Volume 2 PROVINCE OF NEWFOUNDLAND THIRTY-SIXTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NEWFOUNDLAND 2nd Session VERBATIM REPORT Monday, April 9, 1973 SPEAKER: THE HONOURABLE JAMES M. RUSSELL Number 49

' ·" April 9, 1973 The Rouse met at 3:00 P.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. TAPE NO. 1107 NM - 1 MR. J. CROSBIE, Minister of Finance: Before we get to presenting petitions, Mr. Speaker, the statement I make is with respect to the arbitration award and subsequent payment to instructors at the district vocational school. In order to clarify this situation, Mr. Speaker,. I would like to explain that the - this is with respect to the payments to instructors at the College of Fisheries, College of Trades and Technology and the various district vocational schools as a result of an arbitration board ruling. There is a dispute over the

interpretation of the collecti~e agreement. The arbitration board ruling favoured the instructors and directed the employer, that is the government, to make such salary adjustments as were necessary to ensure that each member of the bargaining unit received,during the fiscal year 1972-1973, the salary to which the collective agreement entitled him during that year. With respect to instructors at the College of Fisheries, the adjustments were paid on March 20. With respect to instructors at the College of Trades and Technology the adjustments were paid on March 31, 1973.

However, because of certain administrative difficulties and because of the large num~er of instructors employed in the district vocational schools, the adjustment we hoped to make on March 31, 1973 for those instructors was delayed. I have been in contact with my colleague, the Minister of Education, and we are now able to ensure the instructors at the district vocational schools and the Newfoundland Association of Public Employees that the necessary documentation has been preparerl for the payment of the nd_justments and the Depnrtment of FJnanre will he lRRuinP, the relevont chequeR, ' . . 4022

April 9• 1973 Tape No. 1107 NM - 2 MR. C~OSBIE: it should be before the end of thi week. So these adjustments will be paid .them by the end of this week and if for some reason this is not done by the end of this week, it will certainly be done before the end of next week. This affected agreement with respect to the method of payment of vocational school instructors, whether they should be paid on the same basis as teachers in day schools or on a different basis,and the arbitration award was in theit favour. So these payments should be out within the next week. MR. F..

MAYNARD, ?-linister of Forestry a_nd Agriculture:· Mr. Speaker, I have two statements I would like to make. The first statement is in relation to the National Egg Marketing Scheme. nuring the past few weeks a number of inquiries have been made to the P.ouse of Assemb~y regardinP, the status of the report of the Commission of Enquiry into the Provincial Er,g Industry; and tegardinr, this province's position relative to participation in the National E17.g }larketing Scheme. I want to briefly bring the House up-to-date on the situation at this time.

The Commission of Enquiry was appointed to study the provincial er,P, industry and make recorr.mendations in respe .ct to (1) the marketing of eggs in Newfoundland,includin2 policies relati~g to quotas, distribution throur,h r,rading stations and pricing; (2) the promotion and stablilization of the marketin~ of er,r,s in •~ewfoundland and in concert with other provinces, the marketinP, of er,r,s in Canada. Mt>etinr,s were held in Newfouncll.:mo and l.nhrndor to ohtain the opinions of all affected.

All relevant information on production and !"l'1rkrtinr,, incluc1ing costs, from Newfoundlnnd and elsewhere, was nlso compiled for comparlson purposes. The CoJT1mission also examined marketin~ pro~rammes elsewhere to <lcvclop the best possihlc pro~rammc for ~cwfoundland. . .. 4·02.3

April 9, 1973 Tape No. 1107 NM - 3 MR. MAYNARD: The Commission had strong reservations concerning the ftational marketing plan, but Newfoundland has no alternative but join or else compete openly with the other provinces who •would be able to dump surplus ep;g'11 at reduced p~:fces. The Commission's two basic recommendations are for provision for consumer protection and a strong marketing effort to ensure the beat possible distribution of eggs. The ~overnment is also concerned that all producers receive fair and equal treatment.

We hope to have adequat~ copies of the report to _table before the House within two weeks. An explanatory note here: When the report was first received,as I explained to the House, it was received in a very rough draft form. We had hoped to have it much sooner in its final public consumption form hut it has not been made available tb us. The people 4024

April 9, 1973 Tape 1108 (aftemoon) Pit - 1 are etill working on it. We hope to have it very shortly, at least they tell us we wili. In the meantime, new legislation has beea prepared which will enable us to enter the scheme, provid~ for producer and consumer protection and facilitate the growth of an egg industry in the province. The present legislation does not allow ua· to enter into an agreement of this type and would in fact transfer authority to the National F.gg Marketin~ Agency regarding the setting of quotas and the pricin~ of e~~s.

The government feels that it has~ responsibility to the producers, consumers and th~ province in general and has therefore delayed in signing the agreement. A meeting is scl1eduled for 2 :00 P .M., April 10, to discuss these problems with the producers and bring them up to date on the situation, We are anxious to have the report tabled before the House prior to discussing 'the legislation. If the legislation receive approval of the House of Assemb~y. then the agreement will be signed to participate in the National Egg Marketing Scheme, .

Copiea of that are available for the press and the members of the opposition. The second statement. Mr, Speaker. in regards to the Gros Morne National Park: When this administration assumed office in January. 1972, one of the major projects we inherited was the proposed development of a larpe national park in the Ronne Bay Area ·of Western Newfoundland. This government felt that the development of Gros Morne was very desirable from the standpoint of the economic benefits to the area.

There was no doubt in our minds that a national park of the mar,nitude of the proposed Gros Mome would have a very large and in most ways a very beneficial impact on the whole West Cout of the Island. At thf' same t:fme, however. we looked on Gros }1orne as presenting a considf"rable numher of problcmA, The largest of these problems was the t~rms and conditions set out in the memorandum of ar,reement aiJned 4025

April 9, 1973 Tape 1108 (afternoon) PK - 2 by the then Provincial Minister of Mines, Agriculture and Resources and the Federal Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs, the honourable Jean Chretien. The most objectionable part of that agreement was the

section which called for the relocation of £ive communities within the park area. We felt very strongly that no person should be forced to move unless that person had a personal desire to move. It was and is our belief that people should be treated with compassion and hU111anity. When any development takes place, whether a national park or otherwise, the social upheaval and interference with the traditional way of life should be kept at a very minimum. We are firm believers in the creed that if people want to change their way of life, government have an obligation to help in that change.

On the other hand, if people are content and happy with their present life styles and in the conmunities where t~ey and their forefathers have lived for hundreds of years, then government have a very serious obligation to protect these people from serious social and economic upheavals. It was on this basis that,in early 1972, ~y colleague, the honourable William Doody,and I resumed negotiations with the federal government in relation to the development of Gros Morne.

It should be made quite clear that although the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs were somewhat flexible in regards to some of the sections of memorandum of a~reement. their response to our proposal that the five communities in question should be allowed to remain was an emphatic ''No." We therefore found ourselves in the almost impossi~le position of wanting to develop the national park and live up to an agreement made between two governments.and at the same time having to go a route that was diametrically opposed to our own stated policy, in order to get the development and ahjde by the agreement.

A p,rPRt 1foR1 of thour,ht was givf'!n to po1u1ihle vAye of overc:ominr. this d fl C'mm11. Wt' had almost resis;ned ourselvc.>" to accf'pt ing 4026 ...

Ai,ril 9. 1973 Tape 1108 (afternoon) Pk - 3 and trying to live with a situation which we considered in certain aspects unacceptable in relation to ·our policies and objectives. In early 1973, the honourable Jean Chretien made certain sts~ement" in the Pom,e of Commons, in answer to questions re~ardin~ Gros Morne, which led us to believe that there was some change of attitude on the part of federal people re~ardinF the relocation of the col!Vllunities of Sally's Cove, Green Point, Bakers Brook, Relldowns Point and Lobster Cove-Woody Cove. We immediately communicated with Mr.

Chretien's office to arrange a meeting and try to (:larify the position of the federal ~overnment. A meetinp; was arranp,ed with the federal minister for March 6. The honourable William Doody and I, accompanied by officals of my department,met, in ()ttawa, with the honourable !~r. Chretien and officials of the National Park Servi~e. Once again we stated our position repardinp, the relocation of these communities. Mr. Chretien agreed to make a reassessment of the problem and advise us within a few weeks. I have now received the anxiously awaitecl response from the federal minister.

It gives me a great deal of pleasure to report that the honourahlE' ~•r. Chretien has ap:reed that the people of the communitil:'s naz,,ed may contine to occupy their properties without let or hindrance of any kind for as lonp, as they choose to remain. I woulcl like to read the relevant sections or some of them from ~r. Chretien's letter. Tt says. '

(1) ThP prP.sent ho11ndari.es of the park will remain suhst ;.mti ;illy as they arP. now clra1m an<l the> comrmn1 tic>s listed ahove wi 11 be within the park boun<la des." Thc-se arc- the:> onc>R that T rc:>ad a few minutc>s aro. "~·!o res:lclc-nt of the communitic>s which lie w:l.thin th<' parJr houndari<'s 1-•ill he unclc>r any compulsion to move. These:> reRidc>nt~ rnav continue to occupy thc:>ir propc:>rtic>s without lc:>t or h1ndc:>rancl:' of any kind for ns lonr ns thl:'y choosP to remain. 4027

April 9 0 1973 Tape 1108 (afternoon) PK - 4 • 1 When a resident wishes o~ his own free will to dispose of his property,Canada stands ready to share with the province the cost of providing fair and just options to the people concerned.at favourable terms. Two such options would be to provide,a house for a house and land for land exchange,in a provincial community offering a greater variety of services or,at the resident's choice, _a fair price for his home if the individual considers this option to be more advantaeeous.v The province undertakes to acquire all such properties offered.

"The federal government recognizes that they are residents of the coll'll\ur..ities and have supported their way of life by use of resources lying outside the communities but within the park and access to such resources such as fishing; pastureland fuel•wood etc. must be continued to be assured. I propose that a loca, committee or committees be established,with representation from the communities, the province and the federal parks administration,to work out the details of such arrangement in a way that will be fair to the communiUes and to afford the maximum possible protection of park values.

"Therefore the traditional inshore fisheries utilized by the residents of these communities and the enclaved communities outside of the park will continue undistruhed as in the past.­ ten points set out;these are four of them. There are Mr. Speaker, this is a rreat breakthroup.h in respect to allowinr, people to p~rsue their chosen way of life as opposed to governments dicatin~ the way they should live, The communities will remain within the park boundaries and will not he enclaves such as Rocky Harbour - Norris Point.

A relocation policy will be made available to them. l~e consider this to be very fair in view of the fact that a number of people indicated,during our recent surveys , a di:>sire to relocate. ThiR is' a very real victory for the people of these communities. As far as thiR p,ovc>rnment art:' conct:'rned,we can now proct:'ed at full 11peed with thC' dt:'vc>lopment of this lnrr,e and very important project, 4028

April 9, 1973 Tape 1108 (afternoon) PK - 5 On b~half of the government of Newfoundland and the people of the area, I want to extend our sincere appreciation to Mr. Chtetien and his colleagues for this major change of policy. I am sure that the people of these communities will breathe a deep sigh of relief that this issue has finally been resolved. A copy of Mr. Chretien's letter to me.dated April 5, is attached to this statement. Thank you. HON. E. M. ROBr.RTS: (LEADF.R OF THE OPPOSITION): Mr. .;peak.er, my colleagues and I wholeheartedly welcome the statement by the minister.

I understand a similar statement is being made in Ottawa or will be made when the House of Cotmnons opens there at 2:30 P.M. or whenever they do open, a simultaneous statement. We welcome it. Sir, because for the people in the communities affected.the communities just immediately to the north of Norris Point, on the West Coast of the province, for them, Sir, it means the lifting of a cloud under which they have lived for the past two or three yeara. I was mofft interested to hear the minister reaffirm that the present administration ran into exactly the stone wall which we ran into as an administration.

