The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

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

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. TULK: What is it this time shrimp, crab or what is it?

MR. EFFORD: Seals.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity after the announcement that we made this morning here in the Confederation Building, the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology, myself and the member from Baie Verte, to make a major announcement not only for the Baie Verte Peninsula, but the whole of Newfoundland and Labrador in a whole new industry that we have been crying and screaming for years that we should have in this Province.

I would like to take this opportunity to welcome Mr. Armando Meneguzzo and his staff from Teleos Trading in Italy who we have been working out an agreement with for the past several months, today we finalized that agreement and we now look forward to a major industry beginning in an industrial park on the Baie Verte Peninsula in the former asbestos mine property which will begin with a tannery. I want to make it clear, Mr. Speaker -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: I want to make it very clear, Mr. Speaker, that this is a tannery not just for one animal, the seal. This is a tannery that will encompass animals in Newfoundland, but also importing animals world wide and phase one of a major industry that will take place using in the beginning Newfoundland resource and in line with the new policy that we just announced, that any resource in Newfoundland we should get the maximum benefits, utilize the resource not to be further processed in some other part of the world.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: So, I want just to say thank you to the individuals from Italy and to look forward to a very prosperous venture for Newfoundland and Labrador and in particular, the people on the Baie Verte Peninsula.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

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

The House leader is right, I am spinney today, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, I would like to welcome Mr. Meneguzzo and his Italian delegation and also the mayor of Baie Verte and mayor of Fleur de Lys who are here today, who played a big part in this announcement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, indeed it is a good day for such an announcement. As a matter of fact, I would even go as far as to say it is an historical day in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, that we look at value-added, we move in a direction that is new. Mr. Speaker, I think all members of this Chamber have supported the efforts of seal industry progressing in this Province, I don't think you will get any argument there, for the people, not just the seal industry but of course the tannery which will be set up on the Baie Verte 2000 Industrial Park. So it does, Mr. Speaker, and I do commend the ministers for their help in -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: - for their help in making sure that this came through but the bottom line is that we have to continue on to bring such industries into this Province, to do value-added and to make sure that we put people back to work in this Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. SHELLEY: I would conclude, Mr. Speaker –

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, I would just like to conclude -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) the first one you are going to tan.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SHELLEY: I would like to conclude by saying, not just for the Baie Verte Peninsula but for the entire Province, the idea of value-added and this resource. So I commend you, welcome you and congratulate you. Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi, does he have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to join with the minister and the Member for Baie Verte in welcoming the Italian entrepreneurs to the Province and wish them every success in the venture which is important to us because it does lead to a full utilization of a very important product in our Province. I don't think we should let the day go, Mr. Speaker, without acknowledging the role - we expect government to be involved and that the minister deserves credit for doing that but the role of the Member for Baie Verte in bringing the parties together for this important venture. I think it makes the role of a member a valuable one and I think the member deserves some credit for bringing the parties together in order to make this happen.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Minister of Finance.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the federal government for their announcement this morning that beginning in 1998-99 the Canadian Government will raise the cash floor of the CHST, Canada Health and Social Transfer from $11 billion to $12.5 billion.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DICKS: The CHST cash component will remain stable at $12.5 billion in 1998-99 rather than fall to $11.8 billion as projected in the 1997 Budget. In all, CHST will increase by about $3.5 billion over the next three-year period.

Mr. Speaker, this is very good news for our Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, on the basis of current projections, our CHST entitlements will increase by about $14 million in 1998-99 and $26 million of the following two years. There will be no new money this year. The Government of Canada has taken many difficult decisions to help restore the public finances of the nation. The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador recognizes the efforts of the federal government to that end and encourages them to continue to be prudent in their management. Today, the federal government is able to share the benefits of their fiscal progress by making a strategic investment in the Canada Health and Social Transfer. This is where the most pressing needs and concerns of Canadians lie.

Mr. Speaker, last week the Premier met with the Prime Minister for a second time to discuss the challenges and stresses in the Social, Education and Health sectors in this Province. The announcement today is evidence of the Prime Minister's understanding of the issues as presented by the Premier and we are convinced, forms a response to it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DICKS: The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is pleased with the additional $66 million in CHST entitlements over the next three years. This money will assist us in meeting and overcoming some of the demands which currently exist in our social sectors and we will be responsible in determining how to spend that money. Health, Education and Social Services are vital to the well-being of our society, that is why, during the 1997 Budget we committed to extend the three-year commitment to stabilize funding in the health care sector to 1999-2000. We provided enhanced funding of $2.6 million to retain and attract physicians in rural areas and, we provided $7.8 million for a new hospital at Harbour Breton. We finally provided $24 million to repay all school board debt and half-a-million dollars for tutoring, for tuition programs to name but a few of our initiatives. Mr. Speaker, the provincial government is committed to the Health, Education and Social Sectors. Today we see that the federal government also recognizes the need for extra cash in these areas.

