April 17, 1991                HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS               Vol. XLI  No. 31


The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Lush): Order, please!

Before proceeding with our routine business today I would like to welcome to the Speaker's gallery: Mr. Ray Pollett, the Mayor of the City of Corner Brook, and Mr. Jim Kennedy, City Manager of the City of Corner Brook.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, with the concurrence of the House and before we move to Orders of the Day, I would like to take the opportunity to mention in a public way the passing in the early hours of this morning of Mr. Arthur Warren the father of our colleague, the hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains. Mr. Warren was a resident of Chance Cove, Trinity Bay and though he was in his eighty-fifth year I know those of us who have gone though this traumatic experience would want the House to express its condolences to Mrs. Warren, Jane, his wife, who is still alive. And to the Member for Torngat Mountains and the family.

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

MR. BAKER: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I would certainly like to support what the Leader of the Opposition is saying. I know that the Member for Torngat Mountains is going through a difficult time and whatever we can do to lighten the burden at this particular time we would certainly support it.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I too would like to join in the remarks of the Leader of the Opposition and offer my condolences to the hon. Member for Torngat Mountains and to his family in the loss of his father.

Oral Questions

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

MR. WINSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Social Services. The Minister yesterday in the House told us that he had asked for an internal audit to review the payments made to the Chairman and members of the Social Assistance Appeals Board. At the same time the Premier has told the House that he is making inquiries. Would the Minister not now agree then that the only way in which the public can be satisfied is if a full, independent judicial enquiry is called into this matter?

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

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, I suppose I should not be surprised at the political garbage which is coming from the Opposition on this particular issue. I have stated very clearly my position in this matter. I do not make these decisions. There is only one person who I know of could make that decision, and that would be the Premier. I am quite satisfied that I have done absolutely nothing beyond the Minister's realm of responsibility. And if the Opposition wants to waste the time of this House of Assembly, the taxpayers' money, in going on with such garbage, I am prepared to sit here and answer any questions they put forward.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Fogo.

MR. WINSOR: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister said: the first time I was aware of any amount of money being received by the chairman of the Appeals Board of that magnitude, was, when I read the Sunday Express on Sunday morning. Now, Mr. Speaker, on two occasions in this House, during debate in exchange with my colleague for Torngat Mountains, the Minister acknowledged that he knew of an increase from $200 a day to $350 a day for the chairman. Now, Mr. Speaker, which was true, the one that he said in debate or the one he said, as a response to the article in the Sunday Express?

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

MR. EFFORD: My goodness, goodness.

AN HON. MEMBER: Answer the question (inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: Last year, some time last fall, a decision was made by Treasury Board and Ministers to increase the per diem rate from $250 to $350 for the chairman of the board. What I said yesterday, when I read the Sunday Express, the amount of $1,400, a claim put in by the chairman of the board for one trip, I think it referred to, that is what I said, that was the first time I became aware of that, was Sunday, the amount of money, $1,400 for one trip, that is the responsibility of the chairman, to submit his claim; the Minister of Social Services or the Minister of any Department does not have anything to do with claims for appeals board.

AN HON. MEMBER: You never answered the question.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fogo, on a supplementary.

MR. WINSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A supplementary. In view of the controversy surrounding the Social Assistance Appeals Board, whereby many Opposition Members have to represent their constituents at hearings, would the Minister immediately ask for dismissal of that Appeals Board and appoint a new one free of political patronage, especially in view of the fact that the Ombudsman, who normally would have dealt with that kind of thing has now been eliminated and now there is no provision except the Social Assistance Appeals Board, as the last line of defence for these people - it is tainted with political interference. Would the Minister ask Cabinet to dismiss that Board and appoint a new one?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. EFFORD: If I did not know better, Mr. Speaker, I would suspect that the hon. Member for Fogo has been dipping into the $20,000 luxury which they had when he was a Minister in Government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Answer the question.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: Let me tell you, Mr. Speaker -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: -or probably smoking the $5,000 worth of cigars -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: But, Mr. Speaker, let me tell the hon. Member, let me tell the hon. House of Assembly I have absolutely no intention of abolishing this Appeals Board and re-appointing Ida Reid as Chairman of the Board.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is also for the Minister of Social Services. Has the Minister been advised of an investigation being conducted by the Public Service Commission into allegations of impropriety by his office into a job competition for a position at the Whitbourne Detention Centre involving his campaign manager in the last election? Can he advise the House what knowledge he had prior to today of any interference by his office or his political staff in any such improprieties involved in the position?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, I do not know what is happening in this hon. House of Assembly, but I have never heard such political garbage and political nonsense in my life. I realize I deserve it probably, but when I did ask the questions on the Opposition they were sensible questions with good answers, and I knew the answers when I asked them. My first question would be to the hon. Member for St. John's East. How many campaign managers do I have? Now I realize the only Tory who was in my district in the last election was my opponent because everyone else voted for me, but I cannot be responsible for the actions of everybody in the district.

Mr. Speaker, five minutes before I came to the House of Assembly I was informed that the hon. Member for St. John's East went down to the Public Service Commission and made some allegations about that. I have absolutely no idea of the political garbage he is going on with, and if he wants to go on with it, then fine, do so. I am here and I will answer all questions.

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's East on a supplementary.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Undoubtedly the Minister will also have been advised that I attended the Public Service Commission at their request to advise them of what I knew.

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh!

MR. EFFORD: I did not hear what the Member said.

MR. HARRIS: I said the Minister would also be aware then, presumably, that I attended the Public Service Commission at their request to advise them of what I knew. I want to know whether the Minister can confirm that the allegations involved the supplying of questions by a Member of his staff to this individual.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Well, okay if the House would -

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

MR. HARRIS: Can the Minister advise the House whether or not he is aware of the allegations that a member of his staff supplied to this individual, who is now the chairman of the Social Services Appeals Board, the questions that were to be asked in an interview with the Public Service Commission? Can the Minister tell the House what he knows about these allegations and whether he has ever heard them before?

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

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, first of all I did not know that a member of the Appeals Board had to go to the Public Service Commission. I appointed -I recommended the Chairman of the Appeals Board to the Cabinet and Cabinet made the decision, or Government made the decision. The only allegations that I am aware of, number one, is what was told to me before I came to the House, and number two, what the member is receiving from the individual who has been giving him all the allegations over the last three or four days - political garbage and political nonsense.

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

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, the allegations do not concern the appointment to the Social Services Appeals Board, but rather to a competition before the Public Service Commission involving a position at the Whitbourne Detention Centre. The Minister will be pleased to know, no doubt, that his own assistant confirmed yesterday that such questions were given, in fact, to the individual involved, and I want the Minister to tell this House now whether he was at any time aware of that, and what he knows about it.

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

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, I have no knowledge, except of the garbage which has been passed back and forth over the last week or so. I have absolutely no knowledge. In fact, Mr. Speaker, I do not know of anybody working in either of the centres who worked on my campaign. I have absolutely no idea. And if the investigation -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. EFFORD: Well, Mr. Speaker, the investigation of the Public Service Commission, if what the hon. the Member for St. John's East is saying is accurate, then that will determine the outcome. But I have absolutely no knowledge. I did not even know the Public Service Commission developed a criteria for a test paper or a set of questions. I have never seen anything.

MR. RIDEOUT: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, on a supplementary.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a supplementary to the President of Treasury Board, the Minister in Government responsible, as far as I know, for the Public Service Commission. Is the Minister concerned that allegations are being made publicly that Ministers or political assistants of Ministers are obtaining competition questions from the Public Service Commission and passing them on to prospective candidates? And is the Minister concerned about the impartiality of the Public Service Commission and political interference by his colleagues, in this case the Minister of Social Services?

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

MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am concerned about a number of things. First of all, I am concerned about members of the Public Service Commission who would give out copies of questions they intend to ask to anybody. I would certainly investigate that, and if in fact that is happening, then these people should go.

I am also concerned, Mr. Speaker, about the nature of allegations I have heard in the last few days, one coming from the Leader of the Opposition which indicates that somehow the Premier has been paid sums of money to make certain decisions as Premier.

AN HON. MEMBER: Shameful. Despicable.

MR. BAKER: I have heard these allegations and it indicates the depth to which hon. members opposite will go. I say to the Leader of the Opposition he is making an attempt to go out with a bang, but all he can muster is a whimper.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, there is no trouble to know when a Government is in trouble, when you get that kind of defence coming from a Minister speaking on behalf of the Government. Let me ask the President of Treasury Board this. Is the President of Treasury Board on behalf of the Government going to have an investigation conducted into the allegation that a member of the political staff of a Minister of this Government called up the Public Service Commission, got questions that were to be asked in a competition, and passed those questions along to a person involved in that competition so that the person could have an unfair advantage over somebody else in Newfoundland and Labrador? That is the question and do not duck it.

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

MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker, if the nature of the allegations are similar to the one I just mentioned, which the hon. the Leader of the Opposition has been getting on with over the last few days, the foolishness and conjecture he has been getting on with, I am not going to investigate any such nonsense. However, I will try to find out if a member of the Public Service Commission is giving out questions to anybody. Because if a member of the Public Service Commission is giving out interview questions to anybody, then that member should not be on the Public Service Commission.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: You are reaping now what you have sowed. Keep your ears open. You are not as clean now as people think you are.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I have recognized the hon. the Member for Grand Bank.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you again, Mr. Speaker.

I have a question, Mr. Speaker, for the Minister of Fisheries - a great relief for the Minister of Social Services.

I would like to ask the Minister if he is aware of the decision that has been made regarding the future of the Canadian Salfish Corporation? I know, in essence, the Province is practically a partner of the Canadian Saltfish Corporation. There has been a lot of anxiety expressed over this issue over the last number of months, particularly by residents of Labrador as to what the future of the Saltfish Corporation or some similar agency might be. Would the Minister be able to inform the House if he has been informed of a decision and what it might be?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, yes, and I thank the hon. Member for the question. On March 25 the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, Mr. Valcourt, came to Newfoundland and at his request met with me and my officials to discuss the future of the Canadian Saltfish Corporation. At that time, the Minister indicated to me that he would like to see the Saltfish Board wind up and maybe some other kind of a regime be put in place to accommodate the needs of the fishermen. At that time I expressed to him the fear that we could not do that sort of thing, not in the Labrador area; maybe on the island part of the Province yes, but certainly at this point in time some such organization is necessary in Labrador.

I have since written the Minister again repeating what I said to him at the meeting and expressing the concern that we do not have enough time left now in this year to make that kind of a transition, from the Saltfish Board to the private sector, and I have requested him to delay any such decision, certainly in Labrador, maybe for a three to five year period, which would give us a chance to investigate other ways of maybe diversifying the fishery in Labrador and providing some kind of an arrangement to accommodate the fishermen in the meantime.

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Assuming the Corporation will fold up or be abolished or whatever -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: - I am wondering -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I want to indicate to hon. Members the importance of Question Period. It is a very important time, and I realize there are some Members trying to trivialize it. The public want to hear the answers to questions and they want to know that Members are being serious about the Question Period. I ask hon. Members, please, to govern themselves accordingly.

I ask the hon. Member for Grand Bank to continue.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the Minister again. Assuming the Corporation folds up or is abolished, has the Minister had any specific discussions with the Federal Minister about arrangements for Labrador? The Minister says he has discussed and talked about or written about keeping things in place for three to five years. Is he talking about keeping the Saltfish Corporation as we know it in operation in Labrador for that period of time, or has he specifically talked about some other arrangement to accommodate fishermen on the Labrador coast?

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

MR. CARTER: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I did discuss that prospect with the Minister, and the Minister at the time indicated that maybe the private sector could do the job in Labrador. I expressed some doubts as to whether or not that could work. The Minister then put together a working group given the mandate to maybe put together some kind of a proposal call looking to find out what interest was out there on the part of the private sector to move into Labrador to do the job the Saltfish Corporation was mandated to do.

I have expressed some concerns to the Minister that that is not going to work at this late date, and my request to the Minister is that he leave the Saltfish Board alone in Labrador, allow it to function as it has been functioning - maybe tighten it up and probably recognize there is less need for it on the Island part of the Province. My suggestion to the Minister is that maybe in terms of the Island part of the Province it could act in a voluntary way. If any salt fish processors on the Island wanted to avail of the marketing expertise of the Saltfish Corporation fine, on a voluntary basis it could be done, but to maybe deregulate the industry on the Island and allow the Saltfish Corporation to stay in place for at least another three to five years.

Mr. Speaker, I would be quite willing to table the letter I wrote the Minister on April 8, in which I have spelled out the Province's thoughts on this. I am happy to table it now.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.

MR. MATTHEWS: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Realizing that Labrador has special needs and should be given special consideration in this matter, from personal observation I believe there could be some pluses or benefits to a different arrangement for the Island portion for salt fish. I am wondering if the Minister is satisfied that the abolition of the Saltfish Corporation will be in the best interest of the salt fish industry in the Province? Would he express to the House his feelings on that?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, back in January I visited Ottawa and talked to the Minister about the future of the Saltfish Corporation and was advised then by the Minister that he had put together a committee that would visit the various user groups, and fishermen on the Island and in Labrador, to discuss the Canadian Saltfish Corporation and its future role. The Province was asked to appoint somebody to that committee, which we did. The Committee travelled Labrador and parts of the Island for a month or two then reported back to the Minister, and it became obvious in the course of their travels that the need for the Saltfish Corporation on the Island part of the Province has greatly diminished over the years. When it came about, in 1970, there was a very dire need for such an organization but not anymore. All the groups we have talked to - the various user groups, the fishermen's associations, the salt fish processors and others - all seem to agree that the Corporation has outlived its usefulness on the Island. But as I said a moment ago, that is not the case in Labrador and that is why we want it to continue there.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. I am sure he is aware that the amalgamation plan he was proposing to bring in before the election of November 1989 he then delayed for a year. I am sure he now would be able to brief the House on how many amalgamations have taken place in this Province based on his grand scheme that was supposed to be imposed in 1989?

