduced a new Elections Act. As a

consequence of that, there have been tremendous changes in terms of the election

procedures in the Province. We have also had a new returning officer appointed

shortly before the previous election. One of the other reforms that, again, is a

major reform is the reformation of the Committee structure of the House.

The fourth one, the one I now refer to, is the reform to the

conflict of interest guidelines. These guidelines were passed by this hon. House

and will now be proclaimed. So, Mr. Speaker, this is one in a series of very

fundamental reforms to the parliamentary process that this government have

undertaken, and the kind of thing that this government see as being important in

the parliamentary process.

It now is up to this hon. House to debate this motion, which

moves that Mr. Wayne Mitchell, who happens to be the returning officer,

appointed fairly recently, be and is hereby appointed as the Commissioner of

Members' Interest pursuant to the new conflict of interest guidelines. Mr.

Mitchell is a servant of this hon. House and does not answer to a government

department, does not answer to cabinet but is a servant of the House. He is a

person of unquestioned integrity, a person who is a very good detail person and

obviously will carry out his duties with due concern and due regard for all the

regulations pertaining to the conflict of interest legislation. So, Mr. Speaker,

it gives me great pleasure to move this particular motion, another in a series

of major parliamentary reforms initiated by this government.

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

MR. SIMMS: Yes, Mr. Speaker, we do not want to extend the

debate on this particular motion as the Minister of Finance just attempted to

do. I do not know why he went through all that lengthy history, it was pretty

boring and it is not of much interest to the people of the Province let alone

the people of the House of Assembly. Nevertheless, recognizing the fact that a

motion must be put and it must be approved by the House of Assembly, I just want

to indicate on behalf of our party, not that we have had lengthy discussions on

it or anything but we do support the appointment of Mr. Mitchell to serve as the

conflict of interest Commissioner or whatever the position is called, I just

forget for the moment - Commissioner of Members' Interest. We do support his

appointment, we think, as I told the Premier the other day, I think it was a

wise choice or wise appointment for a number of reasons not the least of which

is that I doubt if the conflict of interest or the Commissioner of Members'

Interest, I doubt very much if the Commissioner of Members' Interest is going to

be working eighteen or twenty hours a day for the next four years.

So, it was important to get a person who would look at the

conflict of interest statements filed by members of the House of Assembly in an

objective manner and to deal with them objectively. In that respect I think Mr.

Mitchell fills the role very well, not to mention the fact that you could

probably get him because he is being paid full time as the Chief Electoral

Officer and paid very well, which I am sure he would admit to himself. You can

get this person now for the same money, two for the price of one I guess is the

way to put it. We have two for the price of one and in this particular instance,

Mr. Speaker, the person that we have I think fits the bill nicely and I am

personally familiar with Mr. Mitchell.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: Yes, he is a competent individual, he is a

hard working individual and I know in fulfilling this specific role that he will

do it in a very objective manner, not an objectionable manner, an objective

manner and we support the motion to appoint Mr. Mitchell.

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

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, I thought we were dealing with a

non-confidence motion in the government by the remarks of the hon. Minister of

Finance. I suppose that that invites all hon. members to comment on the record

of the Liberal government over the last four years or so. I am going to refrain

from doing that because I understood from the Minister of Justice and the

Government House Leader yesterday that we were not planning to have a prolonged

debate on that particular issue. As the minister now says, we will have other

opportunities to comment on the government initiatives over the last several

years and we will have the next four years unless some other crisis happens. So,

I will refrain from that but will comment on the motion itself, that being the

appointment of Wayne Mitchell. I concur with the comments of the Leader of the

Opposition in stating that he regards, as do I, Mr. Mitchell as being an

objective and impartial person when he was offered as the Chief Electoral

Officer. I had no hesitation in supporting his appointment as Chief Electoral

Officer both for his neutrality, objectivity and his ability. I similarly feel

that in this role as Commissioner of Members' Interest he will be available and

competent to deal with the issues that are raised and will do his very best to

be impartial in it. Also, not only in assessing the matters that are put before

him but also playing a role which this Commissioner should do of advising

individual members on possibilities of conflict of interest and advising them as

to what they might do about it. This is a very important role and I do not think

anybody is really suggesting it is being sloughed off on Mr. Mitchell because we

already have him there on salary. I think we ought not to diminish the

importance of the role of this Commissioner by suggesting that, but I think it

is an important role and there will come times when the advice or the decisions

or the position of the Commissioner of Members' Interest will be under fairly

close scrutiny, not only by members of this House but also by the press and the

public, so it is regarded by me and by our party as a very important position

and one which I feel confident that Mr. Mitchell will be able to perform and

therefore offer my support for the motion and for the appointment of Mr.

Mitchell.

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

MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In formally moving this motion I would like to point out to

all members of the hon. House, because everybody is concerned about this and has

an interest in this, that the act will be proclaimed tomorrow and will come into

effect starting June 1st, so all hon. members should keep these dates in mind.

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to move this motion.

Motion 2 carried.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. ROBERTS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Could we have Motion

No. 1, which would be the Budget Speech?

MR. SPEAKER: Motion No. 1, the Budget Speech.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for St. George's.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

DR. HULAN: Mr. Speaker, in my opening remarks to this

hon. Chamber on Tuesday last I referred to my district, the district of St.

George's, as an old district in the Province. I have since then been reminded by

an hon. gentleman that the district of St. George's is indeed not an old

district relative to some other districts in this Province, having been only

recognized as a district somewhere around the turn of this century.

What I was trying to portray in my comments the other day was

that I am very proud to represent a very old historic area in this Province, and

although we were not recognized east of the overpass until around 1900, we were

there and established in the 1600's and without question we do have a colourful

history.

Mr. Speaker, I ended my remarks on Tuesday by speaking of

some of the glorious past of the district of St. George's. Before leaving that

area I am reminded that the district I represent at one time contained what is

affectionately known as the capital of the West Coast, that being Sandy Point.

For those of you who are not familiar with the district of

St. George's, Sandy Point today is a sandbar in the harbour of St. George's, and

yet that sandbar served as the centre of government, commerce and trade for

Western Newfoundland for around 200 years. It is a part of our past and we are

very proud of it. So important were St. George's and Sandy Point, that the

Archbishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese for Western Newfoundland had St.

George's as his residence until about the mid-1970's.

I also want to share with you another interesting story about

the district of St. George's - a story that most Newfoundlanders have never

heard. As this House is probably well aware, when Benedict Arnold attacked

Quebec City for the third time, Quebec City almost fell. Arnold failed to take

Quebec City. Why did he fail? His failure was largely attributed and credited to

the entering into the fray of a contingent from Newfoundland made up primarily

of fishermen and farmers along the west and southwest coast of the Island. Some

years later a French author by the name of Pierre Lancott wrote an article, a

little book on this historic battle, and I have a copy of that book. It is

interesting. The book is published by Queen's Printers in Ottawa and it is

interesting that the title of that book is: When Newfoundland Saved Canada.

Mr. Speaker, before I go any further, it would be remiss of

me if I did not congratulate our Leader, the Premier, for leading us to victory

on May 3rd. The people of this Province have indeed spoken, and they have

clearly indicated that they agree with the direction this government has and is

taking the Province. I should also like to commend the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition and his party for the part they played in the campaign and for

running a clean campaign, at least in the district of St. George's it was a

clean campaign. I wish also to congratulate the Leader of the New Democratic

Party for his efforts in the campaign and for retaining his seat in this hon.

House. While on the subject of the election, I should also wish here in this

House, Mr. Speaker, to thank all of the workers who worked for me and for my

election in the district of St. George's. They worked very hard, we had a

special situation, the victory on May 3rd was indeed theirs.

