The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I stand today to recognize the tremendous contribution of Martin Saunders to the labour movement in this Province. Mr. Saunders has been a friend of mine for many years, going back long before my entry into politics in 1975. We may have differed politically, but never did we differ on issues of work place health and occupational safety.

Mr. Saunders was attracted to the labour movement from his very first job at the age of seventeen, in Stephenville. His labour roots really crystalized in 1958 while working as an orderly in the Sanatorium in Corner Brook; an institution, by the way, that became familiar to me at the age of twelve.

Martin Saunders really became a heavyweight in the labour movement in Baie Verte. Martin led two momentous strikes in Baie Verte. In 1968 he led a strike to change the work week from a six-day, forty-eight-hour week to a five-day, forty-hour week. It took ten weeks but he finally prevailed.

By 1978 there was no doubt in the Western world that asbestos was an industrial hazard. Advocate Mines had refused to mitigate both the hazard by installing even the basics like shower facilities so miners would not bring asbestos dust home to their families. It took fourteen weeks on the picket line, but Martin and the union again prevailed. Martin's efforts have improved tremendously the lot of all workers in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, I wish Martin and his wife Ethel a long and enjoyable retirement. His last day on the job will be tomorrow, Friday, March 31, but his legacy as a labour leader will live on as the labour history of this Province is written.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to inform the House that this morning the conceptual design of "The Rooms" was unveiled.

As you know, last December 13th, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador announced its decision to proceed with the development of a new home for our provincial museum, archives and art gallery.

Since then, our architectural team has proceeded with the development of the conceptual design which we have reviewed with the various stakeholder groups and the arts and heritage communities. Today, the final design was unveiled.

Mr. Speaker, the design for "The Rooms" is home-grown. It reflects our heritage and the traditional structures of the Province. As such, this building will not only contain our heritage treasures but will be symbolic of the structures that used to cover the entire shoreline of the Province. This is particularly important because, at a time when our fishery is undergoing one of its most radical transformations in its history, most of the architecture which is associated with the old fishery is rapidly disappearing. It is therefore fitting that our main cultural buildings will keep its memory alive and serve continually to remind us of our important historical roots.

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, "The Rooms" embodies the cultural values of our society and, as such, is expected to make an artistic as well as an architectural statement. The building will be a major addition to the skyline, without dominating it. It will fit in well with the other institutional and religious buildings in the neighborhood, while standing out and making a statement about the value we place on our cultural heritage.

I am pleased to report that the cost of constructing "The Rooms" remains within our established budget of $40 million. We will continue to monitor the project closely to ensure that it stays that way.

Soon, you will be seeing some activity at the Fort Townshend site. Archeological work will begin this spring, construction will begin this coming September, and we are still on schedule to open the building to the public by March 2003.

Mr. Speaker, we will be soliciting the further advice of the arts and cultural communities as we proceed with the fabrication of the museum exhibits for "The Rooms". The construction of "The Rooms" presents an unequaled opportunity for us to review the historical themes that have traditionally been interpreted at the Newfoundland museum, and to see how these can be improved. We intend to consult with experts and ordinary citizens on this topic, to ensure that the stories we tell are those which truly reflect who we are as a society. We will be providing the public with more information in the near future as to how they can make their contribution to this process.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to congratulate the PHB Group for the excellence of their design, and they were greatly assisted by the staff of the three institutions who contributed their expertise and many hours of hard work to ensure that the building will be state-of-the-art. I would also like to thank the representatives of the arts and heritage groups who provided their advice on the design of the building during a session held last February.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to reiterate today what was said at the December 13 announcement: "Through ‘The Rooms' the province is renewing its commitment to preserving and promoting our cultural heritage, a heritage unlike any other in the world and one of which we are justly proud. The cultural artifacts, natural history specimens, archival documents and works of art which have been accumulated over the years in these three provincial institutions are resources of global significance. They exist nowhere else and in "The Rooms" they will preserved and exhibited in the best possible manner."

Mr. Speaker, "The Rooms" will become a common link to our heritage, reinforcing the connection between those living today and those who came before them.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is certainly appropriate that anything reflecting our history, from a museum point of view, archives or art gallery, would be reflective of the basis upon which our Province was founded; basically, reflecting the fishery and why people came here in the first place. It is something we have to develop, and be proud of our past and put it forward as an attraction for people to come to our Province. Certainly there was a fair amount lacking in coordination in that particular area in the past, and this is something that will certainly overcome some of those shortcomings.

I am sure, I say to the minister, we will hear other announcements by the time it is officially opened; you can count on that. We might all be invited to the pouring of the cement yet, who knows, for the foundation, but I am sure we will see other stages.

AN HON. MEMBER: Electrical contractors.

MR. SULLIVAN: That is a good spot too.

I think it is important that we preserve our culture, not only preserve it but also flaunt it and show it off to the rest of the world. I must say that conceptual design here, it does look good and hopefully its completion, the interior, will be laid out in such a manner that will reflect our culture, our Province, so people can come here and automatically strike an association on what we are all about when they walk inside that building.

From a conceptual point of view, in design, it looks good and we will be looking forward to seeing if that is going to be implemented right through the interior.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to see that we have moved so quickly to the concept design stage of this truly historic project. It is a project worthy of the entry of the new millennium, a significant historic and cultural project. I am looking at the conceptual designs and ,whatever initial fears there may have been about what we are going to get, this looks very magnificent in terms of its structure and it appears to fit very well with the other buildings around there in terms of scope, scale and design. It looks like we will have, in fact, a truly magnificent project once it is finished. I hope that we do continue at the speed at which we are proceeding, and I look forward to hearing further news from government on this issue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS KELLY: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to update the hon. members about an exciting technology that my department has been developing which will benefit businesses and municipalities throughout our Province.

Over a year ago, I launched a comprehensive online business information system, that is accessible through the Internet, called Success~Works. This system is evolving from an information tool to a comprehensive e-business site for economic development in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Technology is becoming more and more integrated into the worldwide business community, and we must continue to find new ways to ensure that our businesses are able to take advantage of these opportunities.

This year we are expanding Success~Works' current capabilities and focusing on three main initiatives.

First, detailed community profiles are being developed which will be used by my department to work with site selectors in attracting new businesses to our Province. In April, members of a committee of the Regional Economic Development Boards and my department plan to attend the International Development Research Council meeting in New York. Ready access to the right kind of information is essential in order to compete, and my staff has incorporated these requirements into the Success~Works planning.

Second, in the coming months, my department will be working closely with the Alliance of Manufacturers and Exports of Newfoundland and Labrador and the Government Purchasing Agency to conduct a province-wide survey of manufacturers' products. Once completed, we will have the most comprehensive listing of products produced in Newfoundland and Labrador on our web site. This will be a definite advantage for sourcing, in particular, government procurement opportunities.

Finally, my department's web site is being re-designed to incorporate the information available from Success~Works and to make the site even more e-business enabled. E–business includes any activity that uses Internet technologies to convey information that enables a company to do business. E-commerce, one component of e-business, was worth $1.4 billion in Canada in 1999, and that number is expected to double this year. We want a significant doubling in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS KELLY: Mr. Speaker, these developments directly address some of the issues highlighted during the Jobs and Growth consultations, such as the need for cooperation at all levels and the need for government to create an environment that stimulates business and economic growth. Success~Works is one of the tools which will help us to enhance that environment.

The strategic advantages offered by Success~Works are available to all municipalities in Newfoundland and Labrador and all businesses.

I ask all hon. members to encourage individuals and organizations and businesses in their districts to become part of this dynamic initiative. It is available through our Web site, success.nfld.net, and my department would be happy to work with anyone who is interested in becoming involved. As we move forward with its development, Success~Works is giving our Province and our companies a definite business advantage.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear. hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am going to take a balanced approach to responding to this statement. First of all, I am going to commend the minister on initiatives one and three because they were not my idea. My good friend the Finance Minister, when he was in another capacity, will remember following me around the Province as I consulted with business people and manufacturers. I'm sure he will remember one of the recommendations I made to have an online site with a listing of all the products manufactured in this Province to help procurement -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: - and to help government know what products were available, and to help municipalities know what products were available. So, you are welcome, minister, for initiative number two, but I will say that you have not gone far enough. Just today, minister, when I had lunch in our own cafeteria in this building, I will say that in order for me to get locally bottled water I had to request it at the counter. Because we proudly display imported water in our cafeteria but to avail of manufactured locally bottled water you have to request it specifically. It is the same old thing.

I say, Mr. Speaker, that if we want to be serious about initiative number two we will take the initiative to ensure that -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. T. OSBORNE: - we promote locally manufactured products in our own buildings, in our own cafeterias -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. T. OSBORNE: - and we practice what we preach, minister.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I was trying to get as excited as the minister was when she was reading her statement but I could not quite manage it. It is obviously very important -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: I don't have a crowd cheering me on like she has over there, you see, but in good time, Mr. Speaker.

It is important that all manufacturers in this Province have access to the World Wide Web, especially those small manufacturers who do not have the capital or the money to put in to the development of their own personal websites. I think it is important that every business in this Province have proper access. I am glad the minister has undertaken that. I don't think we will see the jackets of the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation on that website because they are not really manufactured right here, but for things that are manufactured in this Province we want to see them have access to those markets as quickly as possible. I commend the minister on her efforts in achieving that.

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

MR. K. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, today and tomorrow the Dairy Farmers of Newfoundland and Labrador are holding their annual general meeting in Corner Brook.

I stand in the House today to highlight the many areas of this vital industry within the provincial economy.

Forty-nine dairy farms are operating in this Province. Milk production for 1999 is estimated at about 33 million litres of fluid milk and is continuously increasing. This year's target is expected to be exceeded by more than 1.4 million litres. This is an indication that producers are becoming more efficient in their operations. Local production has placed Newfoundland and Labrador at 100 per cent self-sufficiency in fluid milk.

Many farms have shown increases in milk production as a result of excellent management in areas of genetics, nutrition and housing.

The dairy business is a $100 million industry with employment in excess of 700 people and, indirectly, over 1,000. These jobs, created between farms, Brookfield Dairies and Central Dairies - these are two of the best processing firms across the country - include on-farm processing, manufacturing, marketing and sales, and transportation.

The dairy industry continues to develop and grow. There has been ongoing work in the field of grain production. In 1999, there were 100 acres of land seeded and harvested with barley and wheat. For four years in a row, cattle corn has been planted in the western region. These measures are aimed at reducing the cost of feed to our farmers.

Work is also being done in the area of forage production in order to improve the producers' ability to implement better crop production management and practices.

Programs such as The School Milk Program - again, an excellent program - and The Daphne Taylor Milk Quality Award of Excellence encourage higher milk consumption and the production of high quality milk respectively.

Newfoundland and Labrador has some of the finest professionals in the dairy industry in Canada. Phil MacLean and Pauline Duivenvoorden, who operate Headline Holstein Dairy Farms in Goose Arm and Reidville, were recognized early last year as Atlantic Canada's Outstanding Young Farmers. Wilson Chaffey of St. David's, one of the pioneers in dairy farming on the West Coast, was inducted into the Atlantic Agriculture Hall of Fame last year.

The Department of Forest Resources and Agrifoods continues to provide support to the dairy industry through such programs as: veterinary services, analysis of feed and soils, subsidizing limestone prices, milk quality testing, engineering services, extension services, identification of land use, and on-farm mapping.

In closing, let me say there are challenges ahead for the Newfoundland and Labrador dairy industry. These challenges are being met with professionals and up-to-date equipment. The economic prospects for this industry in this Province are very positive and this is an agrifoods success story.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUNTER: I would like to thank the minister for sending a copy of his statement. I would like to congratulate the dairy farmers in Newfoundland and Labrador for doing such a great job in managing, and their great ability in their field of work in this industry.

I'm also glad to see the increased production is up by 1.4 million litres. It is important that we utilize the product from the industry. We must realize too that there are still a lot of added-value products coming into the Province today that could be done here, but I am glad to see that this industry is moving in the right direction and that the minister and his department are doing a fairly good job in making sure that this industry moves in that direction, even though we need a lot more work done in the forage production area. Because the cost of transportation to the farmers in this Province today must be very high. That could be one of the key areas where it would make our industry more successful and more viable.

Also, I would like to recognize the School Milk Program and the Daphne Taylor Milk Quality Award of Excellence. They are certainly such a good idea. I hope that this will continue.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HUNTER: Also, the recognition of our workers in the field today -

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HUNTER: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave!

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave!

MR. SPEAKER: Leave denied.

MR. HUNTER: I conclude, Mr. Speaker, and encourage the department to continue on the right track.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is very encouraging to see that we have achieved 100 per cent self-sufficiency in fluid milk in this Province. The dairy industry is an example of how we can, in fact, have a successful agricultural industry in this Province with the proper programs from government, the proper levels of subsidization to ensure that we do have goods made here that we can consume here, and be less reliant on imported foodstuffs. It is very important to have a food policy based on that and I am delighted to see it happen. Obviously, we have to try to reduce costs by having more local forage production and more acres in development of feedstuffs so that the costs are brought down even further. I am very pleased to see some outstanding dairy farmers are being recognized as Wilson Chaffey has been in the Atlantic Agricultural Hall of Fame.

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday, the Premier told the media that energy prices in the U.S. could delay an agreement on the development of the Lower Churchill. I want to ask the Premier to confirm that Premier Bouchard and Hydro Quebec negotiate the price for Labrador power with U.S. customers and that neither he, nor Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, have any direct involvement, although this Province owns the resource.

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

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, as was reported in the paper today, and as the Premier said yesterday, negotiations continue. What the final agreement will be and what it will include and exclude at this point is premature to say. Negotiations are ongoing and as with any set of negotiations, 90 per cent of it is easy, the last 5 per cent to 10 per cent is very difficult; the last 1 per cent is the most difficult of all. We are getting to that point.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The fact is, Premier, that this Province has no direct say in negotiating the price for Labrador power once it enters the Quebec grid at the border. You may be called up to Quebec City once in a while, as you were this week, for a briefing from the real players, Lucien Bouchard and Quebec Hydro, but that is the extent of your influence on price negotiations. Isn't it a fact, Premier, that we have once again put ourselves in a position of total dependence on Quebec -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary. I ask him to get to his question.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: - and Quebec Hydro? Quebec is in control I say, Mr. Speaker. It can, and I suggest it will, negotiate a price structure -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary. I ask him to get to his question.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: - with its U.S. customers that is in their best interest and leave us, once again, with the leftovers.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, anybody who has paid any attention to the member who just spoke would realize we haven't had a question, we have had a statement. It is so predictable and so transparent. The member says: Isn't it a fact that we have done the following, A, B, C, D and E? The fact is we don't have an agreement yet, so we are hardly in a position to talk about Newfoundland going for a scattered meeting in Quebec City about pricing of power going into the marketplace when (a) we don't have an agreement and (b) if we had an agreement we would not have first power till 2008.