I do re~ret that he did not say, I expected that he would give CTedit wheTe cTedit is due to the man who bTought about this chan~e in the stone wall. He had help from the honourable gentleman, he had ~elp the member for HumbeT-St. George­ St. Barhe. Mr. Jack Marshall, but the man who most of all brought this shout I am happy to say was the riewfoundland minister in Ottawa, Mr. Don Jamieson. He broup.ht this chanr,e about. He was the man who persuaded the Government of Canada to chanRe their mind when two premiers, two povernments had failed completely.

I may also say, ~r. ~peaker, I p,et a small amoupt of personal pleasure out of this after the vicious personal attack which was delivered by the Premier in behalf of the then ilJ minister, I Aet a certain satisfaction. I said at the time,I Rtood behind what I said. 4029

April 9. 1973 Tape J108 (afternoon) I did starid behind what I said and in the event I have been pr_oven right. One would naturally get a certain satisfaction from that. The minister will answer to his own conscience for this lying on PK - 6 his sick bed drafting vicious and low personal attacks. Rut by far the most important thing is for the people of this area who no longer are living with this threat now they know that they will be allowed to remain in their homes, little thanks to the present government, little thanks to the past administration,all thanks to Don Jamieson at Ottawa. PETITTONS MR. F.

AYLUARD: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to present a petition which I received from the parish priest at Fox Harbour but it is signed by the residents of Fox Harbour and Ship Harbour. The petition is signed by over 500 individuals• The prayer of the petition is, Mr. Speaker, that steps be taken to upgrade and pave the road between Fox Harbour and Ship Harbour. The mileage in question is only five and a-half miles. The exact distance is seven miles but one and a-half miles werepaved a year or so ago.

The Minister of Highways and his officials are quite familiar with the road in question because last year,after the House of Assembly closed,the minister,in company with the Deputy Minister and his area supervisor.visited the road. Now. Mr. Speaker, this is a very, very poor road. The children of the Community of Ship Harbour are compelled to use this road every day in travelling to school either at Fox Harbour or at Placentia. The prayer of the petition is that immediate steps be taken to upgrade and pave this road.

In addition to the: school bus using the highway also several of the r~sidents of both of these communities work at Long 1-larhour and as a result they are compelled daily to drive over this road. Thr par1Rh prirst RtntPR that this yrar ~,e road haR not hern RR hnc't as in pr 0 irvouR yrnn1 nnil it is in vrry, v•ry p,ood condition hut only la~t ypar, ~r. Sprnker, re~fclpnts have had to stay eithPr in 4030

Ai,dl 9, 1973 Tape 1108 (afternoon) PK - 7 Fox Harbour or in Placentia overnight and aometime  ••high•• two days because this road was impassible. I respectfully submit that it is one of the worst roads in the province. I would lik~ to table this petition and refer it to the department to which it relates and J hope that the Minister of Highways will see fit to give it immediate attention this year. ~m. S. A. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. I rise to support the petition presented by the honourable the member for Placentia East on behalf of hie constituten~s in Fox Harbour and Ship Parbour.

Sir, I am familiar with that area and very familiar with that stretch of road and I apree with the honourable member that the road is in bad shape. It needs to be upgraded and paved. I cannot •~ree with him that it is the worst road in his district because the road down to Cape Shore I think is in much worse shape. However, Sir, be that as it may,I hope that someth~ng is done with that road too this year. I hope that the government will see fit to undertake to make some improvements to that stretch of road this year because it is a terrible inconvenience to the people both in Ship Harhour and Fox Harbour.

Are there any further petitions? ANSWF.RS TO QUF.STIONS HON. _.s_O_T_:r_F.N!JP.IMER: (t-1INISTF.R 0F F.nllCATION) · }'r. Speaker, I would like to table the answer to Question 4031

April 9, 1973 Tape 1109 number 188,asked by the hon. member for St. Barbe North. HON. L.D. BARRY(MINISTER OF MINES AND ENERGY): Mr. Speaker, there were a number of questions raised by the hon. member for Bell Island but I do not know if this is the proper time to answer them - with the leave of the House in any event. One question, "Had there been a discovery of a large deposit of copper in the Seal Lake Area of Labrador?" The department has no knowledp;e of any· discovery of a large deposit or cotmnercial deposit of copper in the Seal Lake Area.

There are hundreds of occurrences of copper in the area, a promising concentration of berkelium minerals and further East many occurrences of uranium which have interesting possibilities. BRINEX and its joint partners have been carrying out an exploration programme and still are in the area,with a view to developing a mineral potential. Another question, "What is the status of Hooker Chemical Corporation's activities "in the St. George's Bay Area and of the salt potential there?" The company has reduced its concession area to fifty square miles of development license in a number of separate blocks.

They had already discovered an apparently larr,e deposit of salt in the Fischells Brook Area and through Diamond Crystal Limited,is currently drilling a hole near St. David's. No further information is available for publication on the current exploration project. Another question, "What is the current rate of mineral exploration activit} in the province?" A total of twelve exploration companies, as listed below, have exploration a~reements with the Newfoundland government and are committed to spend approximately $750,000 on exploration in 1973.

These are Advocate Mines Limited, British Newfoundland Exploration Company, Newfoundland Zinc Mines Limited, American Smelting and Refining Company, Commodore Mining Company Limited, Noranda Exploration Company Limited, Allied Chemical Corporntion, Radex Minerals 4032 JM - 1

April 6, 1973 Tap• 1109 Limited, Han•• Exploration  Limited, Iron Or• Company ot Canada, Kemco Explorations Company Limited, Newfoundland and Labrador Corporation Limited. Other cOfflPanies active in the province in most cases as joint partners are Kerr Edison Gold Mines Limited, Cominco Limited, Serem Limited and Canadian Javelin Limited. In 1972 a total of thirty-eight miner~ permits which entitled a company or individual to explore for minerals were sold.- To date in 1973 twenty-five miners'permits have been sold.

The last question, "What is the current status of the Julien Lake mining lease in Labrador?" This lease was issued to NALCO on November 14, 1960,for a term of ninety-nine years. On November 15, 1960,NALCO assigned the rights to the iron ore in the area to Canadian Javelin Limited. Effective June 11, 1974. Canadian Javelin Limited is required to (and this is the wording of the agreement) proceed with mining operations with due diligence, whatever that means. The iron ore deposit covered by the lease is estimated to contain a reserve of 500 million tons.containing 34.2 per cent iron. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, could I have copies of the answers that the hon. minister has given me? I see the minister has them. MR. BARRY: Certainly I will get copies of them. ORDERS OF THE DAY: MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Manpower and Industrial Relations, in the absence of the Premie~ even though his chair seems to be occupied perhaps the deputy Premier, I think it is either a false alarm or coming events cnsting shadows before them. But as I was saying, Mr.

Speaker, a question,! guess for the actinR Premier, the Minister of Justice, can the minister JM - 2 tell us anything about the strike at Labrador City where I gather there are twenty men on what apparently is an unlawful strike and who have succeeded at least at this time in closing the entire operation. , They also say, Mr. Speaker, by way of ar.kinP, the question,! 4033

April 6, 1973 Tape 1109 understand these twenty men feel they have been unjustly deprived of their jobs because of the QNS and _L take over from IOC of the railway from Labrador City to the Ross Bay Junction. Could the minister tell us what this is all about, please? HON. T.A. HICKMA.~(MINISTER OF JUSTICE): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Manpower and Industrial Relations is back in his seat now and I would prefer that he would answer that question. MR. ROBERTS: I will gladly redirect it to the late arriving minister. The minister should be aware that the House sits at 3:00 P.M. and it is now 3:30 P.M. AN HON.

MEMBER: (Inaudible). MR. ROBERTS: I did not ask anything of the minister responsible for garbage. Could the minister answer the question, please? HON. T.P. HICKEY(MINISTER OF PROVINCIAL AFFAIRS AND ENVIRONMENT): To a point of order, Mr. Speaker, are we going to tolerate this garbage? The greatest polluter of all times is over there. MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. minister would permit the Leader of the Opposition is redirecting a question in a quite orderly fashion to the Minister of Industrial Relations.

Some of his remarks may have been ~ratuitous and out of order,however they did not necessarily provoke the response that they did evoke. HON. W.G. DAWE(MINISTER OF MANPOWER AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS): Mr. Speaker, I was in the House. I was not sitting in my own seat but I was just back here. The situation in Labrador City is that apparently the whole operation is now tied up because of the people who went on strike, about twenty or so railway workers.

I do not know exactly where we stand on this one because it seems that it minht be a question of federal jurisdiction,because this is an interprovincial railway sys~em. MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister. I apolo~ize as I did not see him si~tinr. back there.I.was so awestruck by the glamour of thr r~ntlcman fro~ ttay de V<>rde,T ~uess. Could the minister ind 1 en tf' wh<>n we may hrive snme 11c t ion ? Because really 4034 JM - 3

April 6, 1973 Tape 1109 these twenty men apparently have a just claim.~ut whether or not they have a just claim,the entire operation of twelve or fifteen hundred men is now abut down, MR. DAWE: We are working on this now and aa a matter of fact we hope to be in touch with the company officials later on,aa soon as the question period is over. MR. ROBERTS: A further supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, Have the company to date indicated anything to the minister?

I gather they are respo~sible because,as the minister knows,the railway has been turned over by IOC to the Quebec North Shore and Labrador which after all is only a subsidiary of IOC; they own it,and the men are losing their jobs in the process. MR. DAWE: No, the companyhave not contacted my office ao far. MR. ROBERTS: Well, has the minister contacted them? MR. DAWE: We are working on that now. MR. ROWE_.{!_~ Mr.

Speaker, I would like to address a question to the Minister of Industrial Relations and Manpower, In view of the fact that some 130 workers, members of the international Union of Operating En~ineers,Local 904,rejected the latest wage offer from the Avalon Consolidated School Board,has the minister taken any steps to set up conciliation boards to intervene into the matter so that the schools will not be closed as a result of the strike? MR. DAWE: The conciliation services have not been set up yet but if they are required they certainly will be. MR. ROWE(F.H.): A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.

Can the minister indicate what he means by when they are required? I understand there is some danger that schools may have to be closed if those people go on strike. MR. DAWE: The conciliation officers do not go into action unless they are requested by one party or the other • . MR. NEARY: Mr, Speaker, I would like ~o direct a question to the 4035 JK - 4

April 6, 1973 Tape 1109 Minister of Transportation and Co111nunications whom we are happy to see back in his seat today. Would the minister tell the House if his department or if the government intend to extend the same privilege to the isolated residents of Bell Island as they have extended to Fogo Is : and, Change Island and other parts of Newfoundland that are isolated because of the ice blockade,by providin1 a subsidy for freight and essential goods and supplies to get back and forth? HON. DR. T.C. FARRELL(MINJ:STER OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS): Mr.

Speaker, in answer to the honourable member for Bell Island, it is under advisement and we are watching the situation and at this time we do not have any intention of doing so. MR. E.W. WINSOR: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to, I do not know to which honourable minister but I suppose I will have to talk to the honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Has the minister received notice that the school bus at Change Island had to be taken off the road this morning because of road conditions? HON. H.A. COLLINS(MINISTER OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS AND HOUSING): Mr.

Speaker, that is the first I have heard of it. I should say that the honourable member for Fogo did give me notice of it as we walked into the House but that is the first I heard of it today and I will certainly take a look at it. on motion that the House resolve itself into Committee of Supply, Mr. Speaker left the Chair. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY: 601(01): MR. ROWE(F.B.): Mr.

Chairman, while the honourable the Minister of Finance has spoken on this whole business of students allowances and tuition and the way the minister put his words we should have just said, "A111en 1' and all gone l;lome and the matter should have been finished. Sir, the Minister of Finance put on a very dramatic 4036 JM - 5

April 6, 1973 Tape 1109 JM - 6 display on Friday,· a very colourful spectacle, full of fire, the sort of thing, Sir, that he usually does when he gets boxed into a corner and cannot defend the absence of the administration.

S_ir, I submit that the statistics given to this honourable House by the honourable the Minister of finance were completely lacking in logic as far as the actual overall facts were concerned with respect to the students allowances and their tuition, Sir, the honourable Minister of Finance is going to have to do a bit fancier footwork than he demons-trated in the House on Friday to get out from under the statistics that he stated.