Now, Mr. Speaker, and hon. members, the district of St.

George's is blessed. It is blessed in natural resources. It is a district with

unsurpassed beauty with its snowcapped mountains, rolling farm lands and forests

and untold numbers of lakes and streams, its ocean beaches, its beautiful

salmon-fishing rivers and its bay fishery. Because the district of St. George's,

Mr. Speaker, is so blessed, it is a prime target of course for tourism

development, agra-aqua food production, aquaculture production and forest

management.

I first want to turn my attention to tourism. My district has

been identified and is taking

part in the salmon enhancement and river

management program of the Province, and I am sure that this program will have a

very positive effect on the tourism industry of the district of St. George's in

the future, after all, some of the best salmon-fishing rivers this side of the

Northwest Territories are located in the district of St. George's. I would

applaud and support very well the efforts of the Cormack Trail Authority and

what they are doing in the district for the (inaudible) of tourism, both now and

the future and also to provide a facility for our local residents. I am also

very supportive of the work being initiated by the Rails-for-Trails Committee in

the district and they are getting off to a good start.

I want to look now for a minute, Mr. Speaker, at agra food

production and aqua food production. It is fair to say that the district's

potential for agra-aqua food production is largely untapped. Prior to 1949, the

district of St. George's, Mr. Speaker, basically fed this Island. Today,

Newfoundland farmers produce less than 7 per cent of the vegetables we consume;

prior to 1949 we produced it all. Mr. Speaker, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians

consume over a billion dollars worth of food and beverage annually, and that

excludes alcohol consumption, yet, Newfoundland farmers and processors supply

very little of these products and we produce virtually no further processed agra

food products. In the area of vegetable production and small fruit production on

this Island and further processing of these products, the sky is the limit.

Still on agra foods, Mr. Speaker, all Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians can rightfully be proud of our dairy industry and its success

story. I can tell this House, Mr. Speaker, that the success story of the dairy

industry in this Province is not only a Newfoundland agricultural success story,

but a Canadian agricultural success story. In a few short years, milk producers

have increased their share of the provincial consumption of fluid milk from 55

per cent to 100 per cent, yet our consumption of fresh fluid milk is only about

55 per cent of the national average. We have a long ways to go and we have much

room for growth. The introduction of the school milk program by this government

is changing this consumption pattern in a positive way, and in doing so, Mr.

Speaker, is improving the health status of our people, especially our young

people, our children.

Just a few words on the quality of products that we can

produce here on the island. It is a scientifically well-known fact that the

vegetables that are produced on this island are superior in quality to those

even grown in the beautiful Annapolis Valley of Nova Scotia. Blueberries: we

have some of the best blueberries in North America. We are one of the few areas

in North America that is free of blueberry maggot. Areas like Nova Scotia, New

Brunswick and Maine, their blueberries are contaminated with blueberry maggot

and therefore they cannot enter into the world fresh blueberry market. We in

Newfoundland can. We have a maggot free blueberry. Unless you really like

maggots, and that is something else.

I just want to say a few words about aquaculture. The

district of St. George's has a tremendous amount of inland waters, most of which

are now readily accessible by roads as a result of harvesting of the forest over

the years. These attributes offer a tremendous potential for the development of

the aquaculture industry. As chair of the bio-technology working groups here in

the island, Mr. Speaker, I can assure you and this House that indeed there is a

potential for aquaculture production to contribute greatly to the economy of not

only my district but the whole entire island of Newfoundland.

When I compare the potential of my district, and indeed this

Province, for aquaculture production and development, I must remember the

similarities of this Province with Scandinavia, and to the tremendous job that

part of the world is doing in aquaculture. Last May I was fortunate to lead a

scientific delegation to Scandinavia. Based on that study visit, and from my

knowledge of the science and technology of aquaculture, I firmly believe that

this new field of technology can and will play a vital role in the economic

development of our Province, and yes, a vital role also in the return of the

fishing stocks.

Looking more closely however, as far as the fishery is

concerned, I should turn my attention now to the fishery of Bay St. George. The

fishery of Bay St. George has provided a livelihood for coastal residents of the

St. George's district and the district of Port au Port and Stephenville for

generations. Indeed, the great agricultural development of the district of St.

George's had its beginning as a subsistence activity to fishing. Unfortunately,

today the fish stocks in St. George's Bay, like elsewhere, are greatly depleted.

Yet, I have never seen such dragging and seining operations in St. George's Bay

as are currently under way.

I will tell you a story. Last weekend I spent in the district

and I stayed in my home at Jeffrey's. I got up on Saturday morning and I looked

out through my bedroom window and I saw a dragger in Bear Brook Cove, which is

the cove where people fish out off in that area. That dragger was within half a

kilometre or nearer to the shore and dragging in eight or ten fathoms of water

right in the cove where people would normally have their boats moored. That is a

serious problem for our area, and in particular at this time of the year,

because this is now when the herring are going in the bay and are spawning. You

only have to take a brief visit to the area and speak to some fishermen and they

will soon tell you what it's doing to the herring catches in the bay and has

been doing in the last four or five years. That would certainly attest to the

need again for a joint fisheries management package.

I want to turn now to forest management. The forest

industries have been and are very important to the District of St. George's from

an employment and economic development standpoint. Yet, I have to express a

grave concern over the fact that much of the timber resources of St. George's

District were harvested, and there are some that will say even raped during the

1970's and 1980's, and at that period in time few if any trees were planted. On

that point I am reminded of a statement made some forty years ago in New

Brunswick by the late industrialist, K. C. Irving, and I quote: 'For every tree

I cut down I will plant one.' Today New Brunswick's forest industry is as strong

or maybe stronger than ever.

As a result of the clear cutting carried out in the 70's and

80's without replanting, not only are we now faced with a greatly depleted

timber reserve but we are also faced with such problems as water run-off, beaver

fever and worst yet to come, soil erosion. It takes, Mr. Speaker, fifty to a

hundred years to replace one inch of soil under Newfoundland's climatic

conditions. I am pleased to say however that the Silviculture and forest

management programs initiated by this government is having and will continue to

have a positive effect on the situation that I am talking about.

Mr. Speaker, as the Member for the District of St. George's I

am indeed pleased to endorse the past performance over the last four years of

this government and to also endorse the Budget it has presented to this hon.

House.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford -

Kenmount.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I am

very happy today to rise and to offer congratulations to previous speakers, to

offer congratulations to all hon. members who were elected in the May 3rd

election. I would like to offer congratulations to the leaders of the three

political parties, to the Speaker, to the Deputy Speaker and to the Chairman of

Debates.

I would like to thank the people of Mount Pearl for their

continued encouragement, for their support over the past twenty-three years. In

fact, Mr. Speaker, I was first elected in the City of Mount Pearl on November

10th, 1969 and twenty-three years and a-half to the day on May 10th, 1993 I

vacated the office of mayor. I served one term as a councillor, one term as a

deputy mayor and four terms in the position of mayor.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the people of Waterford -

Kenmount for their vote of confidence on May 3rd. It was a very well fought

election. I want to compliment my opponents. The election in Waterford -

Kenmount was very cleanly fought. It was won on a door to door basis, it was won

on personal contact and I can say that it was due, in my campaign, to the

tremendous organizational effort and to the exemplary dedication of my many,

many dozens of campaign volunteers.

Mr. Speaker, we often say that the heart of every community

is its volunteers and I would like to say that in my campaign the heart of my

campaign was indeed my volunteers.

