December

18, 1997

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol.

XLIII No. 54

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (L. Snow): Order, please!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I regret that I have been unable to give the

Leader of the Opposition much advance notice of this statement but I have sent a

copy of it across to him, as I have only just gotten back to my office to

complete the drafting of it.

Mr. Speaker, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians understand the

great hydro-electric potential of the Churchill River. However, to date, almost

all of the benefits realized from the Churchill River have gone to Quebec under

the Upper Churchill contract. Other potential benefits that could be derived if

we developed the Lower Churchill have been lost, as the water has simply, year

after year, flowed to the sea. This government is committed to achieving a far

greater share of the benefits of the Churchill River for the people of our

Province.

In recent days, news stories have indicated than an agreement

is near involving the governments of this Province, Quebec, and the Federal

Government, to develop the Lower Churchill. Mr. Speaker, I can inform the House

today that no such agreement is imminent. What has occurred over the last

several months, indeed since last January, are a series of discussions on

hydro-electric issues involving potential development between Newfoundland and

Labrador Hydro and Hydro Quebec. These discussions have shown some promise. In

the New Year, the discussions may lead to detailed negotiations. Those

negotiations, if they occur, in turn, could lead to an agreement.

Mr. Speaker, it is important to make clear today, in light of

some of the reports - and, I should add, false reports which have been

circulating - that there are, at this stage, no negotiations. There are indeed

discussions to indicate, or to investigate, whether or not the basis for

negotiations themselves can be undertaken.

Mr. Speaker, if there are to be negotiations, three goals are

fundamental to this government's position. First, there must be far greater

benefits to the people of this Province under any new arrangement than under

existing agreements; second, these benefits must include increases in our

revenues as the price of electricity increases; and, third, any new arrangement

must provide for power at long-term, stable prices for Labrador and power back

to the Island portion of the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, as the House may note, the

existing Upper Churchill agreement provides for none of these, neither major

benefits for the people of our Province nor any increase in our revenues as the

price of electricity increases, nor power at long-term stable rates for Labrador

and for the Island portion of the Province. This government is committed to

achieving arrangements that are fundamentally different and markedly better for

the people of our Province or there will be no agreement, Mr. Speaker, in

future.

If our discussions with Quebec and the Federal Government at

some point are successful, then sometime in the New Year we may be in a position

to make public the basis on which we intend to commence detailed negotiations on

Labrador hydro issues. In all of this, the government will be guided by the

three goals that I have set out. These goals are fundamental to making

hydro-electric development in Labrador one of the great success stories for our

Province as we enter the Twenty-First Century.

Mr. Speaker, in

summary, I say again to the people of the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and to members of this House, no agreement

is imminent. No negotiations are taking place. We are holding discussions; we

are investigating the parameters for negotiations and if the parameters can be

achieved, Mr. Speaker, which provide a benefit, long-term to the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador, we shall move forward, but not one moment before.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the Premier, he has stated before that since last

January there are negotiations going on between Hydro Quebec and Newfoundland

and Labrador Hydro. I have asked him in this House, too, when he stated that, if

there are also negotiations going on with the Federal Government, as to what

Newfoundland is going to have to give to allow the hydro-electricity to be

transmitted into the North American grid, and he has indicated we have no

negotiations with the Federal Government. He has been on record as saying back

in January, we have had negotiations between the utilities of each province - he

stated that - and now, he is telling us there are no negotiations.

Is it like the negotiations with an agreement in principle?

He announced a big conference: we have an agreement in principle, and the

parties involved did not agree. The LIA said there is no agreement in principle.

The Premier agreed that he would make an announcement that there could be an

agreement in principle.

In 1991 we had a framework agreement. There has been no

agreement, I say to the Premier, none whatsoever. The Premier has indicated

already - and now he stands here and says that there are no negotiations going

on. Now, that is not consistent with what he has been saying before, what he

said on the public record that since January of last year there has been

negotiations entered. He indicated he spoke with even Premier Bouchard on the

issue and his officials are now getting into more detailed negotiations.

The Premier has been on record again and now here he stands

again and gives another contradiction that so many times he has been doing

lately, the Marine Atlantic is one other blaring example, I say, in the most

recent. They can't even be consistent from week to week. How do you expect this

government to come clean with the people and negotiate in good faith, when they

can't even be consistent in the statements they are giving the people even on a

weekly basis?

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

Vidi, does he have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the Premier for clarifying the issue as

to the state of play with respect to the Lower Churchill development. I do want

to say that we should note that the bargaining power of the Province has

improved as a result of the changes in electricity regulation in the United

States. I know all Newfoundlanders are extremely concerned that any deal made by

this Province is going to avoid the pit falls, not only of the Churchill Falls

agreement, Mr. Speaker, but of many other development agreements that the

governments of Newfoundland in the past has made that have been really at the

expense of the long-term interests of the people.

I would encourage the Premier and ask the Premier to commit

to making public the basis of negotiations as early as possible -

MR. J. BYRNE: There are no negotiations.

MR. HARRIS: - so that everyone should have an opportunity

to participate in the discussion in debate.

Secondly, I want to say that most Newfoundlanders, I think,

would rather wait until the window of opportunity opens up in whether it's 2016

or 2015, I will take the hit in the meantime -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: - rather then give up our right to get a

better deal on the Upper Churchill for the future.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I would like to apologise for the delay in passing this

statement to the Opposition Health Critic.

Mr. Speaker, in light of the recent announcements by the

Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association (NLMA), I feel it is incumbent on

me to inform the people of the Province as to where negotiations are between

government and the NLMA today.

A joint management agreement between the Newfoundland and

Labrador Medical Association and government is currently in place until March

31, 1998. We expect the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association will

respect that contract until a new one is negotiated. In July of this year the

Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association presented part of its package, the

economic package, to the Department of Health. The other two parts of their

package included the administrative and the human resource components, and they

were received towards the end of October. This is a very complex package,. After

we received the full package we immediately engaged an independent consultant

who worked with the departmental staff to evaluate the package and determined

that it would cost government in excess of $30 million in the first year. We

have since informed the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association that we

will be ready to begin negotiations early in the New Year, and in fact we have

our negotiating team in place, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday a news release by the president-elect of the

Newfoundland Association of Obstetricians raised the issue of liability

insurance rates, and the expected rise in the cost in the coming year.

Government provided $800,000 this year to MCP to subsidize malpractice insurance

rates for physicians. In other words, 65 per cent of the difference between the

base rate and the total cost is subsidized by government. We know that costs

will increase for obstetricians in January, and we have acknowledged that this

is a very important issue to be addressed when we sit down with the Newfoundland

and Labrador Medical Association in January. This is a legitimate concern for

both physicians and for government. However, it is only one of the many issues

which have to be negotiated with the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical

Association to reach a new agreement.

The approach by the NLMA is unfortunate in that it is

threatening job action before contract negotiations actually begin. We are aware

that the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association has developed a dedicated

media plan to be part of their negotiations with government for a new contract.

In fact, in the December 8 issue of the President's Letter of the Newfoundland

and Labrador Medical Association, physicians have been urged to garner public

support. I quote the president's words from the newsletter, and he says: "I urge

you to no longer make that special effort so as to ensure government sees the

problem. As well when your patients complain about problems in the system

sympathize with them but urge them to call their MHAs and/or the Minister of

Health." Further, he says: "...I ask you to continue to take actions to garner

public support." End of quote.

There is no doubt about the value and importance of

physicians to all of us in our Province. The people of Newfoundland and Labrador

are fortunate to have dedicated and loyal physicians providing medical services

to all regions of our Province, and I thank them for their work. Yet, we have to

look at the total picture. This year we have provided $140 million to compensate

the 850 physicians in our Province. We provided a new $2.7 million this year to

increase salaries for emergency room physicians. We also provided a new $2.6

million to increase salaries for rural physicians.

This funding was provided before negotiating a new contract

because government does see the need to address the concerns and needs of

physicians.

Mr. Speaker, government must also negotiate contracts with

many other groups, including nurses, allied health professionals and the civil

service. This is important and will all be done in due course. I ask physicians

to understand that we are aware of their issues and concerns, particularly as

they relate to the Canadian Medical Protective Association rates as well as

other issues that we will discuss and negotiate when we sit down with doctors in

January.

Once again, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the physicians of

our Province for their valuable work and the contribution that they make daily

to our health system.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for providing me a copy of the statement

when she received it.

Minister, I am not so sure I can agree with everything you

have said today. As a matter of fact, I cannot. I had the opportunity yesterday

to speak to some of the doctors, and I find out that this problem has been known

to the Department of Health ever before the statements were made on yesterday

afternoon.

The one that I spoke to certainly pointed out to me that in

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, in their particular field, the rate

in Newfoundland is something like $225, and in our sister province in Nova

Scotia it is something like $447. There is certainly a vast difference.

I do not know why in this Province we have to wait until we

are in a crisis situation before we open the door to negotiations. The fact that

we are going to negotiate in January is one thing, but the fact that your

department has known about this for some time is another, and I believe that

negotiations with these people certainly - certainly - should have started

before today. They certainly should have started before yesterday, and I don't

know why, again, we have to wait in regard to calling MHAs. I say to you,

Minister, on that issue, the shop is closed.

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

and Recreation.

MS KELLY: Mr. Speaker, as promised earlier this year, I

rise today to update my hon. colleagues on the success of my department's 1997

parks privatization initiative.

Government has just completed its review of the parks that

were privatized in the spring of this year. This review was a responsible

approach which enabled government to monitor the new privatization arrangements

for each and every park. I am happy to stand in the House this afternoon and

report on those findings.

Mr. Speaker, all of the 21 parks offered for privatization

have been successfully released to new operators. Three of these parks had a

temporary operating licence in place for the 1997 season. Government operated

one park, Duley Lake, for this year only. In the fall of this year, government

issued a separate call for proposals for these four parks in order to secure a

long-term operator for each. My department expects that this process will be

completed and that new long-term operators will be secured within the upcoming

months.

Mr. Speaker, thirteen operators have made capital

improvements to their parks in the first season. These improvements range from

the construction of a kitchen shelter at Sop's Arm park, to the installation of

electrical and water hook-ups at Catamaran Park, to the start-up construction of

a lodge at Indian River Park. Other operators are planning major construction

for the parks while they are closed for the winter months.

My department's review of the parks has shown that the new

operators remain committed to developing their business plans as outlined in

their proposals. All have been encouraged to become members of the province's

tourism association. Some parks are jointly exploring the option of marketing

partnerships.