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

MR. GULLAGE: Mr. Speaker, I think I can give the Member an up-date as to where we are with the amalgamation procedures. We started out almost a year and a half ago now with some forty-two groupings of communities, 113 communities in all. To date, five of those groupings have come together either by way of amalgamation or annexation. In the process now, over the next few weeks I foresee that three or four more will be agreeable to amalgamation - we are getting that close to having final decisions made. The most contentious area, of course, is the Northeast Avalon, and I would hope we will have a decision on the seventeen communities which are in this area before this Session of the House is complete. I have stated that publicly already.

We have about 35 per cent of the population of the Island in the Northeast Avalon, and needless to say it is a very contentious issue amongst the councils; they would like to see this process completed, and so would we. We have other amalgamations, of course, throughout the Province, both in the urban and rural areas of the Province. With the exception of two or three groupings, all the commissioner's reports are in to me and we are in the process of finalizing recommendations to Government.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West, on a supplementary.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I asked the Minister if he could name the ones which have already been done. Can the Minister now tell me how many feasibility reports on amalgamation are still outstanding? And can he confirm that in some cases over a year has passed since the public hearings were held and the reports have not yet been released? Why not?

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

MR. GULLAGE: Mr. Speaker, we have had a delay in some of the commissioners' reports. There are about a half dozen outstanding. None are outstanding over a year. The problem we have had in some instances is the fact that commissioners appointed by the towns in question in these particular groupings have not completed their part of the work for whatever reasons. None are outstanding for a year. With the exception of one or two, no grouping has been in process more than a year - none are outstanding more than a year, I should say. We should have the process substantially complete I would think over the next month or so, and all commissioners' reports will be in to me.

I have presently out of the forty-two groupings approximately thirty to thirty-five reports in, with a few remaining to be finalized. As soon as we get the commissioners' reports in to the Department which are outstanding on the part of commissioners appointed by the towns - that is where the problem is with about a half dozen of the groupings. As soon as those are finalized and in to the Department, we will conclude our recommendations and report to the House.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the Minister says there have been none outstanding in excess of a year. I wonder if he can tell us then when the one for the Corner Brook area was done? Corner Brook, Massey Drive, Mount Moriah, if he could tell us. If there are none done more than a year, could he tell us the dates when that was done?

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

MR. GULLAGE: I would have to check the exact date when we finalized the hearings there.

MS. VERGE: February of 1990.

MR. GULLAGE: February of 1990, Mr. Speaker, would be the start of the process. The hearings are only the beginning point of the process. From that point when the hearings are held there is a considerable dialogue which takes place between the commissioners, the staff of the towns in question, the councils in question. And the feasibility process, in fact, is a very detailed process. The hearings is only one small portion of it. I would have to check the completion date of the process itself. In fact, the process is not complete until the commissioners submit their report. We are still awaiting the report of the commissioner appointed by that particular grouping. When that arrives in my Department and we finalize our recommendations, we will report on the matter.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, let me ask the Minister now that he has admitted that there are some of these in the process of being in excess of a year and that absolutely nothing has been done about it, does the Minister have any intention of continuing with the amalgamation plan or is he going to scrap it as another poorly thought out political motivation by this Government?

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

MR. GULLAGE: I am glad the Member asked that particular question, Mr. Speaker. As a matter of fact, the Member will probably be surprised to hear - although he should not be surprised - that we have groupings of communities waiting to have feasibility processes started in their areas. We have requests from communities which were not even considered in the forty-two groupings who want to be added to the feasibility process. Because we have work to do with the forty-two groupings, we are continuing on with that; the staff cannot be freed up to start the process with new groupings. And you may think it is a negative process, but in fact there are many groupings of communities throughout this Island that want to be included in this process, because they see the benefits of coming together and sharing the limited resources almost everybody has these days, at every level of government.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, a question for the Minister of Social Services. As a result of the t.v. news features in recent days which have focused on teenagers who live on the streets in St. John's we have all been reminded of the lack of protection for young people between the ages of sixteen and eighteen who are neither adults nor children under the law and they seem to fall between the cracks.

Now the Minister can blame our side and we can blame his side, but blaming each other as to why this has happened is not going to help anybody. So what I would like to ask the Minister is when does he intend to bring in the draft amendments to the legislation to provide protection for these young people?

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

MR. EFFORD: The hon. Member is quite right. There is not much point in blaming the former administration for not doing anything, but that is exactly what happened. The Child Welfare Act has not been overhauled since 1972. We have now begun the bringing in of a completely new Child Welfare Act, and that part of the legislation will be dealt with, the vacuum age, between sixteen and eighteen. Hopefully, if it can get before the Legislative Review Committee this summer, I will be able to introduce it in the fall sitting of the House of Assembly. That is the intention of the Department, if everything goes according to plan right now.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port, on a supplementary.

MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I will make this a final supplementary. First of all, I would like to say to the Minister that he has had two years to do this, now he is talking about the fall. What I would like to suggest to the Minister is why cannot the Minister bring in a simple amendment - I can tell you that we have talked about this in Opposition and we will co-operate - so that these children can be looked after. I should say if I am asking a question, is the Minister aware that - I mean, this is a major Act. All we are looking for is help in this legislation, so would the Minister not bring in the simple amendments so that those children would be looked after this spring, before the next session of the Legislature?

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

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, I realize the hon. Members opposite only had seventeen years, whereas I have had almost two long years to do it. I realize that. I also realize that it is a major, major piece of legislation to bring in. And there is not only the vacuum between the ages of sixteen and eighteen which needs to be dealt with, it is much more complicated than that. I intend to introduce a completely new Act in the House of Assembly this year, but in the meantime, we are taking care of the children - the people, I should not say children, between sixteen and eighteen; we are providing lots of services for them in different houses in St. John's under the Board and Lodging Rules of the Department of Social Services. They are not being forgotten as the Member is trying to portray in this House of Assembly. The Act will be brought into the House of Assembly this year.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I do not know why the Minister is deliberately trying to misinterpret what I am suggesting. Is the Minister aware that what I am trying to suggest is that we would pass an amendment which would look after this problem immediately in the House of Assembly, and he can go ahead with his major thing. Would the Minister do that particular thing and deal with the major legislation in the fall - when he has to - because it is a major piece of legislation, and bring in an amendment which we promise as an Opposition to pass in this House quickly?

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

MR. EFFORD: Let me remind the hon. Member Opposite, all hon. Members Opposite, that they are not now in Government; they are an Opposition. They do not tell this Government what to do. That is the difference. I am concerned -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

AN HON. MEMBER: Your arrogance is disgraceful.

MR. EFFORD: I am concerned, Mr. Speaker, about all the problems, all the children in the Province. A completely new Act is being drafted. When it is prepared, when the all the information is submitted from the different groups around the Province, and that includes between the ages of sixteen and eighteen - and that is a very important part of the legislation. But I am not prepared to bring it into the House of Assembly until all the groups in the Province have the opportunity to submit their proposals so that we can properly deal with it. The worst thing we could do is rush it and not put the proper legislation through the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question Period has expired.

Answers to Questions

For which Notice has been Given

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

MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In reply to the question asked by the Opposition House Leader, I place upon the Table of the House a list of trips taken by the President of Treasury Board, the President of the Executive Council, the Minister responsible for the Status of Women and claim from Government during the fiscal year April 1, 1990 to March 31, 1991, a one year period, showing destination, date of trip, length of trip, proposed purpose of trip, and the names of personal political departmental staff accompanying the President.

Mr. Speaker, I am please to table today the answer to the question. In the year there were five trips, one to Goose Bay and Nain which took a couple of days. This was a Chairman of the ad hoc committee on Goose Bay: meet with the council and various interest groups; another trip to Ottawa to meet with the hon. William McKnight on the same matter; a trip to Gander to speak on behalf of the Government at the 50th anniversary dinner of the Newfoundland Overseas Forestry Association; another trip to Gander to speak at the 25th anniversary celebration of the Knights of Columbus, that is the McCormick council; and another trip to Corner Brook to attend some meetings with officials from the head office of the Province's bank. So, Mr. Speaker, there were five trips in the year, and I hope the Opposition does not find that to be too extravagant. On three of these trips I was accompanied by my wife.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes.

MR. HEARN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I stand to present a petition from a number of residents of the Placentia Bay area from Jerseyside, Dunville, Placentia, particularly the Long Harbour-Mount Arlington Heights area who petitioned the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and Legislative Assembly asking that the Government try to assist in the re-instating of Extension Services at Memorial University.

Once again we see a number of people from rural parts of Newfoundland expressing concern that the service that meant so much to them has been eliminated. Another concern with the -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HEARN: How many jobs?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. HEARN: The Member for Carbonear is not tuned in, apparently, to what Memorial University Extension Service does. How many jobs did it create? There were a number of people employed by Memorial University Extension who have lost jobs indirectly. That is not why these people are asking that it be reinstated, so that a few people who work there will have jobs. It is not the jobs that they are looking at, it is the significance of the operation and the effect of Memorial University Extension Services on the events that are happening in rural Newfoundland, the co-ordination, the promotion of rural activities, the identification of the problems in the local areas, the ability to organize and give local people a chance to hold forums, to express their concerns, to offer solutions to the many problems facing them. This is what it is all about, Mr. Speaker. This is why Memorial University Extension is so important to the people. This is why residents of many, most all, perhaps, rural areas in Newfoundland are coming out in droves and sending in petitions to be presented. The unfortunate thing about it is that many of the residents, including the residents here who have signed this, are from areas represented by the hon. Members who refused on behalf of their constituents to stand up and present petitions on their behalf. The hon. Members, whether they are taking direction from the Premier, or whether they are just trying to follow in his footsteps and are telling the people: we got rid of Memorial University Extension because it is no good for you. We are the ones who decide what is best for you. We have the knowledge, the ability, we are omnipotent. And that is the Premier's attitude as everybody knows and Members are taking up the same way: No, I am not going to present a petition. It does not matter what you want. I am your representative, and I will decide what is best. That is not why you are elected. You are elected to present the wishes of your constituents in the House of Assembly.

MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MR. HEARN: He cannot take a lecture.

MR. BAKER: As the hon. Member well knows, when speaking to a petition you address the signatures, you address the concerns expressed in the prayer of the petition. If the hon. Member cannot think of anything to say about MUN Extension, and all he can do is stand up and lecture Members, I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that he is not doing a very good job presenting the petition. He should be relevant to the petition.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes.

MR. HEARN: To the point of order, which is not a point of order. I remind the hon. gentleman, the reason I got off on a tangent was because of questions asked by his colleague, who has no idea what MUN Extension is; and a reminder to the gentlemen opposite, my words and my feelings, my support for MUN Extension are already on the record of the House. What I am trying to do is get them to do what their constituents have asked, to get up and support this request, also. Hopefully, then, Government will re-instate the Extension Service.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind hon. members of our Standing Order No. 92, when presenting petitions. I have done this on several occasions, now, so much so that hon. members ought to know the rules. I say to hon. members that the job of the Chair is to enforce the rules and, equally, the job of hon. members is to follow the rules. I want to make sure that is understood emphatically. I will read the rule again to hon. members, it says, "Every member offering a petition to the House shall confine himself to the statement of the parties from whom it comes, the number of signatures attached to it and the material allegations it contains." I ask hon. members, please, to follow that rather precise and clear rule. Thank you.

The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes.

MR. HEARN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I certainly respect your judgement and agree with it.

The University Extension Service, over the years, has done a significant amount of work, particularly - not `only', but particularly - in the rural areas of the Province. It has also extremely beneficial to the groups of people in St. John's, as has already been exemplified, in the number of requests for support from the more urban areas of the Province, but, in particular, in rural Newfoundland. That organization has helped where no other organizations have, despite what gentlemen opposite say, that, you know, it is a thing of the past. Perhaps, today, when we have so many groups and agencies springing up all over the place, the one common co-ordinator out there has been Memorial University Extension.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HEARN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Before rising to support this petition of residents of the Placentia area, I paused, expecting the Member for Placentia to speak in support of it. I am very surprised -

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

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of Treasury Board, on a point of order.

MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker, it surprises me that, after your ruling a moment ago, the hon. member would get up and deliberately defy the direction given by the Chair. The point of order, simply, that I have, Mr. Speaker, is that she should confine herself to the material allegations in the petition and if she does not know anything to say about MUN Extension, then maybe she should let somebody else get up and speak.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Humber East.

MS. VERGE: Mr. Speaker, there is no point of order. The Government House Leader is just trying to waste my time.

MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order, I again remind hon. members that when speaking to a petition, they confine themselves to the statement of the parties from whom it comes, the number of signatures attached to it, and the material allegations contained therein.

The hon. the Member for Humber East.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I wholeheartedly support this petition, calling on the Government to reinstate Memorial University Extension Service. The Extension Service has provided invaluable supports to all parts of Newfoundland and Labrador, but mostly the rural areas of our Province and, of course, most of our people live in rural areas.

The Extension Service has provided catalyst for community development, has offered workshops and courses, some informal, to give individuals, groups and communities the skills and support they have needed to achieve their own goals, goals for the improvement of their communities, some economic goals, some citizenship goals; but, in all, the work of Memorial University Extension Service has enriched the rural parts of our Province.

Now, Mr. Speaker, rural Newfoundland has not been under such attack since the 1960s, when Premier Smallwood imposed his resettlement programme, as it is today, when this new `real change' Liberal Administration has resumed the resettlement programme by closing hospitals, scaling down other hospitals, closing community college campuses in all but name, and now, more then ever, the rural areas need the continuing operation of Memorial University Extension Service.

Mr. Speaker, although members of the Government have denied this, their Economic Recovery Commission is purporting to subsume the role of MUN Extension. Some of their people have been saying that they are superceding MUN Extension, but the problem, Mr. Speaker, is that a successful agency which operated at arms-length from the Premier and the Cabinet is being replaced - at least, the allegation goes - by an unproven bureaucracy which is under the thumb of the Premier, an agency which does not have to abide by even the Public Service Commission in hiring, as flawed as that process may be under the new régime.