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to stand here today to say that

the District of Waterford - Kenmount, spread as it is over the two large

municipalities, 30 per cent of my constituents are in the City of Mount Pearl,

70 per cent of them are in the City of St. John's. I am very proud to say that

in both those large municipalities a majority of the voters, voted for my

candidacy. Mr. Speaker, the return of Waterford - Kenmount to the Progressive

Conservative Party is of course a change. I note that some years ago, five years

ago to be exact, the Liberal change in the St. John's area occurred in

Waterford-Kenmount, and, of course we would like to say now that the change that

has started in Waterford-Kenmount is going to continue on.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HODDER: Hon. members will note that there are a chain

of events that we are about to see unfolding in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I am quite proud to be a member

of this House. I well remember back in the 60s as a student at Memorial

University I would come over here to the Chamber upstairs and listen to the

debates. I was present for most of the important debates over the last

twenty-five years and it is a great honour for me personally to find myself

elected to this hon. Chamber. I am quite proud to say that I have worked with

and have known all five Premiers since Confederation and I can assure you that

the quality of the dedication as shown by all hon. members in this House over

the great numbers of years is to be commended. I can assure you that if you read

Newfoundland history and if you look around this Chamber and look at the

pictures of the people who served as Speaker you cannot but be impressed with

the dedication and with the fact that so many people in this Province have given

of themselves to serve in this hon. House. I do believe that all of us here have

the interest of our constituents, we have the interest of our Province, and we

are trying our best to make the very best opportunities for all the people in

our Province all the time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to address some of the issues that

were brought forward in my campaign by the people as I met them on their

doorsteps. One of the things I met most often was youth unemployment. It is so

sad to go up to a House and to meet a family in which there are people in their

twenties and some of them with university degrees. I met on two occasions people

with PhDs who did not have a job and I can assure you that this is very

frustrating for the candidates and very frustrating as well for members of the

government, but it is a reality. I do believe that youth unemployment is one of

the issues that all governments, federal, provincial, municipal, and all the

private sector employers is something that we have to try to address because it

is so sad to see so much talent, so much ability, so much energy consumed in

getting ready for the workplace then to find that one does not have the

opportunity to get employment in ones own Province. While I am not against going

and training Newfoundlanders for a Canadian workplace, not at all, I would much

prefer, however, if young Newfoundlanders and Labradorians were able to find

employment right here at home in our Province.

Mr. Speaker, also, tuition fees at post-secondary

institutions. It has been said that at the turn of this century it will be

necessary for most people who are entering the workforce to have between six and

seven years of post-secondary schooling. What has been happening in this

Province in the past few years, we are gradually, very gradually seeing access

to post-secondary institutions being denied to our young people. Memorial

University has had a 46 per cent increase in tuition fees in the past four

years. Mr. Speaker, we have to be very cognizant of the fact that we have a

situation developing where only the very rich... the ordinary Newfoundland son

and Newfoundland daughter will not be able to go to the university, will not be

able to access post-secondary institutions, and that is the time when we as a

people start to move backwards.

We have a great deal of responsibility to our youth. We have

a mandate to give them the very best opportunities we can, and it saddens me to

see the fact that the enrolment for first year university students has been

going down instead of up - to find that we do not carry forward our commitment

to our youth by making sure that student loans are available. Indeed, Mr.

Speaker, student loans were a very important issue in my discussions as I was

carrying on my campaign in Waterford - Kenmount. People are finding that average

Newfoundland families cannot anymore afford to put their children through

university without access to student loans. What is happening is that ordinary

families in my constituency are finding that they do not have the same access in

many cases because of their residency, because they have certain levels of

income, and there is a real frustration out there.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to address some of the

infrastructure needs in the St. John's and Mount Pearl areas. Each day the

people of Mount Pearl and St. John's drive out over Blackmarsh Road. The road is

in serious need of upgrading. There needs to be a concerted effort by both

cities - by Mount Pearl, by St. John's - in conjunction with the Province, to

find funding to make sure that this artery, this roadway leading into the

capital city, is upgraded.

Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, there was some discussion in this

House on the Outer Ring Road. The Outer Ring Road is supported by the City of

Mount Pearl and by the City of St. John's. We believe that it is appropriate

that we address this issue of the urban transportation needs in 1993 instead of

waiting until the year 2005.

Mr. Speaker, we also need to address the issues of the

environment. We need to address the issues of St. John's harbour - its

cleanliness, the cleanup that is necessary - and one of the things we have to

try to do is focus our attention on getting more federal/provincial/municipal

co-operation. We need a tripartite approach to solving infrastructure problems.

There is only one Canadian taxpayer. Mr. Speaker, we have to remember that this

one taxpayer, whether he is paying taxes federally, provincially or municipally,

this is the same person, and what we have had happen the last number of years is

that the federal government has been decreasing funding for infrastructure. It

started back in the seventies and has been going downhill ever since. What is

happening in our communities is that we are finding that our streets are falling

apart. We are finding that we cannot build the first sets of water and sewer

services while other Canadians are talking about rebuilding or doing these

things for the second or third time.

Mr. Speaker, in certain parts of my district there is a need

for recreational facilities. There is a real need for community centres in

certain parts of the district - in the Waterford Bridge Road area, in the Cowan

Heights area. Citizens would like to be able to have a sense of community, a

sense of belonging, a sense of being involved, so we have to assist

municipalities in providing these kinds of facilities.

Mr. Speaker, the Regional Services Board, which was adopted

by this government several years ago, is causing tremendous frustration in the

Avalon North. When Bill 50 was passed, I gave a commitment to the hon. the

Premier that I would try my best to work with it. All hon. members know that I

was opposed to Bill 50. I gave my commitment and I said I would try to make it

work; I would try to do my best to make the Regional Water Committee work; I

will try to do my best to make the Regional Fire Services Committee work; but

what has happened, Mr. Speaker, is that, we are into a situation today where it

is not working. And why is it not working? because some of the smaller

communities -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HODDER: - are not able to pay the kinds of monies

necessary to be paid to support the system, and today, on this very day, the

City of St. John's, as the operator of the facilities, is owed $1,100,000 in

back fees. Something must be done to address that particular issue. If it is not

working, therefore, we must recognize that it is time for us to address it. Mr.

Speaker, I say on behalf of the City of St. John's and the City of Mount Pearl,

that we want to enter into a dialogue. We have asked the hon. the Premier and

the previous Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs to try to address this

issue, because this cannot go on forever and ever.

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour of representing a great number

of seniors. In fact, in the district of Waterford - Kenmount there are eleven

different senior citizens complexes. Mr. Speaker, one of the things mentioned to

me, when you talk to people, when you talk about who is responsible for

pensions, talk about provincial civil servants, who had their last increase when

the Progressive Conservative Party was in power. Since 1989, there has not been

one single change in the rates paid to senior citizens who are in receipt of

provincial pensions. Many of our seniors are finding that with inflation, they

are certainly trying to pay greatly increased bills with very shrinking dollars.

I think it is somewhat tragic that we have so many people in their senior years

who are having real, real frustrations - and I am not saying that they are

impoverished but they are certainly finding that it is very difficult to make

ends meet.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to offer support for day care. I

believe that we have to address day care - not day care where people can pay. I

am not saying that we should have day care which should be simply open to

everybody, but we do have to recognize, if we are going to have programs whereby

the people who are on low incomes can get jobs and can have the chance to

improve the quality of their lives, then, Mr. Speaker, we have a responsibility

as a Legislature, to make sure that these opportunities are, indeed, provided.

If we are going to help people improve themselves, then we have to put the

vehicles in place to make it happen. And, as a Legislature, we have to look

carefully at every case where people who cannot pay for day care and who have

job opportunities, who want to go back for upgrading and training, that these

people can have access to appropriate levels of day care.