Mr. Speaker, these parks were made available to the private

sector because they offered viable business opportunities for rural

Newfoundland. Government also realized that it is no longer needed to play as

large a role in the recreational camping industry as it once had in the 1970s.

Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this summer's review was to:

(1) establish contact with the operators; (2) ascertain the operators' level of

satisfaction in relation to their expectations; (3) identify any problems or

obstacles being experienced by the operators; (4) assess operators' adherence to

original business plans; and (5) determine operators' conformance to the

conditions of the licence to occupy. I am pleased with the review of the parks,

the success of the privatization initiative, but most importantly that these

parks are being developed in a manner in which the government simply, could not

afford.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the House at this time

that all the privatized park land continues to be owned by the government -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS KELLY: - and that the operators hold a licence to

operate. Government is committed to preserving and protecting the significant

ecological features in these parks, and as such, portions of 10 of the

privatized parks have been retained for land protection under the Provincial

Parks Act.

Mr. Speaker, this privatization initiative will see a

stronger recreational camping industry emerge in this Province. This initiative

will benefit users in the long-term. Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for a copy of her

statement before she read it in the House. I would like to say to the minister

that what she said in the statement is pretty basic as to what we have been

hearing since indeed the parks were privatized. I suppose we could say it is a

good news, bad news story. I guess, minister, what we on this side of the House

are waiting for is what has it cost this government? What was the amount of

money that was taken in on the sale of these parks? What did it cost us? In the

beginning, how much money did we receive after we sold the parks? Where are we

in that regard? Also, where are the concessionaires whose claims I understand

are still not, some of them, settled by this government? Of course another great

concern for us on this side of the House is the fact that there are still some

forty-odd people who worked in these parks, who are today not working, who have

lost their jobs because of the privatization of these parks. So minister, we

would like to know what it cost the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. How

much money was received for these parks and at the end of the day, where do we

really sit?

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

Vidi, does he have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that the

results of privatization, the full results have not been made known by the

speaker. She did not talk about the employees who have lost their jobs. She did

not talk about the wage rates of people who are working there.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) just heard that. He just said

that.

MR. HARRIS: Not from the minister we didn't.

AN HON. MEMBER: He said it.

MR. HARRIS: We didn't hear it from the minister, Mr.

Speaker. We didn't get a cost benefit analysis. We are finding out big-time in

Labrador these last couple of days the results of privatization of public

services in Happy Valley-Goose Bay with people receiving, in some cases, less

than half of their pay, or being offered jobs at less than half of their pay. It

isn't a policy that I or my party support, and I don't think the minister can

paint a fancy picture of it without telling the whole story and the whole truth.

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just noticed that

when the Leader of the NDP was responding to the last statement - it has nothing

to do with the one I'm about to make, because it is a very serious, good news

statement, serious and good news - but one of the member mentioned the hon.

Leader of the Opposition's hair cut. Very nice hair cut. They shouldn't make too

much fun of it though, because I understand also it is part of an image

make-over and he has had his heart and his blood pressure checked because he is

thinking of running for the leadership of the PC Party. (Inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: You went to the doctor in December 1995.

MR. GRIMES: I did too. It is true too, Mr. Speaker, I did

go to see the doctor in December 1995, and decided to spend January of 1996 in

Mexico.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Sorry, Mr. Speaker, I didn't mean to get him

riled up. I'm sure that will happen later on today.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce today that funding in

the amount of $150,000 has been approved by the Department of Education for the

development of a new camp at Northwest Pond for the Newfoundland and Labrador

Council of the Girl Guides of Canada.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Northwest Pond near Terra Nova National Park

has been reserved by government for the youth of our Province.

The development of this twenty-five acre campsite will

provide an ideal setting for the 13,000 active members, both girls and adults,

in Newfoundland and Labrador for adventure and leadership in surroundings that

stimulate environmental awareness, physical activity and challenge.

Mr. Speaker, the overall site is designed to accommodate

Guiding units throughout the Province, and the facilities can be used for adult

training and conferences as well. The facility will create immediate

construction jobs and seasonal employment similar to the positions held by

wardens at Scouts Canada's facility on the other side of the same lake.

Funding to complete the project will be provided over three

years through grants of $50,000 per year administered by the Youth Services

Division of the Department of Education.

Over the last several years government has funded a similar

proposal for the Boy Scouts. This past summer I had an opportunity to visit the

site and was extremely impressed by the first class operation there.

The Newfoundland Council of the Girl Guides of Canada and the

Boy Scouts are to be congratulated for the excellent service they are providing

for the youth of our Province. I'm pleased as well that Ms Margaret Breen, the

provincial commissioner for the Girl Guides in Newfoundland and Labrador, and

her associates could join us in the gallery for this announcement today.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I never thought I

would see the day - I'm here five and a half years - that the Minister of

Education would stand up in this House and give a positive news statement here

today. It is the first time I've seen it. It is good news. We are glad to hear

it, we are delighted to hear it come from the minister. I'm sure his reward will

be the Intergovernmental Affairs portfolio, I can assure you that, when the

legislation passes through this House.

I would also like to give the Minister of Education some good

news. I have spoken over the last day with numerous individuals who I guess are

in a position to have a decision on Term 17 that is now, as we know, before the

Senate. As I am speaking here today, Stphane Dion is speaking to the Committee

of the Whole in the Senate saying that there would be no amendments by the PC

minority in the Senate.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: I have every confidence that by 3:30 or

thereabout this afternoon, Term 17 will pass through the Senate, I say to the

minister -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: - in the best interest in respect of over

70 per cent of the people here in this Province. And I can tell him, there are

people on both sides of the political fence in the Senate and even in this

Province who will probably go different ways, and in other areas; but we are

confident that it will pass and that we can get on with doing the job that is

needed here for the future of the children of our Province, that this government

is waiting to get done. So now, let us get on with it and let us see this

government take a stand and move quickly after it passes.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi. Does he

have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the Minister of Education for his compliments

on my image make-over and I want to tell him that I have been to see my doctor

and he tells me that my heart beats proudly and strongly as a New Democrat, so

there is no chance, Mr. Speaker, that there will be any change.

Mr. Speaker, I notice the minister said that he was in Mexico

in January of 1996; I also heard, when he heard by telephone that the current

Premier was running for the leadership of the Liberal Party, he said: Well, I am

staying here in Mexico for the rest of the month.

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the statement, it is hard to say

anything negative about -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

By leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No leave.

MR. HARRIS: They are only kidding, Mr. Speaker, they are

not serious.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No leave, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: No leave?

The hon. member does not have leave. No leave.

MR. HARRIS: It is Christmas, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member does not have leave.

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi, as I

understand it, does not have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Right on.

MR. HARRIS: Is that right?

MR. SPEAKER: I ask the hon. member to take his seat.

Does he have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Yes.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With respect to the statement, Mr. Speaker, it is hard to say

anything negative about it - it is a very positive statement. I am glad to point

out that the minister pointed out that the Girl Guides are on one side of the

lake and that the Boy Scouts will be on the other side of the lake. It is a very

positive incentive to learn canoeing, boating and other water sports and no

doubt that will serve them well in their adult life. We will have safer boating

in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. J. BYRNE: By leave, Mr. Speaker? I discussed -

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

MR. J. BYRNE: Just for a small, small presentation.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. J. BYRNE: Two days ago in this House of Assembly, in

the spirit of Christmas and in the spirit of friendship and kinship, and as a

token of his appreciation, Mr. Speaker, from a few suggestions that I made, the

Minister of Finance presented me with a small gift and, in due course, when the

scientists come up with a pill that causes a person's hair to grow, it will be

well-utilized, I say to him, Mr. Speaker.

So, in the same spirit of kinship and friendship and

Christmas, Mr. Speaker, I have a small presentation to make to the Minister of

Finance, but before I do, Mr. Speaker, I would like to say this: That the use my

gift will get, will be pale in comparison to the use that this gift will get,

and I expect it will be worn out within a period of two weeks, Mr. Speaker, two

weeks. I expect the Minister of Finance will open it, just as I did the other

day.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is pretty obvious why the hon. member chose to part with

these two items, the brush and the hair-dryer. One of his colleagues told me

earlier that he took one look at this and decided he may as well do the job on

this as well.

I guess the last thing -

MR. J. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MR. DICKS: I am sure he will not miss either item.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I am told by some of his colleagues

that the colour, as well, matches part of his wardrobe, which none of us on this

side of the House get to see; although I wonder how his colleagues came by that

knowledge.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You are very kind, and I will

certainly put these under my Christmas tree and enjoy them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today

are for the Premier.

In light of the fact, I guess, that the Premier today has

found a new synonym for negotiations - discussions - I ask him: The President of

Hydro Quebec has been out commenting on negotiations taking place. Could the

Premier just give us an update on the discussions that have been taking place

since early this year? And he has been on record, I might inform the Premier.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition

makes reference to the President of Hydro Quebec. I have here the CP story which

I am happy to table, and I quote the President of Hydro Quebec: The discussions

with Newfoundland are going very well.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

He might read well, but he does not listen well. I asked him

if he would update us on the discussions that are taking place.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Justice

has just pointed out, I gave a complete, fulsome, detailed and a very, very

thorough report by way of a Ministerial Statement.

I can say again to the Leader of the Opposition, and through

the Leader of the Opposition and the House, to the people of the Province, as I

said a moment ago, for the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, the first

thing that needs to be ascertained before we even contemplate agreeing to a

formal negotiation, is whether or not the parameters around which such a

negotiation would take place are acceptable to the Province.

I have said that the days when Newfoundland and Labrador can

accept, for example, a circumstance like the Upper Churchill contract, are long

over. Any future development that we become involved in must have no long-term

contracts, no declining prices. There must be a provision that would allow us to

share fully - fully and completely - in any upside of any price. There must be

provisions that would bring power back to the Island of Newfoundland and

Labrador, considerable quantities of power. We must have the capacity to

stabilize energy prices in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We must

have provisions to ensure that extra hydro is available for industrial

development in Labrador itself. Labrador cannot be left behind. Mr. Speaker, we

must have the lion's share of benefits from power that would flow from the

resource of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of those kinds

of conditions, well we would not enter the negotiations.

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

Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

He must be reading from my news conference, the statements

over the last, I would say, almost a year and a half. Almost a year and a half

of on the record, I say to the Premier, and if you call your statement thorough

I pity this Province on a Lower Churchill contract if you call the ministerial

statement thorough, that is far from thorough, I might add.

