The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to extend congratulations to the Southern Shore female hockey team which this past weekend won the Provincial Female Hockey Championship. I extend congratulations to their head coach, Loyola Driscoll, members of the coaching and management team, Ken and Diane Williams and Jim Boland.

It was a very competitive affair, well organized, well run and the championship game was a very competitive two to one game.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

Today I rise to bring recognition and congratulations to Pouch Cove Elementary on winning a national award. Pouch Cove Elementary recently won Mr. Christie's Book Award, Read To Succeed Program.

One hundred and eight students took part in this very worthwhile project. Four thousand books were read in four weeks. Not only did these students have a great learning experience, but they can say they were tops in the country. As a Member of the House of Assembly I say congratulations on a job well done. I know their parents and teachers are very proud of these students for their commitment and hard work. These students have won $5,000 worth of books for their school library, even more books for them to read.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my pleasure to inform this hon. House that The Western Star, Western Newfoundland's only daily newspaper celebrates its 100 ^th birthday today, April 4.

To mark this significant milestone in its history, the auditorium at Sir Wilfred Grenfell College in Corner Brook was transformed into a time machine on Saturday past where the general public was invited to walk through history courtesy of some memorable pages from The Western Star.

The Western Star was founded on April 4, 1900 by the late Walter S. Marche, a former editor of the now defunct Daily News here in St. John's. Since that time The Western Star has come a long way. Today it has a staff of sixty working at its headquarters in Corner Brook with reporters in Deer Lake and Stephenville, along with Star correspondents throughout the entire western region.

The Western Star was there to cover World War I and World War II. It was there to cover the American presence in Stephenville. It was there to cover our Province's Confederation with Canada. I am pleased to inform this hon. House that The Western Star will continue to cover the events and occurrences that are of significance to the people of Western Newfoundland for many years to come.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On Saturday past I had the opportunity to attend a banquet hosted by the Labrador West Ptarmigan Shrine Club. In attendance, making it a first for Labrador, was the highest ranking official of the Shriners in North America, the Imperial Potentate, Illustrious Sir Ralph W. Semp and Lady Pat Semp. Also in attendance were Potentate: Illustrious Sir Y. Sheridan Yetman and Lady Evelyn Yetman, along with other Shrine officials.

The Imperial Potentate designated Labrador West as a place he wanted to visit because even though their club is small, the Ptarmigan Club's contribution to the Shriners is significant.

The Shrine organization is one of the greatest organizations in our society. Their work with children is recognized worldwide. They have major hospitals in Montreal, Philadelphia, Northern California and a burn treatment centre in Boston. They have recently opened a new medical facility in Mexico.

Many children of our Province have benefited from the generosity and expertise of the Shriners and their hospitals. They have saved our government and governments throughout the country millions of dollars. The Shriners spend $17 every second, well over $500 million a year, providing specialized medical treatments and conducting -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. COLLINS: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. COLLINS: - conducting scientific research trying to find cures for many of the dreadful diseases that affect children.

I ask this House to join me in paying tribute to Shriners everywhere and acknowledge the wonderful work they do on behalf of sick children.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer congratulations to Liam Kavanagh of Torbay who captured top honors at the Newfoundland and Labrador 1999-2000 Finals of the Great Canadian Geography Challenge, a national student geography competition.

The event was held in my district on Saturday, April 1, at All Hallows Elementary in North River, and was co-hosted by Labrador City Collegiate in Labrador City. The second place winner was Anthony Martin from the Labrador area.

Each winner receives an expense paid trip to Ottawa to compete in the National Finals on May 20-22.

It is obvious these students have a keen understanding of the geographic nature of their country and the Province as a whole. This was said by Mr. Peter Laracy, principal and coordinator for the Provincial Challenge.

The Challenge began earlier this year with classroom competitions where school winners earned the right to qualify for the provincial championship. The finalists answer dozen of questions asked by quiz leader Denis Malloy of VOCM.

The Great Canadian Geography Challenge is designed to help foster an interest in geography among -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HEDDERSON: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HEDDERSON: - among school-aged children and to do so in a fun and interactive fashion.

The top two finalists will go forward in the Canadian team. The Canadian team won a gold medal in 1997, a silver last year.

The Challenge is organized nationally by the Canadian Council for Geographic Education with the help of hundreds of local teachers and volunteers. National corporate sponsors include the Royal Canadian Geographical Society, Bell Canada, Corel Corporation, Esso Kids Program, and Canadian Geographic.

I join with the House in offering congratulations to the organizers of this fine competition.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, in provinces across Canada and in countries around the world, April 2-8 is being proclaimed as the week to recognize the importance of good records and information management in the workplace.

This is the sixth anniversary of this special week, which was initiated by the Association of Records Managers and Administrators Inc. (ARMA), a professional, not-for-profit organization for education in the field of records and information management. ARMA has 145 chapters throughout Canada, the United States, New Zealand, Japan, Jamaica and Singapore.

This week, our local chapter of ARMA will be hosting a reception at the Provincial Archives of Newfoundland and Labrador with guest speaker on ISO Standards, Susanna Duke, and will feature this event in the Association's quarterly newsletter. Our local chapter will also be featured at a display by the national ARMA committee in Ottawa during the week.

With the increased usage of the Internet, satellite and other technologies in our knowledge-based society, the world is becoming more and more what McLuhan called a "global village."

As a result, the demand for quick and easy access to information is critical for decision-makers, particularly when businesses are competing on an international scale.

Withe the inundation of information in our lives today, control is essential in order to ensure that both records and information are managed properly. Fortunately, the systems for managing and storing information are becoming increasingly sophisticated in our Province, and around the world.

As you know, the responsibility for government records and information management falls under the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation. However, as the hon. members were informed last week by the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology, her department, too, has taken an initiative in this area with Success~Works, Industry, Trade and Technology's online business information system.

Our records and information professionals play an important role in the work environment, and this week we have the opportunity to recognize their work, both within the public service, and throughout other organizations throughout the Province.

As we celebrate National Records and Information Management Week, I invite hon. members to join with me in recognizing the value of this work, and the importance of good records and information management in our Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!

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

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr .Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for sending me a copy of his statement. We, too, on this side of the House, would like to join with all members of the House in wishing this group every success.

As well, it is very worthy to note that information, in my opinion, is a two-way street. This same minister who just read this statement I wrote on January 21, 2000 seeking information on a project that his department was responsible for.

On January 25, I received a reply saying that my questions had now been sent to Justice. That has been in excess of two months, so I say to the minister, and to the Minister of Justice: Where is the information that should come back the other way? It is fine to have good record keeping, but at the end of the day, when we ask for information, we should have the decency of having that information provided to us.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, thank the minister for a copy of his very important statement and his update on the latest geography of the "global village."

Management of records and information is very important in our modern society, and nothing could be more important than preserving our archival material of this Province, which the minister is also responsible for. I want to congratulate this organization for their professional approach to this and to say that we here, in this Province, have the highest standards of professionalism in terms of our ability to manage records and look after this information. We need the support of government to ensure that all of our records, including our archival material, is properly stored and cared for. We hope that the new facility that we are going to build in St. John's will add considerably to our ability to do that.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods.

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

I would like to take this opportunity to inform the House of Assembly of the significant contribution being made to the pulp and paper industry and the economy of this Province by Corner Brook Pulp and Paper Limited.

Corner Brook Pulp and Paper, through its capital expenditure initiatives, invests millions of dollars each year into its Corner Brook paper mill and its woodlands operations throughout the Province. The company will be undertaking a number of major capital investment projects once again in the year 2000. It is expected that this investment will be in the vicinity of $28 million.

There will be a number of capital investment projects started this year and also completion of other projects from the past year. This work includes approximately $6.6 million of work on the Number 7 paper machine.

In addition, there will be several new projects in the year 2000 which consists of paper machine upgrades, environmental improvements and woods road construction.

It is also worth nothing that Corner Brook Pulp and Paper woodlands division, along with other operating divisions, is currently in the process of implementing an Environmental Management System in an effort to improve their environmental performance. The woodlands division and the paper mill are currently updating the system to conform to the ISO 14001 standard. ISO 14001 is an international standard recognized around the world. This is a clear illustration of Corner Brook Pulp and Paper's commitment to protecting the environment.

Mr. Speaker, this effort to improve, expand and create new infrastructure allows Corner Brook Pulp and Paper to continue to produce a high quality product for its customers throughout the world. The capital investment made by Corner Brook Pulp and Paper provides a significant economic boost to a number of communities throughout the Province, particularly those in rural areas of the Province whose viability is dependent on a healthy pulp and paper industry. The paper mill in Corner Brook and the woodlands division have a payroll of $64.5 million and employs 1,350 people.

Mr. Speaker, this $28 million capital investment this year does not just represent an investment into the economy. It demonstrates a commitment by Corner Brook Pulp and Paper towards advancing the pulp and paper industry in this Province. Government commends their continued efforts in this regard and looks forward to working with the company into the future to support this Province's forest industry.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the Colonel for forwarding a copy of the Ministerial Statement to me today.

Mr. Speaker, it is a good news story and I certainly welcome the good news in the pulp and paper industry today, with the few bad years we had in the past. It is good to see the pulp and paper industry turning around and the companies being very viable and economical, but I also want to recognize the fact of the technology. Last year we saw, through the problems at the strike in Corner Brook, when the loggers were out on strike, the technology certainly hurt them. I am calling on the government and the minister to look into some of the pension issues that were discussed in that strike and the harvesters situation so that these displaced loggers could have some compensation and some hope for the future. It is important that these loggers - after working in the field for so many years - be taken care of in their last few years in the industry. It is important that we see more money put into silviculture because of the low supply of wood and product in our Province that -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HUNTER: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HUNTER: Mr. Speaker, the silviculture program was increased this year by $2 million but I believe that this is not enough money to take care of the problems that we have today in this Province with the development of our low wood supply. I would just encourage the minister and his department to enhance the silviculture program, put more money into it, and help the displaced loggers so that they can have a better chance at their retirement in the future.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Corner Brook Pulp and Paper is an important employer in our Province and it is great to see them reinvesting in their company. It is important today to keep pace with technology, and the focus today is, more than ever, on quality not quantity, as it used to be a few years ago. It is also good to see that they are paying attention to things that will improve the environment, after the concerns that have been expressed in the Corner Brook area throughout the past number of years.

I reiterate, too, that it is important that when technology is brought into the workplace it used to its proper advantage, but we cannot be ignoring the rights of workers who have long given good service to the employer. They have to be taken care of in a proper manner when technology displaces any of the workers in the workplace.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

My questions today are for the Minister of Mines and Energy. Yesterday, I asked a question about the transmission line, or the inter-connector infeed from Lower Churchill to the Island portion of the Province. I asked the question on the basis that this government and the Province had said that the entire transmission line or inter-feed question is dependant - the entire Churchill Falls or Lower Churchill Falls discussions - upon the infeed. The minister said yesterday that wasn't the case and he would love to see where it was quoted from, so I would like to quote it for him today. On June 11, 1998, the Province's chief negotiator said, "...the arrangements that have been made...." - which I said yesterday -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: No, I talked about the chief negotiator yesterday.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: I say to the hon. the Government House Leader, yesterday in this House I talked about the chief negotiator and I am talking about it again today.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get on with his question.

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

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) first question.

MR. E. BYRNE: It is right in Hansard if he cares to read it, Mr. Speaker. If the Government House Leader would like to pick up yesterday's Hansard he can read it for himself where it says chief negotiator.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: No, I did not.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: I will ask the minister this question - "... the arrangements that have been made - the basis for negotiations that have been achieved so far - certainly contemplate having to have that transmission line."

So, the whole structure is really tied into that transmission line. I would like to ask the minister today - now that he has the information - is the deal, or potential deal, with Lower Churchill and Hydro Quebec dependent upon the transmission line, yes or no?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, the Provinces' position has been consistent from the beginning. Let me refresh the hon. member's memory. The first question he asked in Question Period yesterday, in one of his statements, was an allegation that the Premier had said that, and my response to him was that the Premier had never said it. When he got up again, he then said: Well, the chief negotiator said it.

There are a lot of people who might have said things, but the issue is whether or not the line can be justified, given its cost to be built to the Province. What we have said is: It can't be done without the assistance of the federal government unless you want to charge excessive utility rates to people in the Province. We do not see an economic case for building it unless someone can find in the vicinity of $1 billion or $2 billion to subsidize it. That has been the position of the Province from the beginning, it is what we said at the beginning, and it hasn't changed.

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

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

It was also said at that time, on behalf of the Province, that the federal government - I can quote again for the minister if he would like me to - that the Government of Canada had been approached on a good faith basis; that they were working with the Province on a good faith basis; and that it was the Province's intent, in due course, to convince the federal government of the logic of the necessity of the line.

Is the Province still convinced today that the logic and necessity of that line in terms of - you have already had a position stated by your chief negotiator that the necessity and the logic behind the necessity for the line was already in place. I guess, how much work has been done? How much advance have you made in convincing the federal government of the logic for the necessity of that inter-feed line?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, all of these things have been costed; Muskrat Falls as a possibility at the beginning, the transmission line-

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. the Leader of the Opposition wants to ask another question I will accede my place to him.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am delighted to answer the hon. the Leader of the Opposition's question, in particular if he is prepared to listen to it.

From the beginning we have said there are elements to the deal that would be negotiated around. We never said that one thing or the other would happen. The issue of the transmission line, from the beginning, has always been known not to be economic without some massive infusion of capital. We cannot justify it. We probably can't borrow the money to build that, and if the hon. member takes $2 billion, tries to sink the cost and charge for the operation, he will find that the increase in utility rates on the Island would be so huge that you couldn't justify it to the public or certainly to our rating agencies.

If the hon. member has someone who wants to build a $2 billion line to the Island, if this development goes ahead, and is prepared to say they will do it at current electricity rates and not increase costs, we would like to know who it is.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, according to the chief negotiator it was the Province who said it was logical. I will quote him again. It says, "...the Premier will be able to exercise some moral suasion on his former colleagues and he certainly has assisted us in making sure that they've listened to the case that we've made." Also, "...in their own terms, and we think that the logic of what we put forward will convince them." - the federal government.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. E. BYRNE: I would like to ask the minister: What has changed? A year-and-a-half ago the logic of what they were putting forward, certainly they felt that would convince the federal government that an infeed was not only possible, it was economical and viable. So what has changed since then and now, Minister?

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

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. member persists in asking the same question in a different fashion. At the end of the day the issue is: Can it be built to the Island without increasing rates? The answer that we keep giving is, no. What we said from the beginning is that we would like to see it built. It may be a logical extension and make sense to displace the fuel generation at Holyrood. There are elements to this that are logical, that makes sense, that we would like to see it happen, but there is an obstacle and the obstacle is economic.

Now if the hon. member can tell me where the $2 billion comes from, and if he is prepared to finance it at rates that will not increase what the people in the Province now pay, we would be delighted to see it done.

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

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

He has asked me. They were the ones who had all the answers a year-and-a-half ago. This was the project that was going to proceed. The transmission line was going to happen. Thousands of jobs forever and a day were going to benefit. Now he has asked me where we would find the $2 billion.

Let me refer him to the Premier's own statements about $2 billion. In March of 1998, the Premier said that under our arrangement with Quebec, Newfoundland and Labrador is entitled to 100 per cent of greenhouse gas emission credits for Gull Island and 50 per cent of the emission credits from Upper Churchill diversion projects. Out intent is to use those credits to help finance the transmission line to the Island portion of the Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that he is now on a supplementary. I ask him to get to his question.