Mr. Speaker, I want also to speak about the frustrations that

people have with the collective bargaining process in this Province. We all know

that we are in very difficult times. We all know that every government in this

country, every government in the Western World, is having great frustrations. We

know that we have spent money that has caused a tremendous debt to build up. We

all take a collective responsibility for that. But we do have a great number of

people in our constituencies who feel very frustrated, very anxious, very much

uptight with the collective bargaining system.

What is happening is that there is a lack of trust. The

people I talked to - I haven't met one single person, not one, who said that

they were not prepared to take their share of the responsibility to address the

money problems of this Province - never met one. I did meet a lot of people who

said that they need to be convinced that what they are asked to bear is, indeed,

fair and equitable. What we have is not a group of people who are saying that

they are not willing to help out; what we have is a great number in the

population who need to be assured that what they are asked to bear this year

will be the end of the frustrating years for them.

Many of the employees of the Provincial Government, who have

gone on for several years now with no increases at all, what they want to be

assured of is that after this year, they can look forward to some change, look

forward with some hope - that they can say that the pain of the last few years

is gradually going to be improved and that they can look forward to some changes

that are positive for them.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank hon. members. I certainly want

to express my pleasure, after twenty-three years in municipal government, to be

occupying a seat in this House. I look forward to working with all hon. members

for the improvement of my district, but also for the improvement of this

Province, in general. Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WHELAN: Mr. Speaker, hon. members of the House of

Assembly, it gives me great pleasure to stand in the Budget Debate as the new

member for the historic district of Harbour Main. First of all, I want to offer

general congratulations to all members who have been elected to this hon. House.

More specifically, I want to congratulate the Premier of the Province, who, in

no uncertain way, won the support of the people, basically on the policy that he

promoted. This, I believe, says something for the ability of Newfoundlanders to

think for themselves and to stand fast, and to steadfastly stay the course they

knew would see them through rough economic times.

I would also like to congratulate the new Speaker, the Member

for Humber West. I am sure he will carry on the tradition of competency and

fair-mindedness set by his predecessors, several of whom are still sitting in

this hon. House. As well, let me congratulate the members of the Cabinet,

especially the newly-appointed members. Let me join the ranks of those who have

preceeded me in wishing them well in their new positions. I am sure the overall

image of the Wells Government will be enhanced by their addition.

At this time, Mr. Speaker, I would also like to offer a very

sincere thanks to the many workers whose energy and enthusiasm were the greatest

single factor in the success of my campaign.

This sitting of the House has gotten off to a relatively good

start as far as decorum is concerned. There may be a few exceptions but, for the

most part, I believe things are looking up. Although I am a new member to the

House, I have sat in the gallery on a number of occasions, and I have to say,

when it comes to politeness or respecting another person's right to speak, on

occasions something is lacking or left to be desired. There are those on both

sides of the House, who may need to take a look at their behaviour with a view

to streamlining their periodic outbreaks. Each and every person here, at one

time or another, has something worthwhile to say. It would be to everyone's

detriment if hon. members' words were lost in the drone of other voices.

On Tuesday, the hon. the Member for St. John's East rose on

what I believe to be a very interesting matter. He talked about, or speculated

on, the idea of harnessing the wind as a source of renewable energy. There are

those who may say it has been tried before. The question is: Were the earlier

attempts the best we could do? The potential for this type of energy is

unlimited, and I believe that every effort should be made to determine the

viability of wind-powered energy production.

Mr. Speaker, in making reference to my district of Harbour

Main, let me first of all establish the fact that the Harbour Main -Kelligrews

area is one of the first areas to have established settlements. The reason for

this, of course, is its abundance of natural resources. The Harbour Main -

Kelligrews area has an agricultural background and, hopefully, an even greater

future. More and more younger people are becoming involved in this industry, and

although there may be a number of stumbling blocks, such as the lack of adequate

storage facilities for over-winter keeping, I have every reason to believe that

the future will treat this industry well. I know that there have been great

strides made in the production of hay and milk, the production of

non-traditional vegetables, and, in the area of blueberry production, I believe

cultivation has taken on a greater concentration and scientific approach.

I am sure most of us here, as we stand to speak, will promote

our area as being the most beautiful, the most picturesque, in the entire

Province. Well, my case in somewhat unique, I suppose, because I know that most

of you realize that the area of Conception Bay that I represent is, in actual

fact, the most beautiful jewel in the crown as far as scenic beauty is

concerned. The potential for tourism is virtually untapped. Whether it is

fishing, canoeing, camping, a day on the bay, or just a leisurely drive through,

the time and money spent in this area by any tourist is time and money well

spent.

I suppose, if one were to ask: What is the main industry, or

the main source of income for the people of Harbour Main - Kelligrews, one would

have to say, the construction industry. With the advent of the American bases,

people in this area became more and more dependent on construction and, to this

day, many of our people travel North America and, indeed, the world over, plying

their trade.

Presently, we find ourselves in the lucky position of being

close to one of the major construction jobs in the country, that being the

Mosquito Cove - Bull Arm site. Without a doubt, we in Newfoundland have some of

the best construction workers in the world, and a great many of these people

were born and bred in the Harbour Main - Kelligrews area. I would say, there is

not a trade on this site for which we do not have a number of qualified people,

whether it be carpenters, welders, rodsmen, riggers - I could go on and on. So,

Mr. Speaker, as construction picks up at Bull Arm, I am confident that many of

the qualified people in our area, who have had years of experience on jobs

around the world, will, indeed, find employment. That is one of the reasons, I

believe, I should be optimistic over the employment situation in the Harbour

Main - Kelligrews area.

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that there are reasons to be

optimistic; however, there are pitfalls, because quantity of life does not

necessarily mean quality of life. I have concerns, because the social fabric of

any society tends to take a beating when affluency is on the rise.

I know that, relatively speaking, we are not an affluent

Province; however, already, there are problems among our youth, as well as the

adult population. Some areas are more affected than others, but I say that this

problem must be given careful consideration. I know the Department of Social

Services will be keeping a close eye on the situation and monitoring it as the

developments take place.

I have to say that, as a district, Harbour Main - Kelligrews

is one of the fastest growing areas of the Province. This, in itself, is a good

thing; however, demands on municipal services such as road construction, water

and sewer services, etc., tend to put a strain on towns' budgets. The need for

improvement in additional recreational facilities such as ball fields is

certainly a priority, especially in the Kelligrews - Seal Cove area. There is

only one ball field to service the entire area, certainly nowhere near the

number needed. I am hopeful that in the upcoming term of office, we will see

continued spending in this area. Some of our towns are taking inventory of their

fire fighting capability and, in some areas, they find themselves lacking. I am

certain that as these matters are brought to the various departments they will

be dealt with in a manner which reflects the importance they deserve.

Mr. Speaker, there are a number of fish plants in our area,

each and every one of which, hopefully, has a future in the new fishery. These

plants provide much needed jobs, more particularly for the women in the

respective areas. If these plants remain closed for an indeterminate amount of

time, the consequences will bring hardship on quite a few families in our area.

The plants depend on caplin, squid, herring, and mackerel more than they do on

the cod fishery. As a consequence, I am very hopeful that the status of these

plants will remain unchanged.

Mr. Speaker, as the session proceeds, I will again be

addressing these and other matters, as the need arises. I want to finish my

remarks by offering my support to the Budget that has been put to the House.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Capes.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to take

part in the Budget Debate and to express

my views on some of the issues facing our Province at this time, but first I

must take a moment to reflect on the 1993 election. I would like to take this

opportunity to express my deepest gratitude to the wonderful people of the

historic district of St. Mary's - The Capes, who elected me with a strong

mandate on May 3, to represent them for the next four to five years in this hon.