Now, the media has been reporting also that the signing of a

deal -there must be a commitment from Ottawa to finance construction of power

lines.

I ask the Premier will he tell us if he is working on a

proposal or what kind of a proposal does he expect to see - or a commitment from

the federal government on some type of financial or guarantees regarding the

transmission of that power?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, we have no agreement with the

federal government on provision of financing on a Hydro development which would

involve Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and Hydro Quebec, but, Mr. Speaker, I

have certainly made it clear to everybody that I have had opportunity to talk to

- and if the Leader of the Opposition would care to read the speech I gave in

Boston a month or so again, that the Lower Churchill development and all of the

associated works with it are important to Canada in the context to Kyoto.

Mr. Speaker, I know that the Leader of the Opposition has

very carefully studied the Kyoto Conference and he knows that the net result of

the Kyoto Conference is that Canada has agreed to reduce it's emission from what

they would otherwise be, by 137 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions.

Now, if Lower Churchill power were brought onto development

at this time, Lower Churchill power would produce about 20 per cent of Canada's

total commitment to reduce greenhouse gases. Therefore, Lower Churchill

development is not only in the interests, first and foremost, of Newfoundland

and Labrador and secondarily, Quebec, if it were a partner in such a

development, but is also in the interest of all of Canada. Mr. Speaker, I can

say to the Leader of the Opposition that many people in Canada have seized upon

the reality that Canada's commitment to the world can only be met if the Lower

Churchill is developed and Lower Churchill will only be developed when it

benefits first and foremost, Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Now we are getting to the real crux of the matter, I might

say.

This Premier stated that there are negotiations going on with

Hydro Quebec and this Province and if they are not successful and the company

that has $35 billion in sales are ready to come in alone with other companies,

he stated that publicly. Now, let's not try to beat around the issue Premier and

try to pass it off.

I ask the Premier: with the attempts to reduce emissions and

a commitment by Canada to a 6 per cent reduction in emissions here, I ask the

Premier is it contingent on the federal government or the talks you said you had

with the Prime Minister, you indicated that before, you have had talks with the

Prime Minister, you have indicated that if negotiations fall through with

Quebec, you are going to look at private businesses to get into the

negotiations, that is what he stated publicly. Is this Province prepared to

trade-off a significant amount of Hydro electric power to be feeding into the

North American grid as a contingency for the federal government to get involved

in an effort to reduce emissions? There can be a transfer credit now on emission

from one country to another?

I ask him is our Province, basically, going to be guaranteed

or are there restrictions on what power can be retained in our Province for our

own use to develop industries here in our Province? Is there restrictions being

discussed on how much we can retain here in our Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I don't think the Leader of

the Opposition understands something that is very important and this is all part

of an attitude that I believe - and I say this to the Leader of the Opposition

genuine - that we have to shake off in this Province.

The Lower Churchill is ours. The means and the conditions

under which it will be developed is up to Newfoundland and Labrador. We don't

have to ask permission or have conditions set for us by anybody and frankly, I

say to the Leader of the Opposition, I resent the tone of the question, that

Newfoundland and Labrador has to ask permission to develop it's own resources

when those resources are in the interests of the world, Mr. Speaker.

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

Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There was a former Liberal Premier who reminds me very much

of you, who said the same thing, I say to the Premier, across this House, very,

very much.

I have attended numerous environmental groups in the U.S.,

Environmental Protection Agency and others in meetings with a couple of your

colleagues there.

I've had continuous discussions over the last year and a half

since that too with what is happening in terms of trading off and credits and

keeping the level down. Because pollution in the U.S. and so on moves into

Canada, and the sharing of credits.

The president of Hydro Quebec seems to know what is going on.

I don't know why our Premier doesn't know what is going on. I ask the Premier:

Can he just tell us how this Province is going to benefit from the Lower

Churchill, with reference to what is going to come to our Province in terms of

revenues and taxes? I ask the Premier to ensure that the trade off to meet the

federal agenda, we aren't going to be trading off from this Province to get the

funding that is needed to guarantee to develop this, and there are no

restrictions on the power and the recall rights that we would have in our

Province.

Will the Premier guarantee that today, there will be no

restrictions based upon the power we can use and the recall rights, and could he

tell us what this Province has put forward? I'm sure they have a detailed

economic plan to show what revenues and so on we would accumulate to this

Province from the development of the Lower Churchill.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the people of the

Province who are listening, or have the chance to listen to this debate, to

reflect upon the tone of the questions that are being asked. The Leader of the

Opposition almost sounds like he is frightened that Newfoundland and Labrador

might negotiate a good deal, one that we can be proud of, that will bring

billions of dollars of benefits to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I say to the Leader of the Opposition, he knows we are in

discussions with Hydro Quebec. He knows I'm not going to go out and start

negotiating publicly till such time as I see that there is a basis, and the

Cabinet sees, and the government sees, there is a basis for a formal

negotiation. To stand up and ask me to comment on what we might do or mightn't

do in a discussion prior to a formal negotiation is irresponsible.

Let me just say this to the Leader of the Opposition. Before

we enter into any formal negotiations, if we come to that point in time, I will

table in the House and before the people of Newfoundland and Labrador fully the

parameters of any such discussion so that every Newfoundlander and every

Labradorian knows precisely what is on the table.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Premier is

getting excited now, and we have hit a little nerve with the Premier now.

Because he is privy to what is going on and he knows full well.

He stated before that if Hydro Quebec and Newfoundland and

Labrador Hydro don't reach an agreement, he is prepared to talk to this $35

billion company and others that want to get on with it. What happens if the

federal government is not going to be a party to the process? I ask the Premier:

In the best interests of our Province, what alternatives has the Premier looked

at here if the federal government doesn't join in and become a part of this?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, just listen to the questions:

If Hydro Quebec doesn't agree, if Quebec doesn't agree, if the federal

government doesn't agree, if nobody will buy the power, if the dam can't be

built, if the sun doesn't shine. My goodness, I suppose if the sun shines have

not will be no more!

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

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

the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. Minister, last week the local media

reported that an individual, a dentist by profession, currently residing in

Florida, holds the one, and possibly two, shrimp harvesting licences for area

2J, which is adjacent to Black Tickle in Labrador. Could the minister confirm

for the House whether this particular story was accurate, and whether his

department was aware of such licences being issued?

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

Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, the only licence that I'm aware

that is being held outside of Newfoundland are the offshore licences. I think

there are some people in Nova Scotia, some people in New Brunswick, I hear some

people in Montreal. Possibly they go to Florida from time to time, from

Montreal, to New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. I think there is one. Some of the

licences were at the time John Crosbie was Minister of Fisheries and Oceans for

Canada, and his friends and everybody complied and they agreed with it

(inaudible).

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

Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, I guess I can assume from

that answer that wasn't an accurate story?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: No, I'm putting the story out. It was a

story that was on the CBC news, Mr. Speaker, and all I am asking is for

confirmation of the story. I ask the minister again: Is it true, or is he aware

of the story that a person living in Florida is presently holding one or

possibly two shrimp licences for area 2J, adjacent to Black Tickle, Labrador?

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

Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if the hon. member

was asking if was harvesting or processing licences.

MR. FITZGERALD: Harvesting.

MR. EFFORD: Harvesting licences. I cannot name the

individual and I cannot confirm if somebody living in Florida owns a licence,

outside of the ones I already know. I can tell the hon. member very clearly,

there are a number of fishermen around Newfoundland who live in Florida at some

time of the year, who have sixty-five foot long-liners, who fish all around the

coast of Newfoundland and Labrador, but I do not know the particular individual

he is referring to.

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

Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: I do not know the gentleman's name,

although it was broadcasted and I think it is common knowledge. I do not care

what the gentleman's name is - I asked if the licences were issued.

AN HON. MEMBER: When?

MR. FITZGERALD: It was last Wednesday night, I think, or

last Tuesday night.

Anyway, Minister, the fish plant at Black Tickle was built

and designed to process groundfish, mainly cod, and Greenland halibut which we

know as turbot. Would the minister confirm that presently there is a 20,000

metric tonne quota of turbot allocated in waters adjacent to Black Tickle and

17,000 metric tonnes of this particular quota is harvested by foreign draggers

and processed either at sea or in foreign ports?

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

Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, it has been pretty difficult to

hear the hon. member. I get parts of the question -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: That is right; it gets pretty difficult to

hear exactly what he is referring to. But the quota that is allocated by the

Federal Government for turbot to be harvested, part of it is being harvested by

the Seafreez Company and is being harvested by foreign vessels contracted out by

the Barry Group of companies. Some of it is being processed, as far as I

understand, in Port aux Basques, and some of it is being processed in Canso,

Nova Scotia.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: I say to the minister, he had better

check those figures, because out of the 20,000 tonne allocation, 17,000 tonnes

is either processed at sea or in foreign ports by foreign fishers.

Would the minister also confirm, Mr. Speaker, that the

Fishermen's Union, the Fogo Island Co-op and the Labrador shrimp company have

recently obtained a shrimp quota and have sold that quota, which was 2,000

metric tonnes - that is over 4 million pounds - for a price of $1.2 million?

Minister, my information tells me this quota of 4 million pounds of shrimp was

sold in the water, all harvesting and processing done by foreign fishers, while

our own fishermen remain at home unemployed.

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

Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: You talk about an hon. member putting a twist

on a story that is not even close to being factual or a reality. First of all, I

do not know what is happening on that side of the House over there and I do not

know what is happening to the Party. You had a member out from Conception Bay,

twisted his mind a couple of times last week (inaudible) and now you are

opposing your own leader's brother on harvesting and processing fish and

creating jobs in Newfoundland.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: Carl Sullivan. I mean, he is doing a good job

out there, is he not? What is the problem with that, giving people jobs and

getting people to work fifty-two weeks in the plant every single year?

Now, the shrimp quota that was announced for the first time

in the history of this Province was announced this year, 24,500 metric tonnes in

total. It did not start to get harvested until late in the spring, early summer,

and the one thing that we wanted to do was make sure we did not leave any shrimp

in the water this year. It got to the point where the weather did not permit,

for the sixty-five foot boats, to have the capability to go out there

harvesting. So rather than leave that amount of shrimp in the water and nobody

get any value, it was divided up among the union, the shrimp company, Fogo, and

the monies that were benefited from it created jobs and subsidized jobs in those

communities where they are badly needed.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South, a final

supplementary.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, I have to tell the minister

that he is totally wrong. He does not know what he is talking about here. That 4

million pounds of shrimp, I say to the minister, is caught by foreigners, being

processed in foreign ports. Not one pound of it is being processed right here in

this Province.