These gentlemen across the way are so hungry, so thirsty for a failure, Mr. Speaker, that they get down on their knees and pray for it daily, but we are working for success and we won't have a deal till we have one!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Does anyone believe, I say to the Premier, that Quebec, given the sole right to market Labrador power, will put our interest ahead of their own? Let me put this to the Premier. Beginning this year we will drop the price for Upper Churchill power from 3 mills per kilowatt hour to 2 mills per kilowatt hour, while Gull Island Power will come on stream at 25 mills per kilowatt hour to 30 mills per kilo watt hour. Why do we have to accept, I say to the Premier, whatever scraps Quebec will give us from high costs and Gull Island Power, while the Province of Quebec reaps even more extortionate prophets from the Upper Churchill?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, what we are hearing across the way is an inferiority complex manifest by way of a few words across the floor of the House. The fact is this government is not going to put itself in the kind of position that would replicate the Upper Churchill deal. The fact is we are approaching this from a completely different point of view, one that recognizes that Newfoundland and Labrador as the majority owner of any new development will get the majority of the benefits from any future development.

Mr. Speaker, if he wants to talk about recent deals involving mega-projects that have disadvantaged the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, let's talk about the Peckford deal on Hibernia.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Premier, why not tell Quebec to write off any loss in its expected profits on the Lower Churchill from the increased profits it will get at our expense on the Upper Churchill? Better still, I say to the Premier, why don't you insist on a blended price for both Upper and Lower Churchill power? Why should you ask the people of this Province to take less than that?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

PREMIER TOBIN: I am sorry. Did the Member for Bonavista South want to speak?

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure what the Member for Bonavista South is saying, but he clearly does not want an answer to the question being asked by the member opposite who has just spoken.

The member opposite is frankly being childish in his approach to this issue in the House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: The fact of the matter is that the contract signed in the 1960s has been attacked by every administration that has come to power in this Province, including two Conservative administrations and two Liberal administrations. It has been in and out of court, and we are stuck with a contract which was a colossal and tragic error for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. Almost as bad, but not quite, as the Hibernia contract, because in the case of Hibernia once the oil is gone, it is gone. At least in the case of Churchill Falls, at some point, the contract expires and the power is still there. That is a debate about the work of the Peckford Administration on another day, and one I'm doing some research on. I will be glad to share it with the member opposite.

On a go forward basis we are attempting to understand, on the one hand, that you cannot rewrite history. It has been tried. You can draft a better chapter for the future. That is what we are attempting to do. We do not have an inferiority complex. We do not have a chip on our shoulders. We think, as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, we are as bright, we are as able, we have as much capacity as anybody anywhere. We think it is possible for Newfoundland and Labrador to negotiate a good deal.

I would ask the member opposite to bring that level of confidence and maturity to the questions he is putting across the floor of the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are on health. I know the Premier will be up trying to beat some common sense into Allan Rock over the next day or two, so I will ask the questions to the Premier.

It has been a practice to have visiting pediatric cardiac surgeon come to this Province from Ottawa twice a year to perform minor cardiac surgeries. Babies and young children that require major and emergency surgery are flown to Halifax, Toronto, Montreal or Ottawa, depending on where the availability is. I ask the Premier: Why are we now without a visiting pediatric cardiac surgeon and all children are now being sent out of this Province for cardiac surgery?

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

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, this question in another form was addressed to us yesterday in the version of the lack or the scarcity of specialists. At that time I did speak to the House about the efforts that are underway through the Department of Health and Community Services to try and improve the availability of specialist services.

I am sure there is a level of detail associated with this specific issue that the Minister of Health and Community Services will be able to address at this time, but in general it is part of the larger issue that the department is very conscious of, that government is very conscious of, that we have dedicated specific resources to, trying to reverse, and we will continue to do so.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My next question is to the Premier on a more general budgetary matter. Last year, there were about sixty children sent out of this Province. With no visiting pediatric cardiac surgeon this year, there will be about an extra twenty or thirty who would need minor surgeries, who will have to go out also. So we are looking at eighty to ninety being sent out.

With the high cost of airfare, living out of hotel rooms, like in Toronto and other areas, for several weeks in some cases where we have a very serious heart problem, especially after birth - parents of those babies are really perplexed as to why government this year made an announcement that they are going to pay for the full cost of sending sixty adults out of this Province for adult cardiac surgery and they are not doing it for young children and babies who need that surgery.

I want to ask the Premier: Why are you forcing the parents to pick up those huge costs for young babies who need life-saving surgery, surgery that cannot be performed in this Province, when you are willing to pay for it for adults?

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

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, in the Budget, government has allocated a significant investment in the health care area, $138 million new money overall to the care and health of our citizens in the Province. This has had to be distributed in different areas for different priorities.

Certainly one of the things we are most concerned about is the cardiac area with respect to adults and with children. We are allocating our resources as best we can to try to meet the ongoing needs, and will continue to do so, but at any given time there are pressing priorities that arise in each of these areas.

There is no simple solution, as I said yesterday, to many of these issues that we are facing in the health care area, but we will continue to make it our number one priority and to do the best we can with the resources that we have to meet the needs of infants, of children, of adults, for health care in this Province.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Basically, the estimates showed $31.7 new million in the health care budget this year, not $130-some million. That is here in the estimates that are filed in this House.

My question, I say to the minister, was: Why are you paying the full cost to send sixty adults out of this Province, an escort to go with them, hotel and all costs, and you are not doing it for young, sick babies who need that help? That was my question, and that is the one to which I didn't get an answer.

I will ask one final question. There are certain cardiac surgeons out there, and I know the volume of work in this Province for one full-time pediatric surgeon may not be there because we have a declining number of births here in our Province - I'll grant that - but there are cardiac surgeons who do both adult and pediatric cardiac surgery in the minor cases that could be done by cardiac surgeons who generally specialize in adults.

I wonder, and I want to ask the minister: Has the Province looked at this option? If not, if they haven't looked at this, what plan do they have to address this issue?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I just want to assure the member opposite, because I know he has an interest in health care, that the Province will look at any and every option - I cannot give you a commitment on the spot - that will help address the issue of cardiac care. That is why we have taken measures like sending people out of the Province to ensure that the waiting list doesn't continue to expand. The member has just said that he supports that option; that is why we are spending money expanding our capacity to do cardiac surgeries within the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, there is a larger issue and we can't have it both ways in this House. The Leader of the Opposition has said in the House -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER TOBIN: Well, I would ask to be heard.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: The Leader of the Opposition has said in the House that the Province is running, in reality, a $350 million deficit.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to be heard.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition has said that the Province is running a $350 million deficit. The health critic, who has just spoken, said a few days ago on an open line show that there are tens of millions in savings to be had. The same health critic said in this House - and Hansard will show - that several hundreds of millions could be saved.

The Opposition cannot have it both ways. They cannot, in the one breath, say that the Province is broke; that we have mortgaged the future; that we are spent too much money on health care; and, in the very next breath, stand and ask for more money to be committed without looking for efficiencies in our health care system.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: This government has committed more money, substantially more money, but we are also committed to finding efficiencies in the health care system, and we would expect the sensible -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

PREMIER TOBIN: - and the realistic participation and cooperation of the member opposite in achieving those goals.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

The Minister of Finance announced -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Should be. You woke up finally, did you?

The Minister of Finance announced that there would be no new taxes as a result of this Budget 2000. It is here in the Budget, under Budget Outlook, no new taxes in the Budget; and the Premier confirmed this afterwards in the media.

Does the minister still stand by the fact that he is saying here that there will be no new taxes this year?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the best of my knowledge, unless I have missed something, and I don't believe I have, there are no new types of taxes introduced in this Budget.

If the hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis is referring to an equalization, or a leveling up of the payroll tax on a select group of resource industry related enterprises that took place in the Budget, then we announced that in the Budget. It is a circumstance that we believe we could not further defend having a differential rate, but -

MR. J. BYRNE: Is that your final answer?

MR. MATTHEWS: Read my lips. There have been no new payroll taxes in this Budget. The same payroll taxes that always existed are there -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MATTHEWS: - but at a $6.6 million less take in terms of the rate that we are applying and the businesses being applied to.

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

MR. J. BYRNE: I say to the minister, I will give you a life line. You can phone Chuck.

Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister, why is it the liquor outlets have received a directive dated March 23, one day after the Budget, from the Liquor Commission with a new price list effective April 1, 2000?

Won't the minister confirm certain products will increase in price because the liquor board has to come up with another $10 million for the Budget this year? Here is a copy of it right here.

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

MR. MATTHEWS: No, I have to say to the hon. member, it is not an area of interest I have indulged in or looked heavily into other than with respect to taxes on spirits and liquor. To the hon. member and to the rest of the Province, let me reaffirm: there have been no new taxes leveled on liquor or spirits. The fact that the price of the product may have changed is not unlike the fact that the price of the product at the gasoline pumps have changed. We had nothing to do with it. It is driven my market forces.

In terms of the $5 million dividend that we have asked the Liquor Corporation to return to the government this year, we have told them to do that on the basis of going out and financing the inventory they are carrying now on a cash basis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women. Is the minister aware, in addition to the changes in reductions in seasonal workers qualifying for UI, that now 70 per cent of unemployed women do not qualify for unemployment insurance and, in fact, 90 per cent of unemployed women under twenty-five do not qualify for unemployment insurance?

Now, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs has invited the federal Minister of Human Resources to Newfoundland. Is this minister concerned about this issue as being discriminatory against women? And does she plan to make any representations to the federal government with respect to changes needed in the UI system to protect women?

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

MS BETTNEY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, as a matter of fact, over the past four months this issue has become evident through some of the monitoring and assessment reports that have been done on the EI account.

Back in the fall when the ministers met with the Federal Labour Market Ministers, and the subject of EI was one of the major subjects that was on the agenda, this was one area that was specifically addressed. There were two areas where we were seeing unanticipated disadvantages: the area of youth and the area of women. This has been addressed with the federal minister. It is actively under consideration between our departments at the provincial level and with the federal government. I do expect in the upcoming meetings with the minister that we will continue to look at this issue and ways to offset it.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Another consequence of the changes in UI, particularly as they affect women, is that fewer and fewer pregnant women now qualify for maternity benefits under unemployment insurance. Given the fact that there is a $28 billion surplus in the federal UI fund, is this minister and this government prepared to take the position that maternity benefits ought to be de-connected from the unemployment insurance qualifications and be available to all pregnant women in this country? Will she take that position with the federal minister and with the federal government on behalf of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador?

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, both as Minister of Human Resources and Employment, and as the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women, we have addressed this issue as well as the other issues associated with EI and how it affects women. We are engaging with the federal government to try and look for changes to help offset this. We will continue our efforts to make sure that women receive equality in terms of their access to benefits in this area. The federal government, I am sure, will continue to look at this issue seriously and to try and find ways to improve the system.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. I say to the minister that it is a topic that no matter who you talk to today, is the first thing to come off their lip, and that is their concern about what is happening within the crab fishery here today.

Since it is obvious that there now will be some reduction in the amount of snow crab harvested this year, I ask the minister if he has made any recommendations to his federal cousin, or if he would inform the House today whether a reduction should be made the same in all areas or if the area that shows the greatest problem should be affected most?

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

MR. EFFORD: I would like to know what the hon. member is saying to his fishermen, his constituents in Bonavista. What do you think the cuts should be?

Mr. Speaker, if there is an area around the Province - for example, 3K - where it is very evident there has been a major problem for a number of years in the decline in the crab stocks, or like 3PS where there seems to be no problem whatsoever, the cuts have to be different. There will be no cuts in 3PS but there will be significant cuts in an area like 3K. So wherever the science says there is a problem, the appropriate decrease in the quota should take place, based on good scientific information.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, we finally got an answer to a question. I thank the minister.

Minister, since there is now a great concern about processing overcapacity in the snow crab fishery, and since some plants have a licence to process crab but have not been active, I ask the minister if it is his intention now to allow those plants access to the industry?

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

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, we have a policy, not only in the processing of crab, but with all species, that if a plant is inactive for two years it automatically loses its licence. It is a use it or lose it policy. When it comes to plants that processed a part of the season last year, or some that were gearing up last year to process this year, I will leave that up now, today, for discussions which I will be having on Tuesday with FANL and the industry. We will be having discussions on how many plants will be open this year -

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: I'm sorry?

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: There will be plants that will not be processing crab this year, based on an inactive policy and based on economics.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Minister, both you and the Premier have stated that a reduction of 20 per cent to 25 per cent of snow crab harvesting should not hurt the industry in any great negative way. Your comments were that the crab fishery in Alaska is much less than last year and with our reduction here the markets should be strong and crab should fetch a much higher price. Minister, there is one group that you have forgotten. What about the crab plant workers, a group of people you are responsible for?

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

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, I have not forgotten anybody in the fishing industry in Newfoundland and Labrador, but the one thing we cannot do is predict what nature is going to do. This is not a problem caused by overfishing. This is not a problem caused by ignoring scientists' advice or management's advice on the fisheries. This is a problem that has occurred by nature. There will be some short-term pain incurred by everybody in the industry in the Province, but I would rather see some short-term pain than what is happening in Alaska where they have fished it to a complete closure of the industry where there will be nobody working at all.