MR. E. BYRNE: I would like to ask the minister this: Have you done an assessment on the emission credits? What price tags are those? How will that assist in financing arrangements? At least the Premier two years ago felt that he had the answer to where some of the financing will come. Maybe the Minister of Mines and Energy can take some time and update us today in terms of what his arrangements with respect to the emission credits have been and what price tag have they associated with that aspect of the transmission line?

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

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. member has put his finger on one of the issues and one of the problems with financing the line. At the time we did say, and we do believe that it has a value because of the Kyoto Accord which the federal government signed in 1997, agreeing to reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions in Canada down by 6 per cent below 1990 levels. There has been no federal program. There has been no international agreement among nations as to exactly how they are going to do it. Now they have made a lot of progress in Europe. They have assigned these quotas among the different countries but we have not been able to do it in Canada. He puts his finger on one of the issues that we and my colleague, the Minister of the Environment, recently discussed with out colleagues nationally. The big obstacle that we have in Canada is that no one, internationally, no country has been able to put a value on how much per ton will be given as a credit in order to enable trading to take place; because what is envisaged is a system in North America, certainly in Canada, whereby one industry, if they clean up their emissions, can sell those credits to another and you have a general program for cleaning it up. Greenhouse gases are a huge problem because of global warming. The electrical power industry will, over time, benefit from these; but right now the problem is that there is no value and there is no quantum to it.

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

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

We have gone from his asking a question of: Where are we going to get $2 billion? And when he is reminded he is saying he and the Minister of Environment and Labour are working on trying to identify the value for emission credits so they can finance it.

I would like to ask the minister this question. In March, 1998, the Premier, in an address to the Province, said: I have asked the Prime Minister and the Government of Canada to join Newfoundland and Labrador in a feasibility study in both the technical and financial requirements of such a project. The Government of Canada have agreed.

Last year I asked the former Minister of Mines and Energy - it was my information that the federal government had said absolutely no to participating in the financing of the inter-feed or the transmission line. Yesterday the minister, you, said directly that assistance hasn't been forthcoming. Could you update us, now that we are two years later and an update was supposed to be provided in June, on what the status of the negotiations are with respect to the financial and technical aspects that you and the federal government have agreed to look at? Surely, you must have made some progress in the last two years.

MR. DICKS: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think the hon. Leader of the Opposition asked two questions. One had to do with the greenhouse gases and so on and the value of those credits. There has been no value assigned to them, but I will make a deal with the Leader of the Opposition. If he can find someone prepared to pay $2 billion for it, we will build the line to the Island. So far, no one has been forthcoming and the federal government -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DICKS: Because they won't be valued probably in that -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DICKS: Yes, frankly, I do not think that the greenhouse gas credits will amount to $2 billion, but they will have a substantial value, which has not yet been determined. It is very difficult to sell something when no one puts a price on it.

The second part of his question had to do with where we are in our negotiations with Ottawa on the financing of the line to the Island. The difficulty one has is when you look at the cost of it there are cheaper alternate forms of energy that could be produced on the Island, because the 800 megawatt line is to provide for future growth.

AN HON. MEMBER: ( Inaudible).

MR. DICKS: Many. I will entertain a question on it.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: The Minister of Mines and Energy has said - and I will make this very clear - that nobody has been forthcoming with the Province in terms of assisting to build a transmission line. Is he saying that the federal government has said no, that they will not participate financially or in any other way, shape or form in making sure that that transmission line becomes a reality? Is that what the minister is now saying?

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

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, I am not prepared to say that at this time. Let me say that we continue to have a dialogue with the federal government as to what if any participation they will have in financing the Lower Churchill development. They have indicated reluctance to help build the $2 billion line when they believe there is an alternative available, be it natural gas, wind power or others, that would provide more economic power for the people of the Province. That is the issue and that is where we are. By and large, I would have to agree with their economics, but between the two of us, if they put a reasonable amount of money on the table, we might justify it. That amount of money is not there yet.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Final question. What other forms of power are the federal government talking about that are renewable, that will go on forever and a day, that will provide a continuous uninterrupted supply of power to businesses and homes in this Province forever and a day? What other forms of power could the federal government be talking about that would equal the power we could get from the Lower Churchill?

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

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Leader of the Opposition asked the wrong question. Hydro power does have an advantage in that it does last -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. DICKS: The question he should be asking is whether or not the net present value of the line to the Island could be outweighed by another alternative. The truth is, to generate another 800 megawatts the net present value of something else you could build instead of hydroelectric power - there are a number of things that you could propose that would be much more competitive than that, including natural gas, and changing some of the facilities we now have on the Island as well.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Justice.

All Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, I think, were shocked to hear of the latest tragedy that came to the fore in Sheshatshu during the past few days. The Chief of the Sheshatshu Band Council last night on the public airways, practically on bended knee, begged the Province to give the Band Council some additional tools to help it fight the devastation that Aboriginal youth in particular are facing in that community.

I want to ask the Minister of Justice: Has the minister given any consideration to Chief Riche's request that laws and/or regulations be put in place that would allow authorities to apprehend people for gas sniffing?

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

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, we have not been directly contacted in my department at this time by Chief Penashue, but we are aware of the situation and the fact that he has made certain public comments. We do expect to hear from him in the very near future. In fact, I have undertaken with my officials to make sure that we do set up a dialogue. This is indeed a most tragic situation. There are various methods in which to deal with it. Chief Penashue is referring to possibly criminalizing the situation, and if that happens, of course, that would require some federal cooperation, if it is a matter of criminalizing. We do also have tools available as well when persons are harming themselves in the Province, and we would certainly undertake to do whatever is possible or necessary to assist that situation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, this is not a new problem, I say to the minister. Isn't the minister prepared to take the lead here, to contact Chief Riche and the Band Council and say: What is it we can do to help you attack this particular problem that faces the community?

Let me ask the minister this while he is on his feet. Has the minister or his officials determined whether or not, in fact, it is within the power of the Province to be able to enact regulations and/or legislation to help the Chief in the request that he made publicly yesterday?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, in regards to the first part of the question, we do in fact intend to set up a dialogue with Chief Penashue to discuss this situation. It is most tragic, most urgent and most necessary. We certainly do intend to do that.

With regards to the second issue, as I indicated earlier, there are two possible ways of doing this. It may be a matter of criminalization which, if it is, pursuant to the code, we will obviously require some federal government input, but there are obviously methods under provincial legislation, such as the Child Welfare Act and so on, that we can also look at to implement provisions which could be of assistance in those tragic situations.

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

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

My questions are for the Minister of Industry. Minister, government gave Friede Goldman over $80 million in assets and over $70 million in assumed loans. They guaranteed $2.5 million in operating capital and gave them EDGE status. Government assumed all environmental costs. We don't even know what they are yet, Minister. I ask: What did Newfoundland and Labrador receive in return for this deal?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS KELLY: I would say, Mr. Speaker, in answer to this question, that the main thing that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador received was a facility that is operating, that right now has 400 to 500 people employed in it as it works on the Sedco 714 rig. It is a company that is open and viable, and that we continue to meet with and to make sure it has a vibrant future as our offshore is developed.

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: They certainly haven't guaranteed the employment that was set out in the deal.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, according to the Auditor General's report, government did not verify the employment numbers provided by Friede Goldman. Government did not verify the capital improvements reported by Friede Goldman. I would like to ask the minister why government passed over assets of over $150 million and didn't see fit to even audit the employment numbers or the capital improvement figures reported by Friede Goldman.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS KELLY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What the hon. member is saying is just not correct. While the first year the company did not formally, in a letter, write the department with the numbers, they did not do that because in a presentation to government all of these figures were outlined. So while it is not there in a formal letter, it is there in even better form, in a total presentation on all the numbers. If you remember correctly, the numbers were way above the required employment hours in that first year. In the second year, which is this year past, we have had all of the appropriate documentation presented before any set deadlines.

As to capital improvements, government did verify all of this. The capital improvements that the company was supposed to make have been made.

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

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

The minister is calling the Auditor General a liar. Government did not verify these numbers. It is written in the Auditor General's report.

Minister, government was supposed to have had guarantees on the return of the assets in the event of certain occurrences at the Marystown Shipyard. I am asking the minister: Why did government not place language in that agreement to ensure the return of assets in the event government felt it was necessary? Furthermore, what protection do the people of this Province have on those assets?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS KELLY: Mr. Speaker, I think it is very fair to say that when we were doing this transaction it was a privatization transaction. We privatized the facility, and we privatized the facility in such a way that it will become an industry. We did not go about meeting with Friede Goldman looking for their failure. We looked at this as a privatization that would be successful and we continue to work with them to make sure that it is successful.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Health and Community Services and has to do with the home care industry in this Province. Currently, workers in home care receive very low pay, about half of that of those providing the same service in institutional care. They receive few if any benefits, often working split shifts in different homes in the same day. Does the minister regard the service provided by home care workers as equally valuable, if not more valuable, than that of institutional care, and will he commit his government to the development of a home care program with decent wages and full benefits for those working in it?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate a question about a very serious topic for all of us. The government in this Province has been continuing to move into the area of home care and home support with a bigger role and on a bigger basis year over year in the last decade. Ten or eleven years ago the total program, the total funding for home care and home support in this Province, would have been in the range of about $3 million. In this fiscal year there will be a budget of $36 million or $37 million and because of some needs driven assessments the actual funding and spending will be in the range of $40 million.

So there have been some tremendous strides and improvements made over a decade with this particular government and a Liberal administration overseeing what has been occurring. It is interesting to note that at this point - because this has never been a medically insured service under medicare in Canada, even though most of the home care has some kind of medical connection - the Government of Canada is now wanting to come to the table with the provinces and territories as partners in a national home care, home support program that we have already indicated that, even though we do not know the details, we would gladly participate in on a 50-50 basis with the Government of Canada so that we could continue to make some improvements, so that we could give a broader range of coverage, care and support, and so that we could improve the actual working conditions for those people who provide the home care and home support to the people that need it in their homes.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The government, through the Minister of Finance, in the 1997 Budget talked about the great value on services provided to seniors and persons with disabilities and the critical role of home care workers, yet the home care workers in this Province are still not covered by workers' compensation benefits, and government has acted to marginalize the work of home care workers by treating them primarily as under self-managed care.

Is the minister prepared, as part of the development of the national home care program, to have national standards, to raise those standards to ensure that the workers in this very vital industry have decent wages and have full benefits of employment like those workers in institutional care do today?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I sense from a couple of the things that were mentioned in the hon. member's question that he obviously supports the whole concept that in an individual's private home there should be unionization even if there is only one provider of support in the home.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. GRIMES: That is the answer to the question, Mr. Speaker. He is talking about the fact that he is suggesting that we are trying to marginalize workers and that we do not value the actual care, and that the government should not leave the actual person who requires the care as the employer in this case. He is really trying to be up as an negotiator like his friend for Labrador West who knows nothing about it when it is convenient, now suggesting that on behalf of his -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. GRIMES: - union comrades in Newfoundland and Labrador that all home care and home support workers should be unionized, that only agencies should provide the care, that there should be a unionized rate, and that it is inappropriate for an individual to hire a person who will provide care that they need and want.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, hopefully he will ask some more questions -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister now to take his seat.

MR. GRIMES: - so we can explore the issue even further.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are to the Minister of Health and Community Services. The medication (inaudible), or Aricept, which is a trade name, was approved two-and-a-half-years ago by Health Canada as safe and effective in offering the first ever treatment for the devastating and fatal Alzheimer's disease. Now this drug has been proven effective on patients in the mild to moderate range. There are currently 1,500 patients in Newfoundland and Labrador in that range. Clinical studies have shown that 80 per cent of these people with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease can either improve or keep from getting worse by taking this particular drug. This could keep or delay patients from being institutionalized and it could save millions of dollars to our health care system.

I know the minister this year has indicated in the Budget that there is $4.4 million for new drug therapies approved, or increasing the amount under current ones. The cost of this one would only be between $1 million or $2 million, depending on how many are under private insurance and how many might be covered by DV and other sources. I want to ask the minister: Will he consider adding this particular drug that can be cost-effective to the provincial drug program?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker, we have been considering it for some time. If the evidence is presented to government, and to me as the minister, as was described by the Opposition health critic, then we would have added it to the list already. The fact of the matter is that there is a committee here in this Province and also in Atlantic Canada, in each of the four jurisdictions in Atlantic Canada, that do a review of the clinical trials and the clinical tests and they have reported to four health ministers in Atlantic Canada that there is no conclusive clinical evidence-based proof today that Aricept is actually effective.

Health Canada indicates that it is absolutely safe, there would be no adverse or negative impacts, and they say it might be, in some circumstances, marginally effective; but there are further clinical trials and tests being done, other than those being done by the companies trying to sell the drugs, to determine whether or not it should be added to the list in Newfoundland and Labrador and we do this in partnership with the other provinces in Atlantic Canada.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The previous minister said the same for MS drugs and several months later it was accepted because we are the last to come on stream; and with schizophrenia and with other drugs it's the same thing. We are always last to accept the clinical and research evidence.

Dr. Rockwood, Director of the Geriatric Medicine Research Unit at Dalhousie Medical School, the leading people in the field, in the study of dementia, has successfully treated patients with it . He stated that symptoms improved noticeably, particularly in the ability to initiate tasks which have previously been lost. The Director of Alzheimer's Disease Research at the McGill Centre for studies in aging has indicated that we would decrease the number of persons with Alzheimer's by half if we delay the onset, as this drug can do, by up to five years.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Here in this Province, I want to mention that Doctor (inaudible) was here, the Chief of Geriatric Psychiatry at McGill, down here in this Province, and used it as standard therapy for Alzheimer's.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get to his question.

MR. SULLIVAN: I want to ask the minister: Has he read and followed these people who are experts in the field, and the local expert in this Province, Dr. Strong, and even Dr. Butler who has had extensive patients with this? They support a twelve week trial or a trial basis for that drug. I ask the minister: Will he do what they are doing in Ontario and Manitoba and approve a twelve week prescription trial for this drug? If it works, use it, if not, don't use it for these people.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe I might add to the facts that were just presented. I just happened to come from a meeting of Health Ministers in the country where this issue was one of those that was discussed because the increasing cost of drugs and pharmaceutical supplies is one of the real cost drivers of health care in the country in any event. It is interesting that he mentioned Ontario and Manitoba, because I happened to ask both those ministers if they had actually approved Aricept on the basis of clinical evidence. Their answer was, no.

The answers given were these: they suggested that they would have been better advised to wait for clinical evidence from those other than the company trying to sell the drug, which is what we are waiting for; and that in Ontario they said they did it because there was public pressure and they had the money, which is not our case; and in Manitoba they did it because it was announced during an election.

They admitted that in both cases neither of them did it on the basis of evidence; and guess what? In one of those provinces they had just threw out a PC government and replaced it with an NDP government in Manitoba. They are going to try the great NDP solution across the country -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. GRIMES: - and in Ontario, where they happen to have lots of money, the PC government admitted that they did it with no evidence outside of that provided by the seller of the drug itself but did it because they happened to have the money -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: - and could afford it, and did not have to take any more public pressure; because they are Progressive Conservatives and they do not want to take any more public pressure.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has elapsed.

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, Order 1, Committee of Supply.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on Supply, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

CHAIR (Smith): The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, I call the Estimates for Executive Council.