I ask the minister: Is this his idea of how the fishery of

the future should unfold?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, the royalties that are derived

from the sale of that fish that otherwise would have been left in the water and

nobody would get any benefits -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: It was decided in an agreement by all parties

- by me, as Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, by DFO, by the companies, by

industry, by everybody - rather than leave the shrimp in the water and nobody

get any benefit, they sold it and used the royalties to benefit the people.

Is it the policy of the future? It was one-time only because

we did not want to leave the shrimp in the water. We wanted to go back to

Ottawa. We wanted to get an increase in quota for the next year that would

benefit the people of this Province for the first time in history -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: - instead of giving it to the foreign

countries, which your government of the past did in Ottawa.

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

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

I want to follow up on some questions to my friend, the

Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. On Tuesday afternoon, towards the

end of Question Period, I asked him some questions relative to minimum

qualifications in training programs for clerks and other municipal officials in

the Province. In his response, he said he was not too concerned about that, that

in some cases, they kept their records on a scribbler.

I want to say to the minister, the Auditor General has

indicated that -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. H. HODDER: - there is a real problem with minimum

training standards in this Province for municipal clerks. We know it is a real

problem in rural Newfoundland. It has been addressed in some other provinces.

What is this Province doing about addressing the issues identified by the

Auditor General? And when is he going to do something about putting real

programs in place to make sure that all of the municipal clerks in Newfoundland,

particularly those in rural parts of Newfoundland, have minimal standards of

training?

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, I cannot tell you exactly how

much the Department of Municipal and Provincial Affairs spends each year to help

train and educate municipal officials, those elected, as well as employees, but

I would guess that it is in the millions of dollars.

The Auditor General, for a number of years - not only Mrs.

Marshall in her report, but the previous Auditor General and the Auditor General

before that - has always mentioned the fact that we do have some people working

in municipalities around the Province who do not have what she or he considers

to be the top qualifications to do the job.

I say again, Mr. Speaker, that when you are dealing with

little communities in the Province of 100 - 150 people, half a day is probably

sufficient for a town clerk or a town manager to come into the town office and

collect taxes and do whatever he or she has to do. Because the town council

finds itself that they only need somebody for half a day a week in most cases,

then they do not insist that the qualifications for that particular person be of

any great degree other than the fact that they have some basic idea of how to

collect taxes and interpret the Act, I guess, and do the legal things that

person must do.

We, in that particular case, from a departmental point of

view, send our people in then immediately. Immediately our people go in and we

try to help those people as much as we possibly can.

Mr. Speaker, this side of the House cannot find, at this

particular point in time, the monies to train all of these people to the quality

that the Auditor General would expect us to train them.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader, a

supplementary.

MR. H. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, the minister will admit that

these officials are charged with the expenditures of millions of dollars in the

aggregate. I also remind the minister that there are various training programs.

There is Distance Education, there are correspondence courses, there are

upgrading seminars, and his colleague, the Minister of Education, to be training

people in Newfoundland for jobs that do not exist, might begin to train people

in Newfoundland for jobs that do exist and these are at the municipal level.

I ask the minister: Why is it that he has participated - his

department in drafting legislation on this issue - and I have that draft

legislation here in conjunction with the Minister of Justice - the legislation

is drafted with the co-operation of NLAMA, why aren't we moving to establish the

minimum qualifications and engaging in training programs that I identified in my

opening statements?

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, I do not know what the hon.

gentleman is asking me. Is he asking me to force municipalities -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. A. REID: Protection, Mr. Speaker, from that big

galoot, please.

Mr. Speaker, I do not know what the hon. gentleman is asking

me. Is he asking me to insist that these municipalities who, at this particular

point in time, are finding it very difficult to keep the lights on in their

communities, are they asking me to ask these communities to spend money now in

helping train these clerks and managers? I do not think he is asking me that. I

will say to the hon. gentleman that, in most cases today, most of those people

to whom the hon. member refers, are already doing training through ETV and other

methods, and we are doing all we can from a departmental point of view, to try

to help those people upgrade themselves as much as possible.

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

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Education and it concerns

the plight of massage-therapy students at the Career Academy, Mr. Speaker.

Will the minister confirm first of all, that he misled the

House the last time I asked a question about the past rate of the -

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

I believe the hon. member's question is out of order. He is

assuming that the hon. member's -

MR. HARRIS: Not intentionally.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to withdraw that statement.

MR. HARRIS: I withdraw the statement, Mr. Speaker,

Would the minister confirm that he gave the wrong information

to the House when he was asked about, and when he was commenting on the pass

rate for first-time students who wrote the exams for the College of Massage

Therapists of Ontario; will he confirm, Mr. Speaker, that the information that

is available by fax from the college, would disclose that the first-time writers

of these exams in the years 95, 96 and 97, that the average pass rate overall is

78 per cent not the 25 per cent that he indicated was the common experience over

that period of time and, Mr. Speaker, will he tell the House what he intends to

do to help the students who are now without that qualification, the twenty-four

students, and would he also tell us what he is going to do to help the 100

students who are still in the program, to guarantee them that they will get

adequate qualification to be able to successfully write the Ontario exams which

is the standard, Mr. Speaker, by which massage therapists in this Province are

judged?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, the information that I provided there was, like with any

numerical information, Mr. Speaker, depending on the period of time that is

assessed and the information and the group and the timing, the information

changes.

What I indicated to the House, to my recollection the last

time when the issue was addressed, Mr. Speaker, was that in a period of time

when 500 people, first-time writers had attempted the exam in Ontario, 125 of

that 500 - I did not have any details what the dates were, whether it was 95,

96, 97 and so on - but that 125 of them were successful which is a 25 per cent

success rate. So if you take different periods of time, different testing

periods there would be different rates. I have had it shared with me by the hon.

member the information for the dates that he is dealing with, and it is accurate

for those testing periods, the average rate is closer to almost 80 per cent

success rate.

Mr. Speaker, I am reluctant to talk about any details with

respect to the current group of students who have filed a lawsuit against the

particular institution, that will be dealt with through that particular channel

and, Mr. Speaker, as I indicated when the issue was addressed a week or ten days

ago, because it was brought to our attention by the member, we are working with

the school to check again that the curriculum that was approved in September

1995 for the registered massage therapy course is being actually followed

through and is a curriculum that satisfies the information and should prepare

people fairly well for the examination that they write in Ontario.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to take his seat.

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

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, the curriculum that the minister

has approved may in fact be adequate by itself, but what I'm being told by

students - current, and the crop of students who came out - is that the

curriculum may not be being followed to a sufficient degree to prepare them to

write these exams.

One hundred students have to plank down their money for the

next semester by the end of this month, confirm their student loans, and pay

more money to this institution. Can the minister guarantee those students will

be protected and given an adequate program that would allow them to pass this

exam? Can the minister give that assurance here in this House today, or is he

going to do that before they have to plank down more money?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm not in a position

at any point in time with any student to give them any assurance they will pass

an exam no matter where it is written, whether it is in Newfoundland and

Labrador or in Ontario. All I can do is indicate to the House that we are

confirming and re-confirming with the school again that the conditions from

September 1995 are being fully followed.

The conditions of the approval was granted with the

understanding that the instructor would first and foremost be registered with

the College of Massage Therapists of Ontario, where they write the examination;

that the program would incorporate all aspects of the Ontario core curriculum,

which is the test they write in Ontario; and that the school itself would

provide students with the opportunity to complete a competency evaluation by the

College of Massage Therapists of Ontario, and also to challenge the Ontario

registration exam if they so desired.

They were the conditions by which the institution was given

permission to actually start this particular course. It has been on the go for a

couple of years now. We have had a group of students who have had only about a

25 per cent success rate when they have chosen to challenge the Ontario

registration exam, and we are working with the school to check and see -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. GRIMES: - of the granting -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: - of this licence are -

MR. SPEAKER: Question period has ended.

MR. GRIMES: - still in effect, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Question period has ended.

MR. H. HODDER: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader on a

point of order.

MR. H. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I'm wondering if we could do

something about the heat. I was just speaking with my colleague, the Member for

St. John's West about it. For the last several days it has been really chilly in

this part of the Chamber over here. We anticipate being here for some number of

hours, and I do think that something could be done to facilitate members'

comfort. Maybe we could get a little propane stove and put it over here on this

side of the House, or whatever. I am wondering if somebody who is responsible

would call some of the officials to address that problem.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair has been in contact with the

people responsible for the heating in the House. There have been some

difficulties, but we will certainly contact them again and get them in to see if

they can get it under control.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Before we dispense with the routine business of the day,

there is a function that we would like to carry out at this point in time.

As hon. members know, of course, it is a custom to hang the

portraits of all former Speakers on the wall. Before we can do that, of course,

we will have an unveiling here in the Assembly. The former Speaker, now the

Minister of Finance, has had his portrait done and it is now ready for

unveiling. I am going to ask the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition to

accompany the Minister of Finance, when we get the portrait in here, and have

the unveiling.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I understand it is customary

for the Premier and for the Leader of the Opposition, on such an occasion, to

say a few words about the recipient of the honour.

Let me say, to begin with, that there is no question, bearing

in mind the earlier gift that was given by our friend opposite, Mr. Jack Byrne,

to the Minister of Finance, that indeed Gerald Squires has held up a mirror to

the minister and has captured his likeness, I think, in an absolutely exemplary

fashion. This is, indeed, a first-class piece of art, and it is befitting a

first-class member of this House and a first-class Speaker in his earlier

incarnation, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER TOBIN: No, Mr. Speaker, there is no punch line.

This is all seriously said of a member who I think has served this place well,

and we might do well to remember that the Member for Humber West has been in the

Chamber since 1989.

We all know that it is no accident to be re-elected after you

have been elected the first time. All of us who serve in this place know the

stresses and strains of the job, but to be able to come back not once but a

second time - he has been re-elected again in 1993 and again in 1996 - this is

no easy measure or test to pass in one's constituency year after year after

year, and in the case of the member, all through government years and through

years when many difficult decisions have had to be made, but Mr. Dicks has been

successful in coming back again and again.

Of course, the Speaker knows better than all others in this

place that the most difficult job in this Chamber, and indeed, at the end of the

day, the most important job in this Chamber, the one that makes it function, is

the Speaker's job. And may I say to you, Mr. Speaker, I know, notwithstanding

difficult moments on occasion in this place, that the current Speaker has the

full confidence and the good will of all of the members of this House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: The current Speaker, then, knows full well

just how difficult and how important it is, on the one hand, to maintain the

rules of order, and also to read and understand the mood of the House. This is

something that the Member for Humber West did with great skill, Mr. Speaker,

when he occupied the Chair upon which you now sit.