Mr. Speaker, the loss of MUN Extension at the same time as the Government is withdrawing life supports from rural areas, and at the same time as the Government has instilled fear in people of the Province through the massive downsizing and through the thousands of layoffs, is very, very worrying.

Not only has MUN Extension provided valuable services in rural parts of the Province - some of which were co-ordinated through St. John's, including the publication of Decks Awash - but MUN Extension also operated programmes in St. John's. I mention in particular MUN Extension Arts which has operated in recent years on Duckworth Street, providing a focal point for artists of all disciplines. With the closure of MUN Extension Arts there will be no art education programmes anywhere in the Province this summer, and the artists who have made a living here in our midst are having that fragile livelihood jeopardized, because many of them got inspiration and encouragement and support as well as space to work through MUN Extension Arts. And there is no replacement in sight.

Indeed, instead of even talking about substitutes through the ERC or through the Arts and Culture Centres, what we should be doing is joining with the petitioners from Placentia and calling on the Government to reinstate Memorial University Extension Service. And if the Premier wants to reinstate MUN Extension, make no mistake, he can get together with Art May, the President of the University, and accomplish that, no sweat.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Education.

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I think later in the afternoon I will have an opportunity to react to some of the comments that have been made earlier. All I will say now is that the people opposite have been criticizing this arm's length relationship that the Government has with the University. Well, I can assure them that from what I heard at the University, if there had not been an arm's length relationship between the University and the Government, Extension Service would have been eliminated a number of years ago because of the activities of the hon. Members opposite.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER: This being Wednesday, it is private Member's resolution.

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible).

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

I just want to make a point to a couple of Members. When the Chair is speaking no other Member is supposed to be speaking. Particularly when the Chair is calling Orders of the Day. I have noticed a couple of Members doing that sort of consistently and incessantly. And I want to remind hon. Members that the Chair will not tolerate that.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition with his resolution.

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This resolution is fairly simple, it is fairly brief, and I think and hope it is to the point. There is no fooling around with "whereases," there are no recitals because I do not think it is necessary that there be recitals.

Over the last several days since the Budget came down and since the University announced its cutbacks so it could live within the budget that this Government gave it, there have been a number of questions and many, many petitions to this House, many letters to the editor in all the papers, there has been a lot of public commentary, calling for the reinstatement of Memorial University Extension Services.

We thought as a caucus it would be appropriate to ensure that Members of this House had an opportunity to debate the issue whether or not the Government should provide additional financial resources to the university. It is not an arm's length argument. That is not what we are talking about. The Minister of Education will get up in a little while and talk about independence, and academic freedom, and the arm's length approach to the University. That is not what we are talking about, Mr. Speaker.

The University had its budget increased by only $75,000 and the University had to make some decisions. Many of us might disagree and a lot of us do disagree tremendously with the decision to cut MUN Extension Service, but the University had to do something, and the something the University had to do in terms of MUN Extension can be corrected by this Government; all the Government has to do, Mr. Speaker, is earmark a few more dollars to Memorial University for MUN Extension. I do not know if the University wanted to do away with MUN Extension Services or not as something they wanted to do. I have not heard anybody say that. There have been people suggest it. They have done it for budgetary reasons, and the budgetary reasons lie at the doorstep of this Government. Therefore, we thought it was appropriate to bring in a resolution calling on this House, first of all, to oppose the closure of the Extension Department and to urge the Government to provide sufficient funding to the University to enable it to restore the Extension Service.

Now, Mr. Speaker, there is another reason for having this debate today. Just a week or so ago, the Minister of Education in response to a petition got up in this House and made a great number of observations about the lack of involvement of Memorial University Extension Service in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. He poked fun at the Opposition.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who?

MR. RIDEOUT: The Minister of Education poked fun at the Opposition for trying to make a connection between rural Newfoundland and Labrador and the activities of Memorial University Extension. He poked fun at people who were in the galleries at the time supporting the continued funding of Memorial University Extension. The Minister got up and in his sarcastic, snide but yet nice way, suggested that MUN Extension was nothing more than a few jobs in St. John's. That is what the Minister said. It is in Hansard. I reviewed it this morning while preparing for this debate. I reviewed the Minister's comments and I could not believe it, Mr. Speaker. He must be gone totally townie himself to be able to get up and make the connection that there is nothing to Memorial University only thirty-three jobs or something, I think he said it was, in St. John's, five or six of which were field officers in rural parts of Newfoundland and Labrador, and outside that MUN Extension had nothing to do with rural Newfoundland and Labrador, MUN Extension had nothing to offer Newfoundland and Labrador. I say to the Minister, Mr. Speaker, that Memorial University Extension is all about rural Newfoundland and Labrador - all about it - despite what the Minister says when he gets up with his half moon smile and his grin, trying to convince people on this side of the House that some how or other we are crazy because we are making a connection between Memorial University Extension and rural Newfoundland and Labrador. I say to the Minister, Mr. Speaker, that there would be no Fogo Island today if it were not for MUN Extension.

AN HON. MEMBER: Bull!

MR. RIDEOUT: There is the brains behind the decision, Mr. Speaker. I hope Hansard picked up the word `bull' from the Minister of Finance. This is the same Minister of Finance who talks about short and curlies when it comes to the constitutional future of Canada, that is the same Minister who makes that kind of brilliant insight into the obvious. `Bull', he says. Bull! Let me remind the Minister of Finance about some of the things MUN Extension Service has been doing within the last twelve months or so in rural Newfoundland, and then let the Minister of Education get up and say no, they are not true, let the Minister of Education get up and deny the fact.

DR. WARREN: (Inaudible)

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, the Minister will have an opportunity to speak shortly. I assume when he gets on his feet he will tell the truth, because he did not tell the truth in this House last week when he left the distinct impression with the media, and which was carried in the media, that MUN Extension Service means nothing to rural Newfoundland any more, only a few jobs in St. John's. That is what he said, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, let me point out some of the rural activities at Memorial University Extension this past year. I will not go back to five years ago or ten years ago, when that service was providing a vital leadership role in many, many communities in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, when they were helping to organize community councils, when they were helping to keep communities alive, when they were helping to bring leadership to rural Newfoundland and Labrador. I will not go back that far, just let me go back over the last twelve months or so.

What about in June 1990 when Memorial University Extension brought 300 to 400 participants into the Empty Nets Forum. There were five of those forums, Mr. Speaker, held throughout - where? Were they held in Gander, Corner Brook or St. John's? No, Mr. Speaker, they were held throughout rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Why? Because the fishery always has been the backbone of rural Newfoundland and Labrador, always will be the backbone of rural Newfoundland and Labrador, the fishery is in a state of crisis, and Memorial University Extension reacted to that crisis, Mr. Speaker. That is providing vital service to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, five Empty Nets Forums.

Four Empty Nets Forums, Mr. Speaker. Where? At Prince of Wales Collegiate, or Bishop Field College in St. John's? Four Empty Nets Forums, Mr. Speaker, in Labrador - four in Labrador. Five out around the Province, out around the Island part of Newfoundland and Labrador, four on the Labrador part of the Province, nine Empty Nets Forums dedicated to the most important industry that keeps rural Newfoundland and Labrador alive, and the townie Minister of Education has the gall to get up in this House and suggest that MUN Extension means nothing to rural Newfoundland and Labrador any more, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) the Member for Eagle River.

MR. RIDEOUT: The Member for Eagle River?

AN HON. MEMBER: Was he there when the (inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: I do not know if he would attend anything Memorial University Extension puts on any more. I understand they would not hire him. I understand that out of five in the competition he came fourth. And he would not present a petition in the House the other day asking that it be kept alive, that it be kept on, because I suppose he is prejudiced.

Mr. Speaker, the learning and sharing teleconferences - the Minister, I assume, will respond to all those facts when he gets up - four of them last year, 95 per cent rural participants. There were over 100 participants per work shop, there were four of them, that is 400 people, and 95 per cent of those participants lived, worked and tried to survive in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. How does the Minister square that with his statement, Mr. Speaker?

Decks Awash, 6,000 plus subscriptions, Mr. Speaker. Decks Awash published by MUN Extension Services, 75 per cent of the subscriptions to Decks Awash go into rural Newfoundland and Labrador. How does the Minister square that with his statement that it is no longer needed, that it is no longer affective?

What about conferences? In addition to the Empty Nets Forums I have talked about, what about conferences Memorial University Extension were instrumental in putting together or sponsoring last year? What about the Southern Labrador Women's Conference? Memorial University put that off, Mr. Speaker, Memorial University Extension. The Southern Labrador Women's Conferences, I suppose the Member for Eagle River does not think that is very important, that women in southern Labrador have a forum and be able to come together, organize and express their views and be trained in leadership opportunities. The Minister of Education does not think it is important. MUN Extension does not extend to southern Labrador, according to the Minister.

What about the St. Mary's Bay Fisheries Conference? My friend, the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes, I am sure would be aware of it. It was put together and sponsored by the Extension Service of Memorial University. That is a pretty urban activity, Mr. Speaker. That is a pretty urban activity in St. John's, the St. Mary's Bay Fisheries Conference. What about the Native Housing Conference in Goose Bay, I say to the Minister of Education? Was that not important? Was that not worthwhile? Was that not doing something for people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador? And more importantly, was it not doing something for our native people? I say to the Minister.

What about the Fisheries Conference Co-operation `90, Planning for Survival, which was held in March 1991 in Gander, Mr. Speaker? What about the fishery seminars that were held in Triton and Harbour Grace? Is that not rural activity by Memorial University Extension Service in rural Newfoundland and Labrador?

What about the Women and Economic Development Conference held in Gander? What about the involvement of Memorial University Extension in community television? And talking about community television, Mr. Speaker, I wonder is why there was a court injunction in Placentia just a few days ago, to make sure that the equipment of Memorial University Extension was removed from the office at Placentia? Is it not a fact that MUN Extension is, I do not know, the operator or part of the operation of the community television down in Placentia? No, says the Member. Well, I have heard differently, I say to the Member. I have heard differently, and I have heard that that was the very reason why the long arm of the law, on behalf of this Government, zeroed in on that particular office.

Mr. Speaker, all of those things were totally rural. Where is the Minister of Education when he gets up and makes those foolish, asinine statements, that MUN Extension has no more validity any more in rural Newfoundland and Labrador because it is mostly urban?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, the Minister has tried to mislead this House and the people of this Province on so many occasions now that nobody believes a word he says - nobody!

I mean, we have Hansard here. The Minister's own words are in Hansard. But, of course, Mr. Speaker, this Minister is so used to talking out of both sides of his mouth he has no idea what he says from day to day, and that is the problem with this Minister, no idea. The day after the Budget was brought down - the Budget was brought down March 7, was it not? - Friday March 8, the Minister of Education had a press conference and announced that Memorial University's budget was increased by $5.5 million, and then he had to stand in this House a week or so later, after the President of the University had a press conference and announced that actually it only went up by $740,000 or $750,000, that wrong again.

The Minister put in black and white - we have a copy of his statement - that MUN's budget went up by $5.5 million. So you cannot trust a word this Minister says, unfortunately.

What about some special projects MUN Extension has been involved in over this past year? They have been involved in the Co-Op Curriculum Project. Now, Mr. Speaker, Co-Ops, in many forms are very, very important in rural Newfoundland and Labrador - the Fogo Island Co-Op, for example, the Petty Harbour Fisherman's Co-Op - especially now, business being the way it is. Thirty-two workshops were held, mostly in rural schools. Did the Minister of Education hear that?

Memorial University Extension held thirty-two workshops on Co-Op Curriculum Projects in thirty-two rural schools in Newfoundland and Labrador, not at Bishop's College or Prince of Wales Collegiate, but in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and this Minister says they have no relevance to rural Newfoundland and Labrador any more, that their work can be carried out by Community Colleges or Development Associations or some other group. Well, Mr. Speaker, the Development Associations answered the Minister back in spades, did they not? They answered the Minister back in spades when their rural development council told the Minister that he was full of baloney, that he did not know what he was talking about, that MUN Extension meant a tremendous amount to rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance should not open his mouth. We heard the word `bull' come out of the Minister of Finance in terms of how important Memorial University Extension is.

DR. KITCHEN: (Inaudible), they were responsible for (inaudible) people on Fogo Island.

MR. RIDEOUT: That is true.

DR. KITCHEN: That is not (inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: No, that is bull. According to the Minister, that is b-u-l-l.

DR. KITCHEN: No, no. That is your spelling.

MR. RIDEOUT: That is the Minister's word; it might be my spelling. Thank God the Minister did not teach me how to spell.

Mr. Speaker, Healthy Communities Projects, five workshops carried out, four of them in rural areas of Newfoundland and Labrador. And the Minister gets up and makes the defence that it can go because it has no relevancy to Newfoundland and Labrador any more.

Volunteer projects: Three out of the four groups studied were rural based. All workshops were held in rural areas. The Rural Women's Learning Project, ten workshops.

MS. VERGE: That won an international award.

MR. RIDEOUT: Ten workshops for 100 people, all held in rural areas, and I understand it won an international award Mr. Speaker, that is the kind of activity that Memorial University Extension has become known for. That is how the expertise and the arm of the University reaches out into Ming's Bight and Pacquet and Harbour Deep in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. And that arm is now going to be cut off because of this Government and their budgetary procedures, Mr. Speaker.

And there is nothing out there to replace it with, I say to the Minister. The community college in Grand Falls or Springdale or Baie Verte cannot offer to rural Newfoundland and Labrador what the University Extension has offered over the years, and what it can continue to offer. And their budgets have been frozen and cut back. They cannot expand any more. Many of them cannot even offer an industrial arts programme any more to high school students in their areas.