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

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

I have a few questions regarding Executive Council and I wonder if the previous Minister of Finance maybe can help with some of these questions, as the Minister of Finance is unavailable, I am sure.

AN HON. MEMBER: The Treasury Board President is going to answer.

MR. T. OSBORNE: The Treasury Board President is going to answer. Well, that is good.

Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the Treasury Board President can give us a run down of the numbers of employees at Governor House and what their various salaries are?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

In response to the member opposite, I would like to tell you that the salaries actually for Government House were less than anticipated last year. We had a budget forecast of $402,400 and in actual fact there were $370,000 spent in salaries. Out of that $370,000 there were twelve permanent positions, temporary assistance and a little overtime.

Of course, we all know here the important role and function of Government House. Although, it is largely ceremonial, we want to look at Government House as one of the wonderful traditions of this Province and our close association to the British Empire.

I will have to say to you that Government House performs various functions throughout the year. If we were to close it, we would have to provide allowances for the Lieutenant-Governor to perform his duty at other venues and we would still have the building to maintain, as I said last year. It is a wonderful building. The tradition that we have with being the oldest British Crown Colony, a wonderful part of our history in the Cabot year 1997, we had such wonderful ceremonies here. We are quite unique here in this Province in having that part of history, and to do less than not maintain Government House, I think, would be a poor move on our part.

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

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

I thank the President of Treasury Board. I wonder if the President of Treasury Board can give us an outline or a list of the twelve positions that are there and basically, I guess, a brief summary of their duties and the salaries for each of those twelve positions?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

As I indicated previously to the Member for St. John's South, there are approximately twelve employees. Out of that grouping we have: a private secretary to the Lieutenant-Governor, a secretary to the Lieutenant-Governor, residence manager, a gardener, secretary to assistant deputy minister, a chef for Government House -

AN HON. MEMBER: And a gardener, too.

MS THISTLE: A gardener, too, and a chauffeur, and a domestic worker.

All of those positions total twelve. Throughout the year, the salary total came to $374, 800, a drop of the forecasted $402,000 previously.

Thank you.

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

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

There is a considerable increase in the budgeted amount for this year over the revised amount for last year. I would like to ask the President of Treasury Board what that anticipated expenditure or the increase in expenditure is for.

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: With regard to the salaries being lower than forecasted, the reason for that was because there was a vacant chauffeur position during the fiscal year; however, the chauffeur services were provided by the Canadian Core of Commissioners. That is the reason for the drop.

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

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

I wonder if the President of Treasury Board could give us an idea of the cost of repairs and upgrading that has been done at Government House over the past year?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: The repairs would come under Purchased Services, 06., and also Supplies, 04.

Purchased Services, of course, are usually photocopy charges, matting and framing of certificates, pictures and portraits, refurbishing period furniture, restoration of art work, cleaning of draperies and so on, the regular maintenance that would take place in a facility such as Government House.

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

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

I wonder if the President of Treasury Board could tell us what repairs have been undertaken at Government House over the past year.

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would have to tell you at this point, I would not have a detailed listing of the actual repairs that took place on a day-to-day basis; however, if you are interested in obtaining that information, I will be only too pleased to provide you with that in the coming days.

Thank you.

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

That would be most useful information, I say to the President of Treasury Board. We would certainly appreciate a copy of the ongoing repairs over the previous year that have taken place at Government House.

I ask the minister, or President of Treasury Board, under Property and Furnishings, there was a sum of $5,000 spent. I wonder is she can elaborate for us on what furnishings have been replaced, or if there have been repairs to furnishings and so on at Government House, if she could give us an idea of what new furnishings have been purchased at Government House over the previous year.

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

For the interest of this House and the Member for St. John's South, the increase of $1,500 over the forecasted expenditure of $3,500 included the purchase of office furnishing and, of course, household appliances and gardening equipment. Fifteen hundred dollars is not much in the way of new money when you look at the expenses of running a facility such as Government House, and even our own households, when you look at an increase of $1,500 over the previous year in replacement of furniture and equipment.

Thank you.

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: I wonder if you could tell us what furnishings have been purchased at Government House over the previous year. Furthermore, the furnishings that have been replaced, what has been done with those? Where did they finally end up? As opposed to just in government inventory, where exactly did those furnishings end up, I ask the President of Treasury Board?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, the Member for St. John's South is asking for a detailed list of an extra $1,500 spent at the Lieutenant-Governor's residence.

MR. T. OSBORNE: The total $5,000.

MS THISTLE: Well, actually, there is an increase of $1,500.

MR. T. OSBORNE: To a total of $5,000.

MS THISTLE: The normal forecast for replacement of furniture and equipment, the normal wear and tear, is forecasted to be about $3,500 per year. Last year, $5,000 was spent. What you actually asking at this moment is a detailed listing of what was actually repaired or replaced during the past fiscal year. Is that correct?

I would think what you might do, probably at the end of this exercise, if you would write me a letter with all your requests in detail, I would only be too glad to respond to them.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

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

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

MR. TULK: On a point of order, if the hon. gentleman would submit that list of questions that he has there in such minuet detail, I'm sure we could even undertake to even tell him what kind - he is laughing over there. Make no wonder he is laughing. We could even undertake to tell him what kind of soap is used there, the color of the dish clothes. I understand that some of the cups cracked last year in Government House, too.

CHAIR: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. T. OSBORNE: The reason I was laughing was because he wanted us to send over -

MR. TULK: (Inaudible) you were laughing (inaudible).

MR. T. OSBORNE: The reason I was laughing, I say to the Government House Leader, was that you wanted it in writing. I could envision it going off to the Minister of Justice for his approval -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: - and the Minister of Justice would determine whether or not we could find out what happen to the furnishings that had been replaced at Government House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: I wonder if the President of Treasury Board could tell us what happens to the furnishings that are replaced at Government House. Once they leave Government House, where do they go? I am sure there are some pretty nice furnishings there. There is absolutely no doubt about it, it would certainly be a shame for them to be just put in storage somewhere.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, all of us have visited Government House and I think you will agree that there is a great deal of period furniture at Government House. Many people throughout our Province have had an opportunity to visit Government House and admire part of our history, and our history is contained in Government House.

I am certain that every piece of furniture that is within use is kept at Government House for further viewing by the citizens of our Province.

Thank you.

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Chairman, I know it sounds trivial to the President of Treasury Board, but I am sure that, over the course of the past several decades, some furniture have left the premises of Government House and I am curious as to where that would go.

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

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

I wonder how many (inaudible).

CHAIR: Order, please! Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

The Chair has not recognized -

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

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

MR. TULK: I wonder if the hon. gentleman could make known which year? What pattern he thinks was there? Would he like to know what pattern is there, what color? I have to say to the hon. gentleman that this is reaching the stage of being ludicrous.

CHAIR: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MR. TULK: You don't have to answer (inaudible) questions.

MS THISTLE: I realize that.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The questions that the hon. Member for St. John's South is asking are interesting ones, and entertaining. However, if you would like to have a re-cap of the furniture at specific times and dates I would appreciate if you would put that in writing and address those details directly to me. In due course you will get a reply.

Thank you.

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you.

I will move on, I say to the President of Treasury Board, but as well as moving on to another topic I ask: What would the policy be on furniture removed from Government House? What is government's policy on if something were removed from Government House to be replaced? I just find it fascinating that we can't get an answer. I would like to know what would the policy be, and where would that furniture end up?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Most of us, as I said before, have had the opportunity to visit Government House and I can tell you that most of the pieces of furniture there are antique, they are period pieces. I am quite certain, and I can speak with confidence, that every effort is made to restore and retain because that is a very valuable part of our history, and that is all the more reason why we would want to keep it in the condition that it was originally.

Thank you.

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: I can see the President of Treasury Board is either afraid to answer the question or doesn't know the answer. Government's policy on what is not restored, what is deemed no longer fit for Government House, what is to be removed from the premises of Government House, has to go somewhere. Unless the minister has it in her office and doesn't want to tell us, tell us the policy.

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: You might find this entertaining, Mr. Chairman, and members of the House, when I assumed the office of the President of Treasury Board -

MR. TULK: You got Frank Moores' furniture, didn't you?

MS THISTLE: Yes, in fact, I was the one that lucky enough to receive the office furnishings of former Premier Frank Moores.

MR. TULK: Aren't you lucky? The red chesterfield.

MS THISTLE: The red chesterfield. So you can understand that we have been a very frugal government. I would say every effort is made by Government House to maintain, restore and keep the furniture that was originally in Government House.

Thank you.

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: I am going to have to move on because I can tell she is afraid to answer the question. However, when the former premier, Frank Moores, returns to St. John's in the coming months I am going to tell him personally, because he would be most interested to hear, that the hon. President of Treasury Board is sitting on his chair.

Mr. Chairman, I am going to go to Economic Policy Analysis, 2.2.02. Under Economic Policy Analysis, under .01, Salaries, I am just wondering how many employees are hired there and if she could give us a brief rundown of the description of what their duties are?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I believe I have outlined earlier the different positions of the employees of Government House and I don't think it will be necessary for me to outline the position and the work experience of each one, because I believe most people will find them self-explanatory, such as private secretary, gardener, chauffeur and a domestic worker. I'm sure the member opposite does not need for me to outline work descriptions of all those positions. I feel quite confident you understand what each person listed in those categories are able to do and what they actually do.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you for that entertaining answer, I say to the President of Treasury Board, but I was asking on Economic Policy Analysis. If they have a chauffeur and a gardener for Economic Policy Analysis, I can understand why that side of the House gives some of the answers they do. I guess I will ask again if she can tell me under Economic Policy Analysis, 2.2.02, if she can give me an idea of the number of employees that $216,500 paid for and just a rough idea of what those employees do.

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, I feel quite confident the member opposite is quite able to read his salary details and the full explanation as is contained in the Estimates book.

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, I say to the President of Treasury Board.

Under .03, Transportation and Communications, I wonder if the President of Treasury Board can give us an idea of the $16,000 expenditure there and what that was for.

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: I would like to ask the member opposite: What category again did you express interest in with that question?

MR. T. OSBORNE: The subheading is 2.2.02.03, Transportation and Communications.

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Under 2.2.02.03, Transportation and Communications, are you referring to the $12,000 expenditure?

MR. T. OSBORNE: The $16,000 expenditure.

MS THISTLE: The $16,000 expenditure. That is the normal travel related to expenses and telecommunications. It was a little more than was anticipated, by an increase of $4,000.

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, I say to the President of Treasury Board.

On that, I have just one final question for the President of Treasury Board and then I will let one of my colleagues ask some questions as well, because I know they are being very well informed this afternoon by the President of Treasury Board. This is not only an informative debate in the House this afternoon but it is very interesting, I say to the President of Treasury Board.

Under 2.2.03, Social Policy Analysis, last year we had an expenditure of $8,000 under .03, Transportation and Communications, and we have $21,000 this year. I was just curious as to what the anticipated increase in expenditure for Transportation and Communications is for.

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: The subheading you are referring to is 2.2.03, Social Policy Analysis, number .03., Transportation and Communications.

In actual fact it was budgeted for $12,000 but it only cost $8,000 for travel related expenses and telecommunication costs, less than anticipated.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have a few questions; I guess I will direct them to the President of Treasury Board. Minister, under 2.2.07., Protocol, there is an amount in there under Transportation and Communications of $250,000. I wonder, could the President of Treasury Board explain to me what those expenses are for and how they are going to be used, and who is covered off under Transportation and Communications in this area?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The amount that you are referring to under 2.2.07., the increase is funding for the Viking millennium celebrations, the anticipated expenses.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am not really sure if the minister understood what I asked, but I also asked who would be covered. Who will access this funding?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Your question would be best directed to the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation regarding the Viking celebrations.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Chairman, the minister is in the House, so maybe if I could direct the question to the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation. The President of Treasury Board said the $250,000 under Protocol is for the Viking celebrations. I would like to ask the minister: Who is going to access this $250,000?

CHAIR: Order, please!

Maybe the hon. member would like to repeat the question. Obviously the minister wasn't listening.

MR. FRENCH: I would just like to ask the minister, under 2.2.07. on page 19, Protocol. There is an amount budgeted for $250,000 under Transportation and Communications. The President of Treasury Board has told me that this funding is for the Viking celebration. I would like to know who has access to this funding.

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

MR. FUREY: I am sorry. I apologize to the hon. member. I was trying to figure out where he was. I thought you were under Tourism but you are under Executive Council, Protocol?

MR. FRENCH: Yes.

MR. FUREY: Under the Viking celebrations there are a number of guests that we are inviting to the Province this summer. It has not been made official yet because we have not had confirmation, but whenever you go for Heads of State or royalty, you always budget under Executive Council, Protocol, for their cost to come to the Province. For example, we have invited the King of Norway; we have invited the Queen of Denmark; we have invited the Prime Minister of Iceland; the Premier of Greenland, and all of these dignitaries from around the world. The Governor General will be here for a number of occasions. All of that will be funded through Protocol under that subhead for the Viking celebrations.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Minister.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Under the same heading in 06., there is an amount budgeted of $210,000 for Purchased Services. I would like to ask the President of Treasury Board exactly what kind of services we are going to be paying for out of that $210,000. Who, again, has access to this funding?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Again, most of the money budgeted under that subhead is again for Viking celebrations and it would include such things as receptions, banquets tendered on behalf of government, and most of it will be related again to the Viking cerebrations that are taking place this year.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

On page 18, Advisory Council on Economic and Social Policy, under Transportation and Communications there is an amount budgeted of $78,500. Could the minister tell me, please, who that money is going to be spent on, and why?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, can I ask the member opposite the subheading for that one, please?

MR. FRENCH: The subject heading for that is 2.2.06. and it is .03. of that same heading, page 18, I say to the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Is it 2.2.06.03., Transportation and Communications?

MR. FRENCH: Yes.

MS THISTLE: Last year we budgeted for $78,500 and there was only $61,000 actually spent last year. All of those costs are related to travel and telecommunications, normal expenses.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Again I would like to ask the minister: Could she give me some idea of exactly who would be traveling under the Advisory Council on Economic and Social Policy? Are they civil servants, or are they committees which government would form? Exactly how are we going to spend this money?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I do not have a detailed listing on who would be traveling under that heading; however, the actual amount was less than forecasted. It would be anybody traveling on government business; but the question that was asked by the member opposite, I will endeavor, if he wishes to put that in writing, the details of who would be traveling on government business that would make up that figure, I will definitely be interesting in supplying him with that information.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Chairman, it is already in writing because it is recorded in Hansard. I guess what I am asking here is: Is that funding that is available to present Members of the House of Assembly for traveling on either side of this House?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, I was preoccupied at the moment, talking to one of my colleagues, and I was wondering if the member opposite would ask that question again.

Thank you

.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Chairman, what I say was that this is already in writing. It was recorded in the official record of Hansard. What I am asking, Madam President, under the $78,500, is that funding that is available to present sitting Members of the House of Assembly on both sides of the House? I want more than an answer that: it is for telephones or whatever. I want more of an answer to it than that.

I would like to know: Who has access of this funding? Do I have access to it? Do you have access to it? Who can access this funding?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The amount referred to by my colleague opposite, under Transportation and Communications, is basically designed for boards appointed, such as the Advisory Council On The Economy and Information Technology. They would be one of the boards using these funds. However, if you like other details - this one comes to mind - I would be only too pleased to provide you with this if you would like to write me.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to say to the minister that I would certainly appreciate receiving something in writing as to exactly who has access to this funding.