House of Assembly. The support I received was overwhelming, and I intend to live

up to my one and only promise during the campaign, that is, to do the best I can

at all times for the people of my home district, and to be there for the people

of St. Mary's - The Capes. I would also like to thank the over 400 volunteers

who played a vital role in my success on May 3. From Portugal Cove South to

Little Barasway and all the points in between, they came through, as always,

with flying colours. To my family, who stood by me every step of the way, a

special thank you. I would be remiss today, Mr. Speaker, if I did not thank the

very special friend, my campaign manager, who is no stranger to the hallways of

the Confederation Building, the hon. Loyola Hearn. His guidance and direction, I

am sure, played a major role in my being able to stand here today in this House

and represent St. Mary's - The Capes.

Mr. Speaker, I would like, also, to congratulate the Member

for Humber West on his election as Speaker of the House of Assembly and to the

Members for Trinity - Bay de Verde, and for Bellevue on their election to their

respective positions. I would also like to congratulate the Leader of the

Opposition, Mr. Simms, on a job well done. We ran a high road campaign and I was

proud to be part of that team. I would like, as well, to congratulate the

Premier and the members opposite on their election and, especially, the new

ministers who have been appointed. I have watched their political careers with

interest over the past number of years and I wish them well. I was especially

pleased to see the colourful Member for Port de Grave returned to Cabinet and,

along with wishing him well in the future, I hope that his new position is not a

substitute for a muzzle from the Premier, because I believe, not only would it

be a loss to this hon. House, but I believe it would be a great loss to this

Province of ours. To all members of the House of Assembly, I congratulate you on

your success on May 3 and wish you the best. And to my good friend from the

district of Placentia, your seat is ready beside me. I await, with great

anticipation, your arrival and debut in the House of Assembly. To my fellow

rookies of the House of Assembly, special congratulations. Remember, the

distance is nothing, it is only the first step that is difficult.

Mr. Speaker, as the youngest member of this hon. House during

this session, I want to assure all members that I intend to listen and to learn.

When the time dictates to speak on the issues that concern my district, the

district of St. Mary's - The Capes will be my top priority in the years ahead. I

intend to deliver the strong representation that our district has been used to

over the years, and I look forward to the challenges that lie ahead.

Mr. Speaker, as I study and reflect on the Budget, I am very

concerned, not only for my district, but I am concerned for the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador. As I travelled and knocked on over 2,400 doors in my

district during the campaign, I felt a sense of hopelessness in the future

coming from the people. What Newfoundland and Labrador needs now is a renewed

sense of hope, a renewed sense of pride, and a renewed sense of vision, and

neither this Budget nor this government gives us that. I am worried, because, as

the great Helen Keller once wrote: the only thing that is worse than being blind

is being able to see, but not have any vision.

As I read more and more of this Budget, I begin to reminisce.

I believe that instead of calling this document the 1993 Budget we may call it

the 1993 resettlement program. Because I believe that this Budget will have

drastic effects on the lives of thousand of people in rural Newfoundland. In my

district, alone, the cuts are already starting to take effect. The cut in the

electrical power subsidy for recreation facilities, which I questioned

yesterday, is playing a major role in the possible shutdown of the only arena in

my district, that which is in Trepassey. This $10,000 subsidy, divided between

the thirty-three communities of my district, is just about $300 per community

for recreation. I believe it is a shame for this government to allow this to

happen.

Other recreational activities are also being substantially

downgraded or eliminated because of this funding cut. I call on this government

to rethink this proposal, because a healthy, active mind means a healthy, active

person, therefore, a healthy, active Newfoundland and Labrador.

The skyrocketing costs of education is a primary concern in

my district, Mr. Speaker. The proposal to reduce from 50 per cent to 40 per

cent, come September, the subsidy paid by the Province for high school textbooks

will hit the pocketbooks of many poor unemployed Newfoundlanders. The effects

these cuts will have on the students attending, and hoping to attend Memorial

University will be drastic. I foresee the day, and it ain't too far away, when

only the elite of this Province will have access to the better education.

Tuitions are expected to jump by 50 per cent, come September, and this

government preaches fairness and equality. Oh, please forgive me, but it is hard

to stomach.

Then, the day is coming when the President of Memorial

University will not have to answer to the Public Accounts Committee of this hon.

House. Education accounts for 24.4 per cent of the total expenditures in this

Budget, with $118 million for MUN, alone, and the President of Memorial

University will not have to answer questions. Again, I find this hard to

believe.

The provincial roads program will maintain the same level of

$25.5 million this year. I am sure this is another major concern of the people

in my district, especially those wonderful people of the community of Mall Bay,

who have been waiting for a long time now to have their road upgraded and paved.

This vital link should be looked at by the Department of Works, Services and

Transportation as soon as possible. I will look forward to meeting with the

minister responsible in the not-too-distant future to discuss this issue and

others.

Mr. Speaker, having worked in a small business in rural

Newfoundland for most of my life, I can attest to the effect that the payroll

tax is having on our economy. This tax is counter-productive. Employers are not

hiring because the basic limit is too low. Small business is one of the keys to

putting this Province back on an even keel. I call on the government to either

increase the basic amount or withdraw this hindrance to economic growth,

altogether.

The health care situation in this Province is not only a

concern of the people of my district, this entire Province has been dealt a

heavy blow. In the 1989 election campaign, this government promised to open up

hospital beds if they were needed. Was this a joke, Mr. Speaker? Because I can

relate an incident to this hon. House that happened only a few days ago, that

showed a clear need for more beds. First, I want to assure that what I am about

to say reflects in no way on the services of the doctors, nurses and staff of

this Province. I believe, considering the conditions that these professionals

have to work under, they all should receive the Order of Canada when they

retire. On Thursday, May 13, myself and my wife were blessed with the birth of

our second son. When we arrived at the hospital, my wife, who was in labour, was

instructed to sit in a rocking chair until a bed was made ready for her.

Two-and-a-half hours later, Mr. Speaker, she was taken out of that chair and put

on a hospital bed, which was in the delivery room. It was the only bed available

at the Grace that day. Have any of the government officials or members been to

their hospitals lately to see the conditions they work under?

When I look through the Budget and see the cuts in education,

health care and recreation and, on the other hand, see almost $2 million

allotted to the continued operation of the Economic Recovery Commission, I am

appalled. Being involved with rural development over the past five years, I

question what economic recovery this commission has produced. The only recovery

I have witnessed is that of the audience trying to wake up after Dr. House

delivers his speech on his grand plan for Newfoundland and Labrador. I encourage

this government to wake up and put the taxpayers' money to better use, somewhere

where you can see a more useful finished product than what the Economic Recovery

Commission has so far produced.

The cuts in the municipal grants are seriously affecting many

communities in my district, Mr. Speaker. Many of the basic services that my

people have been used to, are, for the first time, in question. Councils, etc.,

are finding themselves in very tight situations. Just a few hours ago, I spoke

to a member of a council located in the center of my district and he expressed

concerns to me that basic services, such as garbage collection, street lighting,

water supplies are in jeopardy right now. I ask, Mr. Speaker, do we all have to

live in the cities to be able to avail of these basic services? I say not. The

provincial government has a responsibility to the people of rural Newfoundland,

as well as the urban areas, to provide them with these services, and I encourage

the government to have more compassion and consideration for those of us who

chose to make our homes in rural Newfoundland.