We have pointed out time after time that this particular Budget is an attack in many ways on the rural base of this Province. Now Ministers get up and deny it. They deny it on MUN Extension, in terms of hospital closures, in terms of post-secondary education, and cutbacks in post-secondary education. But the message is getting through to people in this Province that this Government has an anti-rural Newfoundland agenda. As a matter of fact, it was only a few days ago I heard a union leader out in St. Lawrence -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, Memorial University Extension did a fine job, I referred to it earlier, under Empty Nets for him. I think for Members on the other side they should do an empty head conference, and the person that they should dedicate it to is the intellectual Minister of Finance. When you look over and see the Minister of Finance, a product of Memorial University, you sometimes wonder if the University is making any progress at all. But I suppose you cannot make much progress when you did not have much to work with.

But there is nothing in the heart of the Minister of Finance that has any affinity with rural Newfoundland and Labrador. He could not care less. Let me say to the Minister of Finance what one of his constituents say about MUN Extension. Just let me read a paragraph or two. This person writes: since MUN Extension began teaching art in the early 1960s with Christopher and Mary Pratt as instructors, I have been both a student and an instructor at their workshops and in their classes. For thirty years they provided art instruction at a very high level to a variety of interested students.

AN HON. MEMBER: What does that have to do with rural Newfoundland?

MR. RIDEOUT: What has it to do with rural Newfoundland? I suppose, Mr. Speaker, there are no artists in rural Newfoundland!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. RIDEOUT: If you follow the logic of the Minister -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I do not mind even spontaneous and small "l" liberal interruptions, but I do not have the ability to shout over a half a dozen. Now, if you follow the logic and the reference to "bull" coming from the Minister of Finance, you might as well change the name, Memorial University of Newfoundland and Labrador, to 'The University of St. John's.' That is all it will be. It is going to become an elite institution. The Ministers of Finance and Education made sure of that two years ago when they brought in a budget that increased tuition fees by 10 per cent at the time. It went up again last year, it is going up again this year. About 30 per cent in two years. This Government is out to destroy rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

And one of the manifestations of that destruction is in the elimination of MUN Extension Services. That division of the University was something that made the University alive and meaningful to people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. It was something that provided leadership and a demonstration of it in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I know my time is up, I will have a few minutes later on in the evening.

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

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I really always enjoy the Leader of the Opposition, and we are going to miss him. In fact I am almost ready to start a `bring him back' campaign, because I am really going to miss him. When he gets going in full-flight, I really enjoy him. We are all going to miss him, I think, Mr. Speaker. I do not know why he keeps picking on - the word I use is `picking on' - the Minister of Finance and me. He must have done a course with us and got a `C' grade or a `D' grade. I want to research that, because I think we must have given him a low mark.

DR. KITCHEN: No.

DR. WARREN: Never did?

DR. KITCHEN: No.

DR. WARREN: Okay.

DR. KITCHEN: Anything I ever gave him was an `A'.

DR. WARREN: You gave him an `A'.

More seriously, Mr. Speaker, I do want to address the very serious resolution put forth today, and I want to do it without, hopefully, exaggerating the situation. I want to be fair to all concerned.

I want to provide a little background for the House. The educational system, Mr. Speaker, is facing new demands every day of the week. They are demands that education provide a full education, a full development of every person in society. That is a new demand, greater equality of opportunity, irrespective of where they live, irrespective of their ability, the income of their parents.

There is a demand that education be excellent, that we provide high standards. We have to compete with the world. We have to develop human beings to compete with the world. We need high standards. So, there are tremendous demands being placed on the educational system, including the post-secondary system. At the same time, we have declining resources. Now, that is the problem the Government was faced with in the last few months, Mr. Speaker.

I saw, on my desk this morning, a report which said that the reduction in EPF transfer payments to this Province over the next four or five years will amount to about $80 million. We had an EPF funding programme which transferred to the provinces certain amounts of money every year, and they were increasing. Well, a year ago, two years ago, these funds were frozen and we are now getting $80 million - between 1990-1991 and 1994-1995, an estimate is, on that freeze alone, in transfer payments for post-secondary, we are getting a total of $80 million less.

So, this Government, with declining resources, with the depression we are in, in the country, we have severe fiscal problems this year, and we could not provide all the funds that the school system needed, the university needed, the colleges and the institutes needed. We did provide more money; even with the freeze, Mr. Speaker, we gave more dollars to education this year. I do not want to say we did better than certain other departments, that is not fair. We did reasonably well, but we could not provide more. As the Premier said so often, we either had to increase taxes, we had to increase borrowing, or we had to do something else, and we, as a Government, decided that we had to exercise fiscal restraint. We could only provide to the university, this year, the $115 million.

Mr. Speaker, the university had, before the Budget was announced, a $12 million to $13 million problem. With the freeze in salaries, their problem was reduced to a $7 million to $8 million problem. It is a significant problem, even though they have a large budget; to exercise restraints that would result in a saving of $7 million to $8 million is a major problem. Now, they got some of that from increased fees. The hon. the Leader of the Opposition points out that the university is increasing fees, and perhaps $2 million or $3 million will come from increases in fees, this year. But, the university still had a problem, and they did what the Government did, they put committees in place, and a process in place to examine all the possible options.

One of the decisions they made was to eliminate the Extension Services. We, as a Government, regret that, Mr. Speaker. We regret a lot of the other cuts, the programmes that may have to be reduced somewhat. We regret having to increase, even, student fees, because we want to increase participation in post-secondary education in the Province. We have made more available, but it is still going to be a little more difficult for students. We regret these decisions but we are not going to intervene and tell the University how to run its programmes with respect to academic and other programmes. The arm's - length relationship, and I could go on for some time on this, but I do not want to. The traditional arm's - length relationship between a government and a university is treasured in North America and in Europe because without that relationship universities could not criticize governments. They could not criticize and make positive suggestions for changes in society because they would be threatened by withdrawal of their funds and their decision making power, so we treasure in this country this arm's - length relationship. We are not going to go back to the University and tell them to cut this program, do not cut that, cut physics, cut two professors here, cut seven professors there. Number one, it is wrong in theory and it just would not work, Mr. Speaker, so we have had to leave these decisions to the University. Now, I did, last week, try to correct some information, and the hon. Leader of the Opposition did not tell the story precisely. I have been here in this House listening to how the University is destroying rural Newfoundland. The University is not here to defend itself. I could defend myself against the Government's action - I argued that. Mr. Speaker, over the last few weeks the Opposition said, and they said it again today, that the University by destroying Extension is destroying rural Newfoundland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, they have said that this Government is out to destroy rural Newfoundland, and the University, by eliminating the Extension Department, is going to be a University for St. John's. That is what they have said, Mr. Speaker. We have it on the record, what you said a few minutes ago, the hon. Leader: this is going to be a St. John's university. I tried to put on record the other day some of the facts about Extension and I prefaced my comments about the number of employees and the work of Extension, I prefaced my comments, as I have time and time again, by paying tribute to the Extension Service and what it has done. I know, better than the Leader of the Opposition, or as well as the Leader of the Opposition, what Extension did. I worked with the late Don Snowden when it was in its hayday. I was on Fogo Island in those conferences and I worked with George Lee, and I worked with some of the people who are in the gallery today. I worked with them. I know what they have done and I paid tribute to them, and I pay tribute to them today. I just wanted to put on record a few of the misleading statements, because the Opposition was perpetuating the myth that by eliminating Extension, Memorial was eliminating continuing studies, they were eliminating all those hundreds of programs that are now being offered in rural Newfoundland. I put on record, Mr. Speaker, that outside St. John's the total employed persons, about thirty-three, in the Extension Service, I am pleased to say that a number of the thirty-three are going to be retained by Memorial to do other programs. Of the thirty-three, I said the other day, I think I said four permanent persons were situated outside St. John's. I did not argue that the people in St. John's did not contribute to rural Newfoundland. I said the number of employees in the Extension Service - and I was amazed because I know the conferences they organized. Now, maybe the Leader of the Opposition is exaggerating a bit, maybe they did not organize themselves all these conferences, maybe they worked with other agencies. It is my understanding that their role was to work with all the other agencies and they have been doing that. I do not think they would even claim they did all that themselves, as he did. That is not their role, Mr. Speaker. They did work with others. Outside, St. John's, Mr. Speaker, as I said the other day, there were, I think, four permanent persons, four part-time secretaries, and one or two contract people, situated in the field. I did not argue that all those just served St. John's. I just want to put that on the record. I want to set it straight because the Leader of the Opposition said differently.

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to get into all the other agencies that are now there to serve rural Newfoundland. I will say one thing thought, Mr. Speaker, if George Lee were here today, or if the late Don Snowden were here today, I think they would say that Extension helps to develop other agencies, works with other agencies, and almost puts themselves out of work eventually because they are there to facilitate the development of others. Extension never went into rural Newfoundland to be there indefinitely and to do the same thing for the next ten years. The role of Extension has evolved over the years to help others mature, and they have done a magnificent amount helping other rural development organizations, community futures, municipal councils, and all of these agencies blossom, develop, and give leadership in the regions of this Province. The success of the local development associations, the success of all these agencies must be in part due to the work of the Extension Department by helping these groups mature and give leadership to rural Newfoundland. I have said that over and over in this House.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I do want to defend the University a bit more because the University is not here to defend itself. This is not a Memorial University of St. John's. Let me tell you some of the things that Memorial University does outside St. John's. Not only Sir Wilfred Grenfell, serving the whole west coast. First year programmes in Burin, in Lewisporte and Grand Falls, in Labrador West -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

DR. WARREN: - Mr. Speaker, that is what Memorial University offers.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

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

DR. WARREN: How much time do I have (Inaudible)?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker -

AN HON. MEMBER: Eight minutes.

DR. WARREN: Eight minutes. First year programmes. Continuing Studies. You know, I was amazed to find out how many courses are offered through the Department of Continuing Studies, which was operated - maybe I am wrong - I believe Continuing Studies was operated by Extension at one point in time but Extension gave it to someone else to do.

Continuing Studies: I have heard of as many as 3,000 students a year being offered programmes in eighty to 100 centres all over the Province. And they are going to continue. We have continuing education offices in Clarenville, Grand Falls - Windsor, Corner Brook, Happy Valley - Goose Bay, I gather, and they are going to continue. We have all these teleconference centres. I taught courses through the teleconference centres from Memorial. Many others do.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

DR. WARREN: Maybe I did not do a good job, I will leave that to history to record. I am not going to get sidetracked by the hon. Member for Burin, I know what he is going to say when he gets up, but I will not try to react to him. But I can tell you that Memorial University continues to offer courses and programmes - I am not saying that they are going to replace Extension. Extension had a social activist dimension which may not be replaced by some of these. But the programmes are there, the services are there. Telemedicine, TETRA, the Labrador Institute for Northern Studies, the Centre for Fisheries Innovation of Memorial, the continuing medical education for rural based health communities. This is not a Memorial University of St. John's. I am talking about a University of Newfoundland and Labrador, and I reject what the Opposition is saying, that Memorial is destroying rural Newfoundland by pulling out. This is not happening. This Government is committed to rural Newfoundland. Memorial University is committed to rural Newfoundland. They are working with teachers in rural areas, the university people are. We have social work people and students, and engineering, business and education students in rural Newfoundland.

I was pleased to learn the other day that Memorial University was not going to cut its art instruction programme totally in St. John's. I was told that they have $150,000 available to continue some of the professional and personal development courses in the area of art for the Fall and Winter 1991-1992. My colleague the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs is looking for ways to help the art community in St. John's. I hear the colleges are. I will not get into the role of the colleges either.

The biggest way in which Memorial has contributed to rural Newfoundland is providing an education for students from all over Newfoundland and Labrador. I used to believe the myth that the large percentage of our students at Memorial came from St. John's. I used to believe that. I knew there was a disproportion of people from St. John's there, proportionate to the population. But Dr. Harris, who I have a great deal of respect for, did a study of the graduates of Memorial University some years ago, and he said there were 39,790 - a couple of years ago, 1990, in his Convocation Speech - degrees representing, he said, every section of the Province in roughly equal representation. This is a University for the whole Province. Dr. Harris said this - I think he was a bit surprised - I was, at the number of people who go to Memorial from all over this Province. Because I always felt that if you were closer to the University, closer to Grenfell, closer to first year programmes, you were more likely to go.

But Memorial has attracted students from all over this Province. He went on to point out that there was equal representation from the social economic areas.

So, Mr. Speaker, for the Opposition to say that Memorial University is now going to become a University of St. John's is doing a disservice to Memorial University. And even though I do not defend it, because I was part of it for a number of years - I want in this House to defend the University. This University serves the whole Province. Now maybe there are some other things it can do, Mr. Speaker. Dr. May and the Board of Regents will look at other ways in which they can serve rural Newfoundland. Mr. Speaker, I think it is an injustice to accuse Memorial University of rejecting rural Newfoundland because they eliminated the Extension Service.

Mr. Speaker, perhaps just one or two other comments, by leave.

AN HON. MEMBER: You have four more minutes left.

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, we have met with people about Extension the last few days and it has been difficult for us. I have tried to pay tribute to what they have done. I have tried to tell them, Mr. Speaker, what other agencies are doing. I must say the colleges may not be able to replace Extension, but the colleges throughout this Province, and my hon. friends who are Ministers of career, development and post-secondary education know that these colleges are there and they are providing a tremendous service throughout the Province, to rural Newfoundland. I think we have underestimated their contribution. We have done an injustice to them, Mr. Speaker, by not acknowledging the work that they are going to do in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I again conclude by indicating support for what Extension has done in the past. There are some functions that may not be well performed by other agencies today, but do not underestimate, Mr. Speaker. The hon. Members opposite: I reject that rural Newfoundland and the people of rural Newfoundland are dying. I reject that - there is a vibrancy. The rural Newfoundland people, their conferences are on, week after week I hear of conferences. Rural Newfoundland is strong, Mr. Speaker, and this Government is going to ensure that rural Newfoundland remains strong. We believe in rural Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker, and we have a number of policies in place. We will put more in place that promote development of all parts of this Province, of all people in this Province irrespective of where they live, irrespective of where they reside. We have confidence that we will help them develop to meet the needs and the demands of the future.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have been in this House now for ten years and if I have ever seen an actor, if I have ever seen a person speak out off both sides of his mouth at the same time, if I have ever seen someone speak who does not have the courage to stay and hear the rebuttal of his comments, the truth put forward, it is the Minister of Education. What we have in this Province is a Minister of Education, a Minister of Finance, a Premier who have no commitment whatsoever nor understanding of rural Newfoundland. That is the problem, Mr. Speaker. That is the problem. When you get a filthy rich Premier like we have here, a Duckworth Street lawyer who came up, Mr. Speaker - rural Newfoundland, the fisheries, the farmers and the development associations are not in his vocabulary. That is the biggest problem we have going on here in this Province today. That is what the problem is. We have seen it demonstrated time after time by the Minister of Social Services who has no understanding of the poor and the suffering in this Province, and now we have the Minister and others doing the same thing.