Now take into consideration that last year 42,000 tonnes of quotas of different species was left in the water. That is a significant amount of employment. Those people who did not catch those species last year will have less crab to catch and they will have more time to go out and catch turbot, shrimp, redfish, tuna and other species which will create a significant amount of employment where there will be loss in the crab industry.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I have a couple of questions in the same subject area, but I believe they are more appropriately put to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

I say to the minister that he is no doubt aware that there has been a developing crab fishery outside the Canadian 200-mile zone now for the last number of years. What I want to ask the minister is this. Is the minister aware that over the past year five Russian factory trawlers carrying Russian crews, equipped with crab boilers and brine freezers, have been reflagged under the Taiwan flag and have been, for the past several months, fishing for crab outside the Canadian 200-mile zone adjacent to Newfoundland and Labrador?

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

MR. EFFORD: I do not know who is doing the research or who is doing the investigation and preparing the questions for him. It was only yesterday I had a call from a person in Newfoundland who said a Russian ship left Harbour Grace last week with 5,000 pots on board. I can tell the hon. member that from all the information we have got from DFO, from the Coast Guard and from everybody else, they are not fishing on the Nose and Tail of the Grand Banks. Now, if they are fishing on the Flemish Cap or some other place around the world, we have not got that information yet.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for his answer.

I want to say to the minister this. If this Russian fishing effort, under the guise of a flag of convenience, causes enough crab to flow into the marketplace to replace any reduction that might take place inside the Canadian zone, the minister knows what dramatic effect that will have on harvesters, processors, and plant workers in Newfoundland.

PREMIER TOBIN: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes, I say to the Premier, if.

Now I want to ask the minister: Has the minister raised this issue with his appropriate federal colleagues? If so, what plans have been put in place to mitigate the economic fallout of that kind of disaster in Newfoundland and Labrador?

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

MR. EFFORD: Hypothetical questions, if, if. I feel like I am back, Mr. Speaker, in 1985 hearing the same types of comments coming from the then-Minister of Fisheries for the Province.

First of all, if Russian, Japan, Greenland or anybody else catches crab and puts it into the marketplace there is absolutely nothing anybody in this world can do about that. That is what is called free enterprise. It will have no bearing on the Newfoundland crab industry, either the rise or fall of prices. Last year Alaska harvested 235,000,000 pounds of crab. The crab price in Newfoundland last year went as high at $2 in the fall. The crab prices this year are starting off at pretty well the same level as they did last year. Will it have an impact?

AN HON. MEMBER: You are contradicting yourself.

MR. EFFORD: I am not contradicting myself. I am talking about the crab industry out there. Nova Scotia's quota doubled this year, New Brunswick's quota doubled this year, Greenland's quota doubled this year, and the markets are still there for the high-quality products that we ship out of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Final supplementary, the hon. the Member for Lewisporte.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, if the minister would compose himself he would know why the price is going up this year. It has all to do with supply.

I want to say to the minister that the minister is aware that because crab is a sedentary species, Canada as the coastal state - no matter where it is outside of 200 miles - has all the rights in international law to manage and control the utilization of this resource. What I want to ask the minster is: Has the minister requested the Government of Canada to use all the levers at its disposal to ensure that this under the table crab fishery by the Russians is stopped immediately; and, if he did, what response has he gotten from his federal colleagues?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture who, in his eloquence and generosity, allowed me a moment to briefly live again in the guise of a fisheries minister. Thank you, Minister, for your generosity.

Mr. Speaker, the member just said that the government knows that under the UN Convention, Canada has the right to manage sedentary species, and indeed he is right; because a previous Minister of Fisheries in Ottawa arrested two American fishing boats, the Alpha and the Omega, and dragged them into St. John's harbour when they were catching scallops offshore, and would not let them go until the United States recognized Canada's jurisdiction over sedentary species. I was pleased to do that in 1993.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I was feeling in such a magnanimous mood that I hired a former Premier of Newfoundland to work in the Department of DFO to give us some legal advice while he was at law school - indeed, the member opposite who just spoke - and he did a good job. He did a good job.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: May I finish, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the Premier to finish quickly.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows that we never, ever, raise the navy on the basis of if; we raise the navy when we had a problem; but I assure the member, if there is a problem one day, we will call DFO and expect them to their jobs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question Period has ended.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

AN HON. MEMBER: Mr. Speaker, while the Premier -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question Period has ended.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave?

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the Premier, since he is in such a good mood today: Is the Premier aware that today, outside the Canadian 200-mile zone, there are more vessels fishing today than when the Estai was brought into St. John's, Newfoundland?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the member is wrong when he says that; because, first of all -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER TOBIN: Well, Mr. Speaker, I am going to check it. I want the member to know that the next time he needs post-political employment opportunities and assistance, I will there for him again right after the next election.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear1

PREMIER TOBIN: Because, Mr. Speaker, he is like one of those flag of convenience vessels that we looked after. The first time a gun boat was shown to be on the horizon, they turned and ran and they have not come back.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to table the 1999 Annual Report of the Labour Relations Board.

MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion.

The hon. the Minister of Finance.

MR. MATTHEWS: I thought we were still on Presenting Reports, if I might.

MR. SPEAKER: Well, the Chair did not see any member standing. Will we revert to Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Yes.

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant to section 55, paragraph 3 of the Financial Administration Act, I wish to table the following list of loan guarantees paid out by the Province since the last report to the House.

Mr. Speaker, further pursuant to section 28 of the Financial Administration Act, I am tabling today seven copies of Special Warrants.

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Monday and Tuesday, April 3 and April 4, the House will not adjourn at 5:30 p.m.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition on behalf of some constituents from Bonavista South. The petition reads: Petition to reduce fees for building ATV trails.

To the hon. House of Assembly of Newfoundland and Labrador in legislative session convened, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland and Labrador;

WHEREAS the government is charging unreasonably high fees to people who construct ATV trails so they can access the Newfoundland and Labrador outdoors; and

WHEREAS protecting our wilderness does not have to mean taking advantage of people who do not have any other way to access our wilderness area;

WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to take immediate action to reduce the fees charged to people constructing ATV trails;

As in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, this is a petition that I thought was looked after, because I raised this concern here in the House in the last sitting and I talked about the cost that was being incurred by people who wanted to react, in a positive way, to rules and regulations that the government brought in by saying that you are not allowed to drive your ATV over areas that are wet marshlands and other areas that would do damage to the environment.

I related to the minister how one individual had spent in excess of $650 in order to construct a trail leading to his cabin. The nature of those fees was: $115 for a permit to create the trail; $21 for a cutting permit. Then he found himself going back in the second year to continue with his trail, to find out that he had to get another $21 cutting permit and he had to pay $100 to register a title document. Everywhere on that particular road - everything that he was doing to adhere to government rules and regulations - he found that he had to pass over a small stream or brook. Then he was being a responsible person and he constructed a bridge. For each bridge that he built, government charged him another $100.

Mr. Speaker, this is from a government who have gone out and said that people have to be responsible. If you are going to be using your all-terrain vehicles, we don't want to deny you access to your cabin but we suggest that you cut a trail and you stay away from wetlands and marshlands and we will issue you a permit.

What it is: it is not government concerned about wetlands, marshlands, and damage to the environment. Obviously it is a money grab where this individual now finds himself having to abandon the trail that he has half-way cut to get to his cabin, or leave his ATV out by the road, because government has saddled him with a $650 permit fee in order to cut a trail-

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: - to abide by government rules and regulations.

I ask the government and I ask the minister, since last year he reacted so positively when this concern was presented to the House and he looked over at me and said: Roger, that is going to be looked after, that won't happen -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Does the hon. member have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. FITZGERALD: Obviously, it hasn't been looked after and is still a great concern to those people who want to abide by rules and regulations.

Mr. Speaker, you know, as I do, for many people in this Province their small cabin in the woods is their trip to Florida. It is the only holiday they take. In order to access that cabin and that little cottage, they use their all-terrain vehicles. If they want to act responsibly, then I say to the minister and I say to the Premier that maybe it is time that we looked at some of those silly rules and regulations, and maybe it is time that if we have people listening to government and abiding by government rules and regulations, that we don't reach out and reach into their pocket and take this kind of money from the people in this Province who can least afford to pay for it.

Thank you.

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am presenting another petition today from the residents of Shea Heights, requesting wheelchair accessible housing units within the community of Shea Heights.

As I have yesterday and the previous day, these petitions, I am sure, will keep coming in because it is an area of concern for the residents of Shea Heights. There are a number of residents in the area now living in housing units that are not wheelchair accessible; however, these individuals use wheelchairs and they have no ability to get up and down the stairs in their properties - within the Newfoundland and Labrador housing unit properties - without considerable effort.

What we are asking for is nothing great. It is just to have equal access for people with handicaps, for people with disabilities. What we are asking for in the Shea Heights area is for government to construct a couple of housing units with wheelchair accessibility for handicapped people; single level units where people with handicaps can have equal access to Newfoundland and Labrador housing. At present, the only solution for the people in the Shea Heights area is to go to another area of the city for handicap-accessible housing.

As we all know, the community of Shea Heights is a very close community. The families in the area rely heavily upon each other for assistance and help. As we have seen just prior to Christmas, when there was a house in the area burned down, most of the community rallied around that particular family and helped them construct a brand new home in a period of two weeks. It took just two weeks to construct a brand new home. They were in there for Christmas.

What I am trying to portray here is the fact that the families in the Shea Heights area, if there is a family in need, the other families in the Shea Heights area rally around and do what they can to help the family that is in need. It is really not acceptable to expect a family from the Shea Heights area to go down to the east end, or go out to Mt. Pearl, away from their sources of help.

What we are asking is for serious consideration by government to the construction of wheelchair-accessible units in the Shea Heights area so that the families in the Shea Heights area can continue to rely upon the support network that is evident and existing in the Shea Heights area, and that people with disabilities, people who are using wheelchairs, can continue to live within their own community and rely upon friends and family when that is needed.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. TULK: Motion 1, the hon. the Minister of Finance to move that this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the government, otherwise known as the Budget Speech.

We are going to have almost three hours, I suppose, of glorious, enlightening, information from the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, I find it necessary to stand now and point out what were misleading comments that were made here in the House of Assembly during Question Period, for the reason that there is enough devastation and enough hurt in the minds of people of Newfoundland Labrador now about the crab fishery and about what is going to happen in the year 2000.

I just went out and checked, and called DFO to confirm what I had already said. Here is exactly what happened: A Russian ship was loaded with crab pots in Harbour Grace. DFO, Coast Guard officials, enforcement officers, boarded the vessel and checked out everything. They also have regular surveillance flying over the Nose and Tail and the Flemish Cap. They were told that the shellfish on the bottom, right out to the edge of the Continent Shelf and the Flemish Cap, is under Canada's jurisdiction. They confirmed that the pots they were taking is exactly as I said. Those pots are doing exploring work off Greenland, absolutely nothing to do with Canadian waters whatsoever.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Lewisporte.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, first of all there is no point of order.

MR. EFFORD: You don't make that (inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: The Speaker makes that decision. I have been here long enough not to allow the minister to take the House on his back either.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, he had his moment or two to make his point of order. I am saying to Your Honour that there is no point of order. If there is anything, there might be a disagreement between two hon. members, but neither am I going to be hoodwinked into taking the word of that minister. There is something to this and the minister is not going to get away with it just because he doesn't like it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I think I just heard the Member for Lewisporte say that he was not going to be hoodwinked by the Minister of Fisheries. I would ask the hon. gentleman to be a gentleman and say what he should say, that he will withdraw that statement, that he will not attribute motives to the Minister of Fisheries, that he will not do through the back door - try to call him what he is not allowed to call him in this House, and withdraw that. If he doesn't want to believe the information that is fine, but not to say he is somehow trying to mislead the House and hoodwink him.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

To the original point of order, there was actually no point of order. The hon. member took the opportunity to clarify some statements that had been made earlier.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

Today I want to give the Government House Leader a little lesson in math, which he tried to give me the other day when I asked him questions with respect to the Auditor General's report. I don't think he hoodwinked me. I tell you what it was like; it was like the kindergarten student trying to give a university professor a lesson in math.

What he said, when I asked him a question with respect to the wastage of $60 million in the Auditor General's report, was: $18.1 million, $7 million and $8.975 million add up to $32 million. Actually, it adds up to $34.07 million. He tried to give the impression -

MR. TULK: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader, on a point of order.

MR. TULK: I just want to say to the hon. gentleman that the difference between $32 million and $34 million - if I could give him another little bit of math - is $2 million. The difference between $34 million, if he wants to use his figure, and $60 million, is some $24 million. So my mistake and my knowledge of math must be a little bit better than his.

AN HON. MEMBER: Twenty-six.

MR. TULK: Twenty-six.

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

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

I won't comment about the mistake he just made but I will tell him this. He jumped up on a point of order before I had time to finish. I was getting to the $60 million, and I checked it out again. When you look at it, here is what the $60 million we were referring to - that he tried to say I was wrong in my figures. I will not use the word mislead. In summary, only 25 per cent of ENL's total loan and equity portfolio of $78.2 million is estimated to be collectible.

Mr. Speaker, also - let's sit down now. Don't panic, I say to the Government House Leader.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Not only that; those figures, that 25 per cent and the $60 million, are not even the Auditor General's figures. They are the department's figures themselves. They gave those figures to her and she accepted them. She really doesn't know if they are that accurate or not. So, I say to the Government House Leader, don't be so smart. Don't try to be too cute by a half.

MR. TULK: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER (Smith):Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader, on a point of order.

MR. TULK: Is the hon. gentleman now saying that the public officials of this Province tried to mislead the Auditor General? Let me give him a couple of facts about what he is saying. The truth of the matter is that the Auditor General, in the first part of her report, said only 25 per cent of $78 million was recovered. Now she was using a doubtful allowance account of somewhere around 39 per cent. I am going to confuse him now. Of that, 7 per cent belonged to the Department of Development and Rural Renewal. Further on in her report, though, she says: Historically, the department, ENL, has collected 62 per cent of its accounts receivable. I wonder, did he get that?

MR. J. BYRNE: What's Newco?

MR. TULK: What's what?

MR. J. BYRNE: Newco.

MR. TULK: I will tell you what Newco is if you stand up. You won't like it but I will tell you what it is.

The truth of the matter is that the Auditor General made those statements but she did not say that the Department of Development and Rural Renewal had spent $60 million when in fact its total budget, including the special reserve fund, was only $34.2 million. You would have to waste it all.