Sir, what the Minister of Finance and the honour .able Minister of Education tried to do on Friday was to take a single example or a couple of sin~le examples and try to use these two examples to disprove some of the statements made by the opposition. Now, Sir, I miP,ht point out that one example or one exception does not necessarily disprove the arguments that the honourable ~entleman put forth nor do those single examples disprove the ar~uments that the honourable members of the opposition put forth.

Now, Sir, the Minister of Finance gave statistics with respect to 900 students whose need was esta~lished at $800.00, 600 students whose needs were established at $1,000, 700 students at $1,200, 700 students at $1,400, 900 students at $1,~00 and 1,100 students at $1,800 need. Now, Sir, that was the eY.ample that the honourable Minister of Finance took to prove his case.

He sup,~ested that under these circumstances 1,100 students who needed $1,800,they would get $600.00 in Canada student loans, they would get a direct provincial grant of $600.00 and they would have to r,et an additional Canada student loan of $600.00, makin~ up a total of $1,800. That was the situation last year for that cate~ory of students. !his year the Minister of Finance in his example stated that the students would have to horrow only 4037

April 6, 1973 Tape 1109 $1,400 as compared with $1,200 the year before and they would get a $400.00 direct provincial grant. He said,therefore,that particular category of students have only to borrow $200.00. Sir, that e~ample is perfectly correct. There is nothing wrong with the example except that the example gives the wrong impression as far as the overall affects of the new policy of this administration on student assistance is concerned and I will show that later in some statistics of my own.

Sir, the honourable -Minister of Education suggested that 1,030 students would only have to pay $100.00 more, 1,700 students would have to pay only $200.00 more, 1,705 students would have to pay $300.00 more, 700 students would have to pay $400.00 more and 280 students are unaffected, 1.rhen we add up these figures, Sir, they differ by some almost 1,500 students from the total list of students that the honourable Minister of Finance gave. But again, Sir, I cannot find anything wrong with these stated statistics.

They are deadly accurate except once again, Sir, that that particular explanation of the situation gives the wrong impression as far as the overall effect on student assistance is concerned as a result of the change of policy of this administration. Now, Sir, the use of the honourable minister's statistics was rather like the case where a principal bragged about the fact that his 100 students attained an average of seventy-five per cent in the final exmns hut when the truth was discovered, Sir, it was found that seventy-five students got one hundred per cent and twenty-five students got zero per cent.

Sir, you can do anything with statistics,and probably the honourable members on the other side of the House may accuse me of 4038 JM - 7

April 'I, 1973 Tape 1110 IB-1 twisting ~he statistics around to suit my own ends. The fact of the matter is, Sir, I will give statistics on the over all situation and what it means to the students just a little later on, in a fev minutes. Sir, before I get into the statistics I would like to say that in spite of the Minister of Education's and the Minister of Finance's statements several things are still facts that have been brought forth by honourable members of the opposition.

Sir, fact number one is this; the Minister of Financ~ did have a love affair with some six thousand students of Memorial University over the past two or three years. Sir, the ~onourable 'Minister of Finance as much as admitted that on Friday afternoon but the minister said that he did not promise them anything. HON. J.C. CROSBIE: (MINISTER OF FINANCE): On a point of order, Mr. Chairman. Wh~n I tried to address myself to this point last Friday afternoon, the Leader of the Opposition objected, said it wns irrelevant to the debate and it was so ruled.

I now point out that this is quite irrelevant to the discussion of these estimates. MR. F. ROWE: Mr. Chairman, shall I go on? Well, Mr. 6hairman - MR. CHAIRMAN: If the honourable member will premit, I will discuss it with the clerk. We will permit the honourable member to proceed with this argument and make a brief point on this matter. However, we will not entertain any long debate on it. MR. F. ROWE: ~fr. Chairman, I will certainly make it brief and to the point.

The fact of the matter is, Sir, that Although the honourable Mfoister of Fin;mce did not promise the students anything, he certainly did not level with them. The fact of the matter is that the "linister of Finance was against the student assistance programme as it e~isted and he neglected to tell the students that three years ago, two years ago or one year ago. I can understand not wanting to be embarrassed hy having this fact revenled. FRct numher two, Sir; the students still have to borrow 4039

April 9, 1973 Tape 1110 fourteen hundred dollars in order to qualify for assistance

whereas before it was six hundred dollars last year, and four hundred dollars the year before that. IB-2 Fact number three, Sir, is that - I am not confused, Mr. Chairman. The honourable member for Bonavista South can rant and roar and squeak all he wants to. The fact of the matter, Sir,is that I know exactly what I am talking about and I would ~ppreciate it very much if the Chair would give me the right to be heard in silence. Al~ HONOURABLE MEMBER: Name the member. MR. F. ROWE: Name the member. Yes, Mr.

Chairman, Fact number three, Sir, is that there is eight hundred and thirty-six thousand dollars less in the vote for student aid this year as compared with last year. Eirht hundred and thirty-six thousand dollars will not be going for student assistance this year and that is a very sizeable.amount. Sir, if we look at the next five years; let us assume we have a young student going in to the university from a middle income family, a low income family or no income family - there are a great many students in that category in this province.

If he were to start programme this year, if that group of students start this pro~ramme this year, over the next five years these students will not get a total of $4,180,000. That is $4,180,000 in assistance will not go to the students who need it at Memorial University,and they would have gotten this h~d this administration not brought in a change of uolicy. That is $4,180,000 that will not be going to the students that would have otherwise gone to them without this change in policy.

Sir, fact number four is that very few students who are not used to living in a credit socie~y - and there are many of those in our smaller communities in this province - become horrified at the thought of going seven thousand dollars in debt for the purpose of an educotion. Sir, I submit that many of these types of students from our more rural areai,, from our low income, no income 4040

April 9 • 1973 Tape 1110 IB-3 and middle incOfflll fam111ea will think twice and may not even ao to univer ity in the next·year, two year • thr•• yaera, four ye~r• or five years because of this thought of having to go up to even thou and d~llars in debt. Sir, I might have left the impression on Friday that there will be a definite drop in enrollment at the university in the coming year. Sir, I actually doubt whether there will be an actual drop in enrollment because there are still lots of well-to-do parents who can afford to send the students to university.

The problem is that those poor parents will not be sending their students to university because of the fact of having to go and borrow seven thousand dollars. Fact number five, Sir - no falsehood about it, no falsehood about it whatsoever. Sir,.we quit~ often get interruptions from the honourable member for St. John's Center. If he would only speak up once and make a rational point in debate instead of having his wisecracks made while another honourable member is speaking in this House. MR. MURPHY: Because it is misleading. MR. F. ROWE: It is not misleading. A ruling, Mr. Chairman. MR.

CHAIR..'1AN: The honourable member will please state his point of order. MR, F. ROWE: The point of order, Sir, is that I have been accused of misleading this House. I believe that is Wlparliamentary. MR, CHAIRMAN: If the honourable member has been accused of misleading the House, it of course is unparliamentary and warrants withdrawal. However, as the Chair did not hear it then - MR. F. ROWE: Well, Mr. Chairman, I heard it and so did all other members in this House hear it. MR. MURPHY: Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is absolutely misleading.

There is no reason why one student should be barred from attending Memorial University. That is all that I am sRyin~. The very fact that he is saying that this one will not be r,oing and someone else 4041

April 9, 1973 Tape 1110 IB-4 will be, that is absolutely misleading. Whether-he is no income, low income or middle income, he will still be able to borrow money the same as anybody else. That is the only point that I am making. MR. F. ROWE: To start off with, Mr. Chairman, I did not say that students will be barred from the university. If the honourable member from St. John's Center had been listening carefully, he would ~ave heard what I said.

MR, CHAIR!-'~: The question as· it appears to me is the question as to the fact of whether or not one honourable member said one thing and another honourable member replied in a certain manner. The statement "That it is misleading" cannot be expanded to mean that that person is being accused of misleading the House which is the statement that the honourable member made, The honourable member has the right to be heard in silence,which was the orginial point of order I believe. That wil: be enforced as the discretion ·. of the Chair warrants.

Sometimes honourable members encourage repartee between sides of the House. In this instance I doubt whether this is the case. However, the honourable member for St. Barbes North has the right to be heard in silence, MR. F. ROWE: If the honourable member for St. John's Center would only get up and speak properly in debate. Mr. Chairman, the other point that I wanted to make is that the students were given no warning whatsoever.

The least that this present administration could have done was probably to establish some sort of a buffer zone so that the students could plan on a term to term basis, give them a term of warning so that they could make their plans. I have made that point once already. Sir, the honourable the MiniRter of Finance referred in his speech to other provinces. He sucr,ested that in Nova Scotia the amount is fourteen hundred dollars that has to be borrowed. In New Brunswick it is fourteen hundred dollars. In Prince Edward Island it is fourteen dollars. In Alberta it is fourteen hundred 4042

April 9 • 1973 Tape 1110 IB-5 dollars. In Ontario it is eight hundred dollars. In Manitoba it is four hundred dollars. In Saskatchewan it is eight hundr.d dollars and 1n Briti1h Columbia it i  five hundred and ninety-nine dollar•. Sir, the point that ha been made in the mini-brief from the university students says that it should be added here that Newfoundland already has the lowest percentage university population on a per capita basis.

The Canadian census shows that there is one point five attendance at memorial compared to two point six per cent for the Maritimes and three point one per cent for all t'.ae rest of Canada. Sir, that is one of the very reasons why we need a special students' assistance programme in this province so that at least we can get to the national average of three point one per cent or at least to the Maritime average of two point six per cent. We are almost half the Maritime average,· Sir, the honourable Minister of Finance's argument does not hold up at all in this case.

By comparing the student assistance programme in this province with that of the other provinces of Canada, it does not hold water when we look at the needs as far as our own students are concerned. AN HONOURABLE ME~BER: How about P,E.I.? MR. F. ROWE: P.E.l., I said that. It is fourteen hundred dollars. So, what about P.E.I.? AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Same as ,1e a!'e. MR. F. ROWE: So, what! Two wrongs do not make a right. Sir, another point is that - let us look at the need of a student going to university. I got these figures relatively quickly so we have to build on a plus or minus factor of probably ten per cent.

Tuition at memorial is two hundred and fifty dollars per term. Sir, an awful lot of students are startin~ to go to university now for three terms of the year because of the fact that employment is very difficult to find. Conse~uently, a single student's tuition at the university now is seven hundred and fifty dollars per year if he attends for three terms,plus twenty-four dollars for the Council 4043

April 9, 1973 Tape 1110 1B-6 of Students'Union fees. So, that is seven hundred and seventy­ four dollars. The residence fees for that same period, three terms, is eleven hundred and sixty-seven dollars,and I understand that is likely to go up. With nothing in there for books, with nothing in there for travel, with nothing in there for clothing, with nothing in there for entertainment and all the sorts of things that young people normally want to do these days, that totals two thousand and seventeen dollars.

Sir, I would suggest that a student going to university today needs close to four or five thousand dollars just to live like a human being. So, by talking about a need of eighteen hundred dollars as is set by the Canada Student Loan Programme, this is absolutely ridiculous. Most students needs are far in excess of the maximum amount that can be gained through the Canada Student Loan, Look, I am getting sick and tired of hearinJ that crowd over there now that they have the responsibility of government starting to blame everything on the federal government.

Before they took over everything was the fault of the Provincial Government. We saw the honourable Minister of Finance, we saw another crew of ministers go up just after they were elected,with their movie cameras. We saw them going up there and meeting with federal ministers of finance, federal ministers of this,and saying what a great crowd this was. MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member - MR. F. ROWE: I was provoked, Sir. MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member may or may not have been provoked. He has the right to raise a point of order.

However, provocation does not allow the honourable member to carry on with matters that are irrelevant to the debate. MR. F. ROWE: t~ell, Mr. Chairman, I would like to give notice now that every time some yak over there _opens his mouth when I am talking, that will serve as a point of order, AN HONOURABLE MEMIIER: Do you want to yield? MR. F. ROWt: No, of course I do not want to yield. You will have lots 4044

April 9, 1973 Tapa 1110 IB-7 of opportunity to get up and speak. Is the honourable member for Bonavista South suggesting that these are not facts that I just gave there then, the amount of tuition, the amount of residence fees? AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. F. ROWE: What are not factsi' Mr. Chairman, the truth hurts. The fact of the matter that I was trying to make, Sir, is that it is not unlikely that four or five thousand dollars is a more realistic figure for the cost of spending one year 1n university.