I want to say a few words about what the Minister of Education said. Most of what he said is not true. Most of what the Minister of Education is saying is not true. There is no one within this House or outside who has ever questioned the commitment of Memorial University to rural Newfoundland. We have questioned this Minister of Treasury Board and others who have cut the funding to Memorial University to do what needs to be done in rural Newfoundland. That is the problem. I can solve your problem with MUN Extension Services in a minute if you would listen to me. That is leave the headquarters for the Eastern Community College in Burin, forget about the (inaudible).

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. TOBIN: What did the Minister of Finance say?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Yes, we lost our chance to govern, but it will be back again when you get people as arrogant as you to sit on the benches, and as incompetent as you - there is no doubt about it. Leave the headquarters for Eastern Community College in Burin - yes, and Carbonear. Forget about paying rent to a businessman for five years with no one in his building. Forget about the cost of transferring people. Leave the headquarters there and you will save yourself enough money to run the MUN Extension Service. That is one solution.

The other solution is take a little bit of the $44 million that Doug House and the Newfoundland 'senate' is receiving every year. Take that little bit of money for a few people who worked on the Liberal campaign. Some of the boys who worked on the Liberal campaign, putting them in plush offices and paying them tens of thousands of dollars a year, providing them with cars and everything else. Give that to MUN Extension Services, and see what will do the most for rural Newfoundland. Will it be the campaign manager of the Liberal Party who is situated in Gander, with a Government car and a big expense account? One hundred and fifty thousand dollars for advertising. Give that to MUN Extension Services and let them go out in rural Newfoundland and see what will benefit Newfoundlanders, Mr. Speaker. Will it be the black Oldsmobiles, or will it be people using to some extent their own cars, working on a travel claim?

No, and the Member for Carbonear and others should be standing up condemning this Government for the brutal attack, every time you turn around, that they are implementing and inflicting upon rural Newfoundland. This is serious business, what is taking place.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: This is serious business which is taking place-

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. TOBIN: - yes, Mr. Speaker, I was in Florida. And while I was in Florida, I can tell the Member for Carbonear, I learned enough about him that I am not sure that I want to be associated with him again, if he wants to start talking about that.

Now, I happen to know some of the people who work for MUN Extension Services. I know one person who lived on the Burin Peninsula as a MUN Extension Service worker, Mr. Tom O'Keefe. Who did a job that no one else could have done except MUN Extension Services, particularly for the rural parts. Places like Petit Forte and South East Bight that are isolated. And I would suspect that the Ministers of Finance and Education and others do not know where it is, have never been there, except for the time that it has been brought up in this House. But have some concern for these people who live in rural, isolated communities in Newfoundland. Have some concern for the people who need assistance, who need help in organizing meetings.

And you have some of the people opposite, they stand up from time to time, and they talk about rural Newfoundland. We have seen more hypocrisy in the last two years than we have ever witnessed in the last forty years in this Province. Where are the Members who were members of rural development associations? Where are they today in this House and are not speaking out? Where is the Minister of Development, who knows the valuable contribution that MUN Extension has made to the rural development association movement in this Province? Where are they? Not a whimper.

But the work that Tom O'Keefe and others have done for rural Newfoundland - and the Minister of Education gets up the other day and he makes a joke out of the fact that there are only four people in rural Newfoundland. He said he knew more about MUN Extension than anyone, because when he worked there -

DR. WARREN: I did not say that - almost.

MR. TOBIN: He said when he worked there there were over 100 people worked in -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: You said when you worked at MUN Extension, there were over 100 employees with MUN Extension in rural Newfoundland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: You did not say that?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: What did he say then?

DR. WARREN: I said there were hundreds of people involved in Extension all over the Province. People working. Extension involved a lot of people, a lot of organizations (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Yes, Mr. Speaker. And I can say to the Minister that if he was as incompetent then as he is now there should be 100,000 in the Extension movement in this Province. Because this Minister is the person responsible for attacking Memorial University and the MUN Extension Services. And he can twist all he likes, but he will never be able to shake the opinion in this Province that he is the worst Minister of Education that this Province has ever seen. He will never be able to shake that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Yes, and I doubt very much if the Member for Conception Bay South will be ever able to shake the feeling and opinions of her role as leader of the NTA in this Province. But when we got into some of the comments that the Minister made - let me say something.

He talked about the EPF transfers being down, and so they are, and the Federal Government should not be allowed to get away with it. And this Minister and others should be protesting to the Federal Government for cutting the EPF. But do they know when the EPF cuts started? They started in 1982. And do you know who was on Treasury Board? Would you believe that Mr. Chrétien was a member of the Treasury Board programme that started slashing EPF to rural Newfoundland, the man whom everyone of you to a person supported in the last leadership? That is the fellow who implemented the first surgery on EPF coming to this Province. And you are so proud of that, right? We have the courage to condemn the Federal Government when they should be condemned, and on that issue they should be. And it is now time for you people to stand up and condemn Mr. Chretien for bringing it in in the first place. But as they are doing now, they lack the intestinal fortitude or the courage to stand and condemn someone of their own political stripe. That is what is taking place in this Province.

And there are other areas. Rural Newfoundland must be allowed to continue. For those people who are familiar with the resettlement programme of the sixties, they know what rural Newfoundland is all about. As a matter of fact, there is a good friend of mine who works with MUN Extension who was a victim of the resettlement programme in this Province, who was moved with his family from his home on Merasheen Island by another Liberal regime. He went to work to try and do things that would help rural Newfoundland, to try and organize people and to assist people in providing the best opportunities for them live and be cared for in rural Newfoundland. And they were able to do that for seventeen years, almost eighteen years, until another Liberal regime came into power, when again the dreams and aspirations of these people who had such a commitment to rural Newfoundland were brought to an abrupt halt.

Why? Why do you people not take a trip to a community like Petit Forte or South East Bight and ask them what MUN Extension Service has been able to do for them? Why do you not do that? Why do you not go down to the Placentia West Development Association? I spoke with someone today who was doing their press release to condemn this Government for their attack on MUN Extension, but were so frustrated and bitter about the attack on their development association with the absence of MUN Extension from now on, which had been a very vital part of the growth and development of that association, they had difficulty writing the press release.

Is that what this Minister of Education takes pride in? Where are the Members who represent rural Newfoundland? When one considers the role MUN Extension Services has played in the Placentia area in terms - and this is very interesting - of providing a communication network through the cable t.v. system to the residents of that area in being able to explain to the people of that area what this Government was doing in their health care cuts, in eliminating the hospital, attacking the sick and the suffering of that area. It was MUN Extension that was able to provide assistance in providing that coverage and information to the people. I wonder, does that have anything to do with what we saw last week, when they invaded the office and stole everything that was there? It almost put you in mind of the invasion by Iraq of Kuwait - people running to get clear of the invasion by this Government sending their people in; they do not have the courage to do it themselves. They sent people in to get it done on their behalf, to as quick as they possibly could withdraw the communications system providing information to the people of Placentia about the health care cuts. Is that what this Government is proud of? Is that what the President of Treasury Board is proud of?

The Minister of Education talked about the former President of the University, Mr. Harris, and what he said about the University being attended by people from all over the Province. That is true. That was true. But this Government has raised tuition and the cost of residence to the extent that people from rural Newfoundland, unless they are rich, will not be able to send their children to Memorial University. And we are hearing that every day. A parent told me on the weekend that it is going to be cheaper for him to send his children to a mainland university, in Nova Scotia, than to send them in here to St. John's. Is that what this Government is proud of, Mr. Speaker? Is that what this Government is proud of? They are driving people from rural Newfoundland by the droves, yet the Premier in the last election campaign said there was a certain woman who was going to kiss his feet because he was going to bring her son home; he promised to bring home every mother's son, Mr. Speaker, yet he is driving every mother's son to the mainland. And now the mothers are being driven away as well. That is what this Government has been doing for rural Newfoundland.

There is a hidden agenda within this Government. Through the elimination of MUN Extension, through the amalgamation issue and through the local regional service boards, there is a hidden agenda throughout those three issues to resettle rural Newfoundland, and do not forget it. It is the resettlement program of the 1960s, except that it is more subtle than it was before, and people might as well realize it and Members might as well realize it.

I do not expect the Member for a St. John's riding, such as my colleague there for Mount Scio - Bell Island or the Member for St. John's South or others to understand. Surely they have some understanding of it, but I do not expect them to have the same concept of understanding for rural Newfoundland as does the Member for Exploits, or the Member for Bellevue, or the Member for Carbonear, or the Member for Fortune - Hermitage. So I think it is time for you people to stand and put your thoughts on the record, put your position on the record of this House as it relates to the basic gutting of MUN Extension Service in this Province.

You have a responsibility to your constituents. Clyde Wells did not vote for you nor did anyone in this House vote for you. It is your constituents to whom you are responsible and not to any one in this House. And as Private Members you have the right and the responsibility to do that. I agree that if a Minister wants to disagree with Government he or she has to resign and I can see the situation they are in, but there is no Member over there in the back benches who has that commitment to the Cabinet; you have a commitment to your constituents and it is about time you showed some courage and stood up and spoke up for what you believe in.

And it is not just the four jobs the Minister of Education talks about. If he is shooting you that in your caucus meetings, do not believe him. MUN Extension has touched basically every rural community in this Province. I have spoken about my own District, and I know it has been very effective in the Bellevue District as well as in the Placentia District and the St. Mary's - The Capes District. I am familiar with that part of the Province - and in the Ferryland District and the Grand Bank District. And I am sure it has done the same in the rest of the districts in Newfoundland and Labrador. So why do you sit in this House and support a Government that is not providing enough funding to Memorial University to continue that service? What do you have against the people you represent, let me ask the Member for Carbonear and others, that you cannot stand and defend their rights to have MUN Extension provide assistance to the rural parts of this Province, particularly your district? It takes courage to stand up and speak against your Government I know, but some of us have done it from time to time.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, you have no worries about the Member for Mount Scio - Bell Island doing it either. But you have to have a sense of responsibility and a conscience to speak on behalf of your constituents. I know what they did on the west coast of this Province and what they did in the Clarenville area. And the Member for Trinity North is not here again. If there is anyone who should be in this House listening, it is the Member for Trinity North. Because -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) meeting with some constituents.

MR. TOBIN: He probably is.

AN HON. MEMBER: He is in a meeting with some constituents (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: I am not saying anything in a derogatory sense. I think he would benefit by being here and listening to this debate. Although it is not sinking in very well with the Member for Mount Scio - Bell Island. The Member for Bonavista South is another Member who should forget about his ambition to be a Member of Cabinet and stand up for the people of the Bonavista Peninsula. That is what should happen. He should put his ambitions for a Cabinet position second and let us know his position on MUN Extension and the elimination of it, and how it will affect his district. Because I have reason to believe that it will have a negative effect, from what I have heard and from what I have read.

Mr. Speaker, I know I only have a couple of minutes left - three minutes to be exact. I believe it should not be just the Minister of Education and people on this side who stand up and speak on this issue, it should be all Members who are concerned about the rural parts of our Province. Make no mistake about it, the biggest losers in the elimination of MUN Extension are not the four employees the Minister of Education talks about, but the people in rural Newfoundland communities, people such as the constituents I represent, particularly in Rushoon, Baine Harbour, Boat Harbour, Petit Forte, South East Bight, and other areas where they have (inaudible).

It is almost impossible for me to relate the positive input MUN Extension Service has had on the area I represent. And they do not fly around in helicopters and other means and modes of transportation, as do the Economic Recovery Commission and other people. They get in an open boat in the worst kinds of weather to keep commitments they have in some isolated communities they could not get to by car. That is the the kind of commitment they had to rural Newfoundland, and that is the commitment this Government should have to rural Newfoundland.

Let me say to the President of Treasury Board, I would suspect, Sir, that to keep MUN Extension Service moving in rural Newfoundland will not affect the credit rating of this Government. I do not believe that. I do not believe that when it is said by the Minister of Education and others. I do not believe for one minute that it is going to affect the credit rating of Newfoundland, keeping MUN Extension.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) you are paid to not believe it and that is it.

MR. TOBIN: Pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: I said, you are paid to not believe it.

MR. TOBIN: I do not know what he is saying.

MR. DOYLE: He said you are paid to not believe it.

MR. TOBIN: I am paid to not believe it? Well I do not believe it, nor does anybody else believe it!

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

The hon. Member's time has elapsed.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, let me ask -

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

MR. TOBIN: - my colleagues opposite if they will -

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon Member have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No leave!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. Member does not have leave of the House.

MR. TOBIN: Okay. I thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Normally I think we would be disposed on this side of the House probably to give leave to someone for some concluding remarks, but knowing the past record of performance by the previous speaker, there would not be anything contributed to the debate but another tirade of some sort. So I would prefer to make my few comments than listen to more of that.

Before I make a few comments to let everybody in the House assembled know exactly where I am coming from, to explain for a few minutes why we, on this side, will not support this motion at the end of the day so that you know full well where we are coming from. Before I make a few comments to explain why that will be the position of the Members on this side of the House I just want to talk about some comments made by a couple of the previous speakers, and I expect that one of the next speakers for Members opposite would in all likelihood be the hon. Member for Humber East. I will be very surprised if it is not and I will touch on that just briefly.