Under Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat, page 19, I say to President of Treasury Board, 2.3.01., Minister's Office, again there is an amount in there of $50,000. Is that amount to be used by the minister and his staff?

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: That is the allocation for the minister and his staff for travel and communications.

AN HON. MEMBER: It is too much.

MR. NOEL: I think the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi last year, when he first saw the Budget, suggested it wasn't enough, that I should do more travel and more work on behalf of the government, more work in Ottawa and other places on behalf of the Province. I managed to keep within the limit of $50,000 last year and intend to do so again this year, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: The only thing I would like to say to the minister is that if he has traveled from here to Ottawa to meet with Jane Stewart to work out the major problems in the EI Program as they relate to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, as they relate to my district, then maybe the minister should be spending more money and we should be getting better answers as to why the EI Program in this Province is the way it is: the stupidity, the utter nonsense that this federal government has imposed upon us, upon some of our constituents, and I say that to members on both sides of the House.

In my district we have Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. We have two people doing exactly the same job, and they work side by side from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m or whatever their hours of work are. One fellow lives in Holyrood and the other fellow lives in Seal Cove - you can spraddle the line between Holyrood and Seal Cove - but the guy in Seal Cove needs more hours than the fellow in Holyrood. It makes absolutely no sense to me.

I spoke here a while ago, I say to the minister, on the problem with young people who go back to school to better themselves. This EI Program we have knocks them down every single time. I've had people who have given up jobs - jobs that weren't paying very much money - to go back to either University or trade school to do a course in computerization and this type of thing only to be knocked down. They cannot receive one nickel, not one dime, I say to the minister. Hopefully when he has some more discussion with Jane Stewart these kind of things will be discussed and maybe there will be something placed in the rules and regulations when I and other people in this House go down on Water Street to do appeals. As a matter of fact, I don't know if it was the last time or the second last time I was down there, I say to the minister, that I told the board to have some guts, to have some nerve, to put some backbone into themselves, to finally say no. Because something is in legislation doesn't mean that it is right. Just because we record it and it is passed in the House - whether it be this one or the House of Commons in Ottawa - doesn't make it right. Everything that we pass here from time to time, or certainly that they pass, will not be right and will not be equal treatment for the citizens of this Province.

I say again to the minister that we should have more meetings with our federal counterpart and we should be demanding answers to these questions. Why have we changed the EI Program? Why have we allowed the EI Program to come to the limits that it is at? Why does somebody in Seal Cove need 900-some odd hours for EI but yet a person who lives in Holyrood needs less than that, and then probably the person who lives in Harbour Main or Port de Grave where the Minister of Fisheries comes -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

AN HON. MEMBER: You finally woke up, did you?

MR. FRENCH: You know?

AN HON. MEMBER: They have a good member.

MR. FRENCH: I don't know what they have. I would question that. Harbour Main certainly has a good member, I know that.

Mr. Chairman, I say to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs that these are the types of things I would like to see his department do more of and I hope the minister takes that under advisement and does it.

I would like to ask the President of Treasury Board another question. On page 21, Madam President, we have the Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs Secretariat. Under 2.4.02, Aboriginal Affairs, there is an amount budgeted there for $330,800 for Transportation and Communications, 03.

I would like to point out at this particular time that we must have a flock of people who do one heck of a pile of traveling, because if you were to add up in this Budget the amount of money that is there for Transportation and Communications, the amount of money that is there for travel in this Province, it makes me wonder sometimes if we have anybody here looking after the shop.

I would like to ask the minister why the $330,800, and again, who has access to this kind of funding?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

In response to the member opposite's question regarding Aboriginal Affairs, 2.4.02.03, Transportation and Communications, there was an amount of $330,800 forecasted but in actual fact only $200,000 was spent. The reason for this, and the purpose of that particular line, is for land claims' negotiations. As you recall, last year those negotiations were slower than anticipated, but we are forecasting that same budget for this coming year, $330,800.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I just have one more question. The day that we tried to announce the big meeting in Churchill Falls, was some of the $330,800 that was spent, would that have covered off the transportation of taking media and other people in this Province in to Labrador?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I think the statement that was made by the member opposite was probably in relation to the previous year, 1998. I am reporting on the Estimates for the year 1999-2000.

Thank you.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Because we budgeted $330,800 and only spent $200,000 and now we have it bumped up again does not necessary make it right, I say to the President of Treasury Board.

As well in there, there is $257,000 under .05, and again, last year we only used $200,000, but this year it is back up to $257,000 for Professional Services. I would like to ask the President of Treasury Board: Who are we going to pay $257,000 to and what kind of professional services are we going to be engaging? Is this for legal fees, or exactly what is it for?

CHAIR (Mercer): The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The subheading 2.4.02.05, Professional Services, most of these costs are directly related to land claims' negotiations. Of course, the $257,000 forecast we anticipated would have to do with consultation, specialized research on native issues including land claims, library and archival research, translation services, academic research and interpretation, all very important.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I'm sorry. I must apologize to the President of Treasury Board. I did not hear the first part of your answer. Did you tell me that was for legal fees?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, what I did say for the Professional Services indicated here in this category is we would be looking at consultation and specialized research on native issues including land claims, library and archival research, translation services, academic research and interpretation. They are very important as a furtherance of our land claims' negotiations.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have to repeat myself here, but we are certainly not going to use $330,000 in translations. I have difficulty here, Madam President, figuring out where we are going to spend $330,000. I do not think it is fair to suggest that all of that money is going to be used in translation services. That, to me, is an unacceptable answer. I just want to know exactly: What are we going to do with $330,800? I can do a lot of things in my district with that type of money. Again I have to ask the President of Treasury Board: Exactly who are we going to spend this money on?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

As I previously said, all of these are costs associated with negotiating the Native Land Claims. If, however, the member opposite would like a more detailed breakdown of expenses expended during the past year, I would ask him to make that request in writing and I will be delighted to answer his request.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Again, I am going to repeat what I said earlier. I don't think I should write this down and send it to the minister. It is already written down. It is recorded in Hansard. I believe that Hansard should stand in this House as my record as to what I have asked for. I believe the President of Treasury Board, if she doesn't remember the question I asked, then just look in tomorrow's Hansard because the same statement I made earlier, I am making now. As far as I am concerned, this question is already in writing.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have a few questions for the President of Treasury Board.

Just to start, one that struck my eye when the Member for St. John's South was asking some questions on the Cabinet Secretariat, we see on page 16, line item 2.2.01.10., Grants and Subsidies of $15,000. I was wondering what Grants and Subsidies the Cabinet Secretariat would be principally responsible for to the amount of $15,000, which seems to have been both budgeted and spent in the past year and now budgeted again. What would those Grants and Subsidies be, Madam President?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Subheading 2.2.01.10., Grants and Subsidies under Cabinet Secretariat, that cost is as follows: C.D. Howe Institute annual subscription fee, $3,000; grants to the Public Policy Forum, $5,000; The Canadian Policy Research Council, $3,000; and the Institute of Public Administration of Canada, $4,000, for a total of $15,000.

Thank you.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I take it these are subscriptions for information services, are they?

MR. CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I think it is very important that we keep an up-to-date forecast of what is happening not only provincially but nationally and internationally. By subscribing to these national magazines, we are in tune with whatever is happening in the financial market.

Thank you.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Then perhaps I should suggest that the minister urge the Secretariat to subscribe to the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) Monitor, which is a monthly publication which provides policy analysis and some very interesting articles as well.

Recently I drew to the attention of the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women, and Human Resources and Employment, an analysis of the consequences of the unemployment insurance changes which noted that women, for example, now only qualify, if they are unemployed - only 30 per cent of unemployed women qualify for UI. In fact, only 10 per cent of women under twenty-five, and 20 per cent of men under twenty-five, qualify for unemployment insurance after these changes.

I would suggest that the Cabinet Secretariat ought to be kept apprized of the studies and the work of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. It is certainly equally as important as the work of the C. D. Howe Institute which tends to be rather conservative in its analysis.

I was interested in the questions that were directed to the Minister of Justice earlier today, and they had to do with Aboriginal Affairs. I was kind of curious that the Minister of Justice - if I can get his attention - I was interested in the questions directed to the Minister of Justice today, although my current questions are directed to the minister responsible for Executive Council.

When the minister responded to questions about Aboriginal Affairs, and about the situation that the Innu find themselves in with respect to the ability to adequately control and enforce regulations within their communities and have some control over their communities, the minister was concerned that there was no direct communication by Chief Riche - I think he called him Chief Penashue but he meant Chief Riche - but then I looked at the Executive Council budget and I see a tremendous amount of money available for Aboriginal Affairs and Labrador Affairs.

For example, under heading 2.4.01. and 2.4.02., I see $388,200 for Executive Support; another $1.5 million for Aboriginal Affairs; and a separate amount of $279,100 for Labrador Affairs. I am wondering, Madam President, why is it that if we are spending in excess of $1.9 million for Aboriginal Affairs - Labrador Affairs - with giving senior level advice on matters pertaining to these groups, policies respecting Aboriginals, the administration of the Province's policies, formulating and implementing policies, why is it that these expenditure are going on and yet the government has to watch TV and see on the news, and find out through that method, the most severe and serious issues that are facing the Aboriginal people in this Province, and as a result of that then try to find solutions?

I wonder if the minister can explain how that can be?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

This government is very, very sensitive to the issues in Labrador, and I think our commitment to Labrador was clearly demonstrated in our recent Budget. I would like to outline for the member opposite, the commitments that we have made to the people of Labrador: $23 million in additional funding will be provided for initiatives in the five northern coastal communities.

I was looking behind to see if the Member for Torngat Mountains was there. He is not but he is listening. The initiatives are for the five northern coastal Labrador communities: Nain, Hopedale, Rigolet, Makkovik and Postville. In addition to that, $7.7 million will be provided over three years to improve housing conditions on the Northern Labrador Coast. Together with the current plans of the Torngat Regional Housing Co-operative and the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, this initiative will meet existing needs with the construction of 125 new homes and renovations of 280 others.

Are we doing enough? Probably not. Are we doing what we can afford to do? Yes.

There will $9 million provided through the Inuit communities agreement over the next three years for water and sewer projects in five communities; $6 million over two years is allocated for community road upgrading; $280,000 is committed for reconstruction of community wharves in Hopedale and Postville. Enhanced policing services - very important - will be provided in coastal Labrador in the communities of Makkovik, Postville and Rigolet. In addition to those, this year government will spend $57.5 million on the construction of the Trans-Labrador Highway and two highway depots in the region. Also, funding of $500,000 is provided for the next Labrador Winter Games.

Any of you who have watched the Labrador Winter Games over the past month or so - the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair stood in this House recently and expressed her delight at the events of the Labrador Winter Games and commended all of the participants for their great showing.

As I have said to the member opposite, these are some very important strategic initiatives that this government has undertaken to address the social and economic needs in Labrador. They are good initiatives and they are initiatives that this government will build on over the coming years.

Thank you.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Perhaps the minister has inadvertently revealed the reason why they have to watch TV to find out what is going on in Labrador. I listened very carefully to what the minister said and she mentioned all of the expenditures and the announcements that were made for the Inuit communities of Labrador. Not once did she mention the Innu. Not once did she mention any Innu communities. Not once did she refer to the problems that were discussed in the House today, questions to the minister from the Member for Lewisporte. They were on TV last night and talked about the problems that the Innu were having in Sheshatshu because they didn't have a proper way of dealing with the regulations related to the sniffing of solvents in their communities.

I am looking at the Budget here, line item 2.4.02, Aboriginal Affairs, and I see something called Transportation and Communications. Last year the government budgeted $330,800 for Transportation and Communications on the issue of Aboriginal Affairs and I presume that would mean travelling to, visiting with, communicating with the Aboriginal people of this Province, who happen to be in Labrador for the most part. I see they only spent $200,000 of it. Perhaps the minister could arrange for the people of Davis Inlet or Sheshatshu to explain to the government - or have the government explain to them - how it is they could talk about Labrador and the commitment to Labrador and the Aboriginal people without once mentioning the Innu people - who have severe and serious problems that have been recounted from time to time, most recently on TV last night - and how it is that the government is not up to speed on those problems and not on top of them, is not there working with the Innu communities to find ways of doing it.

I know the Minister of Justice said today that there are Criminal Code implications if we are going to outlaw glue sniffing, but this Province has control over the storage, the handling, the sale of gasoline, which is the principal solvent involved here. If the government was doing its proper job here and spending this money in a proper way, under the heading of Aboriginal Affairs policies and consulting, they would be on top of this issue.

I wonder if the minister can explain why it is they budgeted $330,800 last year for Aboriginal Affairs and only spent $200,000 for Transportation and Communications, and you are budgeting it yet again? Is there any special plan that government has to deal with some of these problems that comes out under these heads of expenditures, or are these expenditures designed primarily so that the government can defend itself against Aboriginal land claims? Is that the purpose of the government's attitude and approach towards the Innu? Using the money to find ways of defending themselves against Aboriginal land claims instead of looking for ways of supporting Native communities and Aboriginal peoples of this Province so that they can find their own solutions? Is that the priority this government, protecting us against land claims, or are they going to do something to work with the Innu people to find solutions to these very severe problems?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I would like to thank the member opposite for his question.

The funding you are referring to for Labrador communities, Native communities and Aboriginal issues, crosses over all departments of government. I believe the Minister of Justice during Question Period today gave an answer to your question earlier.

Regarding the line you described, $330,800 that was forecasted under subheading 2.4.02.03, the reason why that is less than we anticipated last year is because land claims' negotiations have slowed down.

Thank you.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

So I guess that is it. The Province's priority is the area of land claims and not the area of supporting Aboriginal people.

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

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, that is absolute nonsense. He knows it. He is trying to score cheap political points out of a situation that all of us in this House are concerned with and that is the conditions that the people, the Innu in Labrador, are finding themselves in. I think there were some very good questions that came from the Member for Lewisporte to the Minister of Justice, and they were answered. We all have a concern about the situation with the Innu in Labrador, in Sheshatshiu and Davis Inlet. He is standing up this afternoon trying to score a few political points in an Estimates debate to just try and somehow weasel some of his political fortune, improve his political fortune, at the expense of people in Labrador who find themselves in a very grave situation.

My point of order is I think it is politics of the lowest order, and I would ask the hon. gentleman to be more careful about what he says in the interests of the people of Labrador.

CHAIR: To the point of order, the hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: There is no point of order, Mr. Chairman.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

There is no point of order. It was just a lecture by the Government House Leader because it is a very sensitive issue that his government has failed to deal with. As the Member for Lewisporte said today, this issue did not arise yesterday, this issue did not arise today, this issue has been going on for some time. The question is: What is the government using the money under the heading of the Province's policies respecting Aboriginals for if it is not using it to help the Aboriginal people?

That was my question, and my followup question is under the subheading for Salaries, 2.4.02.01. An amount of $608,000 was allocated last year by this House of Assembly to the government for Aboriginal Affairs. Only $515,000 was spent. We are, in fact, asking for a budget amount of $621,200 this year. Can the minister explain why the $608,000 was not spent, what positions were not filled or what hiring did not take place, and what is the additional amount of $106,200 over and above last year's expenditures related to?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I think we got distracted by the gallery that time.