Mr. Speaker, I can't say he's stunned. That is not right. I can't say that.

MR. SPEAKER (Smith): Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

The Government House Leader, further to the $34 million he is talking about, is trying to be too cute by a half. It only goes back to 1996, 1996-1997, 1997-1998, 1998-1999. That is what he is trying to hang his hat on.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Sit down and let me address the point of order you are talking about.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TULK: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me just say to the hon. gentleman that the Department of Development and Rural Renewal did not waste and did not lose $60 million. The Auditor General did make the statement that there is $78 million in the outstanding balance; that if you use an allowance for doubtful accounts that an accountant would use, then only 25 per cent of that is recoverable. What the Auditor General's report does not show is that some of that belonged to a previous administration - the Wells Administration - some of it belonged to the Rideout Administration, some of that belonged to the Peckford Administration.

Let me say to the hon. gentleman that he should check out all of his facts. When ENL was not even around, I say to him that the Auditor General put everything under ENL fifty-two times in the report when she should have been using either DDRR, NLDC, RAND, RDA, which goes back to both the Peckford and the Rideout administrations, as well as the Wells Administration, and has nothing to do with the Tobin Administration.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

Now I can understand why you allowed him to have a second point of order because his first point of order wasn't a point of order. I will address that anyway.

I will address this point. He made a comment that I was saying that the executives of his department misled the Auditor General. That is not what I said at all. What I said is that the Auditor General made a statement that those figures that she was using are from the department. They are the department's own figures. There is no difference in the figures, I say to the Government House Leader, and he chooses not to listen to those statements.

We have here in the Auditor General's Report, under the Department of Development and Rural Renewal, is this statement: "Loans were made to companies that had existing loans in arrears or when there were indications that management was not acting in good faith." That has happened. This government has done that. They have gone back. Yes, there may be some back in the 1980s, but he was trying to hang his hat - from 1996 to 1999 is where the $34 million comes into it. In actual fact, there is over $60 million that the Auditor General is referring to and I will take her figures any day over his.

MR. TULK: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Let me say to the hon. gentleman that if he wants to look at the loans that the Department of Development and Rural Renewal made to companies that came from other governments, of the total $78 million that the Auditor General is talking about, the Department of Development and Rural Renewal to those companies that had problems, in an effort to try to keep them alive -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Are you listening? It loaned $273,000. Do you have that figure? Two hundred and seventy-three thousand dollars out of $78 million. If he wants any other information, I can assure him I have lots over here.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: I am getting used to those no point of orders, Mr. Speaker.

What about the Strategic Enterprise Development Special Reserve Fund, I say to the Government House Leader, that I asked questions on the other day and he didn't answer? He deliberately skirted around. He didn't answer the question with respect to the Strategic -

MR. TULK: I will tell you the truth. I thought you were going to ask a third question and I was going to answer the second question.

MR. J. BYRNE: That is logical.

MR. TULK: You ask me tomorrow (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: No, I will ask you anything now.

The Auditor General said this: Our review disclosed that these procedures were not followed for three projects. That is what I asked him about the other day. Why weren't the proper procedures followed on the three projects?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Oh yes, he will get up on a point of order. Get up on unanswered questions, that is what you can do.

Today, I asked questions to the Minister of Finance with respect to taxes and how the Budget said there are no new taxes in this Budget. Of course, as I said before, the next day a memo goes out to all the liquor outlets in the Province, dated March 23, effective April 1, a new price list.

Our leader asked questions in the House, and he made statements after the Budget, that because of this Budget and the monies that the different corporations would have to borrow, you would see increases in liquor, you would see increases in electricity rates, and you would see increases in other areas of the Province. That is the very point I was making today: they are not doing it through the front door but they are doing it through the back door. Over the past number of years, with respect to the budgets in this Province, they have always tried to praise and brag that there are no new taxes, but as I said before, and I will say it again, how many times have we seen licences, fees, permits doubling, tripling, quadrupling? That is where they are getting their extra revenue. We also know there are fees and permits. Fees are now charged for various permits and licences that were never charged before. That is where they are getting the extra money, and they are saying there are no new taxes. They are doing through the back door what they haven't got the guts to do through the front door

Now, let's look at this increase in spirits or liquor or whatever the case may be. It is on certain products. I believe some of the products, wine for one, will go up. We know there is an increase in consumption of wine in the Province over the past few years, and some of the prices will be increasing there, but in the Budget the minister requires the liquor board to come up with an extra $10 million. The minister was trying to say that it is because of the product, an extra price on the product. I don't care where it is coming from. If it is coming out of my pocket and out of the pockets of the people of this Province it is an indirect tax, again doing through the back door what they will not do through the front door.

Also what we see here is the point that was made with respect to Newfoundland Hydro. Some $86 million is going to come from Newfoundland Hydro. Where are they going to get the money, I ask you, Mr. Speaker? If they charge it out to Newfoundland Power, where is Newfoundland Power going to get the money? So I will say that the Opposition Leader, the Member for Kilbride, was right on when he said that the electricity rates will go up, and you will probably see them go up later on in the summer when they are not so noticeable. Next winter -

MR. MATTHEWS: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Finance on a point of order.

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, it is with great reluctance that I interrupt the speech being given by the hon. Member for Cape St. Francis, my critic, on matters of finance in this House, because his role and his duty is important. As a matter of fact, it is so important that I believe it would be his best wish that he be accurate in the statements that he makes and the allegations that he puts forward. His assertion that a price in liquor products is an indirect tax is factually, with great respect, incorrect. The fact of the matter is if products that they are purchasing for resale increases, the price of their product on the shelf must also increase. This happens regularly with respect to that product or any other product.

It is not unlike the gasoline issue, Mr. Speaker. We do not get one dime extra on our gasoline tax because the price of petroleum product goes up. It is simply driven 100 per cent by market forces. So I think the record should be clear, and I am sure the hon. member would want to be completely accurate in suggesting that the price in product has nothing to do with taxes, tax rates, tax changes or tax increases. It is a function of the marketplace in terms of the price of product increasing that causes a price increase to occur on their product on the shelf.

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

What the minister is not saying, though, is that if the price of the product goes up the taxes go up with it. I find it kind of ironic, too, that there are over 500 products going up at the same time. How would you explain that, I say to the Minister of Finance? The bottom line is this. The liquor board has been told to come up with an extra $10 million this year and you cannot tell me in this House - you might tell me and you might believe it, but I cannot understand how they can come up with extra $10 million and not pass it on to the consumer. The same thing with Newfoundland Hydro. They are coming up with $9 million that Hydro is going to have to guarantee, and $76 million from Hydro on their dividends.

Now, if Hydro has to come up with this kind of money, $85 million this year, I do not care what you say to me, I really don't, but I am telling you that if they have to come up with $85 million extra this year over what they produced last year, it is being passed on to the consumer. You can say it is a tax or you can say whatever it is, I could not care less. It is extra money that is going to be coming out of the pockets of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador by this fall, and more than likely it is going to be starting in late summer when it will not be that noticeable, I say to the minister. We shall see, because more often than not, on this side of the House when we make these announcements or projections, we are right. How often has the critic for health made statements in this House of Assembly over the past number of years and how often has he been right? All the time. I have yet to know him to be wrong on an issue.

I had a few words on the Budget here the other day. I'm going to just do a quick review of what I said the other day, then I am going to go on to other issues. I spoke about the fiscal performance of the Province and the comments that the minister made and the trickery that is being used in this Budget. We talked about the $30 million contingency reserve and how that is being maintained this year. If you really put that into the proper perspective, if they are saying they have $34 million - according to the government's figures, not ours - in actual fact, they only have a $4 million deficit, because that $30 million is there to use. If they do not use it, they can utilize it to help balance the Budget at the end of the year.

One point I am going to get into down the road - and the Auditor General brought this up - is the abuse, I say to the Minister of Finance, of the special warrants. They are using very clever tactics with respect to the special warrants, I can guarantee you that. I have the figures here. I will get into that later on and hopefully I will not forget about it. Then again, they said there are no new taxes in this Budget. I have a lot to say, I say to the Minister of Finance. I am saying a lot more about this Budget, I say to the Minister of Finance, than he has said about it and that he is going to say about it, I can tell you that.

MR. MATTHEWS: It took me an hour and three minutes to deliver. It is taking you about three times that long so far to say nothing about it.

MR. J. BYRNE: I expect what you should do is get Hansard - I have it here- and go read it. You might be able to learn something, I say to the minister. You might really find out what is going on in the Province with respect to this. I hope one of these days I will meet the people that put the Budget together for you, the people that crafted it for you and who worded it for you. They did a very good job, I compliment then on that, because what you are saying you are getting in this Budget and what we are getting are two different things.

I have the minister's attention now. I want to tell him one item just to show you how smooth they are. It is with respect to education. Here they say: In excess of 300 teaching positions will be reinstated for September 2000 at an annual cost of more than $15 million -

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I have his attention now, Loyola. I'm making a point to him. I'm trying to show him the trickery and how it works, right?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: No, I would not use that word.

MR. MATTHEWS: Point of privilege, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of privilege, the hon. the Minister of Finance.

MR. MATTHEWS: On a point of personal privilege.

My colleague the Minister of Education as she was leaving mentioned that the word being used to describe the Minister of Finance was "trickery."

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. MATTHEWS: I would have to ask the Speaker to rule as to whether or not it is parliamentary language to refer to another hon. member as being a person who is using trickery, or engaged in activities that hinge on trickery, or to otherwise make reference, in any oblique way, to the suggestion that the hon. member might be ‘trickeryizing' anything that he has put forward in this House. I am not a ‘trickeryizer' and I do not use trickery. I do not use slight of hand. What you see is what you get, and what you have gotten are the facts: a wonderful budget delivered to a wonderful province, accepted royally by wonderful people because they recognize we have listened to the voice of the people in our exhaustive consultative process.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member want to speak to the point of privilege?

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, for a start he changed his story midstream, if you pay attention to what he did. He got up and he said that I was describing him as trickery. I did not use that, saying the minister - whatever words he used as trickery. It doesn't make sense to me. What I said was what was being used in this Budget - the trickery of this Budget, I said, Mr. Speaker. Surely I can refer to an object being used as trickery.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I would ask the hon. members to restrain themselves while the Chair rules.

The Chair has listened with interest to the eloquent dissertation put forward by the minister that his personal privileges in this House had been abused by the hon. Member for Cape St. Francis. I have to confess that for the first minute-and-a-half of his presentation he almost had me convinced, but the last minute-and-a-half he lost me completely.

I have listened closely to the hon. Member for Cape St. Francis. I did hear him reference the Budget, and there was some suggestion that everything was not untoward with regards to it. I would ask him to refrain from using that term, "trickery," but certainly there was no reference to the hon. minister himself that he in any way used trickery in crafting it.

I think earlier in the hon. member's presentation he already said that the document was probably crafted by someone else and only delivered by the minister.

The Chair recognizes the hon. Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

What I will do is try and refrain from using the word trickery, but I would use the description slight of hand budget. How is that? It was a good ruling against the minister.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. HARRIS: The Speaker is going straight to the Supreme Court after this.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

If the hon. member doesn't want any more members standing on points of privilege, or points of order, I would ask him to refrain from using "slight of hand" as well, because that (inaudible) unparliamentary.

MR. J. BYRNE: If I am clear in what your ruling is, I didn't use word trickery to describe the minister, I used it to describe the Budget and that is okay. As long as I -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I'm speaking. Sit!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SULLIVAN: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess the point of information is this. It is legitimate to use the word trickery. Trickery has been ruled in the House of Commons as to be acceptable; it is ruled parliamentary to use the word trickery. In making reference to any of the debates, it has not indicated that trickery is in the list of unparliamentary ones. Trickery has been an accepted one, according to Beauchesne, §490. It has been ruled parliamentary to use that I just want to say that for the record. It doesn't list it under the ones that are unparliamentary.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, the hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quid Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To that point of order.

I don't wish to question Your Honour's judgement. As a result of your most recent ruling, I would be inclined to think that you are going straight from here to the Supreme Court after your term of office. The term slight of hand, I understood that as a suggestion that the minister had particular skills that are attributable to a magician. I would have thought that the Minister of Finance would have been complimented by such a suggestion coming from the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair will rule on the point of order. The Chair would like to recognize the contribution of hon. members and thank them for their information. The Chair will take these matters under advisement.

The Chair now recognizes the hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: To you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Minister of Finance.

MR. MATTHEWS: Just in response to the representation by the hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, Mr. Speaker. While I would be rather accepting of the proposition that he might want to be in some way complimentary to my genius, I am less understanding and accepting of the concept that he is in fact sincere in putting forward that proposition.

If in fact the hon. member is really sincere in suggesting that I am a magician, then I would ask him, probably after my long political career is done in many years' time, to point me to some area where I might be able use my expertise to further enhance my ability to put bread on the table.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

To that so-called point of order.

If the minister had been listening to me the other day when I was speaking, I said what he should do after he gets out of politics - I found a job for him - is go to Las Vegas and look for a job in the casinos down there. Figure that out.

MR. MATTHEWS: (Inaudible) would be what?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Did you hear what he said? I didn't say it.

MR. TULK: I wonder if you could stop this nonsense and (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I want to talk a few minutes on special warrants and the abuse of this administration of the special warrants. Special warrants are supposed to be utilized by government in emergency situations. It is something that was not in the previous Budget, in the current Budget, and if they have an emergency situation they will use special warrants. I find this kind of ironic. I am going to make a point now - I have to smooth my hair back - that in 1997.... Listen to this. I say to the Minister of Finance, you should pay close attention to this.

MR. MATTHEWS: I'm coming right back. Would you like to take a break, because I have a meeting.

MR. J. BYRNE: I can't take a break. I have to keep going because they will close her down on me.

Total special warrants for 1997 - now just listen - was $75,700,000. You would think, if you have special warrants, that they would be utilized throughout the year; but the special warrants - issued in March of each year.

Just listen to this. In 1997, the total for the year was $75,700,000 and in March there was $75,700,000 - in one month. Now does that make sense to you, Mr. Speaker? Seventy-five million, seven hundred thousand in one month. The full amount that they utilized in that year was issued at the end of March. Why? You have to ask the question: Why would they utilize all the money at the end of the year? Because they are playing with figures in the Budget, the bottom line of the Budget. If you have that kind of money left over at the end of the year, of course there would be a surplus. What are they saying to the people of the Province when they do that? They are trying to give the indication that when they come out with the next Budget they will need all this kind of money.