But the hon. Member for Burin - Placentia West, Mr. Speaker, began his few comments by talking about one of his favourite words, hypocrisy, because it really comes easily to his mouth and from his lips because he has lived it for years and has showed it again here today. He still has the gall today to stand in this House on a debate in which Members opposite indicate that they are serious about an attempt to try to restore some funding so that MUN Extension can be maintained, and to talk about options for this Government, to say that with the ERC they should not have big offices. He was a Member of a Cabinet in which the first thing one of the Cabinet Ministers did when appointed was spend $125,000 to redo the bathroom, and he has the gall - talk about hypocrisy - to stand up in this House today and suggest to the Members and Ministers on this side that we should not have appointed the ERC and given them proper offices to (inaudible) -

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West on a point of order.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure what the Member is saying, but I hope he is not suggesting that I spent $125,000 to redo a bathroom, because if he is, that is far from being the truth. If such a bathroom exists I would suggest it would be appropriate for the hon. Member to visit it.

MR. SPEAKER: No point of order. The hon. the Member for Exploits.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I expect in my remarks he might jump up three or four more times to get on with that usual kind of nonsense because he knows exactly what I said is no reference to him. A Minister - he knows full well who it is - did exactly that.

Secondly, he talked about some of the senior staff on the executive of Enterprise Newfoundland and Labrador who may still be driving and are still driving vehicles that are provided by that corporation because this Government has committed money through that agency for economic development to try and lessen the amount of dependency in Newfoundland on the Government. I am sure that they are not disagreeing with that objective and would suggest that Government should never spend any money on economic development so that there would be more private sector enterprises established which could create jobs, employ Newfoundlanders gainfully, and everyone would not have to think in Newfoundland that the only place to get a job in this Province is to work for the Provincial Government. He does not disagree with that.

He talked about the cars. And he, again, was a Member of a Cabinet with his seatmate very close to him now, as I mentioned in some comments last week, who while a Minister of the Crown had a trailer hitch attached to the Government vehicle he drove with all expenses paid, went on a "business trip" to several cities in the United States, put the trailer on, took the whole family and they stood up in the House and said, 'Oh no, there is nothing wrong with that. He was on business, and it would have cost maybe just as much had he flown down, stayed a couple of days in a hotel and flew back.' There was no reason to go, only an excuse given after to cover up the expense to say that that kind of stuff happened. That Member would start his remarks by talking about hypocrisy. I am amazed that they would continue to say those kinds of things.

I will mention as well, Mr. Speaker, before I get into my comments about the resolution, because I do want to make it clear why we intend to vote against this resolution today. I will expect that the hon. Member for Humber East will probably speak next, if not it will be the first time that she has missed an opportunity on this issue because there is no doubt in our minds that she is now the self appointed patron saint of all worthwhile causes, and this one is a worthwhile cause. I am not sure of the motives of Members opposite, but in this particular case, maybe if she speaks I would ask her if she would clarify for this House the information that I have - I do not have the letter to provide, I was not successful in getting the letter - but I understand that when she was Minister of Education she wrote to Memorial University, because she did not believe in the arms - length operation, and suggested to the Board of Regents at the university that she, as the Minister, would like for MUN Extension to be scrapped.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main on a point of order.

MR. DOYLE: Mr. Speaker, I was not listening to the hon. Member very closely, and maybe I should have been, because I was reading the newspaper, but I was informed by some of my colleagues a moment ago that the hon. Member made a remark that the Member for Harbour Main towed a trailer down through the States. Is that what the Member for Exploits said? Mr. Speaker, I ask the Member for Exploits to retract that, if he said it, because it is a blatant lie. If he said it. He tells me he did not say it.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the Member for Harbour Main to withdraw that remark.

MR. DOYLE: I never accused him of lying. I said it was a lie.

MR. SPEAKER: Would the hon. the Member for Harbour Main withdraw that remark?

MR. DOYLE: Mr. Speaker, I never called the hon. Member a liar, I just said what he said was a lie, if he said it.

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

MR. DOYLE: Mr. Speaker, I withdraw it, obviously, but I never called the Member a liar. The Speaker is misunderstanding, I am trying to correct the hon. Member in what he is saying.

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order, just a difference between hon. Members.

The hon. the Member for Exploits.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I do not want to dwell on those things, and the hon. Member knows I did not reference any particular Member. I am making comments, and if the hat fits for a Member on the other side they know that they should wear it, and they will. They know who is ho, and I do not need to elaborate that for the House, and I have not done so.

I was indicating that the hon. Member for Humber East, when she was Minister of Education, contrary to the principle of autonomy for the University and the arm's - length relationship, did ask, I believe by letter, for the Board of Regents to consider -

AN HON. MEMBER: Do you have the letter?

MR. GRIMES: No. I indicated that I do not have it to table, but I ask her to clarify it in her remarks. It may have been taken with the Minister's personal file when she left the office. I would like to give her an opportunity in debate to clarify it because if I am making a mistake I would not want to leave that on the record, Mr. Speaker. I would like for her to rise in the debate, because I am expecting she will be the next speaker, to clarify whether or not she wrote to the university asking them to scrap MUN Extension so they would have to give less money? Or, if it was just discussed in a meeting? I am not sure of either but maybe she would clarify that in debate. I only mention that because the hon. Member for Humber East and the former Minister of Education, the former, former, Minister of Education, is losing some credibility in this House now, Mr. Speaker, because while it is recognized that some people will jump on bandwagons from time to time it is getting fairly widely known that hon. Member seems to be in the habit nowadays, after being silent for ten years in Cabinet, to be willing to jump on any kind of wagon that seems to be moving and going anywhere. It might be a hay wagon, it may be a trike, it could be a two-wheel bike, a skateboard, or it might be just a rock rolling down the hill, but if it looks like it is going somewhere and it looks like there may be some people on it she is likely to jump on that. That is not to belittle this cause because this is a serious and important one.

I just might mention one last thing before I get to my comments about the motion itself, if I may. The hon. the Member for Burin -Placentia West indicated that Members should stand and should reflect the views of their constituents, and so on, because that is who elected them, not the Premier, not other Members in the House, but your constituents. If I were to do that there would not be as much sympathy for the cause of MUN Extension as I express here today, because I have had calls about health care reductions from my constituents. When I have been visiting in my district I have been confronted with that. I have had calls about teacher layoffs in the system. I have had calls about programme cuts at the community college and the possible effect on the university. I have had calls and conversations about other things addressed in the Budget, the wage freeze, pay equity, and so on, but I have had zero representations from anybody in the thirteen communities of Exploits district about MUN Extension. That is unfortunate because I have some reservations about it myself which I will get to in my comments, but if I were to go solely by what the hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia has indicated then I would have no hesitation whatsoever, I would probably be standing up and saying, and writing to the university, and forgetting about the autonomy and the arm's - length, and trying to suggest that they finally did the right thing because I have not heard, now I may hear after today, and I hope I do, because it will show the level of concern that is in that part of rural Newfoundland which goes through Leading Tickles and Moore's Cove and Cottrell's Cove and Point of Bay and Phillips Head and all those places, Fortune Harbour, Pleasantview, Glovers Harbour, and they represent rural Newfoundland as well as anybody; they reflect rural Newfoundland and I did not have any calls relative to MUN Extension, not one.

The point to be made: The Leader of the Opposition in, introducing the resolution today, Mr. Speaker, tries to frame it as a very simple option for us, no preamble, no whereas, just a very basic resolution, nothing fancy about it, something where Members can debate the MUN Extension issue in isolation and therein lies the whole problem and the whole sham with his resolution. He knows full well, as Premier for a period of time, as a good Cabinet Minister, recognized by people throughout the Province, and I say that in all sincerity, as a very good Cabinet Minister for a long period of time in the previous administration, acknowledged throughout the Province to have done a very, very good job -

AN HON. MEMBER: Who?

AN HON. MEMBER: Not you, no.

MR. GRIMES: - and the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, when a Cabinet Minister in Premier Peckford's administration, was respected by people throughout the Province for his efforts, he knows from those experiences that it is absolute folly to think that on an issue related to the Budget of the Province, you can come in here, put up a motion on one item in isolation from the total rest of the Budget, and expect someone to make a decision about it, so what do we expect next Wednesday?

Next Wednesday, he is saying that today we have a choice, that he has put a very simple self-contained resolution to provide Members of the House with an opportunity to stand up and vote, to give a few more dollars to Memorial so that they can keep MUN Extension. So next Wednesday, someone brings in a motion saying: Why do we not have a nice simple little motion that says let us give a few more dollars to health care, so we can keep what the people want in terms of the hospital in Placentia; and the week after, someone comes in and says: let us have a nice simple straightforward little resolution that says: Let us put some more money in Port aux Basques for health care and then the week after, someone comes in and says: Let us have a few more dollars, let us not clutter it up with all the other stuff now, let us keep it nice and simple and clean and isolate it and let us give a few more dollars to the Cabot Institute and then the week after Marine Institute and then to the community colleges and so on, and on and on it goes. So we would be here in about ten weeks dealing with ten very neat, simple, isolated resolutions and he knows that you cannot make budgetary decisions in that context, it cannot be done.

The week after that, we would probably end up with a resolution saying: Why do we not provide a little bit more money so that we can keep the 2,000 workers employed, who had to be laid off; there would be nothing wrong with that motion, absolutely nothing according to the presentations given by the Leader of the Opposition, and then, why would we not have a motion the week after that saying: Let us provide just a few more dollars so that we do not have to have a salary freeze, followed the week after by a motion saying: Let us provide just a few more dollars so that we can honour some kind of past commitment to pay equity; all things that they have brought up in the House previously, but now today, it is convenient and it is nice and we are supposed to actually be able to, in total isolation from all of the other decisions taken relative to this Budget, to deal with MUN Extension, and provide the money to the university.

There were a lot of choices faced, Mr. Speaker, a lot of tough choices faced in doing the Budget, and Members on this side, in supporting the Government, there need to be a couple of reminders that there is already a $57 million deficit forecast for current account for this year. We are already going to spend $57 million more than we have, but it is okay to come in with a motion to say well, go and get a few more dollars somewhere and let us give it to the university so hopefully, they will make the decision to keep MUN Extension open.

That, followed on the heels of $117 million deficit last year that we spent, more than we took in on current account; and everybody knows, and everybody in the Opposition knows that much of the problem in terms of the deficits we face in this Province now are really attributable to what happened over the last number of years when members opposite were running the Province. A lot of people question the word `running', but they were doing something with the Province - and their political cousins in Ottawa, who have major responsibility for funding in post-secondary education, and their direction, and where they are going.

I just have to say, Mr. Speaker, that I, personally, and we on this side, question their motives. Sometimes, we go as far as to say that there might even be some crocodile tears and some fake concern by the members opposite. They must contend that they do not respect anything about the arms-length relationship with the university. In fact, I hope the Member for Humber East will stand in the debate, next, and prove that I was wrong, that she never did, either in writing, or verbally, ask the university, while she was Minister, to consider scrapping MUN Extension Service. I hope she will put that on the record. I would like to have it cleared for my mind, at least, because it is bothersome to me.

We have had an example again, today, Mr. Speaker, where we question sincerity, because the motion is put, in our estimation, more for political gamesmanship than any real, sincere concern about MUN Extension, or anything else.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, it is clearly against the rules of this House, clearly, according to our Standing Orders and precedent, to question the motives of any member in this Chamber. It has been ruled on dozens and dozens of times by various Speakers over the years. No member of this House can question the sincerity, or lack thereof, of any other member, or a motivation for bringing in a resolution, or anything else.

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: I am reluctant to - Mr. Speaker, what is wrong with the Member for Eagle River? I do not want to take any more time away from the hon. gentleman from Exploits than is necessary, but I will stay on my feet as long as I need to, to make my point. So, if the hon. gentleman will keep quiet, I will make it quickly and sit down.

My point, Mr. Speaker, is that no member - and Your Honour has an obligation to bring the member to order and ask him to withdraw imputing motives to other members.

MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. BAKER: Very briefly, to that point of order, Mr. Speaker.

I do not know which way you are going to rule on it, because the imputing of motives certainly is a thing mentioned a number of times in Beauchesne, but I would simply like to take the opportunity to say to the hon. the Leader of the Opposition that if imputing motives is against the rules of this House, then that is what he has been doing for the last week or so and he should follow his own advice.

AN HON. MEMBER: Indeed, he should.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, to ask a question of fact about allegations made in public is not imputing motives, it is trying to get to the bottom of a very dirty pit that that Government is perpetrating over there.

MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, it is against the rules of the House to impute motives of other hon. members, and I ask hon. members now and in the future to refrain from doing that.

The hon. the Member for Exploits.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In light of that ruling, if I did appear to be imputing any motives, I withdraw. I would not want that to be considered as part of the record in anything I have said.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) ask who wrote the letter, that is all.

MR. GRIMES: In my last minute or so, Mr. Speaker, if I could, just to again indicate why we, on this side, intend to vote against this particular resolution: It is fair for members opposite to ask this Government to provide more money for anything, but the difficulty with this resolution, today, is that even if we could provide more money for Memorial University - which we cannot, the decision has been taken in the light of all other possibilities that had to be considered. The total amount of money that has been granted to the university has been decided upon. There is some review going on. They will look at other things, and so on. Even if we could do that - because of the relationship that we firmly believe in and support - this Government could not then order Memorial University to take the extra money if they got it and reinstate MUN Extension. They might decide to reinstate something else, or hire back some of the workers they laid off, and so on.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I might just indicate in closing that none of us on this side take any pride in seeing MUN Extension closed. None of us take any pride in seeing other programmes cut at Memorial University, any of the institutes, the community colleges. None of us take any pride in seeing cutbacks in health care or the education system and the day school system. None of us take pride in the fact that there are 2,000 people going to be out of a job before this is all over, and none of us take any pride in the fact that those who remain working, giving invaluable service are going to have their salaries frozen and so on. Tough decisions have been made. Any political rhetoric that would come from resolutions like this do nothing to add to the debate. There is a serious concern. Serious choices were made. And at the end of the day the Members on this side will vote against the motion for no other reason - not that there is no worth or merit, but for no other reasons than Members opposite before even putting it know that it could not be actioned in isolation from all other decisions that the Government had to make. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I find it a real pleasure to be able to rise in my place and have a few words to say on this resolution. The resolution is very, very short and right to the point. All it really says is it urges the Government to make enough money available to bring about the opening and the existence of MUN Extension Service.