Mr. Speaker, the Member for Humber West served in the Justice

portfolio, he serves now in the Finance portfolio. He has had the Speaker's

chair, the Justice portfolio, the Finance portfolio. Who knows what the future

will hold for the Member for Humber West?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I want to tell the House that

the Member for Humber West is studying French, and I noticed him scrutinizing

very closely the seats in the House of Commons. It is rumoured that in the year

2006 or 2007 there may be an opening in one of the jobs up there - according to

the current Prime Minister, not before.

MR. FUREY: (Inaudible).

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I just want to conclude with

the usual good will we extend to one of our own when he is honoured in this way

by saying that this is a member who has served the House well, has served the

people of Humber West very well - and, Mr. Speaker, I will not dare say what is

on my mind with respect to the comment just made by the Member for St. Barbe.

Let me just say Mr. Speaker, that there are many people in this Province in

recent budgets who have said that the Minister of Finance should be hung, and

today he has been, and hung very well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is certainly my pleasure to participate in this hanging

ceremony.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: If there is ever a member who deserves to

be on the wrong end of the hanging rope, it is that minister over there, I can

tell you. I do not know what is after happening to him since he was Speaker. He

has a job to get here on time. As Speaker, he was always prompt, always here on

time. There is something in his life that has happened since, I do not know what

it is. We will try to investigate. I will have to -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: That could be it, too. They are getting a

little to close, I might add.

I think it is very inappropriate that the Premier would

announce his support for the Member for Humber West, the Minister of Finance, to

take his chair there when he vacates it. He certainly gave us that indication. I

know, the Minister of Education is a little bit dismayed, but there is one thing

- I have one request, though, wherever you hang this picture, you should put it

in a place where the Minister of Finance can see it. That is one request - not

behind the pillar there, I think it should be held - even if we had to relocate

some of the pictures that are here, basically, I think it is very important.

Gerry Squires spent a fair amount of time in my district. He

has a knack for turning what would be the most unusual photographs into a work

of art. He has done a good job. I guess, those lonely hours at the lighthouse in

Ferryland really helped him to become very imaginative, I say, as he stares out

at bleak scenery, and his hand, of course, has taken a

part in doing some

tremendous work here in our Province - a well-known artist.

I guess, on a little more serious note, the former Speaker

did an excellent job - we even got some favourable rulings, I might add. He did

a tremendous job, he added a bit of humour and wit. The occasional little note

would come down with little words of wisdom, a little comic relief, I guess, in

a time of heated moments here in the House, so he added that to it. We hope - I

am praising you up too much, I am told.

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, sit down.

MR. SULLIVAN: We just wish he had been able to take care

of the finances of this Province as well as he did his job as Speaker.

With that, I would say it is a good reproduction, as close, I

guess, as we can get. And it is only appropriate to be hanging the former

Speaker here, because he did make a very worthwhile contribution to the position

of Speaker, along with some other very renowned and famous Speakers who have

taken their places on the walls of this House. Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, I just want to briefly add a few

comments to those of the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition. I am very

pleased to see that artist Gerry Squires has done an excellent job in presenting

the minister by way of portrait. The minister as Speaker, I have to say I

appreciated him as Speaker, in his rulings. I was very happy to know that if it

was one or two minutes after 2:00 p.m. I usually had a little bit of comfort in

getting into the House. I do not have that comfort with the current Speaker. He

is unfailingly prompt in being here at 2:00 p.m.

The former Speaker did an excellent job as Speaker,

maintained order in the House, had very good eyesight, could see as far as where

I was when he was here, down a little bit further into the corner, and I -

MR. SULLIVAN: (inaudible) down further next time.

MR. HARRIS: I am getting closer to the Speaker's Chair, I

say to the Leader of the Opposition. I think it is a good likeness. There is no

truth to the rumour, I understand, that this will be on his Christmas card next

year. There was a rumour going around a little earlier that he really liked the

painting and that is where he would have it to be. I do not know if he is that

vain to actually do that. It is a good likeness, and I am sure he will enjoy

admiring it from time to time in the House of Assembly late at night - come in

and turn on the lights and have a good look at it.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, I do want to acknowledge the former

Speaker's contribution to this House, as Speaker, as member and as minister.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

For anyone who has not had it done, to get your portrait

painted is a daunting prospect. One of God's blessings to us in His infinite

wisdom is that we do not get to see ourselves. We are sort of left to other

people to have to look on us, so it is often a surprise to see what other people

see you as, and certainly someone who is as insightful as Gerry.

When we went into this prospect of having to get the portrait

painted - and it was interesting in that when I got elected Speaker, as the

Speaker knows, it is something of a questionable job in the House in many ways.

People look to be in Cabinet, yet when you look at it, the Speaker has the best

job in the House, and certainly in government. But when you are offered the

prospect, you are not quite sure if that is really where you want to be if there

might be some other position. But when you consult people outside, all my

friends told me: That is great; you are going to get your portrait on the wall

of the House. So it does have those rewards, among others.

You do have a choice, as John told me. I did choose Gerry

Squires. I did not know him before this time. The reason I chose him was that he

had done some other portraits here, and I think he is very insightful. I think

he found something in our former Speaker, Tom Lush, and I did not know Paddy

McNicholas. But he certainly saw something in other people that I thought helped

me see them differently.

Gerry Squires and his wife Gail are a great couple. One of

the most pleasant things about having this done was I actually got to spend time

with them. Gerry is a very erudite and a very humble man, who is very cultured,

and he and his wife are very interesting people to speak with and to spend time

with. One of the great pleasures of having this done was to actually have that

time of my life to get to know them a little better.

The Premier said it was a first-class portrait of a

first-class Speaker. I just note two things. First, he was not here when I was

Speaker, and secondly, those who applauded were also not here when I was

Speaker. The Speaker well knows it is not always the easiest job in the House or

the most pleasant at times.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition says about it, that it

will be hung somewhere in the House. The great advantage of that, of course, is

that we have had so many Speakers that now it will actually be hung out of sight

behind the Chair. I take that as something of a consolation.

As to the hon. the Leader of the NDP, he said when I was

Speaker I had good eyesight and I could look down on him at the far end of the

House. I just want to assure him that as Minister of Finance and Treasury Board,

I still look down on him.

In any event, Mr. Speaker, to be Speaker is to enjoy a unique

position in this House. It removes you from the day-to-day fray of politics. One

of the great things in the British tradition that we do not do here is that the

Speaker never has to face the contest of re-election. We do not have that

advantage in Canada, and particularly in Newfoundland and Labrador where we have

so few seats. But having said that, during my time as Speaker I found that in

listening to the debate in Question Period I was often impressed with the

wisdom, clarity and insight and probing of the questions of the members

opposite. I must say that since becoming Minister of Finance I am surprised how

quickly they have lost that great insight and ability that they demonstrated

while I was Speaker.

I any event, Mr. Speaker, let me just say that it was a great

experience to be Speaker. It is one that I would not have missed,

notwithstanding some of the other things I have said. I want to thank hon.

members in the House for this honour today. Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: We will go back to our routine proceedings

now.

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, may I revert to Presenting

Reports for a moment, with permission of the House?

MR. SPEAKER: By leave of the House.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees.

MR. DICKS: With leave, Mr. Speaker, I would like to

present the consolidated public accounts of the Province for the period ending

March 31, 1997. Thank you.

Petitions

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

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

I am pleased to rise today to present the following petition

to the hon. House of Assembly. The petition of the undersigned residents of

Newfoundland:

WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is

seeking to pass amendments to the Shops' Closing Act without adequate public

consultation; and

WHEREAS Sunday shopping will increase the dominance of large

national retailers at the expense of small locally owned businesses; and

WHEREAS Sunday shopping will negatively affect the family

life of employees who will be required to work on Sunday, a day often reserved

for family and recreational activities; and

WHEREAS many large retailers are uninterested in opening on

Sundays, due to increased operating costs without significant increase in

revenues;

WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to withdraw legislation designed to permit Sunday

shopping.

Mr. Speaker, it has been some time in this House since I have

seen such an outcry by the public from every sector of society with respect to a

specific issue. The last time that I witnessed such an outcry was during the

famous and long debates over the privatization of Newfoundland and Labrador

Hydro.

Now, this public debate is less than six days old. There

literally have been thousands upon thousands of names on petitions delivered to

our offices. Mr. Speaker, I say to members opposite, I believe that we, as an

Opposition, have done what is required. We presented petitions; we presented the

debates; we have researched the issue; we have talked with the larger retailers

who are not in favour of it; we have talked to small store owners, Mr. Speaker,

who are not in favour of it; we have talked to consumers and taxpayers who are

not in favour of it; we have talked to those employees who will be affected, in

a very negative way, I might add, who are not in favour of it.

The question that is still looming large in this Legislature

and out in the public as a whole is, why is this piece of legislation being

pursued so aggressively, so consistently at all costs? This week we could have

proceeded in this House along a different line but that did not happen. This

piece of legislation has been put forward as a priority by government, as a

priority above all other pieces of legislation that are on this table.

We witnessed the other night a debate up until about four

o'clock in the morning where we debated this issue. We witnessed yesterday a

closure motion introduced by the Government House Leader which, Mr. Speaker, it

should be added, effectively will close debate on this piece of legislation.

Because for those people who are sitting in the gallery, a closure motion

effectively means that every member of the Opposition has twenty minutes, and

twenty minutes only, to speak with respect to Bill 48.

Mr. Speaker, the question I would like to ask - I know many

members, all members on this side of the House have asked it each and every time

they have spoken to this particular piece of legislation. The question that I

will ask again today or whenever government moves to this particular piece on

Orders of the Day is: Why is this piece of legislation being pursued so

aggressively? Why has it all of a sudden become a priority, when over the last

two years, this debate on this piece of legislation has occurred on two separate

occasions, and each time a former government under the leadership of Premier

Wells dropped the issue?

Last spring, this government under the leadership of Premier

Tobin pursued it again, and it was dropped again, Mr. Speaker and I believe

fully the reason that it was dropped from the Order Paper was for the reasons I

have previously outlined, the support in the community and the Province as a

whole, simply is not there. Now, some arguments have been put forward suggesting

that in some areas of the Province: Why not have Sunday shopping? For example:

If a cruise ship is to come in to a particular area -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. E. BYRNE: By leave, Mr. Speaker, just to clue up?