Probably some of the students in the galleries today would think that that is a minumum amount, some may think it is a bit much but as an average I would suggest that it cost in the vacinity of four or five thousand dollars for a student to go to university for one year. So, the real need, Sir, is in that order of magnitude particularly whe~ we look at low, middle and no income families. Sir, I would like to relate to some of the statistics that I dreamed up while I was painting the bathroom over the weekend.

Sir, this is a direct rebuttal to the statistics as put forth by the honourable Minister of Finance and the honourable Minister of Education. I would su~~est, Sir, that these statistics were quite misleading as far as the over all facts were concerned with respect to what this change of policy does to the students as far as assistance is concerned. Now, Sir, I am going to use the same figures that the honourable Minister of Finance and the honourable Minister of Education used with respect to the amount needed by students and the numbers of students involved.

Sir, the figures that the two ministers used is that they categorize students by the amount needed in the area of eight hundred dollars, one thousand dollars, twelve hundred dollars, fourteen hundred dollars, sixteen hundred dollars and eir,hteen hundred dollars. Sir, accorclinr, to tl,eir fiRures there were nine hundred students who needed eir,ht hundred, six hundred students who needed one thousand, seven hundred students who needec;i twelve hundrccl, seven hundred who needed fourteen hundred, 4045

April 9, 1973 Tape lllO IB-8 nine hundred who needed sixteen hundred and eleven hundred who needed eighteen hundred dollars. Now, Sir, if we look at the amount of the grant and the amount of the Canada Student Loan that these students would get in 1971-1972, under the previous Liberal administration, we would see this; in the first category of students, those needing eight hundred dollars, these nine hundred students would have to borrow six hundred dollars and they would get a provincial grant of two hundred dollars·.

In the first year of the Progressive Conservative Administration they would have a grant of one hundred dollars and they would have to borrow seven hundred dollars. In the second year of the Progressive Conservative Administration they get absolutely nothing as a grant and they have to borrow eight hundred dollars. Sir, the difference between last year and this year is that the grant is one hundred dollars less and the amount of the Canada Student Loan is one hundred dollars more for a total loss to the student between last year and this year of two hundred dollars.

If we look at the difference, Sir, between - MR. OTTENHEIMER: Inaudible, MR, F. ROWE: Yes, I will give you a copy. MR. OTTENUEIMER: When the honourable member said a total loss of two hundred dollars, I did not - MR. F. ROWE: Yes. Well, Mr. Chairman, if - I am trying to use an analogy here - if you take away what you would normally get as a grant, that is certainly a loss,and if you have to borrow the same amount, that is certainly ·a loss. So you add the two of them together and you have your loss. Oh, that is not very sick, Mr. Chairman. It is not sickening at all.

I would like for the honourable member for Bonavista South to get up and try to explain that one away to the students. If the honourable member for Bonavista South had to borrow an additional hundred dollars and had a hundred dollars taken away from him, he would not call it a losR? He has to pay hack the hun<Ired dollars. That is a loss .lf you have to pay it bAck, ~ t is not being granted to you. 4046

April 9, 1973, Tape 1111, Pa~e 1 -- apb that i  a loss if .you have to pay it back. 1t i  not being granted to you, so it is a loss. AR HON. MD'BF.R: MR. F.B.ROWE: so foolish. Want to yield? No I do not want to yield, ~r. Chairman. Do not be AN HON. ~ER: (Inaudible) MR. F.B.ROWE: If you would just clam up for a few minutes, I might be able to get on with some logic here. AN HON. ~ER: It is mislea1inp;. fo'P.. F.B.ROWE: ~isrepresentation again, Hr. Chairman, misleading. AN HON. MB·'BER: It is misleadinp;. !'.fR. F.B.ROWF.~ Well you are goinp; to have to listen to a heck of a lot more of it.

AN HON. 1-<El-~F.R..:_ Be factual. ~- CHAIR.1"AN: Order please! The honourable member for St. Barbe North has the right to be heard in silence. MR. F.B.ROWE: Mr. Chairman, if you look at the situation since this administration took over as compared to what was going on before, you will see that the students grant, the 900 hundred students, their grant is less by two hundred dollars and the amount that they had to borrow from the Canada Student Loan in excess of what they had to borrow under the previous Liberal Administration is two hundred dollars, which meana a four hundred dollar loss to the students. ~r.

Chairman, if you look at the 600 students who need $1,000, the difference between last year and this year is this; the grant is less by two hundred dollars and the amount that they have to borrow over and ahove.throup,h the Canada Student Loan, is two hundred dollars for a total loss of four hundred dollars. ~- H0._~. fl'E?~_!~_:_ (Inaudible) !'!!l..:....Y._~~?OWF~=- ~r. Chairman, when I ~et down to the sixth category, it may sink i!1. If you look at the situation arRin, the difference since thP 'Pror.ressive Conservatives took over, the amount that these 4.047

April 9, 1973, Tape 1111, Page 2 -- apb 600 students have.to borrow,over and above what they had to borrow under the Liberal Administration, is three hundred dollars and the amount of the grant is less by three hundred dollars, which means a loss of a total of six hundred dollars to the students. Mr. Chainnan, for the edification of the Minister of Education, what I am obviously doing here is suggestin~ that if you have to borrow more you are out by that amount because you have to pay it back some time along the line.

If the direct provincial grant to the student is less by a certain number of units the loss is these number of units. Add them together, a positive and a negative number gives you a magnitude here of six hundred dollars. Now, Mr. Chairman, there were 700 students who needed twelve hundred dollars. The difference between this year and last year is this; the grant to them is less by three hundred dollars, the amount of the Canada Student Loan that they have to burrow is more by three hundred dollars, the loss to the student is therefore six hundred dollars. If you look, t-'r.

Chairman, at the difference since the Progressive Conservatives took over, the grant is less by four hundred dollars, the amount of the Canada Student Loan is more by four hundred dollars for a net loss to the individual student of eight hundred dollars. For the next category of students; since last year they have to borrow four hundred dollars ~ore, the grant is less by four hundred dollars, they are out by eight hundred dollars.

If you look at the difference since this administraiton took over, it is five hundred dollars more that has to be borrowed and five hundred less in the ~rant for a total loss of one thousand dollars to the student in any one year. Now, Sir, the significant point that I want to make is not just the difference between this year and last year but the difference since this Pr?~ressive Conservative, •·Tory" administration took over. The difference for seven hundred students who need fourteen hundred dollars is th~t they have to borrow five hundred dollars more and the 4048 ·

April 9, 1973, TApe 1111, PsRe 3 -- apb 1rant 1• dnwn by tiva hundred d~ll•r• tor• tnt•l lo•• to thAt atudent of one thouaand dollars in any one year since thi• group took over. For 900 f;tudents," Sir, who need sixteen hundred dollars, since last year they have to borrow three hundred dollars more, their grant is less by three hundred dollars for a total loss of six hundred dollars.

Since they took over they have to borrow four hundred dollars more, the grant is down by four hundred dollars for a total loss of eight hundred dollars and for 1~800 students; they have to borrow two hundred dollars more, the ~rant is less by two hundred dollars for a total loss of four hundred since last year. Since the Progressive Conservatives took over, three hundred dollars less in ~rants, three hundred dollars more to be borrowed for a net loss of six hundred dollars.

Now, Sir, in other words, what I am saying here is this, 900 students, since the Progressive Conservatives took over ha.veto borrow two hundred dollars more, 600 have to borrow three hundred dollars more, 700 have to borrow four hundred dollars more 700 have to borrow five hundred dollars more, 900 have to borrow four hundred dollars more and 1,100 have to borrow three hundred dollars more.

Now only that, but for the first goo hundred students the r.rimt is two hundred dollars less, for 600 students the grant is three hundred dollArs less, for 700 students the ~rant is four hundred dollars less. for 700 students the ~rant is five hundred dollars less, for 000 students the r.rant is four hundred dollars less and for 1,100 students the grant is three hundred dollars less for a total loss to the students, ~00 students, a total loss of four hundred dollars, for 600 students a total loss of six hundred dollars, for 700 students a total loss of eipht hundred dollars, for 700 students a total loss of one thousand dollars, for 900 students a loss of eirht hundred dollars, for 1,100 students a total loss of six hundred dollars.

I did not use nny rhetoric, I did not use any colourful lanruAre. I did not use all kinds of similes, m~taphors, fancy talk And footwork l ikr thr honourahlE' "'infster of FfnAnce. T ctm sim!llY usinr fnct, fir.urf's ;:in,1 st.itfstics to show the> true story since this 4049

April 9, 1973, Tape 1111, Page 4 - apb administration took over,and that is the total loss to the students. Now, Sir, I would lik~ to give another table that is even more devastating as far as the effect of this new student assistance policy on the student is concerned. The following information is based on a five-year degree programme. What we have to remember now is that an increasing number of our students are coming into the university and they are staying there for the full­ time in order to get their degrees. Let us face the facts, Sir, a university undergraduate degree now is not very much these days.

As a matter of fact, there are lots of university undergraduates going around unemployed and there are too many of them making very low salaries. The fact of the matter is, Sir, since the employment opport~nities are relatively small, an increasing number of students are going around, going to uni~ersity, staying in university for the full four or five years. I might point out that many degrees now, particularly in the field of education, are five-year degrees, conjoint degrees.

Commerce degrees and what other degrees? (I cannot very well converse with the galleries) ~ut there are a number of professional degress that are five-year degree programmes instead of four-year degree programmes as you would have for Bachelor of History Degrees or somethinr, like that, or Bachelor of Arts,in History. Sir, the figures I am about to give now are based on what a student loses over the five year period as a result of this retrogressive step by the Pror,ressive Conservative Admiristration.

Again, Sir, I am basing it on the 900, 600, 700, 700, 900 and 1,100 students as used as an example by the honourable ~inister of Finance. The total amount of the students'need for that five years,for 900 hundred students is four thousand dollars, for 600 students it is five thousand dollars, for 700 students it is six thousand dollars, for 700 students it is seven thousand dollars, for 900 students it is eight thousand dollars and for 1,100 students 1t is nine thousand dollars. 4050

April 9, 1973, Tape 1111, Page 5 -- apb Since the Progressive Conservatives took over and if their policy is maintained (even if it does not get worse and I would assume that next year we will hear that they will have to borrow the full eighteen hundred dollars) but if they continue with the very same policy as they stated there in the Budget Speech, the amount of provincial assistance to students would decrease by this amount.

For 900 students the amount of the direct grant, assistance to the students would decrease by a full one thousand dollars, for 60C students the amount would decrease by fifteen hundred dollars, for seven hundred students the amount of assistance would decrease by two thousand dollars, for 700 students twenty-five hundred dollars, for 900 students two thousand dollars and for 1,100 students fifteen hundred dollars.

The amount that the students had to borrow over and above what they had to borrow last year is one thousand dollars for 900 students, fifteen hundred dollars for F.00 students, two thousand dollars for 700 students, twenty-five hundred dollars for 700 students, two thousand dollars for 900 students and fifteen hundre·d dollars for 1,100 students.

In other words, what we are sayin~ is this: that the total loss over the five years for students ~oin~ to the university because of this new ~olicy stated by the Pror,ressive Conservatives works out as follows; for 900 students the total loss is two thousand dollars, for 600 students the total loss is three thousand dollars, for 700 students the total ~oss is four thousand dollars, for 700 students the total loss is five thousand dollars, for 900 students the total loss is four thousand dollars and for 1,100 students the total loss is three thousand dollars. This is obvious to anybody who looks at it.

This year the total amount of assistance that is not r,oinp, to the university students that would normally be p,oinr, to them is $83~,000. nver five years that works out to $4,100,000. In other words,through the new 4051

April 9, 1973, Tape 1111, Page 6 - apb stated policy of the Progressive Conservative Administration, they are saying to the students of Memorial, needy students. Now, Sir, let me point out for one moment that there are hundreds of students at Memorial who I could not give a tinker's you know what for. They have plenty of money,some students at ~etnorial ••• f-'R. PECKFORD: Some work and some are tryin~ to work when they are not ~oing to university. They do not go for the twelve months of the year, they work and accumulate a few dollars ••• ¥R.