Mr. Speaker, I was surprised at the Member for Exploits. He talks to the people opposite here and tells us what we are doing wrong and why there was only so much money with the Government because of what happened years ago by Members on this side. Mr. Speaker, when they are not blaming the previous Government they are blaming Ottawa. This has no bearing on MUN Extension. MUN Extension costs, I think, in the vicinity of $300,000.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. PARSONS: Is it? Oh, well, I am sorry. It is over $1 million - $1 million, Mr. Speaker. This Government received from the Federal coffers for this year $40 million over and above what they received last year, so certainly I think they could find it in their hearts to let $1 million of that go towards MUN Extension, providing a base for MUN Extension to go out to rural Newfoundland and help the people in rural Newfoundland as they did over the years.

Mr. Speaker, there are many people concerned about MUN Extension because I believe MUN Extension touched the lives of many, many people, especially in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. It has been involved in a whole range of activities related to leadership in organization and development and support of local efforts, especially in the economic development field, which is so essential and the lifeblood of rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I was surprised, too, although at times I agree with the Minister of Education, when he talked about rural Newfoundland. I was not an educator, but I played some role in education in Newfoundland and Labrador, especially in this area, where I was a Member of the St. John's School Board for thirteen years. I tried my best to bring to the rural area where I came from and still live the best educational facilities that were possible. Mr. Speaker, I have to disagree with the Minister of Education. As I said, many areas of education we agree on, but in this respect I have to disagree with him. I know the University is arm's length, but I think the money could be found to augment the shortfalls as it pertains to MUN Extension.

Mr. Speaker, $1 million means a lot to the ordinary individual and a lot to a small company, a small business or whatever, but with our Government spending hundreds of millions of dollars, $1 million to help the people out there who need help I do not think is a fantastic amount.

Mr. Speaker, I know the University had only a certain amount of money given to them by the Government and they had to cut their budget to fit those guidelines. I know that, but I think perhaps Government could find it in its heart to expend to MUN Extension that $1 million. Now where could they get the $1 million? I have said over and over in this House for the past couple of weeks that there was money spent as far as I am concerned that need not be spent in the areas it was spent in. I see again my friend, the Minister of Development, and I believe out of the $44 million spent by the ERC, $1 million of that could be channelled to Memorial University to keep Mun Extension open.

Mr. Speaker, MUN Extension as far as rural Newfoundland is concerned did some fantastic work over the years. I do not think anyone can deny that. I said before in the House, when we finally all got together and said there was something radically wrong with the fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador, through processors, fishermen, fish plant workers, and interested individuals we organized, and we organized, Mr. Speaker, with the help of MUN Extension. Their help was of organizational value which at that particular time a lot of us were not familiar with - the right way to do things, the wrong way to do things. At that time, people were very dubious about the fish merchants. But at the first meeting that was held, in the Goulds, when NIFA was formed - that is the Newfoundland Inshore Fisheries Association - there were a tremendous number of people. The hall was filled to capacity, with many, many people outside who could not gain access. But the point remains, Mr. Speaker, I do not think that meeting would have been a success had it not been for the help of MUN Extension.

And, Mr. Speaker, it did not stop there, because then people became aware of the problem we were having. And that problem is more in existence today than it was back that number of years ago. An organization like MUN Extension is needed to go out to rural Newfoundland and talk to people about what is happening in their prime industry, which was the reason why our grandfathers, great-grandfathers, and great-great grandfathers and great-great grandmothers came to this Island in the first place, to prosecute the fishery. Mr. Speaker, that fishery is failing and failing badly. We do not have a fishery in the Gulf now, we do not have a fishery on the Southwest Coast, and for the last two years at least, the fishery has failed in Labrador, although the Member for Eagle River always seems to want a quota for Labrador, and I agree with him. The only thing I question is, where is the quota going to come from? The fishery in Labrador has been devastated. The only place the hon. Member could get that quota is perhaps up in 2J+3KL, or if not 2J, then 3KL and perhaps bring it back to Labrador, which might be common sense. I do not know. The point remains these are critical times in rural Newfoundland. People should be knowledgeable of where our industry is going. What is going to happen to Newfoundland if that bit of fish out there in 2J+3KL dries up as it did in Labrador, as it did on the Southwest Coast, as it did in the Gulf area? What will happen, Mr. Speaker? What will happen to all the people here in Newfoundland today? We have a Premier here who advocates us all joining together in the Atlantic region and perhaps, if separation comes, if this country becomes dismantled, we will have unified atlantic provinces, our unified atlantic provinces. Mr. Speaker, I dread the thought of that day. If we were to ever separate from this great country of Canada, if we were to become splintered, dismantled, whatever, I often wonder who is going to pay what the people look at today as their natural right to receive. I wonder, Mr. Speaker, if this country goes apart, if this country falls apart, if this country is made fall apart by some of our politicians in particular, what will happen to the pensioners? What will happen to the baby bonuses? I mean, these are things which could be brought to the forefront and were brought to the forefront when those meetings were held at the Goulds, Clarenville, Bonavista Bay, Mr. Speaker, all brought about by a great number of Newfoundlanders participating, but with the energies of MUN Extension.

Mr. Speaker, I heard the hon. the Member for Eagle River here perhaps a week ago speak of MUN Extension. I cannot quote him verbatim, but I can certainly say that he said unequivocally that it was not necessary.

AN HON. MEMBER: That is not true.

MR. PARSONS: Yes, I read it in Hansard. He said it was not necessary. I find that really hard to believe. I find that hard to swallow. He even mentioned that clerks and town councils could take over and do what MUN Extension has done.

Mr. Speaker, I do not know where that gentleman is coming from, and I cannot see how he was ever part of a rural area, when he cannot agree that MUN Extension did great work and were still doing great work, when he can stand in this House and say that town clerks or town councils can do the job of MUN Extension. And the hon. Member has been told by this side several times -

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

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Eagle River on a point of order.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member is obviously misleading the House by indicating that I said town clerks can do the job of MUN Extension and saying that I did not indicate support for work MUN Extension has done over the years. I want to unequivocally assure the House that I support wholeheartedly the work MUN Extension has done. One of their primary focuses, Mr. Speaker, was to see that organizations were put into place, and I illustrated through the twenty councils in my district what they have done. They have done remarkable work, but at the present time that work is no longer required and this is why we are in the position we are in.

MR. RIDEOUT: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: First of all, I want to say it is not point of order. At best it would be a disagreement between two hon. Members, but at worst it is just what it is, and that is an opportunity for the hon. Member to try to tread water and disassociate himself from the truth of the statements my colleague is making. Mr. Speaker, everybody in Newfoundland and Labrador knows that the Member could not get a job at MUN Extension, and that is why he is upset with them.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order. The hon. the Member for St. John's East Extern.

MR. PARSONS: I am thoroughly disappointed the Member for Eagle River made that comment, because I was sure I was listening to him that day when he said there was no need for MUN Extension, and he inferred, at least, that some of the work that was done by MUN Extension could be done by town clerks, development associations, whatever. It has no bearing on what MUN Extension was all about, none whatsoever. And the same day your development association sent in a petition saying they want it. So you have to stand on one side of the fence or the other. When the vote comes on this resolution, I am looking for you to vote positively for this resolution.

AN HON. MEMBER: That is not the truth.

MR. PARSONS: That is the truth, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I know that I have a -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. PARSONS: Yes, it is. Mr. Speaker, going back to the fishery again, if there was one thing for which MUN Extension should be reinstated it is the Empty Nets Forums they had. And the Minister of Fisheries will agree with me that there is going to be a lot of those forums needed in many areas of Newfoundland and Labrador if some drastic measures are not taken. And MUN Extension is one group of people who could perhaps get the message across to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, and, indeed, to some of our friends on the mainland part of this country.

Mr. Speaker, this young lady, Kathleen Knowling, she writes a letter: `Since MUN Extension began teaching Art in the early 1960s, with Christopher and Mary Pratt as instructors, I have been both a student and an instructor at their workshops. In their classes, for thirty years they have provided Art instruction at a very high level to a variety of interested students, an invaluable service to the community.

Mr. Speaker, `MUN Extension has been a community resource both inside and outside St. John's: Poetry Reading, Book Binding, Juggling have all been part of their program. MUN Extension helped developed St. Michael's Print Shop and the famous Fogo Project. The loss of the Extension severely diminishes both the University and the larger core University, MUN Extension.

`MUN Extension has a thirty year history. It will take another thirty years to rebuild what has been destroyed.' Another thirty years. That was written by Kathleen Knowling. She is an artist, a painter, a very fine young Newfoundlander who appreciates what MUN did over the years.

I mentioned in my last speech I gave - I think there was a petition being presented and I spoke for five minutes - I mentioned MUN Extension and Decks Awash. I feel very proud that I was in the first edition and I certainly was in the last edition. In the last edition they chose to do an article on where I came from, the rural district where I came from, Outer Cove, Middle Cove, Logy Bay, Flatrock, Torbay, Pouch Cove, Bauline right out to Cape St. Francis, and it says in the opening line of that volume, `In this our last issue, we look at an almost forgotten region of Newfoundland, Outer Cove to Cape St. Francis.' Mr. Speaker, as I go through this nostalgia sets in. I can see how much work went into this bit of history as it relates to me, as it relates to every person from St. John's East Extern.

I look here at Middle Cove. Everyone knows the beaches of Middle Cove, where the caplin come in early in the year and everyone goes down and gets them.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) song.

MR. PARSONS: I could sing a song about it, yes. There are some fine songs written, too, including The Star of Logy Bay, The Hills of Torbay and The Hills of Flatrock. Oh, yes, there are some fine songs written about that area, really fine songs. And if I were a singer and was permitted by the Speaker, I would certainly sing them for you and I would certainly feel good about doing it. But, Mr. Speaker, looking at this now, the history of that particular region is all in this volume. And for someone to get up and tell me that this does not relate to or be a part of rural Newfoundland, or we are not missing something by taking MUN Extension out of existence to save a measly $1 million, then, Mr. Speaker, I think there is something wrong with our being here: I think there is something wrong with this Legislature, I think there is something wrong with the Members opposite, most of the Members from rural areas, some of the Members living in St. John's now and representing St. John's districts. But most of the men over there - and women - are from rural Newfoundland. And where you can let this Government which you play a role in - the Minister there, the Minister of Environment and Lands, he is yakking away over there. I asked him a question the other day but he was not yakking. He got up and said "no.", and sat down. His vocabulary was not very extensive then.

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

MR. PARSONS: But he is still yakking over there now.

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

MR. PARSONS: What are you saying? Are you saying something about rural Newfoundland?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. PARSONS: Do you not think that rural Newfoundland should have representation?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No leave! No leave!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. Member's time is up.

MR. PARSONS: Do you not believe in MUN Extension?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, in (Inaudible) -

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

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, I will let the Members have a copy of (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. Member's time is up.

The hon. the Member for Stephenville.

MR. K. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have only got a short time but I want to give my contribution to this debate. I am saddened to see the University's decision on MUN Extension. I do not think anybody is happy with it. I for one have been very aware of what MUN Extension has done over the years, the good work they have done in all areas of the Province, everywhere, and the people whom they have had on their staff, the contributions that they have made. They have been enormous and they have been a catalyst in rural Newfoundland and even in St. John's for that matter. They have been a catalyst and they have been able to create many things that would not have been created without their presence.

It was a difficult decision by the University to do what they have done. I would have hoped that they would have looked at all the options and ways to try to save money, and to look at even different programmes sharing the brunt of the problems of the budget that they have. But apparently they have decided that one section has to go, and I would have preferred - and I do not know how it was examined, how far it was examined - if they had shared it out. But they decided for their own reasons, the Board of Regents, after a review, to decide to dismantle or put aside one specific function of the overall programme.

MUN Extension has made a tremendous contribution to all parts of the Province, as seen by the editorials in the papers. People have been affected by MUN Extension. I am somewhat of the same mode as the Member for St. John's East Extern, in the sense of - the problem is, how do you rectify it with the lack of funds? I do not know what other alternative proposals have been put forward to the University. I believe that there were presentations made by the friends of MUN Extension, and I think that they should be encouraged to keep doing so to see if the Board of Regents can review the decision, but it is up to the Board of Regents. I was looking at the resolution today, and if the resolution had come in and said something different and said: we would like to see MUN Extension continue and so on, and that (Inaudible).

What you are saying is that the Government can say: go ahead MUN Extension and keep operating, but that is not the case and the Members opposite know that. Now that is the only thing that disturbs me. We all should make a contribution to debate and highlight the good things that MUN Extension has done, but the Members opposite know that. And the reason that they do know that was that back when they were the Government, I wrote the then-Minister of Career Development responsible for post-secondary education. The Member for Ferryland now, who was the Member at the time and he said to me, and he wrote back to me, and I am going to read this verbatim into the record:

It is my understanding that the University, prior to making these recently announced reductions in its Extension Services, reviewed all of its services and programmes, and based their decisions on a priorization of services. It is Government's view that the University has a right and a responsibility -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. Member's time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No leave!

MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker? Another minute or so? Another minute?

MR. SPEAKER: No leave.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Normally I would say yes, with a heart and a half, particularly for the hon. gentleman for Stephenville. Normally I would say yes, but the way in which the Government Members treated the Members of this side of the House today when they wanted a minute or so to clue up, I just cannot do it, I just cannot let down my colleagues, Mr. Speaker. The Member for St. John's East Extern, for example, wanted to point out that in the last issue of `Decks Awash', he made the paper, he made the book, and the Government members were so niggardly that they would not allow the member to point out that important historical fact, Mr. Speaker. So, I would love to give the hon. gentleman a minute or two, but -

MR. DOYLE: Yes, because he is a good fellow.