The heading that the member opposite is referring to is 2.4.02.01, Salaries. There was a budget forecast of $608,000 and $515,000 was actually spent. The reason for that is because one of the positions was vacant for part of the year. There are actually eleven positions described under that salary heading. They are: Executive Director, Director of Land Claims, Director of Policy and Planning, Land Claims Negotiator, Intergovernmental Affairs Analyst I, Clerk Stenographer III. Actually, there are five Intergovernmental Affairs Analysts and two Land Claims Negotiators for a total of eleven employees with a salary estimate this coming year of $621,000.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

It seems obvious that the salary positions are weighted heavily towards the whole issue of land claims which, of course, is very important, but what is also very important is how the communities are able to cope.

Can the minister say what activities have taken place in the area of Aboriginal Affairs for the Mi'kmaw who reside on the Island of Newfoundland, outside of Conne River, the number of communities which have significant numbers of Mi'kmaw people? What activity is government undertaking in relation to policies and programs with respect to support for these communities under the Aboriginal Affairs head and what progress does the minister anticipate in this area in the next year?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to ask the member opposite to be more specific. Which communities do you mean that are right here on the Island?

Thank you.

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

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Chairman, as the minister undoubtedly knows, or should know, there are significant Mi'kmaw populations outside of Conne River on the Island of Newfoundland in Glenwood, in Flat Bay.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) eight or ten.

MR. HARRIS: It is about eight or ten. I don't know if I need to list them for the hon. minister. There are close to a dozen. There is significant Mi'kmaw population in St. Alban's outside of Conne River. There is one in Flat Bay, there is one in Glenwood, and there is one in - I don't have the list myself. The government has a responsibility to develop programs for these people as well. I am just asking the minister if she could outline what some of them are.

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I will be most pleased to take your question under advisement and answer it in due course.

Thank you.

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

MR. HARRIS: On page 22, 2.5.01, Communications and Consultation, the amount of $527,600 is voted. Can the minister tell us what activities this group undertakes on behalf of the government?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: I wonder could I ask the member opposite to repeat that question again? I was distracted there for the moment. If you would.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

On page 22, under 2.5.01, Communications and Consultation, there is an amount of $527,600 for "promotion of public awareness of Provincial Government programs, policies and services." Can the minister be a little more specific about what exactly this group does on behalf of the Executive Council?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Actually, Mr. Chairman, are you referring to 2.5.01.05?

MR. HARRIS: If I may, Mr. Chairman?

CHAIR: You may.

MR. HARRIS: I'm looking at 2.5.01. The whole of that section has $527,600 under Communications and Consultation. It says: "promotion of public awareness of Provincial Government programs, policies and services." It doesn't seem to be much money in the way of supplies and information documents, so they can't be producing much in the way of brochures or stuff for distribution. I don't think they are the ones who produced the -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: The minister has gone from criticizing me for talking politics in the House of Assembly so now he wants to talk about something else. I think he is rather disturbed.

Mr. Chairman, the question is a serious one to the minister responsible for Executive Council. The amount here, Salaries, is $380,600. I don't know how many positions that is. The question is: What exactly do they do? There is not much money in the way of supplies, so it doesn't seem to be something that is the publications branch. Who exactly are these people? How do they get involved with the "promotion of public awareness of Provincial Government programs, policies and service"? What is that all about? Can the minister by more specific about what they do?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

In response to the member's question, for Communications and Consultation, 2.05.01, the total budget is $527,600. This division responds to inquiries from the general public and it also provides for "the promotion of public awareness of Provincial Government programs, policies and services." The number of people working there is six: an Executive Director, a Director of Communications, a Manager, Information Services, a Secretary to the Assistant Deputy Minister, a Clerk IV and a Word Processing Equipment Operator I.

The normal activities there would be found in any department such as salaries, transportation, supplies, professional services, equipment, property and furnishings, the usual equipment and the cost of running a department like that.

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

MR. HARRIS: We have the next item, 2.5.02, which is Internet Operations and Graphic Support. Would that be the maintenance of the government's existing Web site or is that some other activity involving electronic communication service? Can the minister identify for us what 2.5.02 covers in terms of activity within government with respect to Internet Operations and what is called Graphic Support here?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The subheading 2.5.02 does actually provide for the administration and coordination of government's Internet service. It involves a salary cost of $80,000, forecasted to be $81,700 this year, the cost of two temporary employees and the usual routine office supplies. In Professional Services, .05, we are anticipating a requirement for the hiring of a design and development specialist, along with the usual cost of operating and running an office like that.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I appreciate that your salary budget is used to hire people but I am curious as to what exactly this involves. Is this the government's Web site or is it something else? What is the activity other than the words that say here: "...administration and coordination of Government's electronic communications service"? What are we talking about when we are talking about government's electronic communications service?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, the member opposite is quite right. The funding under this category is to upgrade and maintain the Province's Web site on the Internet.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

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

MR. HARRIS: I have some questions under the Women's Policy Office, Mr. Chairman, of the Executive Council. I note that Grants and Subsidies are included under the Women's Policy Office under head 2.8.0l.10, in the amount of $426,000, an increase from last year where it was $12,000. Can the minister indicate what that subhead consists of? Is this support for the women's centres? Where was this money coming from before? Because that, I don't think, is a new program.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The amount indicated by the member opposite in 2.8.01.10, under Grants and Subsidies, the $260,000 that you are referring to is provided for the continuation of women's centres previously provided in other departments throughout government; $156,000 is in new funding and is provided for anti-violence work.

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

MR. HARRIS: If I have that right, there will be $156,000 for the anti-violence program and $260,000 for women's centres? Is that the annual grants of $30,000 per centre for, would it be, fifty-two centres? Is that it?

The last question is on 2.8.02, Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women. In .10, Grants and Subsidies is at $203,800. That is the total grant to the -

MR. TULK: Jack, you have four or five departments that team up money for that (inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: No. To the point that is being made by the Government House Leader, that amount has gone under Women's Policy Office now. It was coming from other sources, I understand. It has gone from $12,000 last year to $426,000 this year and includes the $260,000 for women's centers. I think that came from somewhere else.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Yes, it's not bad.

My question I guess, is the Grants and Subsidies under 2.8.02. That entire amount is for the Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women, I take it. Is that the case, Madame Minister?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, yes, I would like to say to the member opposite, that is the annual operating grant. It is established by statute and provides independent evaluation advice to government on women's issues. It also provides the focal point for groups dedicated to the achievement of equal rights and opportunities for women; and yes, it is an annual operating grant.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for St. John's West.

MS S. OSBORNE: My question is for the President of Treasury Board and is under 3.1.06. Under 01. there, the salary that you are looking for in the Budget for 2000-2001, $1,649,800; how many staff are employed under the Opening Doors program? That would be my first question, and I know that that one will be relatively short and quick. I would like to build another question in here. How many individual with disabilities were employed under the program in the year 1999? How many individuals with disabilities were employed, and for how long was the employment sustained? What I am asking is: How long do the jobs last? Do they go a couple of weeks, a couple of months? What is the record of the Opening Doors for finding sustainable employment for individuals with disabilities?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The member opposite has asked a very important question. The Opening Doors program has operated for quite some time now within government and I am happy to say that very many placements have occurred because of that program. In fact, just recently we have combined with the federal government under what we call the JEEPS program. We are now doing the placements for federal government for disabled persons throughout the Province as well. The amount of people that were actually placed during the past year, I do not have that figure available but I would be most pleased to provide you with that.

May I ask you again what the other two questions were?

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for St. John's West.

MS S. OSBORNE: Well the most important part of this program - the first question was: How many staff are employed in the Opening Doors facility itself, in that office? I realize that is not a lot of people. The most important component of this particular department or this particular project is - the reason for it being is to provide employment opportunities program for persons with disabilities. Because the budget for salaries alone is $1,649,800, I would like to know how many individuals are employed. This is a fair expenditure of money. How many persons with disabilities are employed? I think I asked that same question last year in this same forum and I don't remember receiving the information. That is one of the things that I am curious about. How many individuals were employed and how long was the employment sustained? Are they short-term jobs, and do the individuals then go back into the community? Or are they long-term jobs? What is the success of Opening Doors? I realize that the federal government has come on stream with JEEPS. The most important component is: How many individuals with disabilities are employed, because that is the reason for Opening Doors being in the first place.

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The number of staff that are within Opening Doors that would really administer that program are fifty-seven from different specialities. Of course, when you look at making disabled persons job-ready, there is quite a bit of training, resume writing and skills required to assist disabled persons in that area.

Of course, disabled persons are hired on in both provincial and federal government jobs right throughout this Province. The numbers - I don't have readily available how many have actually found employment and those who have been kept on in full-time and also part-time employment, but these are readily available and I would be delighted to furnish you with that information.

All across Newfoundland and Labrador we are seeing people who are hired on, disabled persons. This has been such a brilliant program since it started. The fact now that the federal government has recognized the value of this program and is contributing to part of the funding just solidifies the program itself. It is designed to help disabled persons throughout this Province. Many have benefitted from this program and many will.

I don't know if the member opposite has had the chance to actually visit the Opening Doors location here in this building.

MS S. OSBORNE: I have their information.

MS THISTLE: I would like to invite any of the Members of the House of Assembly and others, the general public, to actually visit the Opening Doors department and see firsthand the equipment that is there and available to make disabled persons job-ready for the job market. It has been such a great program and many have benefitted from it.

With regards to the number of employees who are out there and still in permanent and temporary jobs, that information I can make available to you at a later date.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for St. John's West.

MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like the minister to consider this a formal application for that information. I asked for it last year, as I said, and I don't remember receiving it.

Of the fifty-seven people who are employed full-time, do you have a breakdown of the types of jobs that are there? Are they all councillors, and are they fifty-seven full-time jobs?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Yes, I do. There are a number of specialities throughout the Opening Doors employment. We have a manager of programs for disabled persons, local administrator, network administrator, computer programmer analyst, design approval technician, computer support specialist, licensing auditor, computer programmer, environmental specialist, environmental health officer, public information officer, career councillor, social assistance worker, computer support technician, statistical officer, information officer, storekeeper, clerk, library technicians, computer operators, library technicians I and II, clerk-typist III, accounting clerks, micro graphic technicians, word processing equipment operator, data entry operator, clerk-typist II, mail and messenger clerk, clerks I and II.

Many of the categories of people who are employed in Opening Doors cover a wide range of job experiences and interests, so many of the people who are applying for the first time need counseling as to what type of position to train for and where the jobs are. By having these specialists on hand, we have a resource of people who can assist both telephone inquiries and in person walk-ins.

You may recall that last year there was a 1-800 line set up for the Opening Doors program so people all over the Province now can call in and get the information that they need without actually walking in, in person, into the Confederation Building, so it has been a benefit for the entire Province.

The Opening Doors program is indeed a success storey. If you look around this Province, you are seeing more and more disabled persons. It comes to mind that when we were doing the transition, the Y2K transition, one of the key people doing that rollover was a disabled person.

The benefit of hiring disabled persons and the dignity of work that comes with it has been just a brilliant success story. It is an overall benefit for everyone in this Province.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for St. John's West.

MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I say to the minister, I am interested and that why I asked for the information last year. I really am interested in finding out how successful Opening Doors is, how many people have been employed, how many people with disabilities, apart from the fifty-seven who are employed in the framework office.

I would like to move to Strategic Social Plan 2.7.01., and that is on page twenty four. What was estimated in the Budget last year is $290,000 and then it was revised up to $340,000. What new position or positions were created that were not planned for in the Estimates? Also, how many new positions are estimated to be created to bring that amount up to $696,000, which is an additional $356,000 from last year to this year?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have a late breaking news announcement. I cannot remember which member opposite asked me the question. I think it was the Member for St. John's South who asked the question: What happened to the furniture that was out of date and had to disposed of by the Lieutenant-Governor's establishment?

I would like to bring you this important news at this time. The reason, so far - there is $5,000 in the estimate and the actual was $3,450. For the listening audience here in this House, I would like to give this very important piece of information.

Number one, it was to replace the fax unit.

MS S. OSBORNE: That was not his question. In his absence, I will do his question again.

MS THISTLE: In doing so, the old unit was returned to the Department of Works, Services and Transportation for disposal. Two, purchased a tabletop copier to increase capacity, and a new filing cabinet. I hope that answer will suffice.

MS S. OSBORNE: Pardon me, Mr. Chairman, before the hon. minister answers the question that I asked -

CHAIR: I am sorry. The Chair has not recognized the hon. member.

The hon. the Member for St. John's West.

MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to go back to the answer that you just gave. That is all very interesting, and it sounds like it is office equipment. I think the question that he was asking is: What is the overall policy of the government to dispose of the furniture - all that gorgeous stuff that hangs around Government House - when they are finished with it? You do not need to answer it now, but that was his question.

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I believe that overall policy rests with the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation regarding disposal of assets. I am quite certain that the appropriate minister will be able to give you that information.

Regarding your question on Office of the Executive Council, 2.7.01., Salaries, the reason for the forecasted increase is basically to implement the Strategic Social Plan project. Funding for 2000-2001 provides for the establishment of regional steering committees and associated activities, plus grants to regionally based organization.

I would like to say, as the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans who has already been involved with the implementation of the Strategic Social Plan in Central Newfoundland, that it is a social plan that works. There has been so much involvement from the community at large in Central. It was a good initiative and it is one that we can be proud of. It is working all over the Province.

Regarding the cost you indicated, the increase would be the salary cost of non-seconded employees to work primarily on that project alone.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for St. John's West.

MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Under the same heading, 03, Transportation and Communications, there is an estimated increase $354,600 up to $502,600 estimated this year. What is the anticipated reason for that?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

All of the costs indicated, especially with the increase, is the implementation of broadening the Strategic Social Plan and moving out into other regions of the Province. The most recent decision has been to extend the Strategic Social Plan to the western region.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for St. John's West.

MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Do you have a breakdown at all of where that $500,000 will go?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The cost referred to in 2.7.01.03., Transportation and Communications, an increase of $195,000 to $502,000, will the travel and the communications, telecommunications, and all the costs related to setting up an extension of the Strategic Social Plan to the western region, so we now have central and western in service right now. These will be the costs associated with implementing this new plan.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for St. John's West.

MS S. OSBORNE: I ask the President of Treasury Board: Is there a Strategic Social Plan office in Labrador yet? If not, when is it anticipated that one will be there?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, we are fortunate to have the Minister of Human Resources and Employment here in the House at this particular moment. I would be most pleased if you would direct your question to the appropriate minister.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment.

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the member could repeat the question, please?

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for St. John's West.

MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The President of Treasury Board was speaking about the expenses for the Strategic Social Plan and I asked her about transportation and communications. She said they were setting up an office and bringing the Strategic Social Plan into Western Newfoundland. I asked: Was there one yet in Labrador? If not, when is it anticipated that one will be there?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment.

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Chairman, we are working with the committee in Labrador right now and they are in a more early stage of development than the regional committee that is established in Western Newfoundland. They are in the process of doing some development work, and they will be receiving funding from this Strategic Social Plan for this purpose but they won't actually be moving to establishing their regional committee process perhaps until next year. It is somewhat flexible, subject to how to things proceed in Labrador, but our emphasis in funding in Labrador this year is on the basic development that they need to do to get their committee in place.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Madam President, just referring you to page 23, under 2.5.02., Internet Operations and Graphic Support, Salaries. Again, it appears like it was budgeted for $80,000, revised $5,000 and in the Estimates for next year is $81,700. Could you just explain what has happened there?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HEDDERSON: Sorry, I missed it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HEDDERSON: What's that?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HEDDERSON: I certainly can. Just give me the short answer this time, then.