F .B.ROWE: T'.,at is perfectly correct. that is correct. that is right. Are you telling the Memorial students how they should go to university, study for a year, work for a year, study for a year, work for a year? Did you ever hear of continuity,of continuillj!; education? MR. PECKFORD: Hold on now, you misinterpreted what I said, they do not go to university ••• MR. CHAi!U-fAN: Order please! The honourable member for St. Barbe North has the right to be heard in silence. 4052

April 9, 1973 Tape no. 1112 Page 1 - MR.W Ml. CHAIRMAN: Th• only time that an honourable mnibar may addr••• thia Houae and be in order 1 if the honourable •mb•r baa the floor, and when another honourable member haa the floor, he may not address the House -unless that honourable member yields the floor to him. In this case the hon. member for St. Barbe North has the floor. Be had given no indication that he wished to yield it. The hon. member for St. Barbe North. MR. ROWE (F.B.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The point that I am trying to make, Mr. Chairman, is th~t: (1).

There haa been a dramatic decreasr. in the amou~t of the direct provincial grant that goes to a student. Thia business of taking an inaolated case and saying to the student that the worst a student has to do is to borrow $400 is absolutely a ridiculous argument.

The fact of the matter 1a that we see here that over a five-year programme the amount of the direct assistance to the student comes to $1,000, $1,500,$2,000, $2,500, $2,000 and $1,500 and the amount in addition that he baa to borrow is $1,000, $1,500, $2,000, $2,500, $2,000 and $1,500 for a total loss to the students of $2,000, $3,000, $4,000, $5,000, $4,000 and $3,000 over a five year degree prograunne period. Sir, that is a significant amount. It is a very significant amount. You cannot disprove facts. The simple fact of the matter is that the student-aid programme is down by $836,000 this year.

The $836,000 that the students would normally be getting they will not get. Over the next five years, $4,100,000 that would normally go to the students of this province, the needy students of this province, is not going to them. As I was saying before the member for Green Bay interrupted •, I am not the least bit concerned about a certain fraction of our university students. They can well afford to go to university. They can be sent off to private schools for that matter, but the~e is a large segment of our university students who come from mid, low and no income families, who have to travel down from St.

Barbe North, and from Labrador South,who need this money. When you add to that the 4053

April 9, 1973 Tape no. 1112 Page 2 actual need of students, we cannot categorize student  baaed on a need of what the hon. Minister of Finance auggeated. The hon. Minister of Finance and the hon. Minister of Education were saying that we have six categorie  of students here, thoae who· need $800 1 $1,000, $1 1 2001 $1,400, $1,600 and $1,800. Sir, the need of students going to University, whether their parents are paying for it or not, is more like $3,000, $4,000 or $5,000. I will give the c,:>1amittee figures to substantiate that. The tuition fees and the residence fees alone add up to over $2,000.

AN HON.MEMBER: Everybody lives in residences? MR. ROWE (F,N: Mr. Chairman, not everybody lives in residences. Let us not be ridiculous. I might suggest that they do live under a roof and they do not get it for nothing. Some of the coats of boarding houses in this town and apartments may even be in excess of what they pay in residence fees. I know that for a fact. When you add all that together, plus the fact that most students that I have seen have clothes on, at least where I , have met them,and they have to buy clothes. They have to buy food.

They would like to go through the year with a little bit of entertainment. They have to travel back and forth from their homes. They want to go to the odd movie. They want to live like a decent human being in this province. The need is more like $4,500. Sir, I submit that the statistics that the hon. Minister of Finance and the hon. Minister of Education gave the other day - the statistics, since they were isolated examples, were extremely misleading as far as the overall effect of this change of policy of this present administration has on the students of this province.

Sir, I would appeal to the Minister of Education and the Minister of Finance to reconsider bringing in this change of policy for next September, that they put it off for a term. If they are not going to change their waya, would the Miniater of Education and the Minster or Finance conidar puttt.lnr. it off at la11t until the econd liemeter 4054

April 9, 1973 Tape no. 1112 Pa1e 3 next year •o th• tudenta would have tiM to have OM planning and o that they do not go waltzing in there iD September and find out that they have• great huge .new bill. Obviously, Sir, I would rec011111end that they reinstate the whole programme as it was. Heaven only knows that the previous administration tried obviously to do the impossible. They tried to provide free tuition. They tried to provide salaries to •tudents. Sir, it wu an honest effort an the part of the previous administration. They knew they were doing the right thing.

I think everybody in the province realized that they were trying to do the right thing, the desirable thing, but this province honestly could not afford it. They had to introduce a means' teat, however regrettable this is. Actually I am just about· finished and so I can yield the floor and allow the hon. Minister of Finance to speak. I am asking the administration questions. It is the opposition's turn to ask questions. The hon. Minister of Finance knows full well that under our democratic system(he has had lots of experience with it} that questions normally come from the opposition, not from the government.

The honourable minister is responsible for policy. He is responsible for administration. Any questions in this honourable Houe should come from the opposition. HR. CROSBIE: I will ask him my question anyway because the honourable gentleman - I wonder will the honourable gentleman be able to tell us why the Government of Canada have a Canada St~dent Loan Programme rather than a Canada Student Grant Programme? Obviously the Government · of Canada have far more financial resources than any of the provinces yet it has a university student loan programme, not a grant programme.

Does the honourable gentleman know why or is the honourable gentleman making any efforts? The Government at Ottawa are eomposed of the same party as the honourable gentleman belongs to. Can the honourable gentleman advise whether any action has been taken to have their policy changed? 4055

April 9, 1973 Tape no. 1112 Page 4 MR. ROWE (F.B.): Mr. Chairman, whenever the honourable - MR. CROSBIE: Could you explain that? Why do they have a loan programme? MR. ROWE (F.B.): Mr, Chairman, whenever the hon. Minister of Finance gets boxed in, when he cannot handle the situation, he turns like a vicious animal on the federal govermnent. We have seen this time and time again. He drags a red whale across the floor of the House of Assembly, Sir, every single time he gets boxed in, he gets trapped. The statistics have him proven wrong again. He turns on the federal government. In ~ite of that the hon.

John Turner in Ottawa lashes out $24 million to him there a few weeks ago, lashes out a few more million for the DREE PrograUDDe,for education in this province. Sir, the hon, Minister of Finance would do better to stop attacking the federal government because one of those days he is likely to do Newfoundland a horrible disservice. He will have Ottawa so turned off that they will probably turn off the financial taps to Newfoundland altogether. MR. CROSBIE: Mr.

Chairman, I did not recognize that I just made a savage attack on the Government of Canada by asking this simple question in such a reasonable tone as I asked it. I did not think I was frothing at the mouth or delivering a vicious attack but obviously the honourable gentleman does not know the answer or does not want to answer or there is no answer. Now I will end my comments for the afternoon, Mr.

Chairman, beca~~e our very capable Minister of Education will stun the House in a moment with a few other words on this, with a poem just composed over here: "We did not come to hear Fred's words in hopes to be more wise. But just in case we go to hell, it will be no surprise," MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Chairman, - MR. CHAIRMAN: I would like to direct a word to the hon. member for Bonavista North.Hhen he speaks in this Chamber,it should be from his own place, 4056

April 9,1973 tape no .1112 Paae 5 KR. OtTENHEIMER: Mr. Chail'll!4n, there are a couple of utter  that I would like to refer to with reference to the statistics and the facts and then some other matters which were brought up in the debate on this heading. I mentioned in the House before ( I think it is clear but I will say it again just in case it is not. I do this. I repeat this although I do not suppose I would be the only gentleman in the House guilty of repetition if I were to repeat something that I aid a couple of days ago. I hope not anyway.

I would not want to be the only honourable gentleman guilty of repetition . ) with reference to a terms' warning or students being able to plan ahead: It is clear,I would trust,that for those students starting the Kay semester,who are continuing on after the January semester and who applied for the student assistance some time &RO (they usually apply two terms at a time) around 450 students, this change does not affect them.

It will affect students starting off new in the May aemester, who have been out a year or out a semester or out for some time or coming in for the first time but it does not affect approximately 450 who have applied and have been accepted on the previous system. There is one other matter and it is a minor matter. It was inadvertent on the honourable gentleman's part when he gave the tuition figures as seventy hundred and fifty, three times the two hundred and fifty and residence for that period eleven hundred and sixty-three, adding up to nineteen hundred and ten o~ rounding it off to two thousand.

I just want to point out to honourable gentlemen that the $1,800, is based on a two semester year. It is really a third factor there of a third. There is another matter too on which I would like to say a few words. I has been mentioned frequently during the debate that a number of people in this province, especially in rural areas, perhaps, 4057

April 9, 1973 'Tape no. 1112 . Page 6 have ( I guess it is part of the culture of the province and of.the people and it is u a result of hj.story) a fear or ao appreheoaioo of borrowing. I think that that is probably true. I think that it is perhaps much less true of the generation we are speaking of than it is for our generation or our fathers' generation.

I think the people in the eighteen, nineteen, twenty, twenty-one, twenty-two year bracket, even in the rural areas or in any part of Newfoundland, I think we can perhaps tend to exaggerate that fear of borrowing because in practically every community in Newfoundland there is an openness to the general cultural patterns of North America, of the Mainland of North America and of Canada in general. I do not think that there is this great fear of borr9Wing on the part of people of that generation that some of us might think.

If there is (I hope that I am not or I do not think I am going contrary to any accepted economic theory here) then I see nothing wrong with stating that to borrow to complete one's education is as fine a use of money and of borrowing and of one's credit as one can find. I do not think that anybody could say that a government would be irresponsible to make that statement and I will repeat it.

All the enlightened educators and I believe economists would agree that for any young person to indebt himself,within fixed limits, obviously, or for any young person to put himself in debt under an enlightened loan programme, such as the Canada Student Loan Plan is, is a very good use of his credit rating and that there is no better use perhaps, certainly at that age, and that there is nothing wrong and much to be lauded in any young person's decision to indebt themselves for the purpose of getting an education. It is an investment in time and a worth-while thing to do.

I make a point of that because on a number of occasions this big fear of going into debt was mentioned. I do not think that that is the case of the generation we are speaking of. I think it is the case 4058

April 9, 1973 Tap• No. 1113 N'M - 1 "'ll,__Q__TTE.~F.t'ffiR: of ~heir fathe~s and forefathers, I do not think it is of a generation we-are speaking of but in case there is any lingering, apprehension in that respect, I would repeat again that it would be a very wise course for any young person to borrow through an enlightened programme such as the Canada Student Loan Plan,(I am not talking about you know finance houses} through the Canada Student Loan Plan in order to get an education, that is an enlightened and intelliRent thing to do which is done throughout North America and that they should in fact do it.

A few other remarks on this - I want to point out as well, I think it is clear that the total amount to which a student will have access next year does not in fact change. What changes is the proportion of grant and loan. Of course, as the honourable gentleman said, one can do a lot of things with figures and statistics and he suggested that my colleague and I did some, not trickery but drew some conclusions that perhaps he did not agree with. I think the honourable gentleman would perhaps agree that maybe as well his use of statistics and fi~ures obviously is open to different

interpretations as well. That is fair enough. tverybody will endeavour to use given figures to bolster their own arguments. That ia fair enough. This is essentially the same list I gave the other day but the total will add up to 140 students more, It Js complete; the other one was done quickly. What I disa~ree with, and it is a question of

interpretation, I am not going to arp.ue it because it is a quP.stion of

interpretation, one can do what one wishes with these figures, but take the fact that in 1972-1973,900 students had a need of $800, borrowed $700 and iot ~100 in r,rant. Under the new system, they will borrow $800. They have to borrow $100 more or/and there is $100 less in grant but personally I cannot (059

April 9, 1973 Tape No. 1113 NM - 2 MR. OTTENHEIMER: go along with the mathematics that that makes a $200 difference, That is $100 difference. He has to borrow $100 more from the Canada Student Loan Plan. AN HON. MEMBER: Re has to pay it back. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Yes but it is the same $100, It does not become an additional $100, Now that $100 that he had to borrow more, that is $100 he gets less from the grant,granted, but it is still only $100. There is no way - I know the honourable gentleman when he was at the faculty of the university was not in the mathematics department. MR. F. ROWE: That is right. MR.