In 1998, total special warrants for the year, $88,601,000; but in the month of March, $34,567,000. That is almost 50 per cent in one month. Obviously, numbers are being juggled around, jumbled around and what have you, to suit the financial ends of the administration.

In 1999 - now this is ridiculous -

MR. BARRETT: How many zeros are in that, Jack?

MR. J. BYRNE: We will buy you a book now to keep you busy, I say to the Member for Bellevue. Do you have any books over there with pictures in them for him? I say to the Government House Leader, can you get a book over there with a lot of pictures in it and give it to him to keep him busy? Because I am sure he can't do very much reading.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I don't mind. I don't mind getting up at all. That's no problem.

Mr. Speaker, listen to this one. This is absolutely ridiculous, I say to the Member for Terra Nova; he is paying attention. In 1999 there were fourteen special warrants issued. The total special warrants for the year, for the full year, was $136,051,900 but in the month of March, out of that $136 million, the last month of the year, there was $123 million in special warrants. Obviously, if anybody cannot see what is going on here they are literally blinded to the actual reality.

If that $136 million had not been spent, they would actually have - or the $123 million in the last month - they could have a surplus by the end of the year of $123 million. Then, what would that look like when they are putting together the budget for the next year? Do you see what is happening? Trickery! What I said before. That is what is going on here.

The Auditor General makes this statement, and I will read it. It says, "Figure 2 provides information on each of these special warrants and indicates that $95 million of the $136.1 million were, in my opinion, issued in contravention of the Financial Administration Act in that they were not urgently required."

As I said earlier the special warrants had to be urgently required for an emergency and what have you, Mr. Speaker. She is saying here that $95 million of $136.l million were in contravention of the Financial Administration Act.

Now, in my mind, if it is in contravention of the Financial Administration Act, have their laws been broken here? Has the government actually broken the law? Some people may think that is stretching it because it is so general a statement, I suppose, and when you come to special warrants it is general, but when you are looking at almost $124 million out of $136.l million being spent in the last month, one would tend to believe, Mr. Speaker, that there is something funny going on with the special warrants and they are being abused.

As a matter of fact, the Public Accounts Committee had hearings on this some time ago. The report is not completed yet, but we will be presenting that to the House of Assembly hopefully this spring.

Also, under the Department of Finance with respect to special warrants, the Auditor General says this here, "Since the Corporation did not use or require the $5 million approved by special warrant on 12 March 1999 during the 1998-99 fiscal year, there was no urgent requirement for the $5 million." Now, Mr. Speaker, what is happening here is that the government is coming out and saying we need $5 million, the Department of Finance, an urgent situation, in the middle of March, and it is not utilized. As a matter of fact, she says, "Therefore, I conclude that there was not urgent requirement of the $5 million for the special warrant.", in the first place.

That is rampant throughout this report. Also, she talks about March 12, under the Department of Health and Community Services, that $58 million was approved, but it was not spent in that period, so where was the urgency?

What we are saying here is when they are using special warrants in the last month of the year, the fiscal year end, basically, and they do not utilize it in that month, really what should be happening is that money that was taken out - the millions, the tens of millions, maybe hundreds of millions - should be put into the upcoming budget. That is where we are getting into the problem that I have with it, that they are playing with numbers, cooking the books, I suppose is the right terminology, cooking the books to make it look something that it is not.

Also, there is a lot of stuff here with respect to the special warrants, and it says, "Impact on Government's Financial Results." I am going to read right straight from the Auditor General's report, if I can. It says, "Figure 3 clearly shows that since 1992-93 fiscal year, Government's actual cash surplus or deficit before special warrants was always more favourable than the cash surplus or deficit projected in the cash budget which was approved by the House of Assembly."

What she is saying is that the special warrants are having a direct result on the bottom line of the budget of each upcoming year. It says, "It is my opinion that $95 million of the $136.l million of the special warrants issued in 1998-99 did not meet the requirements of the Financial Administration Act..." Listen to this now; it is what I said earlier, "...Government would have reported a cash surplus of $105.1 million compared to the $10.1 million that was actually reported."

So, if they were not putting all this money at the end of the year into the special warrants just to utilize them and to use up the money - and, by the way, I saw that happen similar in the government departments and I would image it is still happening in some. I can only speak when I worked with the government back about seventeen or eighteen years ago. What you would see when March month would roll around, if a department or if any sub-committees of the department in the regions or whatever, had X amount of dollars left towards the end of the year, they would make sure they had that money spent; because if they didn't, they felt they would lose it in the upcoming budget. That is the same thing that is going on here. The government, on the end of it, are wasting money. It has been proven out in the Auditor General's report that they are doing this.

We have the government then coming on and trying to give impression often, a few years ago, that they had balanced budgets when, in fact, they are using this $30 million contingency fund every year over the past number of years since this administration - I think probably since 1996, at least 1996 - the $30 million contingency fund, utilized by government for whatever they want. When they say they have a $10 million surplus, it is actually $40 million. If they are saying that they are having a $10 million or $20 million deficit, the difference is there all the time. Again, I think that this government is playing with figures all the time.

I have a lot to say here yet today, I can guarantee you that. I am trying to find some of my notes here now, Mr. Speaker, so just bear with me for a second.

I am going to refer back to the federal Budget and the Canadian Health and Social Transfer payments. As I said before, we have a Premier of this Province who sat around the Cabinet table when they changed the policy on it, and changed it to a per capita basis. That was having a major negative impact upon this Province. We only have 500,000 people in the Province and, if you compare that to Quebec or Ontario, what are we actually going to get? We saw over the past few years, because of that, $125 million per year cut to health care in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

On top of that we have seen 40,000 people, over the past few years, leave this Province. That again is impacting upon how much money we receive from Ottawa. We have our critic for health, in the past few years, speaking to the Minister of Health and to the Premier, and bringing up questions as he did today, many, many times. What do we get in return? Fearmongering, fearmongering, fearmongering, and that we are trying to create problems in the health care that are not really there.

Then, all of a sudden, when it is convenient for the Premier to come out and say: A major crisis in the health care in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Why did he say that all of a sudden? Because, he needed an issue. He needed a national issue. We had the Premiers and the governments from across the country saying to the federal Minister of Finance, Paul Martin, that we need more money pumped into health care in the country. What did we get in the federal Budget? Very, very little. Not even enough to handle the deficit of the health care.

We had the St. John's Health Care Board, the Chairman in there, saying that we needed $100 million into the system and he wouldn't even waste one penny of that. I think we are getting something like $30 million or $40 million.

Now, as I said, the Premier is up, going to be the Captain Canada for health care in the Province. Where was he when we needed him, when they were making the changes around the Cabinet table, when he was the Minister for Newfoundland and Labrador in that Cabinet? You didn't hear a lot then. Now, he has national aspirations. Now he wants to go on to Ottawa and he is going to try to be the hero for health care in the Province.

Also, as I said with respect to that federal Budget, if I was living in Ontario today, if I was a Member of the Legislative Assembly in Ontario, I think I would be pretty happy with respect to that Budget; but the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are certainly not doing anything with it.

The infrastructure that the federal government is putting forward this year for Newfoundland on a per capita basis to Newfoundland and Labrador, $2 million. Here, this little Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, we are putting in some $20 million ourselves - the Department of Municipal and Provincial Affairs - for infrastructure in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, and all Ottawa is going to give us is $2 million. It is a joke. It really is a joke.

Post-secondary education, what did we get in post-secondary education on a national level from Ottawa? Nothing. They said they were going to do something, but we really got nothing in the long haul. All we got was some talk about tax exemptions. How many people are going to be able to take advantage of these tax exemptions? We are talking about students in university. Really, Mr. Speaker. They probably don't even make enough money to get up to the amount of money that would be required, the base, to take advantage of the tax exemptions.

You know, you are talking about a government here in Newfoundland of the same stripe, by the way, as the government in Ottawa, and they are getting kicked like this; but I will tell you what is going on here now with respect to Ottawa. Really, this is pretty disheartening, I suppose, and it is hurtful. We have a government who, I am thinking, are trying to position themselves - and they have billions of dollars in surplus; they have billions in the EI fund. They have something like $8 billion this year - they are saying they have in surplus, if my figures are correct - and it could very well be double that; I don't know.

They are lining themselves up for an election. We won't give it to them now. We are seeing indications of this. We have the Premier and other Premiers getting together and demanding from Ottawa that they put more money into health care. They went up and had a meeting with the Finance Minister, talked about it, and he wants the Premiers to go back to their provinces and do a study to see if there is any wastage in the system. Come back to him again and he will have another look at it. What is really happening here is only a delaying tactic, I say to you, delaying.

When an election call comes, or shortly before, we are going to see money pumped into the health care system into this country. We are going to see money pumped into the infrastructure in this country, but what happens in the meantime? This is a very serious point. What happens in the meantime? The people who are sick today, if we are waiting another year, or fourteen or fifteen months before an election is called, or eight months, what happens between now and then with the people who are actually sick, who are in a life and death situation? I think that is cruel and I suppose you can refer to it as unjust to the people of the country. That is the way I feel.

Another issue - we will move on here - with respect to the Budget: A couple of weeks ago before the Budget came down, we saw the Premier attend a school function where they were going to announce $500,000 for our School Lunch Program. What did he do? He went to the school - and this is his typical fashion, his typical way, his big way - oh, this is such a good program, I am going to put $1 million into it. Not criticizing the $1 million; it might need $2 million, it might need $5 million. Great, I would love to see it, but the problem is the way he did it. How can he come up with $500,000 there, $1 million there, $2 million there, just off the cuff, and be responsible to the budget as it has been set out? To me, it's not logical. How does the Minister of Finance deal with that kind of action - irresponsible action from my perspective?

Also, when it came to the Budget, they are talking about a small deficit of $34 million. Well, if you look at the overall picture, $34 million is not a lot when you compare it to $3.7 billion or whatever the case may be, but $34 million is a lot of money. What he is not doing, and what the Minister of Finance is not doing, and what the people of this Province do not see on a budget day, is this: the boards, the various board, the school boards, the health care boards.

AN HON. MEMBER: Hurry up, Jack.

MR. J. BYRNE: You only have another two hours of this.

Health care boards, the school boards, as I said earlier, and the municipalities. The money that these boards are responsible for, the debt of these boards, are not factored into the Budget. So, when they say they have a deficit of $34 million, the actual fact then, if you look at the municipalities - the debt of the municipalities alone would throw that so far out of kilter it is unreal.

They have Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, Newfoundland Hydro, the town councils, as I said earlier, the health care boards. The deficit this year for the health care boards in Newfoundland is somewhere over $40 million. That is not factored in there. So, in actual fact, as I say before, when we are looking at the Budget we are not getting a true picture.

Another point that needs to come up and is not factored in here - and I have a list here somewhere and I am going to see if I can dig it out here now - is the court cases over the years. I want to talk a bit about the various court cases that this administration and the previous administration have been into. Many of the ministers on that side of the House now - and we saw an example the other day of the Government House Leader trying to stick it back to the sitting administration, to 1996-1997, when the Premier of the day - he has to take responsibility. He was there back in 1993, 1989 -

MR. TULK: Who, me?

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes. You were just about up in the galleries. I know you were not a minister, but you were part of that administration and whatever they said you agreed with. Whatever they said, he agreed with.

MR. TULK: Jack, you know the difference of that.

MR. FITZGERALD: No he didn't, Jack.

MR. TULK: There's my buddy up there. That's my buddy.

MR. J. BYRNE: I stand corrected. The Member for Bonavista South said no, he didn't agree with everything. Didn't he? Okay, well maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention to him because he was so far back in the nosebleed section that I wasn't paying attention. He was up in the gallery almost; but he was there and theoretically, I suppose, if he was in strong objection to what they were doing he would have sat as an Independent. He may say he disagreed with them, but his actions said something different, I say to the Government House Leader.

When you see this administration, they are always trying to deflect, trying to twist, and all that kind of stuff, especially when we get up on this side of the House and ask questions, especially when we do that. Oh, boy, they are so good at it; but they can't because we have the Minister of Finance there, who was there then, the Minister of Fisheries, the Minister of Tourism. Who else was over there back then? They are still here today so they have to take responsibility for their actions, their court actions, the decisions they made around the Cabinet table and the impact that is having today.

I am going to bring up something which that crowd over there likes to throw at us all the time, but it is so ridiculous and insignificant when you compare it to the abuse and wastage of this administration. They talk about the Sprung Greenhouse. At least when that was around it created 300 jobs for two or three years. Now, if I was here I probably would not have agreed with the magnitude but we have to try new things. I think the Minister of Tourism would agree that we have to try new things, I would think, but it depends on the magnitude of how we do it. He is nodding his head in agreement. Pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: No.

Let's make a comparison. Twenty-four million dollars, he said, 300 jobs created for two or three years; and look at the taxes and the business that spun off. Now I am going to start talking about millions and millions, tens of millions, twenties of millions and more, that this administration has wasted and not created one job. The most recent, of course - and I will probably try to work backwards but I will not go back into Smallwood's time, like this crowd tries to do for us. I will just go back to this bunch.

The Auditor General's report, in one department, $60 million; in one department over the past number of years. I am talking about how much money has been wasted over the years by this government and not create one job.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: In the Department of Development and Rural Renewal, $60 million. I am not talking about the money that was put out there and there were actual jobs created. I am talking about the $60 million that cannot be collected.

MR. TULK: But it created jobs.

MR. J. BYRNE: No, but it is money wasted; it is $60 million we are not getting back.

The Government House Leader is trying to be confusing again. What we are saying is this: the money was passed out but it was supposed to come back to the government. It did not come back, so it did not create - that $60 million is gone.

I am going to talk on that later on. I will get into more detail later on.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: No, not now.

That is that. Now, let's look at the call centers. How many millions - are there any pictures in that book you are reading over there, I say to the Minister of Tourism?