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would be delighted to repeat my answer. The reason why there is an increase of approximately $1,700 was the fact that there was a delayed recruitment during the fiscal year and additional funding is provided to upgrade and maintain the Province's Web site.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: On the same page, Property, Furnishings and Equipment under Financial Administration, again there is a bubble there from last year, the $50,000. How was that spent?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, I am looking at 2.5.02., category .07.

MR. HEDDERSON: Wait now.

MS THISTLE: Would you repeat your question again, please?

MR. HEDDERSON: It was under section 2.6.01., Financial Administration. The original budget was for $5,000 but there was $50,000 spent on Property, Furnishings and Equipment. I am just wondering again, what was that spent on?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

AN HON. MEMBER: It was spent on your hairdo.

MR. HEDDERSON: I didn't hear that.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HEDDERSON: Can I get his answer? That is the one I am interested in now.

MS THISTLE: Your reference to category 2.6.01.07., Property, Furnishings and Equipment, budgeted for $5,000 but actually ended up to be $50,000 and again this year we are looking at a $5,000 expenditure, that was due to increased demands due to the age of the old furniture and equipment.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: The property and furnishings, Madame President, but what type of equipment would have been included under that?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: The normal things you would find in any office setting, furniture and computers, fax machines, whatever it takes to make up an office. It has been there for years and needed to be replaced.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Grants and Subsidies, in the next section there, $47,000 budgeted and $58,000 spent but certainly nothing for this particular year. What were those grants and subsidies; and again, why were they discontinued?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, the reason why there is nothing actually budgeted for the Estimate year 2000-2001 for Grants and Subsidies, the reason is that the requirement to provide secretarial support for the former Premier has lapsed.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

If we go to page 24, section 2.8.01, under Women's Policy Office, the Grants and Subsidies again, Madame President, with regard to $12,000 last year - now there is a tremendous increase this year. Could you just give us a breakdown as to where that money is going, please?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, I just answered that question for the Leader of the New Democratic Party. I don't know if you were absent from the House of Assembly at that time but it is an important funding amount, very important, and I will be only too pleased to give you that answer again.

The $260,000 increase you are seeing there is provided for the continuation of the women's centers across our Province. This amount was previously funded through various departments throughout government. In addition to that, we have $156,000 earmarked for new funding for anti-violence work.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Section 2.7.01., the Strategic Social Plan, again it jumped. What has been added on there with regard to salaried positions?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, although that question has been answered previously I would like the appropriate minister, the Minister of Human Resources and Employment, to respond, if she would?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment.

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Chairman, I believe the specific question is related to the Strategic Social Plan. The amount of overall funding for the Strategic Social Plan this year is, I believe, the same as last year. The use of it will be somewhat different because now we are moving out into regional implementation. A number of regions will be brought on with their regional committees and they will have to have support, the facilitators to work with them. The total allocation of the money is the same, but where we only have one regional committee in full operation at this time, and one other started, through the course of the year we will be bringing on other regions and we will need the human resources to be able to support those efforts.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: In that same section, under 2.7.01.07., I would assume - there was $5,000 for Property, Furnishings and Equipment - that increase would be just for this particular year?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment.

MS BETTNEY: Again, could I ask for clarification, the specific item that the member is referencing?

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MS BETTNEY: As I indicated, in the year past there was only one office actually established to support the regional committees and the property and furnishings associated with it. This reflects that there will be, throughout the year, an increased number of offices which require the same kind of equipment and furnishings.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Under the Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat, the Minister's Office, there is a new salary unit there, I believe. What would that involve? There is certainly an increase of $31,900. This is in section 2.3.01.01. I am just interested in finding out what that salaried position was.

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Minister for Intergovernmental Affairs will be able to answer that question.

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Sorry to move you across the House there.

Under the Minister's Office, 2.3.01, page 19, from the Budget it looked like $189,300 was budgeted last year, $161,500 was spent, and $193,400 was budgeted for this year. What is the reason for that? Is there a position that has been added or whatever?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: Yes, Mr. Chairman, for part of the year we were short one assistant deputy minister position because one person who was serving in that position is gone to Ottawa on an exchange program with the federal and provincial governments, so the position was vacant for part of the year.

The other issue there is, there is an allocation for a public relations person for my department which wasn't filled for the entire year, and there were a couple of -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. NOEL: Why is that?

I was misled, during my detour to the other side of the House for a few minutes here when I was absent and didn't hear the member's question.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. NOEL: That is the explanation there, Mr. Chairman, that the PR position was vacant for part of the year and a secretarial position was vacant for another part of the year.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Chairman, again my question is for the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. In that same section, 2.3.01.06 talks about Purchased Services. It was budgeted at $8,000, $24,000 was spent, and it is back to $8,000 this particular year. What exactly are the services that are purchased?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: Mr. Chairman, (inaudible).

This is an area that is difficult to budget for because you do not know what is going to be coming up from year to year. Last year, as you know, we had a lot of events in the Province that required extra spending for this particular service, which is largely entertainment and that sort of thing. We had the Canada conference here last year and the diplomatic forum, and we managed to go down to Massachusetts and attend the SEMACA conference for the first time last year. We managed to get the annual meeting for Goose Bay this year. So we had a larger expenditure than we had anticipated last year and we are hopefully going to have less this year.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Chairman, again my -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: I can use some of those questions if you would like.

Mr. Chairman, my questions are for the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. Under section 2.3.02, Executive Support, we have some differences there. Once again there is a salary difference with regard to the Executive Support. I wonder, minister, could you explain .01, Salaries: $320,200, $296,000 and $327,200? There is a difference there. Is that a salary position or someone on leave?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: Yes, Mr. Chairman.

The explanation for that was the explanation which I gave first in answering the previous question, which was not applicable to the previous question because the previous question had to do with the minister's staff. This one has to do with Executive Support. The explanation here is that the ADM position was not filled for part of the year. That is the primary cause of that discrepancy. Both positions are now filled so we expect to spend the full budget this year.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HEDDERSON: I will get back to that one. Just take your time now, right? I'm asking him did he have goose or anything for dinner.

Mr. Chairman, my question again is for the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. Again, I would like some clarification. Did you say the ADM was included under Executive Support or under the Minister's Office? I did not catch the last part of it there.

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: I understand the difficulty you are having because of the noise and the confusion in the House, I say to the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

When I first spoke to you I talked about the ADM being the explanation for your first question, but I should not have said that. That was not so because your first question -

MR. TULK: (Inaudible) ask him how he spells Gosse?

MR. NOEL: Gosse? The first question dealt with the minister's staff so the Assistant Deputy Minister explanations... Now if I could have the member's attention. Some other people are not giving me their attention but they are not asking the questions either. The member who is asking the questions, if I can have his attention I will give him the answer.

The ADM explanation did not apply. I should not have used it in that first explanation, but it is what applies to the answer of this second question. Do you understand?

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: All right.

Mr. Chairman, we will go back then to the Minister's Office. This is where we will go back to now. To go back to the Salaries again, I would ask the minister what exactly were those positions then, please?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: In the Minister's Office we have a departmental secretary, a political secretary, an executive assistant and a communications director.

The communications position was not filled for a substantial part of the year and one of the secretarial positions was not filled for part of the year. That accounts for the revised amount being lower than the budgeted amount, but we anticipate having them all filled for the whole of the coming year, so that explains why the budgeted amount for the new year is pretty much similar to what the budgeted amount last year was.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Chairman, my questions again are for the Intergovernmental Affairs Minister. Under .03, Transportation and Communications, you have already said that you have travelled here, there and everywhere, to Boston, and you have referred to it as "we." Who is the "we" that you would be referring to, minister? Is it your ADM? Is it your staff? Is it other government members? Who would be travelling, because you did say "we"?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: I would like to correct the hon. member. I never said that I travelled here, there and everywhere. That in fact wasn't the case. My most likely destination last year was Labrador. I went to Labrador about seven or eight times, I think, and to Quebec. My first trip was -

SOME HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. NOEL: My first trip was to Kangiqsualuijjuaq for the funeral of the avalanche victims in January1999. Then I had several trips to Goose Bay dealing with the flight training efforts that we are making up there. I might say that we were fortune enough to get an extra country to come in and flight train in Goose Bay for the coming year. Italy will be the new country. The amount of expenditures relates to the minister -

MR. ANDERSEN: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. ANDERSEN: Mr. Chairman, I guess for the well-being of the House I would like to correct the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. It is Kangiqsualujjuaq . I do believe that the pronouncement he gave was way off.

CHAIR: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: On that point of order, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TULK: He can't spell it over there, I will guarantee you that (inaudible). Gosse, G-O-O-S-E. Goose (inaudible).

MR. NOEL: I'm afraid that I cannot spell it at this particular time but I will do my studies before I return to the location.

That particular expenditure for Transportation and Communications relates to the minister and his political staff. When I said that "we" traveled to places, I primarily meant civil service staff and not political staff, because normally political staff don't travel with me if I have civil service staff going on various trips.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Chairman, again, questions for the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. I might say, with friends like you have on that other side you don't need us on this side. No, you don't need enemies on this side.

Minister, I mentioned here and there - and it was my thing - but again, how many trips can you account for in the year? You started off by saying you went to here, there and everywhere - those are my words - but exactly how many trips would you have taken in the last year?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: I never took enough trips to satisfy the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi because when we were discussing the budget last year he said I should have had more travel money in my budget. When I mentioned that a few minutes ago he said I should have more this year. I should have traveled more than I did last year and I should travel more this year. I don't know, I would have to check to see how many trips. I would say fifteen or twenty, perhaps, if I had the -

AN HON. MEMBER: What? (Inaudible).

MR. NOEL: I never had any trips to China like some people, or to Scotland.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. NOEL: I am only talking about people who are interrupted my discourse right now.

Primarily the trips were to Ottawa. I had one trip to Iceland, and I had three or four trips to the New England States, or maybe five. The rest were within the Province, within the country.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

We will get back to the Minister's Office once again.

In .06., Purchased Services, you have indicated that these purchased services included entertainment. We would like to know, on this side of the House: Who did you entertain? How many times did you entertain? What was the nature of the entertainment?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: Fortunately, most of the entertainment I did was at no cost to the Province, just as I am doing here today. Some of it is with cost and some of it involves entertaining visitors to the Province.

Just today, I was out at a meeting. There is a Greenland delegation in town and I am looking to getting together with them this evening. Some of my entertainment is probably similar to the kind of entertainment that most MHAs spend out of their own budgets, on both sides of the House. It is the normal way of doing business in this business.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Under 2.3.02., Executive Support, page 20, Property, Furnishings and Equipment, $15,000 spent last year and a budget of $2,500. What came up that pushed it over?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

AN HON. MEMBER: Six times.

MR. NOEL: Six times. What an extraordinary expenditure! What accounts for it is that for the first time in ten years a minister was appointed to the office. We had to buy some extra chairs for the boardroom, a few extra imitation chairs for my office - I think they were - and a chair for the minister himself.

AN HON. MEMBER: Three cheers!

MR. NOEL: Three cheers for the minister, okay.

There may have been some computer equipment included in that as well.

CHAIR: The hon. the member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Again, to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, under the Executive Support, Professional Services budgeted for $1,500, spent $15,000, and now it is back to $1,500. Again, what type of services were they, and why were they just a one-shot deal?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: That expenditure was primarily for hiring a legal firm in Washington to advise the Province on trade and water export matters. It was something we had to do last year that we don't anticipated having to do this year.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: There was a firm hired from Washington. Was the full amount spent on it? Was the $15,000 spent on that one?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: My understanding is that the amount was spent primarily on that. I will check and see whether there were any other amounts included on that line.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Again, my direction is to the Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat. Under the Executive Support, I have to ask you as well about Supplies; $20,000 worth of supplies on a budget of $6,600. Again, could you give me the reason for such a drastic increase?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: Mr. Chairman, a lot of that increase had to do with the fact that a new minister was appointed to the department, or to the Secretariat, and letterheads, stationary, envelopes and things like that had to be acquired in order to provide the supplies that were necessary for the ministry.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

In 2.3.03., under Policy Analysis and Coordination, Transportation and Communications, there was $78,700 and it jumped to $100,000 and back down this year to $78,700. What needs came up to make that increase, and how come it is not reflected in the Budget of this year?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: Mr. Chairman, primarily that related to the extra travel that was required last year in relation to the social union agreement and our involvement in some of the hydro negotiations. Then there was an extraordinary amount to finance the movement of the assistant deputy minister to Ottawa under the exchange program. We had to pay certain moving expenses and that sort of thing. That accounts for the difference, primarily, and we don't expect to have those extraordinary expenditures again this year.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Under that same section, Minister, I look at Salaries and again it seems to be a new salary unit or units. There is a difference. There was $498,800 budgeted, only $457,500 was spent, and now, under Salaries, it has gone up to $509,600. What is the difference there, or why is the difference, I should say?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: The explanation again is that we were short several people within the office for periods of last year. We have now appointed several of the positions and we expect to fill them completely during this year, so we expect to spend the new budget completely.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

To the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs again, under 2.3.02.10., Grants and Subsidies, could you give us a breakdown of what these grants and subsidies are, what they are used for, who they go to?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

As you know, the Province participates in a lot of organizations like the New England Governors, Eastern Canadian Premiers Association, the Council of State Governments Association in the United States, which we joined last year, which several members from the other side attended. The annual meetings -

AN HON. MEMBER: A good conference.

MR. HEDDERSON: Yes, I think that is a very useful group for us to be a part of. We were involved in the Team Atlantic mission last year which we expect to be involved in again this year. There are a number of organization we are involved with like that, where we have to pay annual fees and we have to make grants.

We also make grants to particular organizations and individuals for publicly beneficial purposes. Just awhile ago I made a contribution to the Memorial University UN Student Delegation who are going down to meetings with UN to represent our Province in a student assembly that they are having. I think we made a grant of $3,000 for that purpose. That is the sort of thing that we make grants for.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Chairman, with regard to the grants that you give out, especially to students and that, how does one go about getting such a grant?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: Write a letter to the minister, come in and see the minister, make your case and we will see what we can do.

Would you like to make an appointment now?

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Most definitely, I say to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. Whenever your calendar is open, please let me know so that I can go over and hopefully get in on some of those grants.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

My question is for the President of Treasury Board. In the heading there, 3.1.09.06., Minister, on page 30, could you tell me what type of services were purchased? It was budgeted for $365,000 and revised for $412,000. Could you tell me what type of services were budgeted, and what type of services were actually carried out?

CHAIR (Smith): The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

With reference to the Member for Windsor-Springdale's question under 3.l.09., Office of the Comptroller General, .06 Purchased Services, the reason for that is that our banker for government is CIBC and many of the citizens at large throughout the Province now are using credit card transactions to actually pay for services such as motor vehicle registration, photocopier charges, and so on. There is a cost attached to that, and the transaction fee cost is higher due to an increase of the usage of credit card payments in government.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Minister, are you saying that all this cost is service fees on transactions, or just the increase in the budget and the revised? Is it the increase you are talking about or is the total amount that is there for the service charges for these transactions?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Yes, more and more people are using credit card for payments of services throughout government, and for every transaction that is processed by our main banker, CIBC, there is a fee attached to the transaction, so these fees are increasing. As usage increases, the fees increase.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Heading 3.1.03.03., on page 27, I would like to ask the President of Treasury Board what was involved in the cost of the revised amount, the $80,000. What was that used for in the Transportation and Communications?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, in response to the Member for Windsor-Springdale, my close colleague who resides in my district and who votes for me all the time, and one I can depend on - I am his member. He lives in my district and his vote and his household is one that I can count on, and I have counted on him twice in the past, in 1996 and again in 1999; sure votes.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS THISTLE: Well, I had an extra 1,200 to count, Waterford Valley member.