OTTENHEIMER: Well I do not know what the honourable gentleman did with him I am sure but anyway, no doubt there would be some statistical theories. I am not an economist nora statistician at all, and there would probably be things that one could do with that, but just looking at it as a nonmathematician and as the honourable gentleman from Twillingate, he is a businessman, I think he would agree that that $100, that is an extra $100 he has to borrow. You have to borrow it because you get $100 less from the grant but it is still $100.

I do not think there is any way - well there would be ways - but I do not think that it is particularly informative nor enlightening to interpret that $100 as if it were $200.· That is all I have to say because obviously one can do all kinds of things with it. I just want to go down,just for the record,to have it straight without further comment on it, how the situation would change from last year to next year.

Last year 900 students borrowed .$700,under the new system they would have to borrow $800, Now all these figures I gave per year, per two semester year, Las '; year 600 students borrowed $ROO, this yenr thc-y will borrow $1,000, I.nst year 700 students, 4060

April 9, 1973 Tap• No. 1113 NM - 3 HR. OTTENHEIMER: and th••• are .a;1 aingl• student• now, 700 tudent  borrowed $900, next yeu $1,200; '$300 more. Obviously in a four year course that would be four times that. in a five year course it·would be five times it. Last year 700 students borrowed $1,000, under the new system they will have to borrow $1,400 for that year, an increase of $400. Last year 500 sin~le students borrowed $1,200,under the new system they will have to borrow $1,400, a $200 increase.

Last year 700 single students borrowed $1,300 and under the new plan they will have to borro~ $1,400 so some will have to borrow $100. $200, $300 or $400 more. But there is no case in which any student will have to borrow more than $400 more for one year in four years or five years he would borrow four or five times that. Married students - last year 150 married students had to borrow $700,under the new regulations they will have to borrow $800.

Last year 60 students had to borrow $900, under the new regulations they will have to borrow $1,200 - an increase of $300, Last year 45 married students had to borrow.under the Canada Student Loan Plan,$1.100 and this year they will have to borrow $1,400 - an increase of $300. Last year 80 married students had to borrow $1,300, under the new regulations it will be $1,400. Last year 280 students had to borrow $1,400 and there will be no change, they will still have to borrow $1,400. I just say that for the record, ~ -~ICl.(}IAN: When does this apply? St~rting September,is it? MR. OTTDnlEIMER: Right. MR.

H_~C~N: It does not apply for the summer semester. MR. OTTENHF.I!-IER: Not for those who were in in January. Now I planned as well to make a few comments on some of the other matters that were brouRht up during discussion on this vote that we are on. The honourable gentleman, member for St, Barbe North, mentioned the possiblity of two depnrtments of Education 4061

April 9, 1973 Tape No. 1113 NM - 4 MR. OTTENHEIMER: or two departments concerned with h11111an resource development. Be was obviously thinking of provinces such as Alberta, Ontario the west in general. I believe Quebec as well ·have this, the distinction often between post-secondary and other. There is certainly much to be said for that. I would not doubt that in time it will come to Newfoundland. It may come soon. I do not think it would be wise now.

For a number of reasons I think what we need to do now is to co-ordinate and iutegrate our services, our human resource development services, and I think that now that can best be done under one department •• As the committee is aware,we are planning to appoint two assistant deputy ministers and that division will be made within the department. The honourable gentleman also referred to the church-state partnership and the fact that in the area of certification there is certainly a need for modernization.

I agree there and all I can say is that this 1s a matter which I have been discussing with the authorities and the other partners and we are continuing to meet on that and I certainly hope that there will be agreement on a solution so that certain anachronism perhaps would no longer exist.

The honourable gentleman mentioned as wel~ and he was referring to the statement I made a few days ago on the pupil-teacher, well in the area of pupil-teacher ratio, the year's grace which will be offered to school boards, This obviously tied in with AOVernment's committment for an improved pupil-teacher ratio next year, the year's grace which will be tied in 0 Re~ulations will be amended to give a year's r,race. This is bearinr. in mind schools where there is a decrease associatrd with the·decreased birth rate.

I believe, if ! understood th(' IJUC>stion rir.ht, it w:1s as to how would this affect a hypothetical, T bcl ir.ve ,situat iort whe>rc perhaps a school 4062

April 9, 1973 Tape No. 1113 NM - S MR,_O!.TENHEIMER: board had thre• or four,onP or two room chool  and these were cloaed out and a new achool will b• there in its place. The answer ia,it would not really tfect that because that new school would be staffed under the allocation for that one school rather thsn carrying over the allocation for the three or four it was there to replace. The purpose of the year's grace is to provide for what could have happened if we had not provided that in a strict

interpretation of the regulation where you get the slight natural decreases due not to a whole reorgranization of the education system in an area .but due to this birth rate decline. With reference to comments on two ~reas here - the le~islation on collective bargaining that has been drafted. I think the legal officers of the Crown are now going over it with a fine tooth comb and is being done in close consultation with the NTA. MR._F_=.._!OWE: Does the NTA have to ratify that before it is drafted? ~. OTTEN!lEIM'F.~: The NTA negotiators.

Before it,for example, comes to the legislature., the negotiators of the ?:TA would meet with the government,and they would look at it together again. With respect to the bargaining in the area of collective ar,reement salaries, meetinr,s are continuinp,. The honourable p,entleman did say some words as well on school tax authorities, I think there that there was a difference of opinion on both sides of the Eouse, that is fair enounh. If we all ap,reed with one another, either we would all be over thP.re or all honourable gentleman wollld be over here.

I have, durinJ!, the past three months, met on two occasions with the executive of Provincial Association of School Tax Author1tfC's an,! the dcpartmrnt cloes b:tv<' th<'ir brfrf wher<' thry "1063

April 9, 1973 Tape No. 1113 NM - 6 recommend,among othe~ things, certain chanies in the legislation. We have quite an internal committee of the Secretary of Treasury Board, the Deputy Minister of Education, Mr. Newman Kelland,who is an assistant superintendent·to the Avalon Integrated School Board,and one other person whose name slips me at the moment, but a forth person,looking at those recommendations with a view to suggesting amendments to the legislation where necessary.

There are, as honourable members probably know, two areas where we expect to get official requests for school tax authorities -we have not got them yet. If we get them and if in fact they are accepted, that will mean that approximatley eighty per cent, populationwise of the pr~vince will be within school tax areas.

We feel,at this point·in time, it is important to have local involvement and we think as well that with regional authorities, with more assistance from government - I think we should make more assistance available to them in terms of expertise in accounting and financial expertise but that on a rep,ional basis there is a greater knowledge and awareness and sympathy toward people's needs in various areas.

I think there were some other matters which perhaps in the headings as we go through would be more appropriate to get into.but there was one matter brought up by the member for Bell Island where strictly speaking there would be perhaps no heading,so I will mention that,and they were his remarks on drug and alcohol education. Actually the vote for the Drug and Alcohol Foundation comes in the headinr. of the Department of Rehabilitation and R1!cre11tion. Therr. is a vote there. Inquiries that we r.et - obviously in tltr.

Department of Education wa do Aet enqu:lries, arc referred to henlth erlucatlon ., wlthin the 4064

April 9, 1973 Tape No. 1113 ~. OTTE!'illEI'!F.R: Department ot Health, and alo to th• Alcohol and Drug Addiction Foundation. NM - 7 I should point out that within the approved curriculum of the Department of Education, the health books for grade seven and eight contain special chapters with up-to-date information on alcohol, drug and tobacco addicition, their effects on people. The science books for grade Vll to• Xl also deal with that and the biology text for grades X .ind Xl also again have information on alcohol, tobacco and drug addiction.

I would think as well, I am quite sure that an important part of education with respect to addiction in this area of course would come under the religious education programmes of the various school boards, MR. SPF.AKER: The honourable member for St. Barbe North. - - ---- MR. F. ROWE: Mr.

Chairman, the Minister of Education suggested that we might have been manipulating statistics around a bit and he accepted his responsibility for his part of it as well, but I would just like to make one point with respect to this column that I drew up about the total loss to the students in any one year of $400, $600, $800, $1,000, $800 and $600 according to the various categories and over the five year programme it amounts to a ~otal loss $2,000, $3,000, $4,000, $5,000 4065

April 9, 1973 Tape 1114 (afternoon) PK - 1 Now let me just ask the honourable Minister of Education- thia question because I do not want this to become confused at all. The honourable the Minister of Fducation and all other honourable ministers are now makin~ a salary of $11,000 outside of their $10,000 sessional fee, but a minister is making $11,000, Correct.

Now supposing we look at that as a grant and supposing we say, the government says this year;&:irry, boys no ministerial pay this year,• He loses his $11,000 salary and he has therefore, to maintain his stt•ndard of living,to go to the bank and borrow $11,000, Is that minister not $22,000 worse off? AN HON, MF.1-IBER: Inaudible. MR. ROWE, F. B. Oh, no, no. Not $22,000. bank and I do not feel that is to my.credit. Well I owe money at the That is the only point that I am making he~e. 1f you have to borrow money, you have to pay it back in some stage of the game.

That is the only point that we made, The honourable minister will he $22,000 worse off, next year he will have to get a double amount of salary to be even. If he got the same salary reinstated next year, he would still be ~11,000 worse off, even if he r,ot the aame one reinstated. You would have to make twice as much in order to get back on an even par. AN HON, 'lff.MBER: Inaudible. MR. ROWE. F. B. That is perfectly obvious, If they cut out my sessional pay this year and I had to borrow that amount I am out by $20,000. So it is as simple as that.

Probably a better use of terminlor,y that I could have used was that instead of a total loss to the student, I quite e1sily could have said the student is worse off by this amount of money. It is as simple as that. Now, Mr, Speaker. the honourable the member for Labrador South wanted to ask a couple of questions but I am a little bit afraid that I may not pet an opportunity to get back at this point that I 4066

April 9, 1973 Tape 1114 (afternoon) PK - 2 aked the minister about ~•rlier,hecauee there iA no vote tor it. It h lillted thoup,h. llomemhor thv la11t day I r•Ad out, to the:, embarraaamont of honourahl~ m•mher on tho oth~r ido,all thoao newspaper clippinp.s relatin~ to all the commitm~nte that the honourahle the Minister of Social Services made at the time when he was minister and the honourable the Premier ~de with respect to reinstating the mothers allowance.

(1) The possibility of a reinstatement, a definite commitment.

(2) They were going to set up another special progratTlll\e to take the place of the mothers' subsidy with a parent:S sub!!lidy for needy mothers in this province. Another programme that was going to be announced just after the hy-election in Labrador South. It was never announced.

Then, Sir, we got another announcement that they were going to set up a special study to look at the needs of the needy mothers in this province with respect to getting their kids to school and then, Sir, later that was denounced or unannonnced whatever you want to call it and we just got a cancellation of the mothers' allowance completely.with no study, with ro special programme to replace it.

So I was wondering if the minister could indicate whether or not there is some policy of his department that they are considering that may be of use to the needy mothers of this province, Sir, because I have gone into homes up and down the coast of St. Barbe, Lahrador South. all over this province,where those few dollars that would be meaningless for any honourable member in this House mean quite an amount to a mothe>r with ten. fifteen, nine, ei~ht, seven, six kids,when the> father is unemployed or he is i' poor fishermen in some little small place in our province.

I would like for the honourable minister to give us some indication of that. Sir. I might add before I sit down that I am quite disappointed that the honourahle the }finister of J'ducation did not convince the Premier and the> honourable tht' t•inister of Financ£> to take th£> hull hy the horns, to call a spade a spadt' llnd si'\y to all Newfounclland. we r£>cor-nize our responsibility to estahlish a more effidl'nt co1lection 4067

April 9, 1973 Tape 1114 (afternoon) PK - 3 system for ;he purposes of financing education in this province . . Possibly, the most efficient system ·would be to accept the full responsibility for collecting revenue for purpose of educatior. in this proYince. Sir, I mentioned the other day where school tax authorities are the most inefficient, cumhersome, sloppy, stupid, inequitable, unfair system of collecting monies for education ir this province.