Call centres. Millions of dollars out the windows. They were going to create thousands of jobs.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: No, not likely, but millions of dollars gone. I remember the Premier being here - now, this is not a call centre, this is the tee shirt factory, the designer clothing industry he was going to create in the Province. A lot like Joey Smallwood with his big ways and big ideas, with the hockey stick factories and the chocolate factories and the rubber boot factories and what have you. He was going to have this designer clothing factory in the Province, with thousands of jobs. Then all of a sudden it was going to be tee shirt factory in the Province. What did it end up being, Mr. Speaker? A big, fat zero, nothing, and that is typical of the Premier and this Administration.

I would like to have it here but I don't have it in my hand, but I noticed today that the Minister of Tourism made a Ministerial Statement about "The Rooms." That in itself is a controversy, "The Rooms," the heritage and the museum and everything here in St. John's. That in itself is a controversy.

AN HON. MEMBER: You are against that?

MR. J. BYRNE: Listen, the minister is just like the other minister. The Minister of Tourism is trying to put words in my mouth. He should be patient and let me say what I am going to say. There are two or three points I want to make.

We have this $40 million, give or take. My concern is this. If we have the same situation go on there as we did with Trans City Holdings, Mr. Speaker, if you have the same situation happen there as we had with the ferry in Labrador - the public tendering on this project, let's have a close look and see what is going to happen. That $40 million could end up being $50 million, it could be $60 million, if you go with the history of this Administration and with their court cases. They are going to do something somewhere to see that their buddies get the contract.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I am going to address that. I want to get on this. You ask me that in a few minutes, will you?

If they do what they have done in the past that they have a history for, the reason why they tore apart the public tender act a couple of years ago, is they went to court and found out that they were in contravention of the public tender act and ended up having to pay out millions of dollars for not properly following the public tender act. I'm predicting the same thing is going to happen with that ferry in Labrador. When the judge the other day came down and said, basically, that: You have every right to take this court. I can't turn it over because it will affect the services of the people in the area. That may be a factor, but he awarded court costs. They didn't have to pay that. He basically told them: Listen, you have a good case, take it to court, a civil action. What will be the bottom line? How much? We don't know.

With respect to "The Rooms," which I'm on about, the point I'm making is if they put it out to tender and they don't follow the tendering act we could end up paying tens of millions more than we should be paying.

With respect to the controversy on that, $40 million dollars -

AN HON. MEMBER: What controversy?

MR. J. BYRNE: The controversy across this Province.

AN HON. MEMBER: Your leader just got up and praised it up (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: He got up and said it is a nice looking facility.

MR. SULLIVAN: To preserve our culture, I said.

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, to preserve our culture and what have you, but then again there are people out there - I am not saying this is me -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: The Minister of Tourism.

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible) preserving our culture and our heritage. What we have now is not adequate, I will admit that.

AN HON. MEMBER: Doesn't that do it?

MR. J. BYRNE: I'm for that too.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: See, the Minister of Tourism is panicking again, trying to put words in my mouth. I never said I was against it. I am going to try to express to him some of the concerns expressed to me so he can see what some of the people in the Province are saying. They are saying this: Forty million dollars. Yes, it is something that it would be nice to have, but we have to look at priorities. Some people out there would like to see $40 million go into health care. Some people would like to see $40 million going into education. Some people outside of the City of St. John's, in rural Newfoundland, would like to see it going to dialysis machines. That is what they are talking about, that is what they are saying. I heard it here in St. John's. I attended a public meeting not long ago with forty or fifty people there on a different issue all together. They came to me and said: Jack, $40 million. It is something we would love to have, it would be a great thing to have, but I do not know if we really want to put that kind of money into that when we need hundreds of millions dollars in health care. I am only expressing to you what was expressed to me.

MR. FUREY: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I never said I was one way or the other. I am only expressing to you some of the concerns that were expressed to me, I say to the Minister of Tourism. You should take that into consideration. That is all I am saying to you. That is simple, right?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: The minister wants to ask me where I am on it.

MR. FUREY: Never mind what other people think. What do you think?

MR. J. BYRNE: I think we should have our priorities straight. We should put our priorities in place. Maybe it could be done over time. Maybe instead of putting $40 million into it this year it could be $20 million. Right? So they have to set their priorities straight. That is what they have not been doing. The only priorities this Administration has had in the years is: Take care of my buddies.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: It is, but it is all degrees, I would say. It is not too hard to confuse you, I say to the Minister of Tourism over there looking at and reading a book, and the only thing that is in it is pictures. A comic book, by the way, I think, Mr. Speaker. I do not know if it is Superman. Captain Canada, that is the one.

AN HON. MEMBER: Alley Oop.

MR. J. BYRNE: Alley Oop.

AN HON. MEMBER: What time do you finish, Jack?

AN HON. MEMBER: Another hour and forty-four minutes.

AN HON. MEMBER: Jack, tell us where you stand on "The Rooms."

MR. J. BYRNE: I stand on the roof of "The Rooms." By the way, "The Rooms" are in Logy Bay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. J. BYRNE: What difference does it make? When you point to that side they are all the same anyway, so one for all. Do you know what I mean? It does not make any difference. When I point over there (inaudible) be talking to you.

MR. BARRETT: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: ‘Sir Gisborne of Bellevue,' what are you saying now? Is Whitbourne in your district? Blaketown? Are you getting a new school in Blaketown?

MR. SULLIVAN: Jack, the one in Ferryland started two years after that was supposed to start. That is covered in now up in Ferryland.

MR. J. BYRNE: I know, it is shocking. Don't get me going on the school in Pouch Cove, because I was speaking to the Deputy Minister of Education this morning on that. It is absolutely ridiculous. Two years ago they approved the funding. That will tell you how efficient this crowd is. Two years ago they passed the funding, under the former, former Minister of Education.

AN HON. MEMBER: If you (inaudible) the other government you could not get any money.

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, I was not here then.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I say to the Government House Leader, what?

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Do the what? The break?

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I do not know what you are saying. What did he say?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. J. BYRNE: No, I am interested.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. J. BYRNE: I will tell the Government House Leader this: there is a cafeteria downstairs.

MR. TULK: What about it?

MR. J. BYRNE: What are you doing over there now? Look at his mouth going. What is he chewing on over there, boy? There is a cafeteria downstairs. How thick are some of these people around, I do not know.

AN HON. MEMBER: He got a cud.

MR. J. BYRNE: He got a cud. He is chewing his cud. That is about it.

Listen here. Do the government want to hear what they are doing wrong and how they can straighten out this Province? Do they?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I know you are. I appreciate that.

The ferry in Labrador. How much more are we going to have to pay when that goes to court? Obviously it is going to go to court if they award that contract. We had the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation up the other day trying to answer some questions here, trying to skirt around it, and he would not answer the questions when he was saying it was in court. It finally came out that we were right again.

How much money has this government wasted since I have been here, since 1993, on Hydro? How much money did you waste on Hydro, legal fees, you guys over there? The last count we had was somewhere - legal fees and accounting fees, paying out to more of your buddies I suppose - near $10 million, the last I heard.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: That is why (inaudible). I say to the Minister of Fisheries, I will tell you.

MR. EFFORD: Who would you pay it out to?

MR. J. BYRNE: Typical of the Minister of Fisheries. Who would you pay it out to, he said. I will tell you what we would pay that to. (Inaudible) the Tories brought in the public tender act, why they brought in the Public Service Commission. You guys destroyed it. We were being fair to the people of the Province. Everybody had an opportunity. Not with this crowd, Mr. Speaker. That is who we would pay it to, I say to the Minister of Fisheries.

Government House Leader, you are next. What do you want?

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: What? One firm?

Ten million smackeroos gone out the window. He has $60 million from the Department of Development and Rural Renewal, $10 million from Hydro, that is $70 million; the ferry up there we don't know; the call centers....

This government is looking for money and they say they don't raise taxes. As I said before, every licence, fee and permit has increased. The Minister of Works, Services and Transportation knows what I am saying is right.

The North West River - I remember when we talked about, in this House of Assembly, our policies. In the last election we had our policy manual done, and what did this crowd do? They scoffed at it, laughed at it as they normally do, but the Liberals are good at that. The Liberals -

AN HON. MEMBER: What Liberals?

MR. J. BYRNE: You guys on that side of the House of Assembly are good at that. When they get the chance - we saw it in Ottawa. We saw when Trudeau - not Trudeau - when Chrétien took over - a big to-do about the GST. When he got in, what did they do? Nothing.

They talked about NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, the worst thing in the world. When they got in, what did they do? Expanded it. That is what they did. They are taking policies right, left and center - here in this Province, this crowd over there. It is a trait. They must be born with this trait. We had policies in the last election. We talked about the payroll tax: We can't do that. Where are we going to get the money to do that?

What are they at now? The very thing we said they could do. We said: We can cut the income tax. They said: We can't do that. Where are you getting the money to do that?

What are they doing now? They are not doing as good as what we would have done, but they are starting to take it.

We said, too, about the damming of the rivers, the NUGS we refer to them as. Well, they were going to do the Torrent River up there. They were going to dam that up. They were going to do the North West River in Gander. We were after them, asking questions in the House of Assembly, begging them not to. The Star Lake issue, begging them not to do it; Star Lake, of course, an environmental issue.

AN HON. MEMBER: The decision will be out on that in June (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: The decision on Star Lake will be out in June.

The North West River is the one I am coming to. We were telling them not to do it and they went right straight ahead. What happened? Another million dollars down the tubes. Not one job created for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, another million bucks out the window.

We had the Member for St. John's South on his feet in this House of Assembly two or three years ago, and he was the first to bring up about the water export in the Province. I remember members on that side of the House - the Minister of Fisheries was probably one of the worst - laughing, scoffing at him. What happened now, after the election? No more export. Another one of our policies taken.

It is no wonder they are accepting our policies. There are so many of us on that side of the House now that we are starting to infiltrate the Liberal government -

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: - with respect to the policies that you are accepting and adopting as your own, I say to the Government House Leader, the stuff that you laughed at and said couldn't be done but you are doing it now.

What I am going to suggest to the Government House Leader, what I will do - this is serious, now - what I will do the next time around, I won't run. I will write a policy manual for you and charge you $40 million or $50 million, and you will give it to me, because that is what you are doing all the time.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible) you are more expensive than the lawyers.

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, sure if you want to be re-elected, what do you expect?

The school court cases: How much money has been spent on the school court cases where the school boards and the department would not listen to the people from all over this Province?

AN HON. MEMBER: You got the minister (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, and they are in the courts all the time. They have been down on the Burin Peninsula area -

AN HON. MEMBER: They're in court more than they are in school.

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, that's true. They are in court more than they are in the classroom, I say to the Government House Leader. How much is that costing the people of the Province?

MR. TULK: I will tell you one thing, John Ottenheimer (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: He's good at what? Fixing.

Another one, how much was it, $500,000 -

MR. TULK: For what, Jack?

MR. J. BYRNE: For the mayor.

MR. TULK: It was more than that.

MR. J. BYRNE: Was it? Seven hundred and fifty.

It is $500,000 but what we are not factoring in here, in all of these cases, is how much you are paying out in fees to lawyers, engineers and professionals, all that. We can't get a handle on -

AN HON. MEMBER: Court costs.

MR. J. BYRNE: Court costs, all inclusive, I say to the member.

Also, up on the Southern Shore, there is a construction company up there - which one was that? Mobile Construction? What was that?

AN HON. MEMBER: Tors Cove Excavating.

MR. J. BYRNE: Tors Cove Excavating, another - what was it, $1 million, Loyola?

AN HON. MEMBER: Minimum.

MR. J. BYRNE: Minimum of $1 million.

AN HON. MEMBER: More than that.

MR. SULLIVAN: Over $1 million.

MR. J. BYRNE: Another million, my God. How much money?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Oh, about $120 million.

MR. TULK: You started off telling me (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I just thought of another one and I have to write it down here now, Marble Mountain. Oh, that is going to be another $6 million or $7 million by the time it's done.

MR. TULK: Chicken feed.

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, chicken feed alright. I won't even get into IPL. I won't even talk about IPL, I say to the Government House Leader. Okay, we will get to that. IPL is another one. I had better write that down. Another $25 million, IPL.

MR. TULK: $22 million.

MR. J. BYRNE: Twenty-two million, IPL. That is what he said but I think it is really more like $24 million or $25 million. The Government House Leader is admitting to $22 million.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I am too low? I am too low on Marble Mountain, no doubt there.

The Murray Premises, $4.2 million. The construction - it cost over $4 million. I would say the Minister of Tourism would know.

MR. TULK: Know what, Marble Mountain?

MR. J. BYRNE: The construction of Marble Mountain.

AN HON. MEMBER: The Murray Premises.

MR. J. BYRNE: The Murray Premises is $4.2 million, that we know, right? $4.2 million there, the Murray Premises.

We had Trans City. My figures on Trans City - and I think I am being conservative - over the life of the contract and when government, at the end of the day, buys them back, I am figuring about $35 million.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: The Government House Leader figures it is going to be much, much more than that. I am trying to keep my figures within the realm of comprehension for most people. So we have $35 million, $40 million, $41 million, $50 million, $42 million, $43 million, court cases, $44 million, legal fees another $10 million - sixty there, seventy (inaudible). Oh, I left two out. I am up to $120 million now.

Cabot Corporation -

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. J. BYRNE: The Cabot Corporation.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I wouldn't even know. I don't know if all the people have been settled yet; $1 million, $1.5 million for sure.

We have IPL, $25 million. Now we are up to $160 million, and staffing - how many people - I wonder if I will get into that. How many court cases are there before the system, I wonder?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: How many court cases do you have in government, which is all-encompassing, of all the departments?

AN HON. MEMBER: Jack, if it wasn't for this government they could close half the court houses.

MR. J. BYRNE: That's right.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, those are only some.

MR. T. OSBORNE: I heard they were putting Paul Dicks to the bench in the Court of Appeal so that might finally win a few cases.

MR. J. BYRNE: They need somebody.

Mr. Speaker, we are looking at the Budget by the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and we know that we need millions and millions of dollars in health care, we need millions and millions of dollars in infrastructure, we need millions of dollars in pretty well in all the departments, and in education alone. Now, I should say a few words on education.

Back in the 1960s, and I give Joey credit for this one, I have to say, he saw that an educated population are a working population.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who?