Regarding you inquiry on 3.1.03. -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS THISTLE: I don't know if I would called that luck. I would call that good planning.

AN HON. MEMBER: Good planning. Well, there yo go. At least she is (inaudible).

MS THISTLE: You can take from that what you wish.

The reason for the increase there was more travel requirements than expected, and we are back now again this year to $65,000.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MS THISTLE: (Inaudible).

MR. HUNTER: Mr. Chairman, do I have the floor or does the minister have the floor?

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MR. HUNTER: I would like to ask the minister: Could she tell me who and where the transportation and communications costs went? Could she tell me who used it, where it was used, and what for?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The figure that you are referring to, the $80,000, is for the overall running of Treasury Board. It would include such people as communication people, myself, and anyone that is traveling in Treasury Board.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Minister, when you said anybody that would travel with Treasury Board, would that mean anybody outside the employment of the Department?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

No. We are reviewing the expenditures of Treasury Board and they would be for employees of Treasury Board only.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MR. HUNTER: This is for the President of Treasury Board, again, Mr. Chairman. On page 24, 2.7.01.10. -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. HUNTER: Could you tell me, minister, where these grants went to and who is eligible to apply for those grants?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, I think I heard properly, but I will repeat it just to make sure. You are referring to section 2.7.01.01.?

MR. HUNTER: No, .10.

MS THISTLE: Pardon me?

MR. HUNTER: Grants and Subsidies, 2.7.01.10.

MS THISTLE: Yes, .10, Grants and Subsidies.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to respond to the Member for Windsor-Springdale. That section, Grants and Subsidies, is actually funding for groups or individuals to carry out demonstration projects that will show innovative and more effective ways of addressing social issues. Individual project costs will not normally exceed $25,000.

I am sure the member opposite knows of the value of one particular project that would have been for the Corduroy Brook walking trails that was an environmental project. That assisted that walking trail greatly. I know you would be familiar with that one, living in the District of Grand Falls-Buchans.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MR. HUNTER: Mr. Chairman, could the minister tell me why there was a decrease in the Grants and Subsides in the Estimates for this year? Is there any particular reason?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

The Minister of Human Resources and Employment is here, and probably you might be able to repeat your question for the minister.

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Chairman, I am going to have to ask if the gentlemen can repeat the question, please.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

Minister, I was just looking at the Estimates. The budget estimate for last year was $1.2 million. This year it is $500,000. That is the Grants and Subsidies in 2.7.01.10 on page 24.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HUNTER: Pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HUNTER: That is the Strategic Social Plan, yes. Is there any particular reason why this Grants and Subsidies amount was reduced so low, down to $5,000?

CHAIR: Order, please!

The Chair must intervene here. I would ask the minister to rise and be recognized, because for Hansard there is nothing being recorded unless the minister has been recognized.

Does the minister understand the question?

MS BETTNEY: I believe I understand the question now, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: The Chair recognizes the hon. Minister of Human Resources and Employment.

MS BETTNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman.

In the Strategic Social Plan, last year being the first year in which we were starting the process, we had put aside a certain portion for demonstration projects because the regional process was only just getting started and we knew we would only need to have sufficient resources to support one region. This year we are moving into the majority of the other regions. We will be using the money that previously had been used for demonstration projects to support those regional committees in the work that they are doing. So it is simply a transfer of funds from demonstration projects into the regional committees and the work that they are doing on the Strategic Social Plan.

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, I would like to respond to Member from Windsor-Springdale on a previous question regarding travel for Treasury Board. It was under 3.1.03. A further review of my notes has indicated that most of that travel was coordinated for the Y2K issue last year, travel to and from Ottawa and meeting with our counterparts. I would also like to tell you that thirty-five people are in the Budgeting and Systems section of Treasury Board and they would account for most of the cost of that travel. This figure also includes phone and communication costs.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MR. HUNTER: This is to the President of Treasury Board, Mr. Chairman.

Is this where you got the money to take the singing group from home, the Bel Cantos?

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Chairman, I would like to say that the questions that have been answered as part of Executive Council are accurate. The answer to the question that was just asked by the Member for Windsor-Springdale is no. The funding for the choir that travelled to Ottawa did not come from Treasury Board.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Order, please!

Is the House ready for the question?

I ask the Clerk to call the heads.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01 through 3.1.09, carried.

On motion, Executive Council, total heads, carried.

CHAIR: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, the next heading that we want to call is the heading in the Legislature, which starts on page 53.

CHAIR: 1.1.01.

The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible) don't imagine we are going to spend too much time on (inaudible)..

MR. MANNING: I don't know, we might be here for a couple of days, I say to the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: No, it is interesting.

Mr. Chairman, I would just like to make a few comments on the Office of the Auditor General. I have to say, just reviewing her latest report, it is about the best value for the dollar that we spend here. Certainly if there was any office in the Budget that should receive more money - and I know that times are tight but, at the same time, we always find a few dollars for needs that come by. I am sure that if we had the opportunity, the Office of the Auditor General should receive an increase.

AN HON. MEMBER: They did.

MR. MANNING: They should receive more, I say to the minister, so she can get out and travel throughout this Province, and go to each and every detail of government and find a place where - a good investment of maybe -

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: I don't like you to put words in my mouth, I say to the Government House Leader, because words are important. I am sure the Minister of Health understands that.

I am just thinking that if we had a government that wanted to really lay things out for the Province, to lay in front of the Province an accounting of the dollars that are spent throughout the year, that we would have an increase - and I don't say an increase of $3,000 in salaries. From the revised budget of 1999 we are going to see an increase of $4,000 in salaries for the Office of the Auditor General. I think we should double the salaries in the Auditor General's Office, and then we could give the Auditor General and her staff the opportunity to travel throughout the Province, to get into the nitty gritty of spending within the government. Hopefully, then we could have an opportunity to have another host of unanswered questions; because when you look at the Auditor General's report this year we have a lot of unanswered questions.

AN HON. MEMBER: Wastage.

MR. MANNING: Wastage, my God, I would think that by doubling that salary of $200,000 we could possibly -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: Don't allow him to bully you, Jack.

Mr. Chairman, doubling the salary of the Auditor General, I think, would be a wise investment for the simple reason that if she could take that $200,000, her and her office and her staff, and go and do an in-depth review of several government departments, Rural Renewal would certainly be one department that the Auditor General could get into to and pick it apart, and find out about the millions of dollars. I am sure that out of those millions of dollars there is a percentage of wastage, and I am sure the Auditor General would be able to find it.

I say for every $1 million, Mr. Chairman, there is $1 million wasted. I would say if the Auditor General could get in and pick that apart, I would say that $200,000 investment in extra salaries for the Auditor General would be a wise investment for this House of Assembly. Then we wouldn't have the Government House Leader over swinging the head around like that if we had another extra $200,000 to invest into an investigation in his department.

Mr. Chairman, it is a fair amount of money and I am sure the Auditor General would like to do that. I am sure she would, but it is just that the time and the allowance we give her in the House is not enough for her to get in and ask the questions that need to be asked.

We have a minister here who is responsible for the revitalization of rural Newfoundland.

MR. SULLIVAN: Is the minister responsible or irresponsible?

MR. MANNING: Well, he acts very irresponsible most of the time but I have to say he is the minister responsible under the law of the land for the revitalization of rural Newfoundland.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: Oh, I say to the Minister of Government Services and Lands, I beg to differ. We are talking about the revitalization of rural Newfoundland. We are not talking about the revitalization of Central Newfoundland. We are talking about revitalization of all Newfoundland, rural Newfoundland.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: Where is that?

MR. TULK: Down your way.

MR. MANNING: Well, if you attack it like you attack the rest of the Province, I would say we had better put up the -

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: You didn't attack them. You are attacking the rest of the Province.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible) down.

MR. MANNING: I welcome you to come down and see what the department that you are responsible for has done in that part of the Province.

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible) if you have him out there, he would give you a bundle (inaudible).

MR. MANNING: Who?

MR. SULLIVAN: The former Minister of Municipal Affairs.

MR. MANNING: The former Minister of Municipal Affairs did a fine job, I say, Mr. Chairman. He came down when we had a disaster last September down in St. Bride's with Hurricane Gert. The minister, Mr. Matthews, wanted to see what Gert was all about, so the minister left his office in St. John's, traveled down to St. Bride's, did a major investigation into Gert. Then he came forward and said that any way his department could help out - that is no problem. That is very wise and very understanding that you would have a Minister of Municipal Affairs - and I am sure the present Minister of Municipal Affairs would travel down to the district and check out those things also.

I want to get back to the Auditor General and how important a role that office plays in the Province. We here in the House of Assembly have to be always aware of the fact that we are responsible for the expenditure of several billion dollars of the taxpayers' money. It is something that everybody has to have accountability for. There has to be a level of accountability. One sure way of having a solid level accountability is to allow - and I stress the word allow, I say to the Government House Leader - allow the Auditor General full access to the files, full access to the paperwork.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: I say to the Government House Leader, no, not in the Department of Rural and Economic Renewal. No, Mr. Chairman, I beg to differ.

That is why I think that we in this House should take an extra $250,000 and invest it into the Auditor General's office so she can hire more staff, so she can dig in and get the answers the people of this Province are looking for, especially in the Department of Developmental and Rural Renewal.

I can remember back here in 1994 when the Auditor General's report came out. It was in the fall of 1994, and the present Government House Leader was up in the nosebleed section at that time. That's because the person who was in the Premier's chair didn't like him. He said: You stay in the nosebleed section. He tried to get him up in the gallery. The Premier of the day, his wish was to have the Government House Leader of today up in the gallery. He managed to get down to the nosebleed section in defiance of the Premier of the day.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: No, he didn't want you in St. John's. He figured you were an outport boy and you should stay out there. He said, in his own mind, he doesn't understand what out means.

Anyway, what happened then was that the member was up in the nosebleed section. He started the ball rolling, circled the wagons, and the next thing you know that Premier is gone, the new Premier comes in, and he is right up in the front row, shoulder-to-shoulder, cheek-to-cheek, and running the show.

I don't have a problem with that. I don't mind having someone from outport Newfoundland sitting down at the Cabinet table, who has a fair idea of what is happening out there, but at the same time I would say that in order to be able to sell to the people of the Province, in order to tell to the people of the Province that we have done everything fair and square, that we have done everything across the top of the board, that we have done everything fair to each and every part of the Province, we should allow the Auditor General in to do her work. We should allow the Auditor General in to knit and pick the Department of Developmental and Rural Renewal and find out exactly where all the millions are gone, where all the millions are spent, who benefitted from all the millions that were spent in the Department of Development and Rural Renewal.

We will have a list then that we could look at, and we could ask ourselves the questions: Did this person in this company contribute to the party opposite? Did this company or this person contribute to the individuals opposite? Then we would take the report of the electoral office and the donations, and tie them into the grants and money that has gone out for the Department of Development and Rural Renewal. Then, with the help of the Auditor General in piecing this together, we would finally put the puzzle together.

I have to say, it is a very tough puzzle because there are a lot of pieces that the Auditor General can't get her hands on. In order to put the puzzle together and find out where all the millions of dollars in the Department of Development and Rural Renewal are gone, the Auditor General has to have access. In order to have access, she has to have staff, and in order to have staff, she has to have money. This is what brings us back here today to speak on the Auditor General's report. She needs more money in her office.

Where do we get that money? That is always the question. Sure, we would like to be able to give more money, sure we would like to be able to give more access, but where do we get that money? There are many places that we can find that money.

I am sure the Minister of Government Services and Lands wouldn't mind looking through his office, looking through his finances, and coming up with a donation for the Auditor General's office. I am here now wondering, a year or so, what he is all about, anyway. We will get back to that later. I am sure that we could find a few dollars in Government Services and Lands to put into the Auditor General's office.

I am sure, if we look at Intergovernmental Affairs, we could find some money in that department to help the Auditor General. I am sure the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, and knowing his background, he would want full disclosure. I would say he had a job to rub that into some of the other ministers, but I am sure he would, knowing his background.

I am sure the Minister of Environment, knowing his background - and a good solid

Tory background it was - that he would want full disclosure.

I am sure if we looked around at the Minister of Health and Community Services - I look back and think about the days where he cried out on the Confederation Building steps, where tears rolled down his cheeks because he wanted full disclosure. He wanted everything out in the open for the members of his union at the time. When he got in here, the whole thing changed.

MR. SULLIVAN: He is some glad government said no at the time.

MR. MANNING: I am telling you, when he got in here, everything worked out the best kind. Forget about the crowd out on the steps, you can cry all you like, I am laughing all the way to the bank. Forget the rest of you. That is what is comes down to here.

I am sure if you went back to his department -

MR. TULK: (Inaudible). Before you know it, your credit cards are up in Toronto somewhere.

MR. MANNING: All I will say to the Government House Leader is that I was well taken care of for my stress.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: One thing about us, we don't tell.

Mr. Chairman, I want to get back because the Government House Leader knows I am finally getting somewhere with what I am trying to say here. I am getting into the nitty and gritty of his department. I am here today not about a few dollars on an old credit card - peanuts, less than $1,000 - peanuts. I am talking about the millions of dollars that have been thrown around this Province. I say that in all sincerity - thrown around, squandered; the minister responsible for squandering, I would say. That is what I am trying to get at here.

The Government House Leader - I am trying to get at the fact that the Auditor General needs a few more dollars so she can go into his department and check the files, and check off who is getting the cash, and check off who is getting the millions. Then we could get some real good solid answers in the House of Assembly that we cannot get here, and we certainly cannot get through freedom of information. That went out the window with the Public Service Commission.

AN HON. MEMBER: And the Public Tendering Act.

MR. MANNING: And the Public Tendering Act. What is that? They never used that since they came into power. Public Tendering - they don't know what that means over there.

MR. SULLIVAN: Clyde used it a few times.

MR. MANNING: Yes, the former Premier used it few times and he used it very wisely, I would say.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. MANNING: By leave, Mr. Chairman?

CHAIR: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

CHAIR: Leave denied.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, since the Minister of Finance is unavoidably absent today, out doing Her Majesty's business, I thought I might take a few minutes to speak on the - I felt a need to speak on this head of public expenditure called the Legislature. Of course, we just had fifteen minutes from the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's in which he talked about the Auditor General's office and that we should give her some more money.

MR. NOEL: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: I know the Member for Virginia Waters, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, is quite right. We could save $50,000 of the hon. gentleman's salary - no, more than that, probably $60,000 or $70,000 of the hon. gentleman's salary, hire a good auditor, and nobody would be any the worse off.

Let me say to him that before he stands in the House to get into Estimates he should first of all read them. I know that is a bit difficult for him too. I heard the Minister of Tourism tell him yesterday that he would get him some pictures. The Auditor General, if you believe it or not - and the Member for Ferryland, the Opposition House Leader, will confirm this because he sits on the IEC - came in this year to the IEC and presented her budget. The Clerk is nodding his head, he is right. She came in and presented her budget, what she felt was adequate. The Member for St. John's East knows this. I believe he was sitting there at the time replacing the Member for Lewisporte who was unavoidably absent. She came in, sat down and presented a budget to the IEC, the exact same figures that appear in the Estimates. We gave her everything that she asked for.