The school tax authorities now are considering the collecting of school tax from recipients of social assistance, They are considering payroll deduction of the poll tax from r,overnment employees. The school tax authorities are considering the institution of property taxation for ~chool tax purposes in additional communities. They are considering the imposition of poll taxes on owners of business or other properties where no property sssessmena are available. They are considering the imposition of poli taxes on occupants of tax exempt property where grants in lieu of property taxes are paid.

They are considering the collection of school taxes from recipients of manpower allowances 9 attendinr, vocational or upr,radin~ schools,and they are considering the inspection of employers payroll records by school tax authorities.

Sir, school tax authorities are the most inefficient, unfair, inequitable, cumbersome, controversial, inefficient method of collecting revenue for financing education, I cannot demand but I suggest that the government of this day immediately should aholish completely and forever all school tax authorities in this province and collect the revenue themselves-whether it is throu~h a school tax or the imposition of additional sales tax or on the provincial income tax, I do not know what the mechanism is, but I think we are going to have a situation where school tax authorities will proliferate, creep throughout the land and we will reach a point,in two or three years, of no return.

It will practically be impossible,after. all these administrations have been set up,to abolish them, F.ven if they are established and they cover every segment of this province,you still 4068

April 9, 1973 Tap• 1114 (afternoon) 1'1( - 4 have• tanta tic duplication ot admini tration and _everythinR el• and it is just - I cannot see how in a province where we are finding it so difficult to finance education·how we can afford wasting money on administration of various n\Dllbers of school tax authorities. One ot·her point, Sir, I ask the minister if he would indicate whether or not this administration had any kind of a policy whatsoever respecting junior and!or cc11m1unity colleges. I will leave it at that because I will get into the meat of that one when we reach the vote. Ml . J. A. CftRTF.R: Mr.

Speaker, I do not want the honourable member's statements to pass unchallenged. I think that it is the most pernicious nonsense that I have ever heard to say that because if your incor.te goes down by $11,000 and then you borrow $11,000,that you are $22,000 worse off. Against that statement has to be credited the $11,000 that you borrow and presumably enjoy. So the net result is,if your inco me were to go down by $11,000 or if your income were to go down by $11,00, You are still $11,000 or $11.00 worse off but no more.

If a person who is working shoul:i borrow ~100 and then has to reray it, at least he has the enjoyment of that $100 for that period. I think it is very, very wrong, it is false, it is misleadinp, and quite out of order to suggest that that money is doubled in any way, share or form. 1-fR. M .__llfRTTN...:. Mr. Speaker, the statistics that we have heard, the fact that the statistics play such an important

part in this kind of a decision only proves to me that ar~uments of this nature are no more than academic exercises when i _t comes to ~ettinr, rip.ht down to wh£.>ther or not we are p;oinp; to maintain this position or rescind it or what we are ii;oinp.; to do about the matter at issue. There are any number of ar~uments that can be proven or disproven w:fth figures. I am not sayinp; that one set is rirht or wrong or whatever. It rc>ally does not interest" me at this point. The arp.ul'lents put forth by the honour;ihl<> memher for St. P,arhe North are well taken. There is no point 1n my r,oinr, over those>. I have discarded some five or six 4069

April 9, 1973 Tape 1114 (afternoon) PK - 5 pages of my notes here. But I would like to interject another factor that we have seemed to have forgotten about here,in that we are dealing with people, individuals, and so very, very many variables that ~o alon~ with this kind of thing. I would like to ask the honourable members just for a few moments to put aside the partisan political side of this debate and try to get back to where we started when the whole thing opened up,as to whether or not the university students should be allowed to have this kind of aid programme.

I sincerely believe that the decision of the government in this regard has been a wrong one. I would ask the honourable gentlemen on the other side, especially the honourable Minister of Education and the honourable the Minister of Finance, to try to take it back out of the realm of political partisanship and the controversay which has surrounded it and to ~isten to a few suggestions,and I hope that they will not be so arrogant as to dis~iss the arguments from this side simply because they are from the opposition. I would like to take a close look at seve~al of the more subtle ramifications of this whole thing.

I am asking, Sir, for the honourable ~inister of Education and the honourable the Minister of Finance to reinstate this programme as it has stood in the past year.

After having reinstated it, if they still believe,after hearin~ the arguments, that their decision was a right one and if they decide to abolish this aid programme,that they will do so over a lonP, enouAh period of time, phase it out over a long enough period of time so that it will eliminate the sociological hardships that are being imposed now upon the students who are now in university and those who are about to graduate from high school and contemplating entering university.

As it stands tight now,there are many young people in the univ~rsities, many mo~e about to graduate from high school,already hav~ their plans made for the next two or three years and have based those plans to a l arp,e dep,ree upon how much money is cominJ? and from what sources. Thrir financial pror,rronme I surr.est, Sir, is of paramount 1mport:mcc- in tlie rc-nc.hinr. of a dc-cil'lion as to where they arc goinr. for ti•• 4070

Ai,dl 9, 1973 Tape 1114 (afternoon) PK - 6 next three or four yeara and whether in fact they are going to university at all. Under this heading I would just like to address myself to this one.issue because it is controversail and I think I will get around to orthere will be ample opportunity for me to get around to the rest later on. I think none of us will disagree that there is a necessity to tighten our belts. That there is not enou~h money to 10 around for everythin~ 1 there never is. I believe that if the university students were asked to ti~hten their belts and to take

part in an austerity pro~ramme with the rest of us, they would have no objection to doing that. If this budp,et were truly an austerity budget,! do.not think there would be too much to be said ahout keeping this student-aid programme on. But, Sir, it is not an·austerity budget. I do not think it is in any way an austerity budget. We have a growing staff of special assistances and executive assistances, cabinet ministers.

Maybe they are necessary to the p,ood and efficient runninr, of government here hut if we really have to ~et down to savinp, money perhaps they are not all that necessary at this particular point in time. There are several other luxuries SUl!h as Mr. McLean, Mr. Nutbeem and all the re~t of the pro~rammes which in themselves may very well be all ri~ht. We are not arr,uinr, that point right now but they are there nevertheleFs' lf thia were an austerity budget,they are items that could be excluded without very much damage.

What we are askinp, the students and their parents to consider now is at what point between the S4,000 mark and the $7,ono mark does a university education become out of reach? That is really what we are tryinr, to decide. Now let us consid£>r for just a moment the implications of this kinrl of debt. We are talking about a great many peopl_e who see the education of their children as the only way of hreakinr, out of the poverty cycle thRt have kept us down in rural Newfoundland and Labrador 4071

April 9, 1973 Tape 1114 (afternoon) PK - 7 for centuries. To achieve this,l am sure that most of them will undergo a great deal of privation and hardship. Hut we have to consider too that a great many of our rural families right now today have an annual earned income of no more than $1,000 to $2,500 earned income, not counting the social assistance programme. You can talk all you like about people of this generation becoming more attunedto the kind of financing that we have available to us today and not being worried about borrowing money.

But when you are forced to live under the restrictions of that kind of an income, it becomes than a sociological barrier in trying to reach a decision whether or not you a~e going to university or not or whether or not you are going to subsidize your children going to univ.ersity when you are only earning $2,500 a year,and you are looking at putting that student, your son or daughter,in debt to $7,000Just to contemplate that amount short circuits the whole decision process, 4072

April 9, 1973 Tape 1115 , Now, the rural ~reaa have lower inc0111ea. Tha atudenta from rural areas have greater distances to travel, They are being brought into an area where automatically their spending ia increa ed, the housing costs are increased.

In short, the cost of living for people in rural areas coming into the university is such that it becomes quite a staggering thing to contemplate when you are looking at the whole cost of going to university, much more ao than those that come from urban areas, 11-1 Now, most of those students who come from the rural areas will have to borrow the money necessary to get through because they come from lower income families. Okay! What do we have?

A young man for instance coming from university must look at the prospect of when he gets out of university having right off the bat seven thousand dollars perhaps,just as an instance~ if we want to get down to particulars, seven thousand dollars hanging over his head before he has a chance to earn one cent. This is a debt on which he must begin paying interest six months after he gets out of university. I may stand to be corrected on that but this is the way that I understand it myself. Okay! He may not have finished university in the first place. He may have just left without graduating.

More than likely he will not have any employment to go into immediately. Nevertheless, that interest begins accumulating six months after he leaves, There is at this point in time no government programme to assist him in paying off that interest even supposing he d~es not have an income. Now, let us hypothesize a little more: Thia young man man has had to go through that cost of getting himFelf through university, he is probablv going to get out and at that age he may be getting married.

He may not have a job, he may be settin~ up a household, he may even be marrying a girl who has gone throur,h university and she herself will have n three or four thousand dollar debt, All of this he must aRR11me. There is the cost of settinr, up hiR house, You know, these are the human 4073

April 9, 1973 Tape 1115 IB-2 factors that we have to consider. We cannot just dismiss them because they are hypothetical. So, if we are to look at figures, then let us look at a few of the other figures that have not been trotted here in dealing with these human considerations. There used to be a bursary fund, I understand. Two years ago that bursary fund was $120,000. Incidentally, this whole amount was used up. Last year that amount was chopped to $60,000 and last semester it was chopped again to $22,000.

Now, this bursary fund was set up to take care of the really hardship cases who had already used up the money available from other sources. This money was only given out after a very, very rigid screening by the university to make sure that the people who appl~ed for it really did in fact need that money to get through. That whole $120,000 was used up by those people with that demonstrated need. After the Canada Student Loan fund and other sources had been used, there were still applications in for that bursary fund, to a tune of $190,000,of which there was no money to pay off.

And you say that there is no need, there is no financial requirement for these students. That is only one part of it. The Council of the Students Union at Memorial University used to have a scheme whereby they would co-sign for students looking for short term loans from the chartered bank. A young man or woman at university had used up all the money available to him or her and still needed more; this applied more in the case of those people who had summer jobs and could draw against that.

They could go to the bank and get $2,000 or $3,000 to tide them over and the Council of the Students Union would co-sign for them. Last year the CSU had to abandon this practice. The!y had to abandon it for one very good reason, the demands being made were getting out.of hand. They were being asked to co-si~n for too many loans and they were getting themselves into a positjon where they may get in serious financial trouble themselves as a council. Last year the CSU co-signed for 4074

April 9, 1973 Ta_pe 1115 omewhere between $15,000 to $18,000. I do not have the exact number but here again i  a demonatration of a need abova and beyond th• money that ia made available through the recoantsed loan funds. Il-3 Now, let us take a close look at ~he Canada Student Loan Fund. It is a federal programme set up to make money available to those who need it and can prove that they need it. So they use a means test.

The means test is administered under a rigid formula that takes into account none of the many human values associated with the extraordinary requirements, the unanticipated re~uirements of going to university. For instance - another for instance. I am probably shot down for all of these. You take two families of identical income, ten thousand dollars for a round figure.

If the student should applyand the means test is applied to that student or those students from those two households,both making ten thousand dollars, they look only at the income of those !smilies in judging whether or not the student has a need for extra assistance. They do not take into consideration whether or not one family happens to have a mortgage and has to pay out $250 or $300 per month and maybe the other one does not have a mort~age and thereby has more of that income saved. None of these things are taken into account.

Similarly none of the extraordinary expenses that may be incurred by studentR at university are taken into account,such as if there is an accident, A student falls down and breaks his leg and has to go into hosnital,sure the MCP will take care of a certain part of it but there are other expenses always associated with this. If tl1at should happen there is nowhere else to ~o. The formula used in the means test does not take these considerations into account. This all constitutes a further need. If the honourable the Minister of Finance, Mr.

Chairman, had Riven us the'correct fi~ures - we have no renson to suppose that he 4075

April 9 • 1973 Tape 1115 1B-4 has not given us the correct figures. He says that at least eleven hundred young people will be borrowing a maximum of Sl.800 by last year's figures. He stated that there were eleven hundred students who borrowed the maximum \lllder which the system - I know we are not too clear on this - there were eleven hundred people according to the figures given us the other day who borrowed the maximum, eighteen hundred dollars allowable. ~Who had the maximum need,Ul am sorry. I rephrase that. Who had the maximum need of eighteen hundred dollars.