MR. RIDEOUT: He is a nice young man, but the way his colleagues have treated the Opposition this afternoon, Mr. Speaker, I cannot do it.

Now, Mr. Speaker, the Member for Eagle River should go out; I believe Ron Pumphrey is looking for him.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I have twenty minutes to clue up and I ask Your Honour to try to keep the other side quiet for about twenty minutes.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank members who participated in the debate. I think the debate, by and large, was a good debate. I want to take the opportunity to refer to some of the statements made by members on the Government side. The Government has made it clear, Mr. Speaker, that they are not going to support the resolution. That is fine, that is their choice. Obviously, they have been told not to support the resolution.

The reason put forward by the Member for Exploits is not a very good reason: We cannot support this resolution because it has budgetary implications, and if we support this resolution, there will be a resolution next week about something else that impinges on the Budget, or the week after something else that impinges on the Budget.

Mr. Speaker, the Government have already made decisions contrary to the Budget since the Budget came down. For example, Mr. Speaker, it was only a day or two ago, after the Government met with the women's lobby, that the transition house in Gander was advised that their staff complement was increased, and the Minister of Finance should check with his colleague, the President of Treasury Board. So, it is possible, Mr. Speaker. At 5:00 that evening - it was Monday, was it not, that we met with the women's lobby? - on Monday, both caucuses met with the women's lobby, Mr. Speaker, and one of the items on their agenda was that, despite the fact that a new transition house had been built in Gander, there was insufficient staff, only three, I believe, allocated to that particular institution. At 5:00 that evening, the Member for Gander, the President of Treasury Board, called the institution and told them they had additional staff approved.

AN HON. MEMBER: How many?

MR. RIDEOUT: From three and one-half to eight and one-half, five extra units, Mr. Speaker; and the Minister of Finance and the Member for Exploits -

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible) responsible for that.

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, then, you had better check with your colleague, I say to the Minister of Social Services.

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: Maybe he has cancelled them already.

Anyway, the point I am making, Mr. Speaker, is that if Government wishes to change its mind, it can be done. It has been done on other occasions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. RIDEOUT: Now, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Education, the lead Minister in this particular debate, speaking for the Government, the person speaking for the Government who responded initially to the resolution, so that other members on the Government side could take his lead and speak accordingly. Mr. Speaker, in his twenty minutes in the lead off for Government, never once did the Minister say why we should keep MUN Extension, never once. He got on his feet and spent almost twenty minutes defending the university. Now, Mr. Speaker, the university people are big boys and girls, capable of defending themselves, if they need to be defended; and let it be known, Mr. Speaker, that nobody, nobody today on this side of the House was critical of the university. It is the Government of whom we are critical, Mr. Speaker. It is the Government that provided an insufficient amount of funds to the university. It is the Government that forced the university to make cutback decisions, and one of this was this Extension Service. It is the Government that can correct the problem by providing more money to the university.

Now, the Minister of Education, the chief spokesman for education in Newfoundland and Labrador, never once gave us a reason, or gave any feeling or any understanding, today, that the Government would even consider. And, something else, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Education and the Premier met with a number of people about MUN Extension a few days ago. Mr. Speaker, this Minister is becoming famous for telling you something before your face that he thinks you want to hear, that will get you out of his sight, and then come down with not changing his mind after. He has done it time after time to different groups and individuals in this Province, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Education got up and talked about everything. The resolution calls upon the Government to reinstate funding to the University in the amount necessary to reinstate Extension Services. He talked about putting first year university courses in Burin, in Grand Falls, in Lewisporte, and in Labrador West. There is nothing in the resolution about that, Mr. Speaker. It is irrelevant, it has nothing to do with the resolution, and then the Minister gets up and tries to take credit for those things. All those things were done and in place before this Minister got his nose inside the doors of the Department of Education.

AN HON. MEMBER: He did not know about it.

MR. RIDEOUT: Who did not know about it? What is wrong with the Minister of Finance? Will the Minister of Finance go home, search through the boxes in his basement and see if he can find the files he stole from the PC Party when he was President and bring them back to the Party, because we would like to have them for our archives? The day the PCs caught him hobnobbing with Joey out on Roaches Line, called a special convention, and passed a resolution through the convention having him impeached, and then he refused to give us back our property. The man stole our property and look where he ended up, as Minister of Finance. He has a face like a robber's horse. I would say, Mr. Speaker, that bond holders in this Province had better be aware because he is likely to swipe the debentures when he leaves the Department. That is a fact, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Finance stole our party property and would not give it back. We hired a historian not long ago, I think it was two or three years ago now, to do a historic perspective of the Progressive Conservative Party in Newfoundland, and when we went and searched the files a certain period was missing, and we were told by the person who succeeded the impeached President that the impeached President took them and refused to bring them back.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

DR. KITCHEN: I would just point out to the hon. Member that the Minister of Municipal Affairs is prepared to give him an historic grant if he should wish to write the history of the PC Party of the Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order please! There is no point of order.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I want to make some comments on the presentation by the hon. gentleman from Exploits. Imagine, Mr. Speaker, getting up and speaking to a substantive resolution, calling on the Government to re-instate enough funding to the university to enable the university to re-instate Extension Services, a vital force today - still could be a vital force today in rural Newfoundland, imagine, the hon. gentleman getting up and talking about the $125,000 toilets, washrooms. One hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars to redo a bathroom, he said. Even if what he said was true, which it was not, it was not to redo, it was to install one where there was not one, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. RIDEOUT: You talk about trivia, that is how important MUN Extension is to that gentleman. He gets up and he talks about a washroom. Mr. Speaker, he gets up and when a point of order is brought to his attention he tries to weasel out of it. He gets up and says: sitting very close to the Member for Burin - Placentia West. This is the way he put it, Mr. Speaker: sitting very close to the Member for Burin - Placentia West. When I looked down there was only one person close to the Member for Burin - Placentia West at the time, the Member for Harbour Main. He accused him of putting a trailer hitch on a Government car and going down through the States. That Member is getting $65,000 or $70,000 a year to be in this House defending the Government or putting forward alternatives on behalf of the Government, and that is the best he can come up with. Mr. Speaker, that is the best he can come up with. Why doesn't the Member stay in his seat or take the Government Bronco and go down to Bally Haly and bat around a few balls or something? He has been known to do that too. Mr. Speaker, it is terrible, when we are here today trying to plead with the Government to reconsider what I believe to be a backward step, then he makes all kinds of trivial jokes about the resolution, accused the person who brought it in of not being sincere. Mr. Speaker, the Member should know better. I thought a former President of the NTA, a teacher, would get up and debate on its merits why the Government would not support this particular solution, but he gets up and trivializes it by bringing in foolishness and nonsense. Then he makes reference to a letter, that he could not find, from the former Minister of Education asking the Board of Regents to cut out MUN Extension Services. It may or may not be true - I do not know. The Member says it is not and I will take her word over that hon. gentleman's. But the point remains, Mr. Speaker, that it is now out. It does not matter whether it is true or not, the fact of the matter is it is out there and some people, despite whether it is true or not, whether it can be proven to be true or not, will believe it. And this is where the hon. -

MR. EFFORD: Well you are a fine one to be talking!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. RIDEOUT: What is wrong with the - ?

MR. EFFORD: You are a nice one to be talking.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: What is wrong with the Minister?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. RIDEOUT: What is wrong with the Minister? Is it not the truth, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister is responsible for a board that had a significant increase retroactively in what it pays it to the members? Is that not the truth? I did not make that allegation, a former Chair of the Board made it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. RIDEOUT: No, it is not.

AN HON. MEMBER: Not true?

MR. RIDEOUT: No!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, be careful now.

MR. RIDEOUT: Go read the Standing Purchase Agreement, to be delivered as is, where is, when you require it - no!

AN HON. MEMBER: You were not there long enough.

MR. RIDEOUT: I was there long enough, that is right. Mr. Speaker, another allegation was made today about a political staff of the Minister. I did not make it. Is it true? And the Minister has the gall to get up and talk about truth. What is true is that this Government has a vendetta against rural Newfoundland and Labrador. That is what is true!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: And it is evident in the way this Government has forced the University to cut the Extension Service. It is this Government that has to bear that responsibility. This Government did not go to the University or put any pressure on the University to cut in other areas, but save something that was vital to the vitality and well-being of rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Did it do that? No! It pleads arm's length, it pleads academic freedom, it pleads the Minister of Finance saying "bull." That is the kind of response you get from this Government.

This Government has a vendetta against rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Where will the cutbacks in post-secondary education be felt most? Will it be felt most in the capital city? No, Mr. Speaker. Where will the cutbacks in health be felt most? Will it be mostly felt in the capital city? No. It will be felt in the little places like Old Perlican and Bonavista and Baie Verte and Woody Point and Springdale and Port aux Basques. Those are the areas where it will be felt most, the heart and soul of Newfoundland and Labrador. Where will the lack of activity by Memorial University Extension be felt most? Will it be here in the city? No. It will be those little communities where the University went out and provided some leadership for local organizations: for women's conferences, for Empty Nets, for talking about what makes Newfoundland and Labrador real. That is where it will be felt.

And this Government cannot get away from the fact that it has taken deliberate budgetary decisions that will negatively impact on the rural parts of this Province; they will hurt all parts of the Province, but they will hurt rural Newfoundland and Labrador more so than they will hurt anywhere else.

That is the political legacy of the real change that this Premier and this Government have brought to this Province. This Premier was a Member of a government before which tried to put the boots to rural Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker. First of all you take away the doctor, then you take away the nurse, then you take away the teacher, and the school is closed down and the services are moved somewhere else, and by and by people feel intimidated or forced to move closer to the services. That is how you do it.

What does this Premier say, Mr. Speaker, in one of his speeches to a group in St. John's just a few months ago? He said, `We had great plans for Newfoundland and Labrador, but once we came to office we found out a few startling facts; we found out there were 800 communities in Newfoundland and Labrador, we found out they were spread along 5,000 miles or 6,000 miles of coastline and they were populated by 560,000 people.' In the name of God, what Province did he run to be leader of? Did not the Premier know those facts before he asked the people of Newfoundland and Labrador to vote for a change? Did he not know there were 700 or 800 communities in this Province? Or did he come to power, Mr. Speaker, with a hidden agenda to reduce the number of communities in this Province?

That is what he came to power with, Mr. Speaker, a hidden agenda to reduce the number of communities in Newfoundland and Labrador. And you will see it happen if this Government brings in another Budget next year with the lack of heart and the lack of soul and the lack of compassion that they brought in this year: You will see more hospital closures, you will see more classrooms closed, you will see more of the entity of rural Newfoundland and Labrador like MUN Extension phased out. That is what you will see, Mr. Speaker, and that will be the legacy of the second Liberal Government in the history of Newfoundland and Labrador since 1949.

The first Liberal Government left a history of resettlement, it left a history of devastation to rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and I say today that the second Liberal Government will leave the same legacy and the same history, Mr. Speaker. It is unfortunate that there is nobody over there who will stand up for the rural parts of the Province. I am disappointed that the Member for Eagle River, for example, did not even bother to speak to this resolution today.

AN HON. MEMBER: He is not allowed to speak.

MR. RIDEOUT: I know he spoke against MUN Extension.

MR. MURPHY: (Inaudible) first Liberal Government, how come you were Liberal?

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, how come I was a Liberal? Well -

AN HON. MEMBER: Your leader was NDP, so how come (inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: It is all immaterial, but I do not mind answering. I could answer the question I suppose by asking the Member for St. John's South how come the Minister of Finance was a Tory once? And not only any old Tory, not any insignificant Tory, but President of the Tory party. And he was a leadership candidate, and when he got defeated he took his marbles and left. Anyway, Mr. Speaker, some of us have had a history of supporting different political parties.

MR. WINSOR: He took his marbles, but he lost them again.

MR. RIDEOUT: He took his marbles and went home, but the marbles were not upstairs. This is a very, very important resolution impacting mostly, despite what the Minister of Education tried to say in this House the other day - the Minister of Education got up in this House the other day and insulted Memorial University Extension: the Minister of Education said in effect they were no longer necessary; the Minister of Education said in effect they meant nothing to rural Newfoundland and Labrador; the Minister of Education said it was a myth perpetrated by the Opposition that MUN Extension was significant in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. At least this debate, Mr. Speaker, has destroyed that myth and I call on the Government to do the right thing, to do the proper thing, in the words of their Leader, to discharge their responsibility and support this resolution.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Is the House ready for the question?

It is the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion.

Those in favour of the motion please say `aye.'

AN HON. MEMBER: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: Those against the motion please say `nay.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion defeated.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Division, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Call in the Members.

Division

MR. SPEAKER: Those in favour of the motion, please rise.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, Ms. Verge, Mr. Doyle, Mr. R. Aylward, Mr. Tobin, Mr. Matthews, Mr. N. Windsor, Mr. Hearn, Mr. A. Snow, Mr. S. Winsor, Mr. Parsons, Mr. Woodford, Mr. Hodder, Mr. Harris.

MR. SPEAKER: Those against the motion, please rise.

The hon. the Minister of Development, the hon. the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture, the hon. the Minister of Environment and Lands, the hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations, the hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy, the hon. the Minister of Fisheries, the hon. the Minister of Social Services, Mr. L. Snow, Mr. Barrett, Mr. Grimes, the hon. the Minister of Finance, the hon. the Minister of Education, the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, Mr. Crane, Mr. K. Aylward, Mr. Gover, Mr. Noel, Mr. Penney, Mr. Murphy, Mr. Dumaresque, Mr. Walsh, Mr. Short, Mr. Langdon.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

CLERK (Ms. Duff): Mr. Speaker, ayes fourteen, nays twenty-three.

MR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion lost.

This House stands adjourned until tomorrow, Thursday, at two of the clock in the afternoon.