AN HON. MEMBER: Everything?

MR. TULK: Every last cent that she asked for we gave her. Some people say we will never learn, but we recognize, on this side of the House, that the Auditor General has to do her job and we do not want the Auditor General to feel hamstrung in any way, shape or fashion. That agrees with all of us, I know, on the other side of the House. There are probably no areas of this House where we would not want the Auditor General to look into.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Memorial (inaudible)?

MR. TULK: Don't go too far. There is certainly enough money in this Budget. Every cent that she asked for she got. He said we should give her another couple of hundred thousand dollars.

Mr. Chairman, let me say this to you. Last year the Executive Support for the Office of the Auditor General was $212,100. This year we gave her $215,200. Last year for Administrative Support she asked for $173,800 and we gave her $177,800.

Look at this. Audit Operations, 2.1.03, states: "Appropriations provide for the performance of the attest audits of the financial statements of the Province and certain Crown Corporations and for the performance of reviews and examination of the various Departments, Agencies of the Crown and other public organizations."

Last year she had budgeted $1,218,000. Has everybody got that? What is her budget for this year? What did she ask for this year?

AN HON. MEMBER: Too much.

MR. TULK: She asked for $1,434,400. She got exactly that figure. An increase - if the hon. gentleman could subtract and add over on the other side - of $179,400 to hire two more staff.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. gentleman also passed a few comments on the Department of Development and Rural Renewal.

MR. J. BYRNE: A point of order, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Chairman, I want to be clear now on what the Government House Leader is saying with respect to the Auditor General. He is saying that he wants to make sure that that government has full access to whatever she needs to do with respect to the government, all government departments and Crown agencies and what have you. Agree? Is that what you are saying? Therefore, does the minister -

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: No, I'm not finished. The minister would agree with me and what I have said in the House of Assembly in the past, that the Auditor General should have full access to all records, books, accounting records and what have you of Memorial University. The minister would agree with that?

CHAIR: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Did you hear me say Memorial University?

MR. J. BYRNE: You said full access.

MR. TULK: Full access to government for anything that she is allowed to have under the Auditor General's Act.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TULK: By the way, didn't you authorize that when you were in government, that she (inaudible) be allowed to go in to Memorial University?

MR. J. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Of course you did. The truth of the matter is that this government has given the Auditor General more access. It shows the depth of knowledge that is on the other side about what happens in this place. I heard him stand up over there and say: She should be allowed to get into every piece of paper that is in the Department of Development. I have to tell the hon. gentleman something right now. The Auditor General has the authority to almost see what kind of socks civil servants wear. She can get any piece of information. She has the authority under the legislation to get any piece of legislation in any department of government; and you would almost think that sometimes she does look for your socks.

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Down now, Loyola. Down Loyola, your turn will come.

She has the authority and now we have given her everything that she ever asked for in order to see -

MR. MANNING: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

MR. MANNING: I listened to the Government House Leader and I would just like to pose a question, if I could. In the Auditor General's report, only 25 per cent of ENL's total loss and equity portfolio of $78.2 million is estimated to be recoverable. I am just wondering, is any of that $78.2 million in anybody's socks?

CHAIR: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, if the hon. gentleman could read his book, the Auditor General's report, if he read it just a little further along, and if he understood what he had read, he would have seen that when the Auditor General put in an allowance for doubtful accounts she said there was 25 per cent that was recoverable. Now there is a couple of things he should know about that. One of his former heroes -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TULK: Yes, Ed. You control this side too, do you, Ed?

The hon. gentleman should know, and should know clearly, that one of his former heroes, his employees, his employer, when he was the president of the RED board -

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. TULK: One of his employers, when he was president of the RED board, is responsible for part of what the Auditor General looked at under the guise of ENL.

AN HON. MEMBER: Charlie Power?

MR. TULK: Was Charlie Power his employer?

AN HON. MEMBER: Absolutely.

MR. TULK: When he was chairman of the RED board?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. TULK: Well, that must be the gentleman.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: You were Charlie Power's what?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, if he had went a little further in his book - if there were some pictures there, as the Minister of Tourism told him - in the Auditor General's report, he would have seen that historically, when you step outside the accounting practice of the Auditor General, she herself says that ENL collects 65 per cent of what they put out. You should read along a little further.

By the way, the Department of Development and Rural Renewal, in the allowance for doubtful accounts - no, not careful, I know the file and you know I know it - was responsible for 7.3 per cent of it. I can't be any more accurate than that with you, but that is what it was.

Let me just say something else to him. In the Auditor General's report he should take a look and see when she says ENL. There are fifty-two times when the Auditor General refers to ENL when she really means some other department of government. One of them was RAND, one of them was RDA, another one was the NLDC. If you look at some of the dates, I say to the hon. gentleman - and I will give him an initial for one of the companies, S.P. You should be able to figure that out. There are cages involved. There are a few cages involved, I tell him.

AN HON. MEMBER: What government was responsible (inaudible)?

MR. TULK: What government was responsible? I think the hon. gentleman knows what government was responsible for that file. I think he does.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible). Take responsibility for your actions, or non-action.

MR. TULK: Oh, I do. For everything that I have done in the Department of Development and Rural Renewal, I take responsibility. I don't take responsibility, I say to the hon. gentleman, for what the Tories did in this Province. Neither do I take responsibility for any other administration in this Province. I don't intend to.

Let me say to the hon. gentleman, he talks about Development and Rural Renewal in the Province. How long was he Chairman of a RED Board, president of a RED Board, when he was also executive assistant to a member in Ottawa? How long was he? I wonder, did he use his position on that REDB to try to work his way back into this Legislature?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No!

MR. TULK: No, of course not. I wonder, did the hon. gentleman ever use that for political favoritism for his own people?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No!

MR. TULK: No, of course not. He would never, in the wilds of this world, think about using a Regional Economic Development Board to feather his own political nest.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No!

MR. TULK: Not at all. The hon. gentlemen is so clean over there, he squeaks.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Why not? It is a good brochure. Did you like it?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Great.

I say to the Leader of the Opposition, if he wants to go over - I expected some questions, actually, on the Auditor General's report. I want to say to the hon. gentleman that if he wants me to give him what the Department of Development and Rural Renewal has put in Bonavista North, and where it ranks in terms of funding in electoral district - thirty-two - ranks in terms of funding.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: That is right. The hon. gentlemen knows it, so don't go talking about my brochure. It is a beautiful picture, though, on that brochure.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: One department? You don't mean to tell me that if I was in charge of the department, if I really wanted to stuff my own district, that I could not do it (inaudible).

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Don't be surprised. Believe nothing of what you hear and only half of what you see, I say to the hon. gentleman.

Let me come back to the hon. gentleman and his antics down in Placentia. He was never engaged in rural development, and he comes off and says: Well, what has the minister done in Placentia & St. Mary's?

Here he was, had his hands on the cash from Charlie - Charlie had to sign off on the HRD stuff - and he has got the gall to come here, after two years of serving in that position, with his own crew - I believe his own brother is the coordinator. Is that correct? He is a good fellow. Is he your brother?

AN HON. MEMBER: Cousin.

MR. TULK: No, I think it is his brother. Calvin, that is his brother, isn't it?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: The truth of the matter is, I say to the hon. gentleman, that even with himself as president, his brother as the coordinator, his hero, Charlie Power, as the MP who had to sign off - and how stunned are some people - on every HRD grant that went down there - Charlie Power - he left down there as the coordinator and comes in here as the member and talks about how -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Ed, it was intentional.

- and talks about how bad off his place is.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

MR. TULK: By leave.

MR. MANNING: Sit down. No leave. How much of that garbage can you listen to?

CHAIR: Leave denied.

The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: I expect the Government House Leader will want to get on his feet again but I will just wait and see, Mr. Chairman.

I asked a few questions. The Government House Leader got upset because I asked a few questions about his department. I asked a few questions about the Auditor General being allowed to go in to see who got the millions of dollars. We are not talking a few dollars. Then he goes talking about socks. I would like to know if $78.2 million is in somebody's socks, because it is unrecoverable. Mr. Chairman, it is estimated not to be recoverable. He said it is in somebody's socks. Maybe the socks are full, I say to the Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. MANNING: Mr. Chairman, we asked here today - the minister got into the Regional Economic Development Board. He got into my family, my brother. He got into all those -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: No, I don't mind that.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: What is that?

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: I have no problem with that. I say to the minister, there is an old saying out our way that if you give a fella enough rope he will hang himself. I say to the Government House Leader, I have no intention of going there.

Also, he asked a few questions where he thought he would embarrass this member. Well, I say to the member, there is no red in me. I am Tory blue. There is no red in me. He may have tried to embarrass me. He may think he is going to embarrass me. He may think he is going to make me turn red, but there is no red in me - none.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: Don't get up, thinking you are going to embarrass me. You will not, I say to the minister.

You talked about the Auditor General being allowed into Memorial University. Then you got up and tried to twist that and turn that, and say that she cannot go into Memorial University because it is not covered under the act. Well, I would say it is time to change the act.

How things change. I was here in 1993, 1994, and 1995, and the Government House Leader today was up in the nosebleed section because the Premier of the day was trying to get him up there somewhere, or outside. He didn't even want him in the building. Clear the building, he said. He was up there, and every now and then and again he would go um, um, um, um, and he did not know what he was saying.

I remember here one day when he got up and brought through a private member's bill. I am sure the member can remember that. He asked fishermen across the Province to sign this petition, and he had petitions going everywhere. They were down in Placentia and St. Mary's. They were out on the Burin Peninsula. They were down on the South Coast. They were all over the place, these petitions, thousands of names to bring back to the Department of Fisheries.

We sat on it for a week, we sat on it for a month, we sat on it a season and we never saw the petitions. They tore them up because he wasn't allowed to get out of the baggage section and come up to the front.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: He wasn't co-pilot then. He wasn't even serving the meals on that flight, from 1993 to 1996.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: No, he wasn't even serving the meals.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

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

CHAIR: Order, please!

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

MR. TULK: I just cannot put up with this any longer. I cannot sit in my seat and allow somebody to come at the Chief Justice of this Province in the way he is doing it over there. Now, will you give it up?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

MR. MANNING: All I can say to the Government House Leader is that any time I went after the Chief Justice about anything, I went face first, face on. I didn't come from behind. Like some hon. members, I didn't come from behind, I say to the Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: When he was up in the nosebleed section and he began to circle the wagons - I can remember back when he began to circle the wagons in late 1995 because he wanted to be co-pilot. Then he got the opportunity to become co-pilot when the new Premier came in and won the election in 1996. Mr. Chairman, the new Premier felt that he was a very good fellow to have as co-pilot, so he made him co-pilot. Then, a few years after that, we find out that millions of dollars have gone out across this Province. That is what I am asking today about the Auditor General, that the Auditor General be given more money to go in to the Department of Development and Rural Renewal and answer some of the questions that people in the Province are asking.

The minister spoke on initials, the minister mentioned S. P. and cages. I'm fully aware of what the minister is talking about. I would say, Mr. Chairman, that the other day a gentleman who had received a loan from your department - part of your department that you are responsible for - and had paid his money back in full, I say to the minister, then picks up the newspaper the next day and there is $70 million gone. It is unaccounted for. It is not paid back. This gentleman said to me: I must be the only fellow who paid them back, because nobody else seems to pay them back.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: I say to the minister - yes, laugh! It is not laughable. I don't know what you find so funny about it. It is not laughable. Millions of dollars. You are not talking about what the fellow in Niagara Falls took out of my bank account, I say to the minister, less than $1,000. You are talking about millions of dollars that is unaccounted for. The Auditor General should have full access and she doesn't have full access. That is what we are asking here today. Seventy-eight point two million dollars. That is an incredible amount of money.

We have to ask ourselves this. When you have the minister, now the co-pilot, when you have the co-pilot in charge of that many millions of dollars, and then we find out - then you look over to another part of the Auditor General's report. She says to us: Our review identified concern with four of forty-two files reviewed regarding the accuracy of security. How many of these loans that went out had security backing them up?

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: Very solid questions, I say to the Government House Leader. How many had security? You go to the bank today -

MR. TULK: (Inaudible) your former employer.

MR. MANNING: My former employer had nothing to do with me, I say to the minister.

MR. TULK: Oh yes he did.

MR. MANNING: I say not. You don't take any responsibility for the former premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: Do you? No, you don't.

MR. TULK: There is a difference. He is your hero.

MR. MANNING: Oh, he is my hero. What about the present Premier, is he your hero?

MR. TULK: Absolutely.

MR. MANNING: Absolutely, no doubt about it. So you are taking responsibility for anything he says or does?

MR. TULK: Absolutely.

MR. MANNING: You have a long life ahead of you. Mr. Chairman, not on that side of the House, I would say.

Then we asked about another part of the Auditor General's report. It says: Once the loans are issued, there is an inadequate followup to ensure the conditions of the loans continue to be met.

AN HON. MEMBER: Shame!

MR. MANNING: Shame on you, I would say. You should resign. Here they are giving out loans without security, they are not following up and them, then they write them off and that is the end of it.

MR. TULK: You spent half of it.

MR. MANNING: I spent half of it? I never had a loan from your department. As a matter of fact, anyone who was related to me who had a loan paid you back, come to think of it. If my memory serves me correctly, they are one of the ones who are paying back.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) loans to companies in arrears.

MR. MANNING: What? No, you are joking. Sure enough, here it says: Loans were made to companies that had existing loans in arrears. You stand in your place and tell me about mine? I say to the minister hold on now. So the best way to get a second loan in your department is not to pay off the first one. Is that right?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: All I am asking for here is what criteria you need to get a loan. One, that you are in arrears. Two, you don't need security. Three, you don't allow any followup. Four, you don't pay it back. That is all I am saying.

AN HON. MEMBER: Don't embarrass your colleagues.

MR. MANNING: I would say, Mr. Chairman, there is a lot of embarrassment that could go on that side of the House. Today I got up on a few simple notes. You just got me going, you got me riled up. You got up bringing up all kinds of old stuff. All I was asking was a few questions about the Auditor General. Telling me about the RED boards. Sure, that is under your department.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. MANNING: All I say is that I asked the Auditor General to have a fair shake on getting in and therefore we should give her an extra $250,000 so she can investigate some of these millions of dollars. I think it would be money wisely spent if we could give the Auditor General -

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. MANNING: By leave?

CHAIR: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

MR. MANNING: We could give the Auditor General $250,000 so she could find out, and it would be wisely spent.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) she got everything she asked for,. (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: She may have gotten everything she asked for but she should be given more. She knows you are an old tight-wad and she didn't want to ask you for too much.

Minister, we will get back to this I'm sure.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: Yes, keep it up.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01 through 3.1.01, carried.

On motion, Legislature, total heads, carried.

CHAIR: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, I move the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

On motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again, Mr. Speaker returned to the Chair.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply have considered the matters to them referred and have passed without amendment the Estimates of Expenditure of the Executive Council and the Legislature and ask leave to sit again.

On motion, report received and adopted, Committee ordered to sit again on tomorrow.

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, before I move that the House adjourn I think tomorrow we are doing a resolution that has been put forward by the Member for Twillingate & Fogo. We will debate that resolution tomorrow which is on the licensed practitioner nurses.

I move that the House adjourn until tomorrow at 2:00 p.m.

On motion, the House at its rising adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, at 2:00 p.m.