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

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: No leave?

MR. E. BYRNE: No leave?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in my place today to support this

petition presented on behalf of the people of this Province by the Member for

Kilbride, something we have been doing for the past five or six days. We know

that the opposition to this bill, to this legislation:

An Act To Amend The

Shops' Closing Act, is mounting, growing all the time. I cannot understand why

the government has not backed off on this. We have asked many, many questions in

this House of Assembly.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Well, they have, you know, and sometimes

the government can be a bit wise and listen to the Opposition - listen and make

a good decision.

We are here, Mr. Speaker, to represent the people of the

Province, the people in our district. We are constantly receiving letters,

faxes, petitions, wanting us to oppose this legislation.

Just as an example, Mr. Speaker - and we have brought this up

in the House of Assembly before - at 8:30 this morning, just as I was going

through the door, the phone rang and I answered it, Mr. Speaker; it was a lady

from Torbay who works as a cashier in one of the stores here in St. John's and

she was on the verge of tears saying that she has to work right now, six days a

week to get in thirty-five hours to survive. She said if this goes through, what

will happen is what we have said in this House of Assembly before, that she will

have to work seven days a week to get the thirty-five hours in, Mr. Speaker.

That is what she said, and she was on the verge of tears.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, I will. I will go outside, I will go

anywhere, I say to the Minister of Mines and Energy. I have no problem with

that.

What I do not understand, Mr. Speaker - we have been in this

House discussing this now for approximately six days and I have yet to see

anybody on that side of the House stand and give the logic of this bill and the

reason why it is being forced. There have been no answers given, no answers to

any of the questions. The Minister of Justice got up the other day and said a

few words, trying to be smart or facetious on the issue. But he did not give the

answers as to why, who wants it, and who is going to benefit.

We know again - we said it here before that the Board of

Trade is against it, the Chambers of Commerce are against it, the retailers are

against it, employers are against it, we have letters from employers. We have

employees against it, we are getting calls from the public against and we do not

understand who is for it and who is pushing it.

Now, a comment has been made, Mr. Speaker, and there is some

belief going around - some people believe this may be the case - that this is

connected to the multi-nationals, who want to come in here and make, maybe large

contributions to certain Parties, that if this goes through they might do that,

and certain people will be able to build their campaign funds for a shot at

different positions inside the Province, and maybe outside the Province. Is

there a connection? That is what is being asked today out there. Because we

cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, get to the bottom of it. We have

asked the questions.

As a matter of fact, I have spoken to members on the other

side of the House. I cannot get into names now, and would not do that. I am not

sure everybody over there is strongly supporting this legislation. They will toe

the line, I am sure they will toe the line. As a matter of fact, we have letters

here today, an open letter, to all government members on the other side of the

House asking them to back off on it. We have those types of letters. We have

letters from businesses saying they are going to have to lay people off.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: We can produce them. They are going to have

to lay people off if this legislation goes through. We said it here, Mr.

Speaker, that there will be job loss because of this. There is no doubt, and now

we have the proof to back up what we have been saying in this House of Assembly.

I still do not understand why this piece of legislation cannot be withdrawn, put

to a legislative committee, and go out across the Province and have

consultation.

There was no consultation on this legislation. This

Administration during the last election said they would be an administration of

consultation. They would talk to the people on any major pieces of legislation.

This is not a very thick bill at all; it is a couple of pages.

Here is another prime example of what is going on in this

House with respect to the bullying of that Administration; brought in closure on

this piece of legislation. Now, today, I was sitting - I couldn't believe what

was happening. I could not believe it - five more bills given to us today, and

they want to close the House of Assembly tomorrow. Is that not ridiculous, Mr.

Speaker?

AN HON. MEMBER: Who said that?

MR. J. BYRNE: I know. I have talked to the members on

that side of the House. I know what they want, Mr. Speaker. Five more bills

coming in.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. J. BYRNE: By leave, Mr. Speaker.

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

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave!

MR. SPEAKER: No leave.

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: I rise today, Mr. Speaker, to present a

petition to the House of Assembly. To the hon. the House of Assembly of

Newfoundland and Labrador in legislative session convened, and it goes on. The

bottom line to this is that it is the Shops' Closing Act.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: No, I have a drawer full of them, I say to

the Minister of Education. This is on shop closing as well.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: I would like to say - oh, I have a drawer

full of them.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: Do not worry, I will, if I get the

opportunity here to present them. I say today, Mr. Speaker, that I rise and

stand in my place to support this petition. I find it almost incredible that

there is nobody on the other side of the House - well, with the exception of the

Minister of Justice who stood and supported this bill, and the minister. Nobody

else has got out of their place. My office received two calls in the last

forty-eight hours from Grand Falls-Windsor to know if their member got out of

his seat to oppose this particular piece of legislation. I told the individual

who called: Absolutely not. Somebody else spoke to my secretary who went and

checked and said: No, absolutely not.

That is just one of the calls I got. Later on today, if we

get into debate, I am going to read portions of a letter which I have received

from a business in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador which clearly

states that it has to lay off or will lay off every permanent employee it has in

order - so who is over there who wants this bill? Does it really have anything

to do with shop closing, or does it have something to do with the new elections

Act that is being proposed? Is that what we are doing?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, I would like to be able to

continue.

AN HON. MEMBER: What elections Act?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Order Paper there somewhere?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FRENCH: No, not yet. The one you sent over for us to

review to see if we would agree to it. We will not agree to it, by the way!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FRENCH: Anyway, I say to the Government House Leader,

I hope he has his pyjamas, because we have five more pieces today. If he thinks

we are going away because he is trying to bully stuff through this House, it

will not happen, Mr. Speaker. If he is here tonight, he can stay here tonight,

and we are quite prepared - and this will mark the third time I have said this -

we are quite prepared to stay here with him. Those who have their tickets for

early tomorrow morning, I would suggest you cancel them unless we are going to

see closure on one pile of bills, because the word from some of your own members

over there, I say to the Minister of Education, you have a lot of jaw when

somebody is up speaking -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FRENCH: - but you have not jumped out of your seat

yet to talk on this bill.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FRENCH: Stand up and speak in favour of this bill if

you are in favour of it. You voted for it. Stand up and speak in favour of it,

as the rest of us on this side of the House have stood up and voted against it.

Stand up and speak if you are in favour of the bill.

Mr. Speaker, the phone calls are still coming. I am receiving

faxes every single day, and letters every single day. The City Consumers Co-Op,

Mr. Keith Sheppard, President of the Board of Directors, opposes Sunday

shopping. Honda One in Newfoundland and Labrador opposes it. Canadian Tire

opposes it. Riff's Limited in Newfoundland and Labrador - I have a copy of the

letter that they sent to the Premier, from the President of the Riff's Company

and their 400 employees - oppose this particular piece of legislation.

So, Mr. Speaker, who is driving the bus? Who wants this piece

of legislation? Who wants it? We do not know. Nobody over there has given us a

reason as to why this piece of legislation should pass. We have not heard it. We

sat until 4:00 a.m. and we did not hear it. I guess now we have brought in

closure so they can sort of run us out, but that is fine.

MR. J. BYRNE: Abuse of authority that is all that is.

MR. FRENCH: That is exactly what it is, I say to my

colleague, the Member for Cape St. Francis. That is exactly what it is. It is

nothing short of abuse.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

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

I rise today to support the petition put forward by my

colleague, the Member for Conception Bay South, and to say to the House again,

as we have said on many occasions in the last three days, that the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador are not persuaded with the arguments put forward by

the government in favour of the proposals to open up all of the shops in this

Province on Sundays. In other words, we are going to add another fifty-two days

to the shopping schedule.

Mr. Speaker, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador do not

want this to happen, and that is why we have all of those petitions. That is why

this morning when I was out visiting a constituent, the first thing they said

was: Do what you can, but make sure that you do stand there and try to stop this

proposal for Sunday shopping.

Mr. Speaker, that is why we have stood here time after time,

and we will stay here as long as necessary. We will work through the orders and

the rules that govern this particular Legislature. We will work through them,

and I know that at the end of the day, in a parliamentary democracy, the

government will, if it chooses, get its way. That is the way Parliament works;

however, our job here is to bring to the government's attention what the people

of Newfoundland and Labrador are saying about it. That is our job here. We will

do it. We will do it until the very last minute, and if that takes us until 4:00

tomorrow morning, if it takes us until Saturday, if it takes us until next week,

or takes us into January, that is the way it is. We will be unrelenting on this

particular issue, and I can tell all of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador

that this caucus is united, it is very firm, and we will stay the course. Stay

the course means that we will use every parliamentary option available to us to

prevent the adoption of Bill No. 48.

We want the people of Newfoundland and Labrador to know,

however, that if we fail to convince the government to take this proposed

legislation off the Order Paper it will be because of their decision, not

because we have not brought it forcefully to the floor of the House of Assembly.

We know there are more petitions arriving. They are arriving

every day. They are arriving by fax, by courier, and we have put forward the

arguments against this legislation. We say to the Premier, who is now in his

seat, in the House the other day when he was not present, I reminded the House

of his commitment in his Liberal manifesto that he put out in January 1996, when

he said that he was going to facilitate an ongoing dialogue with the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Well, we wonder what has happened to the ongoing dialogue.

Because right now the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are saying: We want to

have a chance to have public hearings on this issue and have a chance to have

our say, want it referred to a legislation review committee. That is not going

to happen. That has not been agreed to by the government. They voted down the

hoist motion that we put in that would have allowed us to have more time to

consider. Mr. Speaker, the government says: No, we are going to be bulldozing

this all the way through. We are not going to accept any considerations that

reflect the viewpoints of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. We are going to be

pigheaded, we are going to be aggressive, we are going to stay the course and we

are going to make sure that this legislation passes, even if it jeopardizes some

of the other legislation that we might have here.

Mr. Speaker, I say to all members that we, on this side,

today, tomorrow, tomorrow night, whenever it is, we will not be relenting. We

will be staying here as long as is necessary. Mr. Speaker, I say again that we

have put forward the arguments; we have said that we will stay the course as

long as it is necessary.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: I move that the Orders of the Day be now read.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

It is moved and seconded that we move to the Orders of the

Day. All those in favour, `aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, `nay'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

AN HON. MEMBER: Division.

MR. SPEAKER: Call in the members.

Division

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

All those in favour of the motion please rise.

Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Finance, I believe, entered after

the bar was across the House.