Any cuts proposed that would affect social services

recipients, hit home to many people in my district. I ask government to think

about those people, who, through no fault of their own, have found themselves

having to turn to the Department of Social Services at this time. I trust that

the new Minister of Social Services, whom I believe to be a compassionate

person, will think about the people affected when he tries to deal with an

ever-increasing work load with less and less money to operate.

Mr. Speaker, the great district of St. Mary's - The Capes is

abundant with tourism potential and I was quite honoured when the Leader of the

Opposition appointed me tourism critic in his shadow cabinet. I look forward to

working with the Minister of Tourism and Culture in making sure that this

industry in our district and Province is developed in an orderly and beneficial

way that will not only benefit the people of St. Mary's - The Capes but the

Province as a whole. I look forward to assisting in the development of the

Caribou

Interpretation Centre on Trepassey barrens, small cottage industries,

secondary processing, a full-fledged golf course for our district, the Cape St.

Mary's ecological reserve, and many other great tourism ideas, especially the

development of our proud Irish heritage, into an economical and vital stimulus

to our area but, at the same time, making sure we maintain our traditional way

of life.

Mr. Speaker, I have left the most important issues for last,

because I want to impress on the members of this hon. House that these two

issues are the greatest concerns of mine, as I begin my tenure in this House,

for the people of St. Mary's - The Capes. These two issues are brought together

because I believe that the success of one will spell success for the other: they

are the fishery and the unemployment situation. The fishery was, is and always

will be the backbone of Newfoundland's economy; without it we, like the unicorn,

will disappear. Today, as we sit here in this House, many of my constituents are

lucky enough to be involved with the cod moratorium package, but it is not the

end to all our problems, it is only a temporary solution to a long-term problem.

What happened to our fishery? I am sure we all have our viewpoints on that

question, but I believe there is enough blame to go around for everybody,

therefore, I believe that everybody has the responsibility to our Province and

to our people, to do our part to revitalize the fishery of Newfoundland and

Labrador. I call on all levels of government, all leaders and ministers to cast

away our political differences and stop trying to score brownie points at the

expense of each other. I can remember my father telling me stories about walking

on the beach in Cuslett, as a child, and kicking the piles of mackerel and

herring ahead of him. I can remember as a boy, and I am not that old, Mr.

Speaker, watching the caplin come ashore, home in St. Brides, and the horses and

the carts would be from one end of the beach to the other gathering the caplin

together. I can recall when it would take two strong fishermen to throw the big

cod up on the wharf. Today you cannot kick the mackerel ahead of you anymore;

the horses and the carts don't head for the beach because the caplin do not come

ashore and there are no big ones left to throw up on the wharf, Mr. Speaker.

I beg our leaders and our governments, and I look forward to

working with the Minister of Fisheries, who represented our district many years

ago, to steer clear of their petty differences and to get to the issue at hand,

and that the survival of the fishery of Newfoundland and Labrador be uppermost

in their minds, because, only if our fishery survives, do we survive as a

people. In closing, I would also like to ask the government to look and work

with the federal government in making sure that we have another rural

development agreement for our Province. Working as a co-ordinator over the past

three years, and over five years involved in the rural development movement in

our Province, I know, and speak from experience how important it is to the rural

parts of our Province.

In closing, I would like to thank you, Mr. Speaker, for this

great opportunity to express my concerns today, in this my maiden speech to the

House of Assembly, as the member for the great district of St. Mary's - The

Capes. I will once again, thank the people of that district for this great

honour that they have bestowed on me and I look forward to working on their

behalf with all members of this House of Assembly in the years ahead, and I

reiterate my pledge, that I cannot move mountains, but there ain't a mountain I

would not climb for the people of St. Mary's - The Capes.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!

MR. RAMSAY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and for that

resounding applause. It makes you know you are back where you belong, back to

the grind. I also, Mr. Speaker, want to congratulate you, Sir, in the Chair, on

your re-appointment as Deputy Speaker of this House, and to His Honour, the

Speaker, the hon. the Member for Humber West on his appointment to the office of

Chair, one, which we all hold very dear in protecting us from the incessant, at

times, Opposition and sometimes our own, and also to the Assistant Deputy

Speaker, the Chairman of Committees, the hon. the Member for Bellevue.

On a political side I suppose, I want to congratulate all

hon. members sitting here in this House on their re-election to the House, and

to the Opposition, on a campaign which was very well run. It was a high road

campaign on all parts and I think that is the kind of thing that will bode well

for the political process and also bode well for the future of the way that

politicians are held in public esteem. I also want to offer the heartiest

congratulations to our Leader, the Premier of the Province, on the exemplary job

that he did in running the election campaign and in leading us to victory on the

3rd of May. It is nice to see new faces here and on the other side of the House,

and to get to know the hon. members well and the way that they speak, their

style of speaking, the way they operate and deal with their constituency matters

and matters that concern them greatly. It is really impressive to see members

who have certain key things that they want to concentrate on and focus on.

I remember four years ago, coming in here as some would say,

all full of the two elements that you cannot say in here, but ready to roll and

being I suppose, a member who was somewhat eager to change the world, and to

offer all the solutions and to feel that pragmatism could be put to one side and

you are just going to go and do it, and of course, in the course of attempting

to do that over the four years you take your knocks and you learn sometimes the

hard way that the system we are dealing with in a government, and the overall

system of public administration throughout the Province and in the country for

that matter, is one which changes slowly. It is a giant, it is a thing that

sometimes small changes really cause a lot of pain for people and if you keep

people in mind you realize sometimes that although the end does ultimately

justify the means, you want to do it for the benefit of the people of the

Province, and I am sure that those in the opposition have no less solid intent

on wanting change to be for the right reasons.

I want to comment on some of the issues that came up, of

course, in my own district throughout the election. Going around knocking on

doors you meet people of all different backgrounds, of all different, I suppose,

abilities, and people who come from the different sectors of society - those who

are very poor; those who are very able to pay their way and have had, I suppose,

some luck and through some hard work have done well; and those in the middle, in

what we would refer to somewhat as the middle class, which some would also, in

that area, refer to it as the paying class of people - those who seem to pay the

most for their share of what society offers. Through that you do get, I suppose,

a re-education as to what the people of the Province have experienced over the

course of a mandate of a government, and what they have concluded to a point of

how it affects politics, and also what they have concluded in their general view

of what society now offers them.

There is one point, I suppose, of hope that the future will

bring better things. There is, as other hon. members have mentioned, a certain

element of despair out there. I remember on a visit to my district the Premier

and I sat in the back of the campaign bus after one engagement where we spoke.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I wonder if the hon. member could take his seat for a moment

while I inform the House of the questions for the Late Show.

The first question is: "I was not satisfied with the answer

provided by the Minister of Health to my question re the HIV contaminated

blood." That is from the hon. Member for Placentia.

"I am not satisfied with the response to my question from the

Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs concerning the reduction in

recreational grants in the 1993-'94 Budget and the effect this cut is having on

recreation facilities in our Province." That is from the hon. Member for St.

Mary's - The Capes.

"I am not satisfied with the answer I received from the hon.

Minister of Health re the funding for the renovations of the Golden Heights

Manor in Bonavista." That is the hon. Member for Bonavista South.

The hon. the Member for LaPoile.

MR. RAMSAY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am more than

pleased to offer you the floor.