MR. J. BYRNE: Joey Smallwood and the government of the day, and he had free tuition at the universities. Now we have, what's his name out there, Vince Withers, with Newfoundland Telephone or Newtel, or he used to be with them, and he feels, too, that there should be free tuition. In Ireland -

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I will get to that.

In Ireland, I say to you, Mr. Speaker -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I agree with free tuition. If they were wasting money.... Another thing I would like to know is this - I am going a bit off the topic here now. We on this side of the House, on Interim Supply -

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I didn't need to do that, I had eight brothers to do it for me, and I could do it to them, too, I say to the Government House Leader.

On Interim Supply, last week when we were trying to put that through the House of Assembly, $1.7 billion, I think it was, we didn't see anybody on that side of the House get up and speak to the Interim Supply, nobody. What is on the go? That made me wonder how much support this administration or the front benchers have on that side of the House with the back benchers, and what kind of animosities are going on over there that we don't know about? We know about some but not all. When they were on their feet, very few of them - the Minister of Fisheries was up once or twice speaking on Interim Supply, but he really never; he spoke on fishery. He didn't speak on the Budget at all. A bill that was that important, $1.7 billion, the Minister of Finance introduced it in four or five minutes probably and we, on this side of the House, debated it and tried to point out the pros and the cons.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: That is my job. I get paid. I have to do these things. That is what we are here for. The House of Assembly is a very important part of our responsibilities, I say to the Minister of Fisheries. That is what we are here for. We are here to represent the people of our districts. We are here to represent the people of the Province. We are here to point out what we feel is wrong with the legislation of this administration. We are here to point out what we feel is wrong with the Budget. We are here also to point out the things that are positive with the Budget. I give credit where credit is due, and the Minister of Finance does not deserve a lot of credit for this Budget, I can tell you that; very little credit.

When we add all this up, the money here, we have something like $130 million to $140 million over the past few years that this administration has wasted and not created one job. Then they have the gall and the audacity to compare their administration with the previous administration. I don't know where they are coming from. I do not know.

Again, I am going to say a few more words on some other topics. It is all relative to the Budget, of course, Mr. Speaker.

With respect to the provincial economy and how well it is performing, I left off on this topic the day before yesterday on child poverty. Child poverty has declined in every other province in 1996, but it continues to rise in this Province. The Canadian Council on Social Development reports that the percentage of children who live in poverty in this Province has risen from 18 per cent in 1989 to 23 per cent in 1997. This alarming growth in child poverty reflects the extent to which families and parents in this Province have fallen into poverty.

Of course, we have the Premier, the Minister of Finance and other ministers, telling us how well we are doing in this Province. I think that probably the biggest measure of how well we are doing, or should I say how bad we are doing, is in the statistics with respect to child poverty. We see all of the other provinces progressing and we are regressing. The Minister of Human Resources and Employment should be very interested in these statistics. They are accurate, I would say to you, Mr. Speaker. They are not like the statistics that the government puts out on occasion to try and make themselves look good.

People in this Province are starting to realize exactly what is happening in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. They are going to see in a year or two down the road when the Premier is either gone out of here as a Cabinet minister again, or if he tries to go for the leadership of the Liberal Party in Ottawa, that when he is gone it is going to be left to a few of the ministers on that side of the House to try and pull it all together. The end result will be that, in the next election, they will be defeated, we will win, and it will be left to us to straighten out the mess that they have created.

It says we are the only Province where the total personal income and total wages and salaries adjusted for inflation have been stagnant since 1992.

If you listen to the Minister of Finance, the Premier of the Province, or any of the ministers get on their feet, they are always talking about what a great job they are doing. In reality, they are not doing a very good job at all and the stats bear that out.

There has been little or no improvement in provincial own source revenues as a result of economic growth since 1990. Growth in the provincial own source revenues are due mostly, almost entirely, to the increase in the personal income tax rate, the imposition of a new tax, the payroll tax, massive increases to license and user fees, and a six-fold increase in lottery revenues; a six-fold increase in lottery revenues. We are bringing in more money in lottery revenues than they are brining in in corporate taxes in the Province. That in itself is shameful. We do not see the Minister of Health taking any amount of money and putting it towards addiction, over and above what they have in the past.

I was watching a show on the news there the week before last. Really, when it talked about addictions to those gambling machines, it was laughable. What they have done is put a sticker on the machines to say: If you are addicted to this, call this number.

How many people are going to admit that they are addicted in the first place, Mr. Speaker? Not too many. When they call this number, they go to another number and they refer them to another number where there is an answering machine. What is that going to do for addictions in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador?

This is a very serious concern. I know of individuals who spend their total paycheck on these machines. They go to the bar, sit down and put in loonie after loonie, one after the other. I have never done it myself. I don't put money in those machines. I never have. I don't have an addictive personality, I suppose, Mr. Speaker. The paychecks are gone, one after the other; the car is gone, lost because of these machines; homes, families, gone because of these gambling machines. What do we have this administration doing? Putting a sticker with a phone number on the machines and that is going to help cure the problem? Not likely, not by any stretch of the imagination.

I think that this administration, if they are taking in over $70 million - I think it is up to $90 million now - in those lotto machines, those gambling machines, or whatever you refer to them as, and no significant amount of money going back for addictions in the Province, I think it is only fair and it should be in any budget that a certain percentage of this - that could be based on studies or whatever the case may be, whatever is needed - of this money that comes into these gambling machines should go towards addictions in the Province.

Now on to other issues. I am just going to talk a little bit about water export. I talked about legal fees, and now I will talk about the potential for water export in Newfoundland and Labrador. As I said earlier today, the Member for St. John's South was quite adamant in opposing the export of bulk water out of our Province. He talked about NAFTA and was laughed at by the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology of the day, who said it didn't apply and now we know that it does. The Premier, I believe, has admitted that it does. The potential and the demand for water supply in the future is probably going to be bigger than the demand for oil. It should be an industry - if this Administration and the next administration, which will be us - takes it seriously and understands the potential for the job creation and the amount of revenues that we take from water export in the Province, as well as the secondary processing. The jobs that we could create in Newfoundland and Labrador with respect to water export is properly greater than any other industry that we have had in the past if due consideration and seriousness is given to water export in Newfoundland and Labrador.

As we said before, with Gisborne Lake out there the government was full steam ahead on that. We have a developer who was planning on developing that resource. We gave advice two or three years ago not to go ahead and not to permit or allow anybody to, basically, put money into planning or into research with respect to the development of that until we had everything in place, had it checked out with NAFTA, had our tax regime in place and whatever, a royalty regime for water, and whatever needed to be done. That is one of the court cases that could be forthcoming. That could be another court case, couldn't it?

The Premier of the Province, when he finally realized the potential for this, came out and said: Yes, there is a problem with the free trade agreement on this and NAFTA and we could get nailed. He finally admitted that what we were saying is correct. That was another one.

Here is an issue that affects a number of people in the Province. It has an impact upon the Budget and it is something that needs to be addressed. I have a number of these people in my district. The issue is temporary employees: with government, with Crown corporations, with the Health Care Corporation, with the senior citizens' homes and what have you.

I know of two individuals who have been on temporary employment with the Health Care Corporation for fourteen years. That is absolutely ridiculous. Why are they doing it? We saw the situation with the nurses where they were being called back on temporary because they don't have to pay out the different fees, the taxes and what have you. For fourteen years a person is temporary with the Health Care Corporation in one of the senior citizens' homes, and when he retires what is he supposed to do for a pension?

AN HON. MEMBER: You are talking about your pension, (inaudible)?

MR. J. BYRNE: I'm not talking about mine. I'm not temporary. I know someone else who is pretty temporary though.

Anyway, he has spent fourteen years working for government, temporary, called in whenever it was convenient, with no money now for when he retires, nothing. Walk out the door with nothing. I don't even know if they get severance. How many of those individuals are there? I think what should happen is there should be a study done of how many people are working for government and Crown corporations. If an individual is employed in the system for three or four years, continually in the system, then obviously that person is needed. Shouldn't he or she be put on permanent status then? Shouldn't they be put on permanent status at that time? There should be some kind of a policy in place that when they hit a certain time frame they become permanent. It is absolutely ridiculous, fourteen years.

The critic for health the other day was talking about the nurses being called back on overtime -

MR. FUREY: (Inaudible) you are boring us all to death.

MR. J. BYRNE: If I am boring you to death I am so pleased. You just made my day, I say to the Minister of Tourism. You just made my day.

The nurses called back -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Pardon?

MR. TULK: He is up there for a while. Don't you worry about it.

MR. J. BYRNE: Look, I have him convinced to cross.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible) you fellows (inaudible)..

MR. J. BYRNE: How much money, Mr. Speaker, has this Administration wasted in overtime when we should have permanent employees. Do you understand what I am saying to you, Minister of Tourism?

MR. TULK: Jack, you tell them how much.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: What?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Everything in due course, I say to you. Everything in due course.

AN HON. MEMBER: Give it to him, buddy.

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, give it to them.

Here is another thing. I'm going to hit on the man who just sat in his place just at the right time. We saw three years ago that the government go out with this grand scheme, park privatization. What did we see happening? There were people who got up against it, opposed it, but no, they wouldn't listen. So they put out the parks to their buddies again, a lot of them. A lot of their buddies got these parks. I was going to ask the Minister of Tourism: How many parks, how many previously open, were not opened last year?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: No, this is current because it is coming up. How many parks, that were open in previous years, were, after privatization, closed in this Province?

The park in Pouch Cove was opened up last year. I heard a lot of complaints about it with respect to the condition of the park, but the big one - I was up on the Northern Peninsula last year. I try to get one trip a year to the Northern Peninsula. I went up there for salmon fishing last summer. The River of Ponds Park on the Northern Peninsula last year - the most beautiful park in the Province - was dismantled because the individual, from what I have been told, to whom it was privatized, had another park down around Corner Brook somewhere. I am going to ask the minister this. What they did - now this is unreal - was they took the picnic tables out of there. You know the bumpers, those wooden bumpers, eight by eight planks that are in the ground? They actually took them out of there. Now this is the truth.

It didn't open last summer. People coming up from all over the Province, from down in the States, to that park every year, and it was closed, it didn't open. I brought it to the attention of the Minister of Tourism. I said it is dangerous up there now because they took these bumpers out of there. What happened? They had these big steel spikes, the bolts, sticking up out of the ground. I complained to the minister and do you know what he did? This is fact now. They went in and cut the bolts off instead of requiring them to put the park back in the condition that they received it. It is a mess up there. Now the minister tells me that it is going to be opened up this summer. At 4:05 p.m. on March 30 in the House of Assembly, can I quote the minister as saying that there are new operators up there?

MR. FUREY: (Inaudible) River of Ponds.

MR. J. BYRNE: It is great news, they are from River of Ponds. That is the guy I was talking about. Excellent. That is great news, I say to the Minister of Tourism. He is trying to be funny over there now. I know the park and I know the river, and I know the river well. I know the Torrent River, too, by the way.

AN HON. MEMBER: Do you swim?

MR. J. BYRNE: No, I don't swim.

In the Torrent River -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I know, I have been out there.

If that is the case, and what he is telling me is correct, I am really pleased with that, I have to say.

I say to the Minister of Tourism, did he happen to watch the show last Friday night on Land and Sea where they had the blind fisherman fishing on the Torrent River? He was up there -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, quite the story, really.

AN HON. MEMBER: Beautiful (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: The Torrent? Oh, beautiful. I caught my first salmon there.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Of course. I caught my first salmon on the Torrent.

This individual taught me in school. He was the blind fisherman up there with the fly rod hooking salmon. It was a pleasure to watch.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Pardon? Can I what?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I can teach you a thing or two about salmon fishing and trouting and what have you, I can tell you that.

MR. TULK: Do you salmon fish, Jack?

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, I salmon fish but I only get one or two trips a year. That is the best I can do. I don't have time for it. I am in my district taking care of my constituents.

MR. EFFORD: What (inaudible) do you use?

MR. J. BYRNE: I am not from Port de Grave, I say to the minister. I use a fly that size - look - to hook a salmon and land him. When I hook him, I land him. Another thing: I agree, too, by the way, with catch and release. I am into that. If I want a salmon to eat, go down to the store and pick up a salmon for fifteen or twenty bucks.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: No, it doesn't. See, that will tell you what the Minister of Fisheries knows. It does not kill the fish at all, not if it is handled properly and you take the proper time with it, I say to the Minister of Fisheries. That is how I catch them. They just float down the river to me.

I am pleased, I have to say to the Minister of Tourism -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: The proper length. It was within what was required for you to keep. It was within the specifications. It was within the sixty-five centimeters. If it was anything longer than that, I would let it go. As a matter of fact, I say to the Minister of Tourism, when I go trouting down in the Northeast Avalon, down in my district, on the Bauline Line, for rainbow trout - two and three pounders, I say to the minister - and I catch them, I let them go because I am a sportsman. If I want a trout, I can go get it.

MR. EFFORD: I bet you saw that on TV.

MR. J. BYRNE: I would say now the Minister of Fisheries - I remember the words collective senility being used in this House of Assembly on somebody.

AN HON. MEMBER: Selective senility.

MR. J. BYRNE: Selective, is it? Selective senility.

Those words were used on Minister of Fisheries and he was quite upset, but with what he is saying here today, I would have to question that.

AN HON. MEMBER: How long did it take you to land that salmon?

MR. J. BYRNE: That was the first one I caught -

MR. FUREY: How long did it take you to land it?

MR. J. BYRNE: How long? I don't know why the Minister of Tourism would be so concerned.

MR. FUREY: A good hour.

MR. J. BYRNE: Not likely. Five or ten minutes maybe.

MR. FUREY: No, Sir.

MR. J. BYRNE: I am pleased to hear that the Minister of Tourism has just confirmed that the park in River of Ponds will be open this summer - great to see and great to hear, good news.

With respect to the provincial parks, I would think, because of the out-migration in this Province, that the park usage is down, I would believe, because for summer holidays, the ordinary people of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador could not pack up any time they want, like some of the ministers here and, go down South two or three times a year, but they would utilize the provincial parks.

As a matter of fact, they would take their trailers that they probably worked for, for years, and saved up to get, bring them out to the parks, put them there for the summer, and that is where they would spend their time.