All those in favour of the motion please rise.

CLERK: The hon. the Premier; the hon. the Minister of

Development and Rural Renewal; the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney

General; the hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture; the hon. the

Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs; Mr. Walsh; Mr. Flight; the hon.

the Minister of Education; Mr. Penney; Mr. Oldford; the hon. the Minister of

Health; Mr. Barrett; the hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology;

the hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment; the hon. the Minister

of Government Services and Lands; Mr. Wiseman; the hon. the Minister of Works,

Services and Transportation; Mr. Andersen; Mr. Canning; Mr. Smith; Mr. Ramsay;

Mr. Woodford; Mr. Mercer; Mr. Reid; Ms Thistle; Mr. Sparrow.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against please rise.

CLERK: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition; Mr. Hodder;

Mr. Jack Byrne; Mr. Edward Byrne; Mr. Fitzgerald; Mr. T. Osborne; Mr.

Ottenheimer; Mr. French; Ms S. Osborne; Mr. Harris.

Mr. Speaker, twenty-six `ayes' and ten `nays'.

MR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion, carried.

Before recognizing the hon. the Government House Leader, I

want to draw members' attention to Standing Order 11(2) which says, "When the

Speaker is putting a question, no Member shall walk out of or across the House,

or make any noise or disturbance." Members were walking around the House when

the question was being put.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I move Motion No. 3.

MR. SPEAKER: All those in favour of Motion 3, `aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: Those against, `nay'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion, carried.

AN HON. MEMBER: Division.

Division

MR. SPEAKER: We are voting on Motion No. 3.

All those in favour of the motion, please rise.

CLERK: The hon. the Premier, the hon. the Minister of

Development and Rural Renewal, the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney

General, the hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, the hon. the

Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, Mr. Flight, Mr. Walsh, the hon.

the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, the hon. the Minister of Education,

the hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods, Mr. Penney, Mr.

Oldford, the hon. the Minister of Health, Mr. Barrett, the hon. the Minister of

Human Resources and Employment, the hon. the Minister of Environment and Labour,

the hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology, the hon. the Minister

of Works, Services and Transportation, the hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture

and Recreation, the hon. the Minister of Government Services and Lands, Mr.

Wiseman, Mr. Andersen, Mr. Canning, Mr. Smith, Mr. Ramsay, Mr. Woodford, Mr.

Mercer, Mr. Reid, Ms. Thistle, Mr. Sparrow.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against the motion, please rise.

CLERK: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Hodder,

Mr. Jack Byrne, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Osborne, Mr. Ottenheimer, Mr. French, Ms.

Osborne, Mr. Harris.

Mr. Speaker, thirty `ayes' and nine `nays'.

MR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion carried.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I move that the House not adjourn

at 5:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the House do

not adjourn at 5:00 p.m.

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: Those against, 'nay'.

Carried.

AN HON. MEMBER: Division.

MR. SPEAKER: Call in the members.

Division

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

All those in favour of the motion, please rise.

CLERK: The hon. the Premier, the hon. the Minister of

Development and Rural Renewal, the hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy, the

hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General, the hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Aquaculture, the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs, Mr. Flight, Mr. Walsh, the hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury

Board, the hon. the Minister of Education, the hon. the Minister of Forest

Resources and Agrifoods, Mr. Penney, Mr. Oldford, the hon. the Minister of

Health, Mr. Barrett, the hon. the Minister of Environment and Labour, the hon.

the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology, the hon. the Minister of Works,

Services and Transportation, the hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and

Recreation, the hon. the Minister of Government Services and Lands, Mr. Noel,

Mr. Wiseman, Mr. Andersen, Mr. Canning, Mr. Smith, Mr. Ramsay, Mr. Woodford, Mr.

Mercer, Mr. Reid, Ms. Thistle, Mr. Sparrow.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against the motion, please rise.

CLERK: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Hodder,

Mr. Shelley, Mr. Jack Byrne, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Osborne, Mr. Ottenheimer, Mr.

French, Ms. Osborne, Mr. Harris.

Mr. Speaker, 31 yeas and 10 nays.

MR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion carried.

Before we proceed any further, the Chair would like to inform

the House of the questions for the Late Show today.

Question one is from the hon. the Member for Bonavista South:

I am not satisfied with the answer provided by the Minister of Fisheries and

Aquaculture re my question on foreign fishing allocations.

Question number two is from the Member for Waterford Valley

to the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs re my question

regarding municipal qualifications for municipal clerks and administrators.

The third question is from the hon. Member for Signal Hill -

Quidi Vidi. I am dissatisfied with the answer provided by the Minister of

Education re my question on private schools' massage therapy.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I move that the House resolve

itself into a Committee of the Whole.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the House

resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole and that I do now leave the Chair.

All those in favour, `aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, `nay'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

AN HON. MEMBER: Division.

MR. SPEAKER: Call in the members.

Division

We will deal with the division question now, and we will then

proceed with the Late Show. Then the Speaker will leave the Chair whenever the

thirty minutes are up for the Late Show. I think that is the agreement we have

here.

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

MR. H. HODDER: Yes, Mr. Speaker, we agree that that would

be the best procedure to follow to facilitate the rules of the House.

MR. SPEAKER: All those in favour of the motion, please

rise.

CLERK: The hon. the Premier, the hon. the Minister of

Development and Rural Renewal, the hon. the Minister of Fisheries and

Aquaculture, the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, the hon.

the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, the hon. the Minister of Forest

Resources and Agrifoods, Mr. Penney, Mr. Oldford, the hon. the Minister of

Health, Mr. Barrett, the hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment,

the hon. the Minister of Environment and Labour, the hon. the Minister of

Industry, Trade and Technology, the hon. the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation, the hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, Mr.

Noel, Mr. Wiseman, Mr. Andersen, Mr. Canning, Mr. Smith, Mr. Woodford, Mr.

Mercer, Mr. G. Reid, Ms Thistle, Mr. Sparrow.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against the motion, please rise.

CLERK: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. H.

Hodder, Mr. Shelley, Mr. Jack Byrne, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Ottenheimer, Mr.

French, Ms S. Osborne, Mr. Harris.

Mr. Speaker, twenty-five `ayes' and nine `nays.'

MR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion carried.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, if I could, when Your Honour was

reading out the ministers who were required to answer questions, I didn't get

the names of the ministers who we were supposed to (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Question number one was to the Minister of

Fisheries and Aquaculture, number two was to the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs, and number three was to the Minister of Education.

MR. TULK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion carried, but the Chair

will not act on the motion until the Late Show has expired.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I stood today and

asked a series of questions about foreign fishing, allocation of fish stocks to

foreign interests, processing of fish in foreign ports.

One of the questions I directed to the minister was to

confirm a story that was recently aired on the CBC Here and Now show

where it indicated that a dentist presently living in Florida holds one, if not

two or more, shrimp harvesting licences for area 2J. The minister asked at the

time if I would let him know the person's name. I've since found out that

person's name and I've shared it with the minister. It is a Dr. Bill Murphy who

is a dentist living in Florida and owns and operates Murray Sea Foods in

Liverpool, Nova Scotia.

I understand from the minister that those licences were given

out at an earlier time. I spoke with the Premier about it, and he told me those

licences were probably issued at a time when a party by the name of the party

that I support was in power at the time. I don't care who was in power at the

time, or who issued the licences. I think we are living in a time in this

Province today that such licences and such activity should be immediately

stopped.

I'm very familiar with what is happening down in Black

Tickle. I worked in a plant down there for at least five summers myself, back

and forth there on a regular basis; probably once every two or three weeks. It

was a plant that was built and designed for groundfish, cod fish - turbot for

the most part; Greenland halibut that we know as turbot. Right now, in that

particular area today, in area 2J, there is an allocation of 20,000 metric

tonnes of turbot. Out of that 20,000 metric tonnes of turbot 17,000 metric

tonnes, Mr. Speaker, is harvested by foreigners, taken to foreign ports,

processed by foreign workers. Not one ounce of that 17,000 tonnes is processed

right here in this Province. We have a situation, Mr. Speaker, where our own

people are out crying for work. Our fish plants are closed and we continually

let foreigners come here and scrape the bottom of our coves and our bays and

take the product back to foreign ports to process.

Mr. Speaker, shrimp is a shell fish that is offering many,

many new opportunities in the processing industry in this Province. In my own

district alone, FPI just recently announced an $11 million investment in a

processing facility there to process shrimp. It is my understand, north and

south of the fifty line, that the FFAW, the Fogo Island Co-op and the Labrador

shrimp company, Mr. Speaker, has recently sold in the water, sold a resource in

the water, four million pounds of shrimp. Four million pounds of shrimp sold to

a foreign country, Mr. Speaker, to harvest and process on foreign soil. This

should never be allowed to continue, I say to people opposite.

The minister says that we should harvest it rather than leave

it in the water. Well that is the same kind of thinking that has gotten us where

we are today. It is my understanding, in talking to fishermen - in fact, one

particular fisherman has been pleading for part of this allocation for some time

now. In fact, he has a sixty-five foot boat down in Goose Bay. As we speak, his

boat is in Goose Bay willing to go out and take

part in this fishery but is not

allowed to do so. This particular resource is being controlled by a union that

was put in place to protect the very people that are hurting here today but in

order for that to have happened government must have given them the licence and

given them the okay to go and fish. Government must have given them the okay in

order to go and harvest that particular product and to give them a quota. It

should never have been allowed to happen. It is better to leave it in the water

then it is to allow it to be taken outside of our Province and deprive our

fishermen and our fish plant workers of processing jobs. If this is the fishery

of the future, I say to the minister, if this is what the fishery of the future

is going to be than God help us.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, the only analogy, the only

description I can make of the member opposite is talk a second about the story

of Rip Van Winkle who woke up and realized he had missed all of this time in

history and all of the things that went on. The hon. member is exactly like

that. Dr. Murphy and all those people who live in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick

have had licenses since John Crosbie gave them to them. Wake up, read the papers

and learn what is going on and come down to earth and deal with the real issues

of the day.

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

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

I wanted to address a few comments to the Minister of

Municipal and Provincial Affairs relative to the training programs for municipal

clerks. I have asked some questions on this in the House and I wanted to bring

to the minister's attention that the Newfoundland and Labrador Association of

Municipal Administrators and the Federation of Municipalities have been trying

to get some programs in place to help those clerks, particularly in the smaller

municipalities. The minister will know that with the severe financial

constraints that are now facing all municipalities, it is very important that

they do have some kind of guidance as to what is acceptable. I recognize that

some money has been provided to the federation, particularly to assist the

upgrading of computers.