Now, last year's figures stated that there were eleven hundred students who borrowed the maximum 1.mder which the system amounted to two thousand, two hundred and forty-two dollars in grants and loans. Does that check out with you? I think that will check out, Mr. Chairman, with the honourable minister's figures. This year the ceiling has been placed at $1,800. Statistics indicate that the costs of living are going up and statistics also indicate that the student population is rising at the university.

This being the case,then these allowances are discontinued and we have to ask ourselves where the extra two or three hundred dollars is going to come from. I submit, Sir, that the $863,000 that is involved in this particular case means very, very little relatively speaking to the over-all population of this province as compared to the extra two or three hundred dollars that is going to be placed as a burden upon the shoulders of the students coming in.

Compare $863,000 in the over-all provinctnl budget to two or three hundred dollars in a household budget where they are earning $2,500 annually and you have got a considerable difference. Therefore, Sir, I submit that to ask these students to make a decision as to whether or not to go to Wliversity under these conditions, the limiting of that loan programme to students . is a psycholop.ical deterent and is goi1 •g to mean that many of our 4076

April 9, 1973 Tape .llU children from rural and lower ~ncome areaa are not going to go to university. That is an inescapable fact. Since education is a provincial responsibility, I look upon thia deci1ion to limit the amount of aid to student  as a reneging on the province  -responaibility. toward education. It is not fair either, Mr. Chairman, to compare our province, the situation here with the situation in other Atlantic Provinces.

In the first place if the honourable Minister of Finance's figures IB-5 are to be taken into consideration here, they really mean very little if he wants to compare them to for instance New Brunswick. In New BT.unswick a student can receive up to twenty-two hundred dollars per year based on need,of course. In addition, something which we do not have here in this proviflce, a student from New Brunswick also gets that paid,no matter where he goes to university, anywhere else in Canada, There is no comparison. What we are really talking about is a different set of cultural circumstances.

We have a different tradition here in this province then they have in the other Atlantic Provinces. The other Atlantic Provinces have gone past the time when they need the kind of financial assistance that we are talking about here today. We are just that much further behind. We bear people talk about the irrelevancy of the university and we do not really need that many students there anyway, that when they come out there are no jobs for them anyway, that we are educating them for nothing. Well, there are :1uch . far wider implications here. We have been traditionally tied down by our lack of communication.

The whole problem, the whole outport syndrome is connected with the lack of communications. A great widening of communications has re­ sulted from our children coMing in to university, into St. John's and partici~ating in this ~hole experience. So university education, notwithstanding the very fact that this area has orened up to ·provide a wider base communication, is p,\rhaps far more significant. We hen rd people refer, tongue in 4.077

April 9, 1973 Tape 1115 IB-6 cheek.to the coming revolution. I submit, Sir, that there is a revolution in progress· even now, the revolution of consciouaness, if you want, certainly not in the classic sense. It is nevertheless a.changing of our consciousness of -who we are,as a nation, as a people, of who we are culturally, that is changing the whole face of this province. That revolution was brought on by the wider access to education and all the implications are there. We know, Sir, who it is that we have to thank for that, the former Premier, the former leader of these honourable gentlemen here.

Regardless of what we may think about that gentleman, regardless of where we stand politically, we have got to give Mr. Smallwood credit for instituting that education system which has brought about this revolution in concepts and consciousness. Joey Smallwood knew full well what he was- doing •. He said it at one point that he was instituting something that would eventually lead to his downfall,and it did. By making education available to everyone, he was ensuring that one of these days those people were going to put him out of office.

It is ironic, I think,because the one gentleman who has stood to gain more from student aid - I wish he were in his seat at the moment - but I submit, Mr. Chairman, that the one person who has stood to gain more from student aid and higher education has been the honourable gentleman from St. John's West. I do not say that facetiously. We saw what happened a couple of years ago at the leadership convention and how the students rallied round him. There was a participation at that point that we could not have dreamed about four or five years previously. I think it is wrong to tag 4078

April 9, 1973, Tape 1116, Page 1 - . apb dollars and cents of education on to how many are_going to graduate and how many are then going to go into the workforce, becau•e it ha• far widar implication  than that. It ia very, very de•irable that everybody be aivan access to education and if we are only talking about $163,000, what does that mean if we are goinR to change our whole way of thinking here? 1 submit, Sir, that it would be much to the benefit of the honourable gentlemen on the other aide if they could encourage and foster that same kind of thinkin~.

I have not touched at all on the sorry state of our secondary education system, I have not touched at all on the whole philosophy of regional and co111111unity colleges nor the revenues and tax authorities and all of that. I think 1 will probably have an opportunity to do that but whatever,! most sincerely urge that these honourable gentlemen, in particular the honoura~le the Minister of Education and the honourable the ~inister of Finance, to seriously reconsider, .reconsider this decision to reduce the student aid programme.

It haa far more to do than with mere statistics or whether or not we are going to get "X" number of people out of university and into higher paying jobs. ~~!--..!~.Q~,Y.: Mr. Chairman, I would like to read into the record of this House a letter written by a former student of the university, of which I have received a copy.

I notice the ~inister of Education has the letter over there as well .. the letter .written by a former student to the honourable John C.Crosbie and to the honourable r.erald Ottenheimer: Sir, I think it states the case of the students extremely well and further than that, Sir, I think it states quite clearly the expectations that the youn~ students of this province had with respect to this administration taking over the r.overnment of this Province and what they had hoped to see from this administration.

It is a fairly len~thy letter and I will try to read it relntively ouickly and I will not read all sections, only these that 4079

April 9, 1973, Tape 1116, Page 2 - apb I think are reasonably relevant. It is from a Mr. John C.Gould, a former student of the university. "Dear Sirs: I am writing in support of a petition presented on behalf of some 5,500 Newfoundland stutlents who can attend ¥emorial University only by borrowing outra~eously high sums of money. I stron~ly protest this action on the part of the government. It is completely and directly contrary to all statements made in the election campaigns of 1971 and 1972.

"This government was elected in many areas by the young voters or the young vote, the university vote, because we as intelligent Newfoundlanders saw a new era for Newfoundlal'!d. '' On February 27, 1972~ one month, Sir,that is before the March election, is that correct? AN HON. MEMBER: That is correct. --------- MR. F.B.ROWE: ''I attended a huge rally in the Thompson Centre of Memorial University and heard the then ~inister of Education, the honourable John Carter say; 'There would be no decreases in the form of tuitions or grants.

Federal student loans would be increased from $500. to $700. per semester.' I, like the other 1,000 or so students,cheered wildly that day the statement was made. Looking up at the platform, looking up at Mr. Crosbie, Mr. Marshall, Mr. R. Wells and Mr. Carter, I felt that there was a new feeling in the air, a new hope. A new wnve of optimism was felt by every student. •we all looked up at this group for new,a new direction, a new future, a new frontier in provincial politics and goverrunent policy.

We left that meeting with a feeling of responsibility, that responsibility was to put an end to false promises, an end to cheap political tricks and a government that did not care about those whom it was .elected to serve.'' That is what the students of this province were votinr for, Sir. Ph:1t a letdown! "And RO we voted thPse mrn into 4080

April 9. 1973. Tap• 1116, P•R• 3 -- apb office, in ~ood faith wa 1upported them than and in ~ood faith .we support them now." Sir, this letter i  coming from some auprortere of this administration. •·we supported the honourable C.W.Doody, one of the top,new breed of men to run for office, when he said on September 29, 1971; 'The P·.c.

Party will do everything it possibly can to help our young people achieve their aims, regardless of their political beliefs.' On March l, 1972, we heard with enthusiasm another new politician, the honourable Tom Ooyle saying; 'The province seems to be losin~ sight of its youn" people, the best natural resource.' On October 25, 1972 we all listened as Dr.

Tom Farrell reaffirmed the P.C's. philosophy: 'A P.C.Govermnent would establish a provincial youth advisory council to deal with such matters as educational development.' Another new face in Grand Falls, (presumably the ex-honourable Aubrey Senior) told us on October 13, 1971, that: 'We must offer the young people opportunities to keep them from migratitl$! to other provtnces,"' Going on with the letter Sir, "How, Sir, do we propose to keep them here if you make it such an expensive .venture to go to university, that many hundreds will turn it down?

Turn down university, turn down a productive life, a fulfilling life in intellectual and financial terms,for welfare, unemployment on this small island,or else migrate to Ontario. "Where is the faith in our people, the new interest in our young that was so evident in the campaigns of 1971 and 1972?

In October 1971, the honourable the Premier spoke at Cox's Cove amd told us: 'The ~overnment I would form will not tell the people what they are to have and then give it to them but would ask them what they want 11nd then work with them to achieve it."' Sir, the students are asking for the reinstatement of the original policy that was in action before this administrAtion took over. To ~o on with the letter, Sir, ''Are we.,the university students who supported this p.ovc_,rnmc_,nt,not worthy of that cons:lderat:lon, -~081

April 9, 1973, Tape 1116, Page 4 -- apb a small consideration in financ!al terms? Only one-sixth of one percent of the total b~dgrt is what we are talking about. Only $1.6 million out of six hundred odd •million spent in the coming year and even then, we will not be totally happy, even then we will stand to be 'pre _judiced against, even then we will have to scrimp and save and live on the smallest of budgets. Because the government cannot use the argument; this increase in the ceiling of loans will only mean that t~e student has to borrow more.

If that was only the case it would not be so bad, we could live with that but the students cannot get any more, the students just cannot get any more loan. "For example, we were told last year that 700 students needed $1,200 loan. Usinr, last year's calculation we get, a $600. loan, a $300 grant and a $300 additional loan for a total of $1,200. The total loan would be $900. This year these same 700 students would need $1,200 full loan, all loan, no grant, $300 more each for 700 students. That is $210,000 these 700 students alone would have to borrow more each year. .

So, that is $210,000 per year more that these 700 students alone will have to borrow. Where are they ~oing to get it? Each of these 700 students found it hard enou~h last year to borrow $900 from the ~reat, rich federal r,overnment. Do you think it will be any ea·sier for them to borrow $900 this year plus $300, and that is only $700?" I think I will skip some of this now, Sir. The total additional loan that is required, Ly the way, is $1,800,000.

So the letter p.:oes on; "So, if the university population stays the same, we have no new people enroll next year, we are p,oinp. to have to squeeze an extra $1.8 million out of the federal ~overnment. Any person who says this legislation to raise the ceilinp, will not prevent any Newfoundlander from going to university is either not tellinP. the truth or is telling an untruth. It is as much a deterrent as raising the entrance reou:lrernents at the university. The acadeTT1ic entrance requi reTT1ents are the same, the t'inancial reauirements are up by $ 1. 8 4082

April 9, 1973, Tap• 1116, P•~• 5 -- apb million per_ yaar." Sir, I could go on with ma:ny other statistics here- that give some indication of the cost to a student through insurance registration fees, for books, tuition fees, residence and this sort of thing. These statistics I have already given earlier this afternoon, so I will not bore the House with repeating them again.

I felt it was my responsibility to read into the record of this honourable House the feelings of an ex-student of the university a person who does not stand to lose this comin~ year, the feelings of a person who had been deceived through two election campaigns, a person who thought he was goin~ to see a new light throu~h this administration. Instead, I maintain.as I said earlier in this House, the ~inister of Finance in this administration has in fact stabbed the students of this university, this province,in the back.

I think that this letter indicated that this person and many other students supported the election of a new administration in this province and there was nothinp, in this letter to give me any indication that that same individual does not support this present administration. However, something comes across very strongly in this letter and that is that this person alonr, with thousands of other students in this province feel that he has been letdown, he has been deceived by the chan~e of policy of this administratiop. This is something that we have related to before in this House, Sir. '1-fR. OTTF.NHEI1-!F.R: Mr.

Chairman, before we pass off 601-01, I do not know that there is a great deal more really that ca'I'. be said anew or add~tional, One can obviously repeat various arr,uments