Just to get back on speaking about the bus trip, and I

suppose one would call it - to a point we were discussing our previous stop in

one of the communities in my district. We were almost, I suppose, left just to

think and not say much about what we had experienced in dealing with some of the

people. After we spoke and were going around shaking hands and talking to some

of the people, the Premier, who was very, very apt to stop and listen to people,

and if they have a concern he will do whatever he can to take the time to talk

to these people. On speaking to some of them, to hear some of them and to see

their eyes filled with tears at times at the situation that they have had, as no

result of anything they have done, but in the fishery and problems related to

the fishery, he said to me: It seems almost like some people along the coast of

your area have resigned themselves to the despair. He said to me that it's

really the kind of thing that we want to improve on. Again, finally we have,

although an inadequate, but a compensation package that has been offered up

through the Department of Employment and Immigration federally, and the

Department of Fisheries.

The people out there were left out when the fish stocks on

the south and west coast have been suffering as they were suffering everywhere

else along the northeast coast and for a longer period of time. When fishery

problems crept up I suppose as late as last year along here a compensation

package was brought out and the fishery was shut down.

Out on our coast there are a lot of problems that had not

been addressed. I've brought them up in this House of Assembly many times;

through correspondence to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans many times;

through correspondence to other federal ministers; through press releases in the

media. Trying to bring attention to it. Finally I guess it has been addressed

somewhat, but not to the satisfaction of trying to satisfy the needs that are

there of all of the people who have been displaced by problems in the fishery.

So for us at that time it really came home, to see people who

were hurting, who were suffering, who had given their lives to the fishery, and

now the fishery was not able to provide to them a livelihood. It was certainly a

touching moment for some of these people to be able to meet with the Premier and

discuss the matters with him and myself. I certainly feel that's the kind of

thing that has an impact and makes me as an elected member, and I'm sure the

Premier of the Province, want to perform that much better for the people of the

Province. To try to do everything that we can to make this a better place for

all of our residents to live.

If we look at the comments of some of the members opposite -

and of course an opposition's role is one to object to things that are not in

what they would deem to be the public interest. Also, to offer an alternative

should they think that the way the government has proposed to deal with the

fiscal situation, to deal with policy objectives, is not the way that they feel

it should be done. To offer the alternatives.

Again, as we go along, and you note certain things that are

brought up often by oppositions, the specifics would be along the lines of: not

enough money for recreational funding, the cutbacks in the transfers to

municipalities, the problems associated with individuals having difficulty

getting the health care services they require at any given point in time, and

having to wait longer. The various things that are brought up here daily.

I suppose when you're in government you look at them a little

bit differently, when you sit on the government side of the House. It's not that

you feel any different for people who are having problems. But when you are over

here and you know that your mandate is one to deal with the financial situation

the government is in, the people of the Province, services that they require and

they need and the services that they as citizens of Canada here in Newfoundland

demand, you wonder as to: okay, we want to provide these services on into the

future.

To look at it that way, as opposed to looking at the

immediacy of wanting this now - the desire to have something provided

immediately, the desire to have the cutbacks made to balance the books, but to

not experience any pain. You see it more and more now. I note in the United

States they're going through the shock of the experience, I guess, of having to

suffer through increased taxes and decreased services more so than ever before

as a result of the way that they're trying to deal with their $4 trillion debt.

Which if you look at it to a point as a percentage of their overall gross

domestic product is quite a bit less then what the Canadian governments are

dealing with. We're at a 44 per cent level, our debt as a percentage of our GDP;

in the United States they're only at 7 per cent. Again, relative taxation

figures. They don't have the taxation either to offset the debt as a percentage

of the GDP.

So if you look at it that way you tend to see that Canada

does have a much more difficult situation to face as far as debt problems go. We

here in this Province do have a larger problem to deal with than any other

province, if you take into account our debt and the servicing of this debt. How

do we prevent our future from being decided by the credit managers at Moody's

and Standard and Poor's?

So when you are in government, to get back to the way I was

discussing this, you see it a little differently, and not entirely from a

political perspective but mainly from the perspective of upholding the integrity

of the Province's finances and then saying: Okay, some tough decisions have to

be made. It is not going to be without pain, but the pain we will try to

mitigate as much as possible and make sure that we are keeping in mind the

interests of the people of the Province in seeing to it that decisions are made,

with a sense of fairness overall, in how you go about that. That is a little bit

of difference, and I know that opposition members will also offer the

alternatives.

I think that if we look at the $70 million as a question, and

how that would be dealt with, I would like to hear the way the opposition plans

to deal with that, because I was waiting with bated breath through the campaign.

I say that seriously and not with any sense of being flippant or anything, but I

wanted to see how they would do it, to see if there was an alternative that

looked better to me - not that I was going to jump ship or anything at that

point in time, but just to see if maybe something could be integrated into the

approach that we are working with now, and just how we would go about it.

AN HON. MEMBER: Next Thursday.

MR. RAMSAY: Well maybe it will be in four instalments or

whatever.

Anyway, I suppose we have to be willing to accept some of the

pain, and if we do not offer the alternatives then it is very difficult, I

suppose, to assess the difference between what we are offering and what they

purport to be offering.

We also, I think, can gain as politicians with our electorate

if we, on a whole, try to depoliticize - and of course the new hon. Minister of

Works, Services and Transportation is certainly a case in point of having

difficulty in depoliticizing the whole political process in our Province. It is

one which does not bode well for the hon. member.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. RAMSAY: Hold on now. Now the other hon. - the very

political Member for Fogo - if I speak of depoliticization, maybe that has to do

more with the idea of improving the decorum and the co-operation here in the

House of Assembly and getting away from this overall attitude of -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. RAMSAY: Anyway, Mr. Speaker, some of the members -

like I say, occasionally you need protection from your own and not only those

opposite.

AN HON. MEMBER: How do you spell that?

MR. RAMSAY: Depoliticization? Well you can try it.

Anyway the other thing, and this, of course, would go to the

hearts of the new Cabinet members, but I think that we have to desecretize if we

want to get into more expounding on words.

The way that the Budget process was done this time was a very

open process that was offered up to the people of the Province. It was offered

up to the public service unions as a process; here is our Budget situation and

it was the most open Budget process in history, as we understand it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. RAMSAY: What was that?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. RAMSAY: I beg your indulgence, Mr. Speaker.

Anyway, to get back to the Budget -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. RAMSAY: I guess silence is allowed on occasion, Mr.

Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I think I will just take a seat and let the

member opposite have a few words.

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

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I thank you, Mr. Speaker, but this is a

first, when you get in your place to provide - I was not going to say comic

relief because obviously there has been enough of that, but just to let the

member get himself - I will, by the way, yield when the member wants to

continue. I will just fill in with the understanding, of course, if members

would agree, that it will not be my time on Budget.

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

MR. RAMSAY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What I was getting into there, and I talk about an open

Budget process. If you get into the openness of the Budget process one only has

to look at what is happening in large corporations throughout the world now.

They have opened the process of their deliberations, the process of their

decision making, so that it is fairly transparent. It is the kind of process

that will, I would say, improve the confidence level of those involved. It is

the kind of process where you gain the confidence of those who are involved in

the making of these decisions when they have knowledge of the reasons why you

are making the decisions, and this government like any government, I suppose, to

a point, has at times made decisions and people have wondered why the decision

was made as it was.

So, if we do not know the reasons why it is like the selling

of any product or the selling of any decision to a board of directors or to the

people of the Province who ultimately are our board of directors, I guess you

would say. If you are able to offer the reasons and the rationale for doing

things a certain way then that process is held up in a much higher esteem as

opposed to the secrecy which does have a reason. Originally, I believe, it was

brought about because those who were in Cabinet were in consultation with the

Queen and therefore the secrecy came about because of that reason and as you see

with the Budget deliberations this year everything is becoming more open.