However, the difficulty that many of these clerks have is

that they do not have the training in order to be able to operate the computers

properly therefore we end up like some of the government departments where, a

few years ago, with computers on desks that really are non-functional, not that

the computers cannot function but the people who are operating them do not know

the programs, so a piece of equipment like a computer is useless unless the

people have some basic training and know how to work it within its own

capacities.

Also, I bring to the minister's attention that, again the

Auditor General recognizes that there is some need for training. I know that the

minister is well aware that

an act was prepared by his department and is called:

An Act Respecting The Newfoundland And Labrador Association Of Municipal

Administrators and his department has participated in drafting that legislation

in consultation with the Department of Justice. Now, during the background for

this particular series of questions, I did some consultations with Manitoba,

with the Province of Saskatchewan, with Ontario to see what programs they have

in place to assist rural municipalities to upgrade their clerks and the best

program I could find of those that I was able to examine exists in the Province

of Saskatchewan and in that province there is a program put on in conjunction

with the University of Regina and that program is particularly geared to helping

municipalities in the rural parts of the Province to upgrade their skills and is

done by way of correspondence courses, a Distance Education Program and is a

very, very good program I say to the minister, as I have had some consultation

with the people in Saskatchewan on that.

I think it is inappropriate for us to say that these people

in those municipalities have no need for skills. In fact, they have need for

skills. I know that the municipalities sometimes cannot afford to be able to

have them participate but these are jobs out there and they are handling public

dollars. It is public treasury dollars, the taxpayers' dollars and the dollars

of the Province and it is not sufficient for us to say that we do not really

care or that we are not going to provide an educational program for them.

So, Mr. Speaker, what I am saying to the minister is that we

have to address this issue because, again the minister seems content with the

existing status quo, and I am saying to him that is not okay when other

provinces are trying to address this. You do not have to worry about the big

municipalities like the St. John's and the Mount Pearl and Corner Brook, Grand

Falls, Gander, they have, you know, a fair size bureaucracy, but out in these

municipalities the smaller ones, we have to say to the Minister of Education, he

should be putting money into training programs where people have jobs and where

jobs do exist.

So I would say to the minister again: Look at what is

happening in the other provinces. Manitoba and Saskatchewan have a lot of

relevancy to Newfoundland and, Mr. Speaker, I would say to the minister that his

officials should make some consultations - again I have the acts that were

passed in those provinces and have their educational programs for the education

of the clerks, and they seem to be very, very good and are administered by the

clerks themselves. There is a time set, there are seminars to which they can go

and there are programs put out by correspondence courses and now that we are

going to have the computers in these municipalities, I think the minister should

make sure that it is no good to have the computer if you do not have the

educational program to back it up, and with the Internet that is available in

various parts of the Province and most places now can have access to Internet,

only go to the school system and (inaudible) -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. H. HODDER: - and I am recommending to the minister

that he would try to do something about this particular issue.

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. A. REID: There are a number of questions and I would

try to answer them all as quickly as I can, Mr. Speaker.

We are working with NLAMA and the Newfoundland Federation of

Municipalities; training will be included in the purchase price and package to

the smaller communities with the purchase of new computers and I am not

satisfied with the status quo as it is today and I say it quite honestly to the

hon. member, if he would talk to the larger communities like St. John's and

Mount Pearl maybe, just maybe they might give up their municipal operating

grants for the next three years then I can go out and give it to those small

communities that the hon. member think so much about to be able to help - to be

able to help those smaller communities.

So, I suggest to the member, go back to his council in Mount

Pearl and ask to let me have their municipal operating grants so that I can go

out and do what the hon. gentleman is saying.

God bless you and a Merry Christmas to you, too.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, I want to make some further

enquiries and elicit further responses from the Minister of Education concerning

the private training schools in the Province in general, and focus initially at

least on the massage therapists.

Mr. Speaker, the minister seems to insist that there is a

wide variety of results for first-time writers of these exams in Ontario. The

first-time writers of these exams overall do very well. Since July of 1995 to

July of 1997, the only periods for which periods are published by the Ontario

college, 1,519 students wrote the exams and 1,186 passed, for an overall 78

average. At no period for these exams that are published by the college was

there a 25 per cent pass rate.

Mr. Speaker, the minister is really covering up the fact that

there is a very, very high degree of pass rate for those who take those exams,

and it is the standard that is accepted here in the Province of Newfoundland in

the absence of Newfoundland regulation of the massage therapy profession.

Mr. Speaker, the other aspect of this, the minister read out

some conditions of that licence, in particular the core curriculum from Ontario,

and my inquiries reveal that the curriculum, the one of which they will not give

out copies - of which the minister will not give out copies - my information is

that the curriculum itself complies with the Ontario standard. The question is

whether or not that curriculum is being taught.

The students who wrote those exams in October were provided

with a copy of the core curriculum. They have listed numerous items on the

curriculum on which they were being tested that, in fact, were not covered in

their program. The minister has not addressed that.

The students who are there now, the 100 students who are

there now who are being asked to continue to pay significant amounts of money to

the college, do not have confidence that what the minister has said or done to

date gives them any assurance that they are going to be properly trained for

these particular courses. So, I would like the minister to elaborate on what is

being done to ensure that the curriculum is, in fact, being followed.

I have seen complaints that people teaching the massage

therapy course were not, in fact, registered massage therapists. The minister

has those complaints on file in his office, that there were people teaching the

course who were said to be registered massage therapists but, in fact, did not

have that designation.

I want to ask a further question of the minister concerning

this whole area of private post-secondary education. Does the minister have, as

I am informed, on his desk, a document - it may be entitled `Post-secondary

indicators '96', produced by the Division of Evaluation, Research and Planning -

indicating the results of the post-secondary students in this Province,

university, private colleges, public colleges, and can he tell us whether it

shows the satisfaction rate for programs by post-secondary graduates between

private colleges and public colleges? Does it show the student loan default

rates for private colleges and public colleges? And does it give, for example,

average salaries for employment gained after graduation between public and

private colleges?

Does he have such a report dealing with post-secondary

indicators '96, and why is he not making that public? Is he trying to keep the

information from the public because it would support, perhaps, if we saw it, a

call that I made in this House of Assembly about a month ago for an independent

look at the whole issue of private post-secondary education and whether or not

it meets the public needs.

Mr. Speaker, can he also tell us why there is no private

training institutions review board, which appears to be necessary if the

minister is even to refuse any applications. Is that why every application seems

to be accepted because if he is going to refuse any application he has to give

someone notice that they have fifteen days to go to a private training

institutions review board and if one does not exist it seems pretty difficult

for him to either refuse an application or turn someone down. So, I would like

for the minister to address all those questions.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Minister of Education.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Probably tomorrow in Question Period or one of the Question

Periods next week - the questions deserve attention - I think the public - I

haven't sensed in my eight or nine years that they get attention in the Late

Show, so maybe in a regular Question Period I would like to invite him to ask

the questions and we will answer then all.

MR. TULK: Bill No. 48, Mr. Speaker, Committee of the

Whole on a Bill "An Act To Amend The Shops' Closing Act No 2".

On motion, that the House resolve itself into Committee of

the Whole, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (Oldford): Order, please!

Bill No. 48, "An Act To Amend The Shops' Closing Act No. 2".

Shall clause 1 carry?

Under closure each member has twenty minutes to speak.

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I rise again today to oppose this particular bill and to talk

about what effect this will have on various businesses in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Today, I received a letter in the mail from a company in

Newfoundland and Labrador and it says, `It is with deep regret that this

company, after eighteen years in business, will have no choice but to

immediately lay off all of its full-time employees once this bill comes into law

and is enacted'. And it says, `It bothers us', meaning the company, `immensely

that these dedicated men and women are being removed from their positions, not

of their own inability, but because of government dictatorship. For this

business to meet its financial obligations all full-time employees will be

replaced with part-time workers just to accommodate the seven day work week and

remain competitive with national companies. It saddens us', again the company,

`as these men and women have young families, mortgages and have contributed

immensely, not only to this industry, but the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador. Sunday shopping will be nothing but a demise in our industry. Besides

all the economic issues, the only one above all that is the fact that Sunday

shopping will have an erosion on the family life at that particular point in

time. It means that there will be no time to spend with each other, and you

can't put a price on that.

That is from one business within the Province of Newfoundland

and Labrador. Just imagine, they are going to have to lay off all of their

full-time employees, and yet nobody, Mr. Chairman, gets out of their seat.

Nobody is concerned. I have another letter which is a copy which was sent to the

Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador. It says:

We are asking for your support in lobbying, voting against

the proposed changes to the Sunday shop closing act regarding Sunday shopping.

We are totally opposed to the idea of Sunday shopping, and we feel it places an

unfair burden on smaller independent retailers and their staff. Please put the

Sunday shopping issue to rest once and for all. This is signed by a Gerry Rose

for Ivan Riff and the 400 staff members of their company.

Four hundred staff members, the owner of a company, and these

people are against Sunday shopping. Just imagine. Nobody over there cares.

Nobody cares. Nobody gets out of their seat to ask a question. Just imagine.

Nobody stands up to ask a question on this bill. Why? The calls haven't stopped.

Let me tell you, I got more calls on this than I did on national unity, let me

tell you that. Because after running an ad for some six to eight weeks I never

got a call, but on this here, I've gotten lots of calls.

Yet, for some reason, we introduced closure. We have to ram

this through the House. We on this side intend to do whatever we can legally do

to stop this particular piece of legislation. We intend to do whatever we have

to do to try and stop this particular piece of legislation.

City Consumers Co-Operative Society Limited, their head

offices are in St. John's. This is a letter from its President, Mr. Keith

Sheppard, President of the Board of Directors of City Consumers Co-Operative

Society, and it is written - and this is a copy - to the hon. the Minister of

Environment and Labour.

On behalf of City Consumers Co-Operative Society board,

management, staff and members, I would like to express dissatisfaction with the

new legislation concerning Sunday store openings. Sunday shopping openings will

have a negative impact upon locally-owned businesses. Sales for six days will

now be spread out over seven. This will mean increased cost for sales, plus

increased cost to customers. But, Mr. Chairman, nobody over there cares.

Multi-national chains will be the only ones to benefit from

this change. Local ownership will suffer and may disappear, leaving the retail

sector of our economy controlled by multi-nationals. The enormous profits

already made