What is happening with 40,000 people leaving this Province over the past few years? How much are these parks being utilized? I don't have the stats on it, but I am sure it is down significantly. Is that having an impact on the revenues of the Department of Tourism, I would say, who these parks come under, what provincial parks we have left?

The people of the Province expect good parks. The Province put the money into those parks over the years. They were privatized. Many of the people who got the parks - there were questions at the time if they paid enough for the parks. By the way, that was another issue, the privacy. The government would not release the information on these parks. They would not make it public information. We do not know if the people of the Province got a good deal. We do not know that, because of the administration and their top secret - the secrecy of this administration and not making information public. They would not put out the information with respect to when a person privatized a park, how much they paid for it; what were the lease agreements; and all these facts and figures; how much land they got; what was required; what services would they be required to put in there; what services would they be required to keep that were already there. That, in itself, was a very big concern to the people of the Province at the time.

As a matter of fact, only last summer in my district, in the park in Pouch Cove, I had people come to me and say: What is going on with the park? Is it going to be upgraded? Individuals who got it - I will give credit where credit is due - put some money into it, but I had a lot of complaints about the condition of the park. It is a great site - I don't know if the Government House Leader was ever down to the provincial park in Pouch Cove, between Pouch Cove and Bauline on the stretch down there. It is a great park. It has a nice pond, and a great spot for cabins or whatever you want to put in there.

Last year I had a lot of complaints, I have to say, just on the general condition, more like a mess being created. It used to be a provincial park. It was privatized again, so hopefully there will be improvements in it this year.

During the last election we saw - and I referred to this today - the government, after the election, adopting many of our policies, and partially adopting some other policies. In the last election - I am going to refer to a few things here now - according to the political pundits, we were going to be wiped out. We might save one or two seats. We had one of these pundits in the gallery today. He is not here now, but he was here earlier today, talking about -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: One of the bought-and-paid-for opinions.

He was talking about how we were going to be wiped out. It might stay at two - a good chance to be none. The election before that, the same thing, but we picked up four seats. We are going to pick up a lot more the next time, by the way. We lost a number of seats by less than -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Yours.

Lost a number of seats by less than 200, some by less than 100. The Minister of Finance just barely got his seat the last time around, and our candidate in the last election was a week late getting into the campaign. The Minister Municipal and Provincial Affairs won her seat by what? Sixty votes or something?

AN HON. MEMBER: Just over 100.

MR. J. BYRNE: Just over 100.

MR. MATTHEWS: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER (Mercer): Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Minister of Finance.

MR. MATTHEWS: (Inaudible) topic of the Budget, but myself and the Minister of Fisheries were having a discussion about the whole issue of whether or not it would be appropriate for men at our age and in our circumstance to look at adding some color back to our hair. I wonder if the hon. member would have any expertise advice to offer on that, given the fact that he is rather scarce in the -

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

MR. J. BYRNE: It is stupid wit, I suppose, Mr. Speaker.

I will say this to the Minister of Finance, pay attention. I am not going to say it. I say to the Minister of Finance, when he wants to pay attention to what is being said in the House of Assembly, that God - somebody get his attention, will you?

AN HON. MEMBER: What odds, say it anyway.

MR. J. BYRNE: I say to the Minister of Finance that God made a few perfect heads and he covered his mistakes up with hair, so take that for what it's worth.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) perfect..

AN HON. MEMBER: He made a lot of mistakes. Is that what you are saying, Jack?

MR. J. BYRNE: He made a lot of mistakes. There is one there.

MR. MATTHEWS: I am detecting, right around here, on the hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis, some additional color on this area of his head.

MR. J. BYRNE: Well, all I can say to the Minister of Finance on that issue, try not to be so childish, immature and simple-minded. This kid here -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, Sir. God made me as I am and that is the way I accept it. I don't need anything extra, buddy.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace. He would know about it.

MR. J. BYRNE: What about the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace? He would know something about it, wouldn't he? You should be talking to him. What about the Speaker? You should be talking to him - not the one sitting there now, but -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: - this kid here, forget it. It is never going to happen. I am not that vain, I say to the Minister of Finance. I am not like you. I am not that vain, Sir.

MR. TULK: Jack, would you tell (inaudible)?

MR. J. BYRNE: Back to the election. Last year, Mr. Speaker, the election must have cost again, I don't know, $4 million or $5 million I think it cost for the Province to run the election last year. Do you know what I believe in, Mr. Speaker? I honestly believe this. I really don't see that the elections should be called at the whim of the Premier. There should be a certain amount of time that has to pass before an election is called, in my mind. I mean, I had to go through three elections - and people here in this House - three elections in less than six years.

AN HON. MEMBER: Did we?

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, we did, and it is not right. It is a waste of the taxpayers' money, I say to the Minister of Finance. As I said, the Government House Leader went through seven -

MR. TULK: I went through four in ten years.

MR. J. BYRNE: Four in ten years. That is two-and-a-half years average, and it is really not right. I really don't think it is necessary..

MR. HARRIS: I went through seven in twelve.

MR. J. BYRNE: Seven in twelve. Boys, you are all doing well. I wonder how many elections the Member for Terra Nova has gone through?

Another thing, I say to the Government House Leader, I have a problem here. Get his attention. I say to the Government House Leader, there is an injustice being done in this House of Assembly and it is the Estimates Committees. We have a person in this House of Assembly who has been here over twenty-odd years and he is serving on these Estimates Committees. I think his stats should pre-empt him from having to do that. I mean, really.

MR. TULK: Would you agree to put it back to five?

MR. J. BYRNE: I don't understand why we have seven anyway. I really don't understand.

MR. TULK: Do you want to pass the motion now?

MR. J. BYRNE: I can't do that, but it needs discussion. If somebody would explain the logic to me, I certainly would consider it.

MR. TULK: Do you want to make a motion?

MR. J. BYRNE: No, I do not want to make a motion. Explain to me after why it is necessary and I will bring it up tomorrow and put it forward.

AN HON. MEMBER: ((Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Well, I don't know. There may be a logical reason for it, but I don't know what it is.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I am not speaking on it. I am asking a question on it.

MR. TULK: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I am quite serious when I say to the hon. gentleman that I don't believe it is necessary that we have a minimum - and that is what we have - of seven people allowed to sit on the Estimates Committee. I don't believe it is necessary at all. I think all we need is three government members and two Opposition members to sit on it, and if the other side is prepared to put that motion to change the Standing Orders, I am prepared to do it right now.

AN HON. MEMBER: We are ready.

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

MR. TULK: Is the Opposition House Leader listening?

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

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could get the attention of the Opposition House Leader. The hon. gentleman just made a point, and I agree with him, that we have to have seven members, under our Standing Orders, sitting on the Estimates Committees. I told him that I don't see the sense of having seven as a minimum. I'm prepared to move a motion right now to the Standing Orders that we decrease that to five if he is agreeable. I don't see the sense of it.

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

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

Boys, don't be trying to do that, force stuff through the House of Assembly without proper consideration given to it. I would like to talk to members on this side of the House.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: (Inaudible) my idea. There you go confusing things again. I was asking the question: Why? He got up and made an answer -

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible) the caucus said no.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I still think, even with the seven, it does not alter the point I was making, that the elder statesmen in the House shouldn't have to be on the committee.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, well, he shouldn't have to be anyway.

Mr. Speaker, one of the topical issues that is going to have a great impact on this Province in due course is Churchill Falls. We had questions on that today in this House of Assembly. Last week, the week before, and the week before that - the dates I do not have exactly in my mind - we saw the Premier of this Province trying to rationalize to the people of the Province that there was no need for a transmission line to the Island. That is what he was up to. The question has to be asked: Why?

He was in the media talking about a gas line coming to the Island for industry or whatever the case may be, and that if you had that you would not need the transmission line. To me, we have a situation here. In fact, when the original deal was talked about there was going to be a transmission line to the Island, an in-feed, and we were going to have two rivers diverted. That has already changed. The Premier now, in the media, is trying to say: If we get the gas line, maybe we don't need the transmission line. He is now talking about a flow of water for eternity compared to a limited resource. Why? I have to ask the question: Why is that the case? Why would he try to promote that? Is it because of his political ambitions, and to work a deal with Bouchard and the boys in Quebec that if he got their support - because he is going to have to get the support of one of the provinces, the big provinces population-wise, either Ontario or Quebec, for his leadership bid -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Go get Hansard, I say to the Minister of Tourism, any time at all. Read away. There won't be too many pictures in it, I say to you. The Minister of Tourism asked me to tell him about Stockwell Day. On this day I am not going to say too much about Stockwell Day because I don't know enough about the man to even comment on him.

AN HON. MEMBER: He is a right-wing Tory.

MR. J. BYRNE: That is what you are saying. The Minister of Tourism is saying that Stockwell Day is a right-wing Tory. Okay, that is what he said, but that is your opinion, I say to the Minister of Tourism. It is not necessarily my opinion at this point in time because I do not know enough about the man to make that comment.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: No, he does not sound like this lad here, I say to you. That is what he doesn't.

Let me get back to the Premier and his ambitions up along, and the proposed Churchill Falls deal. I had to laugh the other day when he left the House and he was going to Quebec to meet with Bouchard to talk about Churchill Falls. I wish I had sat down and wrote a note on what was going to come back out of that meeting because when I told our fellows it is exactly what happened. I said: He is going up now to look for an excuse to say why there is not going to be a deal in the near future. Sure enough, he came back with one. I don't know if it is the real one or not, Mr. Speaker, but he came back with an excuse all right. It has to do with the rates being charged down in the States.

He is a master of -

AN HON. MEMBER: Deception.

MR. J. BYRNE: I don't know if I can say deception or not.

AN HON. MEMBER: Try it.

MR. J. BYRNE: He is a master of changing things to make you think one thing is happening when in actual reality there is something else completely different happening. He is acting.

AN HON. MEMBER: Illusion.

MR. J. BYRNE: A master of illusion, I suppose, that's right. I will not say delusion but illusion. A master of illusion, and he is good at it. There is no doubt about that.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: The Minister of Tourism is at it again over there. He comes in the House of Assembly every now and then and he brings in these big, thick books to try and impress people, and every now then he throws out this big word that he probably saw on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire last night or something. He is trying to give the impression that he is so intelligent, but I can tell you one thing. I went to school with that man and I know the difference. I know all about him over there.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) go to confession with him?

MR. J. BYRNE: No, no, not going there.

In actual fact, Mr. Speaker, I know. I don't want to insult the man because he is a likeable fellow actually, one on one, but as a minister, I don't know.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: We were in the same school together, yes.

AN HON. MEMBER: For how long?

MR. J. BYRNE: We were in the same school together. I can't say I went to school with him.

MR. FUREY: Jack was always good at math.

MR. J. BYRNE: Do you know something? I will tell you a story about that. The Minister of Tourism said that Jack was always good at math. I'm going to tell you a true story about math. When I left high school - as most young fellows did back in the late 1960s - I went out to work for two years, then went back to trade school, and I did a course, of course. Listen to this now. I did surveying, I say to the Minister of Tourism.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Exactly. There was advanced math, there was trigonometry, there was calculus, there was photogrammetry, there was geodesy; all math, nothing but math. Let me tell you, the person I was speaking of earlier, the blind fisherman who is up on the Torrent River last week, he was the man - when I first went to trade school - who taught me math. He was the one who all of a sudden, just like a lightbulb going on in your head, helped you understand it.

MR. SULLIVAN: Was he blind then, Jack, or (inaudible)?

MR. J. BYRNE: No. As a matter of fact, with respect to that individual, when he was teaching us math we had to have these markers, a black marker like this. When you were doing exams, or whatever the case may be, all you could do for him at the time, was do one problem on one page with the black marker. I never had a teacher like that individual who really saw the light with respect to math. Then, all the other courses with respect to geodesy, cartography, photogrammetry, all of these courses -

AN HON. MEMBER: Was there any arithmetic?

MR. J. BYRNE: There was math, algebra and all that stuff.

MR. FUREY: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: See, I should never cease to amaze you, I say to the Minister of Tourism, and you should know the difference. There is cartography, geodesy, photogrammetry, advanced surveying, calculus -

MR. FUREY: Take us through. What is cartography?

MR. J. BYRNE: Here is the Minister of Tourism trying to be smart again now. With all the big thick books he brings in here, and he doesn't know what cartography is? That will tell you. I have a chicken for you. Do I have a chicken for you, I say to the Minister of Tourism.

Seriously though, really, that individual, when I watched that show - and the Minister of Government Services and Lands was here earlier and he saw it. They did such a good job on it. After watching the show on this individual you just felt so good, really. You would have to see it to know what I am talking about. Anyway, it was that good my wife wants to go salmon fishing with me. To the Minister of Tourism, it was that good that my wife wants to go salmon fishing with me now.

MR. FUREY: That's great.

MR. J. BYRNE: It is good. Anyway, I will move on. Mr. Speaker, I am getting there.

Next is the Public Service Commission. When the Tory administration was in place back -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Whatever, you know it means the same. They put the Public Service Commission in place for hiring in the civil service. Over the past few years they have changed that, they have torn that apart, the same as they did with the Public Tender Act. They said the hiring would be done through the line departments. In other words, the hiring will be done by the ministers and who the minister wants to hire.

AN HON. MEMBER: How much time do you have left, by the way?

MR. J. BYRNE: Unlimited. Let me say to the Minister of Tourism that I have unlimited time. The longest response ever to the Budget Speech is eight hours.

AN HON. MEMBER: How many hours have you been at it?

MR. J. BYRNE: Four-and-one-half. I can go on for another hour.

AN HON. MEMBER: It is unanimously agreed that we will (inaudible) adjourn.

MR. J. BYRNE: I will adjourn debate for now, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I have to say that is one of the best. This is my seventeenth or eighteenth year sitting in the House and we are hearing one of the most concise critiques of the Budget that I have ever heard out of a finance critic, and that includes the people who used to sit with me on the other side when they used to do it.

I move that we call it 5:30 p.m. and that this House do now adjourn.

Before we move, I have already told the Opposition House Leader that on Monday we will start at the three heads of expenditure in the Estimates that we do in the House.

On motion, the House at its rising adjourned until tomorrow, Monday, at 1:30 p.m.