If you look at the federal Cabinet, the reporters seem to

know what is going on inside the federal cabinet room before the decisions are

even taken later that day. They talk about what is going to be discussed in the

federal Cabinet and this sort of thing. It is not that we need to pry into

everything because there are matters that need to be dealt with in secret and

also there are matters which, if members of the Cabinet are to allow their own

feelings on it to be known, then there is a division that can occur, so

therefore they speak with one voice. The rationale and the reasons for coming to

certain decisions and the reasons why, I suppose, to offer to the people of the

Province it is a very important thing to be able to explain this and to tell

them this is why we have to do this. These are the figures on our Budget, these

are the reasons why we make this controversial decision and based on that you

gain the support of the people of the Province and the understanding.

Now, if you look back at the record of our government over

the last four years we have always tried, even with the bad news, to offer to

the people the explanation: look, we are doing this because - and it is good to

offer that, Mr. Speaker, to the people of the Province. I think that the honesty

and being forthright with the information, telling it like it is so to speak, to

the people of the Province went a long way during this election campaign because

I heard at so many doors, and I am sure that all members did: well, the

government is telling it like it is, and I think even in districts where

Opposition members sit, that kind of feeling was there. In some cases that - we

know there is not a lot of money, I am sure a lot of them heard that. We all

like to have things for our district but there does not seem to be a lot of

money there. These sentiments were coming across very clearly to me during the

election campaign and certainly it is the kind of thing that we have to try to

improve for all of our districts for the betterment of the people that live

there.

I wanted to point out, Mr. Speaker, that there is a magazine

article in today's Globe and Mail, one of the magazines report on business,

which I want to refer to and it was written by a Newfoundlander, one of our

local authors, although I guess he is of Irish decent, Patrick O'Flaherty. Some

of the comments that he has made in there are speaking of Newfoundland and its

population and how that should happen in consideration of what Parzival Copes, I

suppose his name was -

AN HON. MEMBER: Copes.

MR. RAMSAY: Copes? Okay, he brought about a study in 1961

and he brought in the -

MS. VERGE: (Inaudible).

MR. RAMSAY: I was not born then, to the hon. member, I

was minus one, if you look at it that way.

Anyway when Copes originally reported on the Newfoundland

economy there were certain things he said that we were overpopulated for our

resources. If you bring that up to today and look at it in comparison to what -

not only the resource situation but also with reference to the situation when

you take a look at what we have to offer and the way that the resources

increased and improved and our ability to use our resources, the premise on

which the dissertation was based back then, could certainly have been in error

but of course, I suppose hindsight is 20/20 for anyone if you look back on that

kind of thing.

I would just like to quote from O'Flaherty's remarks and of

course people could react as they wish, he said why did Copes generate such

anger at that time and it was very much - he did generate a lot of anger in the

populace. To argue that any region would do better if partially depopulated is

bound to create resentment as does blunt talk about the seasonally idle outport

workers who fish for UI stamps and should not be subsidised. This was what Copes

had to say at that time and again if you look at what O'Flaherty had to say

about it, he certainly was one who looked at what the future would hold, that

Newfoundland would continue to have problems and really have we gotten that much

further ahead? He thought that the Newfoundland population would be up around

700,000 by now and it is still around 565,000 or so but he spoke of the work

ethic of Newfoundlanders.

Now I know from my own family situation, I have family

members who travel to the Great Lakes every year, who go up there to earn a

living for their family. If you look at that, when you talk about

Newfoundlanders as not being productive, which is the premise on which Copes and

Patrick O'Flaherty based their essay, than are you really looking at the reality

of the situation when people will remove themselves from their family, to travel

to mainland Canada, to work and earn a living for their family on into the

future. So, the premise of us not being productive is one that is entirely

wrong. We are of course offering up our services and we are - you could also

expound on it, that we are part of a system that is one which rewards small

periods of time working. It is a system to a point that has our people dependent

on it and that is the kind of thing that we have to try to get away from.

Whether we will be able to, through community education programs, as was

mentioned by the hon. Member for Port au Port, speaking very highly of a

community education initiative. That could very well be the way that we change

the people of the Province, to improve upon the past and build on our future. To

offer to the people of the Province some hope in saying: we need to get the

people of the Province thinking of entrepreneurship, interested in working on

their own ideas and activities. Being more industrious with it. Improving their

literacy training through some of the programs that are available not only

through the Northern Cod Adjustment Program, but now hopefully, on our coast,

through the other programs.

Mr. Speaker, if we can do that we can improve it for the

future of all the people of the Province and become a much more productive

place. As I said earlier, the other thing that we as members here can do is to

is to... maybe the word is not de-politicize, as I mentioned earlier, but to

cooperate as much with each other if we have matters of mutual concern, to see

to it that we can do things for the betterment of all of the people in our

districts and the districts of those members in Opposition. Hopefully that will

see us held in higher esteem as politicians, and also will serve well to protect

the interests of the people of the Province.

With those comments, I'll sit down and allow a member of the

Opposition to speak for the remaining time before the Late Show. Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of

Finance has done a tremendous job of conning the people of this Province on a

budget with $70 million in compensation measures, and we're two months into the

fiscal year. There's no indication where these compensation measures are going

to come from. He doesn't indicate what departments.

AN HON. MEMBER: We're not dictators.

MR. SULLIVAN: We're debating estimates. They will dictate

I guess with their new mini-budget in November and December. They'll be

dictators of the highest degree when ultimatums go out to school boards and the

health facilities across the Province, saying: $10 million has to be chopped

here and $6 million chopped there.

Basically, can you imagine being told you have $3.5 billion

to spend and on operation budgets, $71 million or $70 million have to be taken

out of that, and you don't know where it's going to come two months into a

fiscal year? I asked the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture yesterday, and he

said: we know what our department's budget is. He said it in Hansard.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: I would ask him - I had that yesterday. The

compensation measures are not factored into that budget. I'm wondering if you

have the budget minus compensation measures. He didn't. In fact, I asked the

minister yesterday if the person who was hired internally to move up to my area

from Labrador and was told the person would go to work on May 19, who's now

living in the area, and had to set up residence there, and hasn't gone to work

there, and he came back with an answer today questioning the person who was

hired. I asked: will you hire the person that you moved in? I wasn't questioning

the person got hired.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Read Hansard. No, I said that person - the

person, eighteen years experience I said, has always been hired earlier, and he

hasn't even been hired also. It's all in Hansard. Just read it, hon. minister.

One of the biggest problems I think we're having here, and

the hon. the Minister of Finance indicated, that one of the problems with the

credit rating service, with the downgrading, is that they have concerns, not

over this Province's ability to be fiscally responsible, but because of the

decline in transfer payments over the past number of years, and the fears that

the federal government portion of that is such a significant part of our budget.

I'd like to inform the minister, I think there is another real reason behind the

bond rating agency downgrading our status.

I think they have a lack of confidence in this government's

ability to be able to manage.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: You can only fool the people for so long,

and that has happened I guess since the beginning of time. One of the reasons

why - and we will see it again, probably in November or December - we will see

another mini-budget or a financial statement. We'll see the rating agencies do

not have faith in the government's ability to budget. They have to come back

each year with a mini-budget looking for $10 million, $15 million, $20 million,

and $50 million and $60 million. They call the Budget a 'Budget of truth and

hope'. A Budget of deceit and despair would be more appropriate for the Budget.

We have been operating on about two budgets per year for the

past couple of years, when one of the reasons why this Province is low on the

credit rating is because our debt ratio is 75 per cent of our GDP, and the

responsibility to increase the GDP in this Province is the responsibility of

this government to entice and increase the opportunities to do business and

improve the business and in