We conclude by once again thanking the federal government for making this strategic decision which will greatly assist our Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We had a published plan by the government just recently to reduce Canada Health and Social Transfer by $3.8 billion between now and the year 2000 and they are going to put a part of that back. On page 25 of Let The Future Begin, it is the same figure this government has used today, and not only did John Charest say it will be $12.5 billion, but he will provide tax points to ensure there is stable funding beyond that in the future. They have only come part-way from Jean Charést. And I would like to point out that last year in this Province there was $87 million taken out of the Canada Health and Social Transfer from the previous two programs; this year, another $70 million. We have $157 million less this year than we had the year before last. On top of that $87 million they took last year, it is, in two years, $244 million less and they are going to give us back $66 million over three years. One-quarter of what they have taken in two years they are going to give back in three years, and they try to get up and pretend it is a good news plan.

It is a plan taken from page 25 of Jean Charést's book; but he goes further in ensuring that we have the transfers there, and that is on the top of page 26.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. SULLIVAN: By leave to finish up?

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

MR. SULLIVAN: I am only getting started, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. SULLIVAN: To conclude, Mr. Speaker, if there was every such a thing -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up. There is no leave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave, the hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just to put the minister's comments in context, the CHST replaced the established programs financing and the Canada Assistance Plan which in 1995-1996 delivered $29 billion to the provinces for post-secondary education, health and social services. That is now $11 billion. So to go from $29 billion down to $11 billion, and then to give back $1.5 billion does not sound to me like good news, and I am surprised to see a smile on the minister's face when he realizes, more than anyone else, the consequences to this Province on health, education and social assistance as a result of the federal Canada Health and Social Transfer. There is no reason for smiling here; it is simple electioneering.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, wish to recognize the move by the Federal Government today to increase the cash floor of the Canada Health and Social Transfer from $11 billion to $12.5 billion. The extra $66 million it will mean for this Province from 1998-1999 to 2000-2001 is significant and is evidence of the Federal Government's understanding of the need for more funding in the areas of health, education and social services.

I rise today to inform hon. members that on Thursday of this week I will provide details of the Health Care Forum announced by the Premier last week. We recognize the strain on the Province's health care system, and we know that there are some specific areas which require our immediate attention. While money is not the only answer to our problems in health care, the extra CHST funding will provide more flexibility for government as we determine our priorities, not only in the health care sector but in education and social services as well.

The need for this forum has become all the more urgent in light of today's announcement. While government has shown its commitment to health care by providing funding for rural doctors, new hospitals and equipment, amongst other things, new monies are difficult, obviously, to obtain. This announcement by the Federal Government today is good news for the Province. As the Minister of Finance has said, we will determine where the money will be spent and can be spent most responsibly to best serve the needs of the people of this Province.

I think, Mr. Speaker, it bears repeating, and it is noteworthy, that the Premier of this Province has taken a lead and significant role in dialoguing and –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: - in discussing this whole issue with the Prime Minister of Canada. It is substantially as a result of his initiative and his effort that not only this Province but the whole country will benefit from the activity he has undertaken, and for the objective that we have achieved together as a result of this very positive announcement by the Minister of Finance and the Prime Minister today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, I would like to thank the minister for his statement. I guess I have one question, of course. Where has the Prime Minister of Canada been for the last four years? It is becoming abundantly clear - why was there such a delay in dealing with the health care crisis in this Province? I suppose, because our Premier and, of course, the Minister of Health maybe, just maybe, wanted to create some sort of scenario for their uncle in Ottawa. There is no way, of course, that this could be an election goodie. I mean, absolutely not. Of course, Mr. Chrétien would never do that to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Sorry Mr. Minister, but for my book you are just a little bit too late with this. All we are doing here, of course, is just creating another forum for the Prime Minister of Canada to come on with some more of his political patronage to his brothers down here in Newfoundland. That is exactly what it is. It is another photo opportunity. It is more recycled information just to keep going along with the training.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: Yes, that is right.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave, the hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Health, of course, and the rest of us, will not turn down the money. It is obviously going to be beneficial, but I don't see it as being astoundingly good news. The former Minister of Health, who is now the Minister of Justice, when this CHST was being introduced, said this would spell the end of Medicare as we know it. Now this minister is the one implementing these downloading decisions, downloading health care onto the health care institutions, downloading home care on the volunteers, and expecting other people to take the heat. Well, I think that this minister and the other ministers of government should be challenging what the Government of Canada is doing to the people of this Province, not cheering them on.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I rise today to inform hon. members present that today, April 28th, is being observed nationally as a Day of Mourning to remember workers killed or injured in the workplace or afflicted with industrial disease.

To commemorate the day, government, the Federation of Labour, and the Employers' Council, participated in a wreath laying ceremony at noon today in the Main Lobby of the Confederation Building, East Block. In addition, government is flying the Day of Mourning Flag at half mast.

Mr. Speaker, government, through the Occupational Health and Safety Branch of the Department of Environment and Labour, encourages safe and healthy workplace practices in this Province. In acknowledging the Day of Mourning, I ask that everyone in Newfoundland and Labrador commit themselves to the goal of working safely.

Mr. Speaker, the number of lost-time accidents and workplace fatalities is steadily declining in this Province. In 1994, Mr. Speaker, there were 6,547 lost-time accidents in this Province and twenty-seven fatalities. In 1995, that number dropped to 6,046 lost-time accidents and twenty-one fatalities. Last year, there were 5,028 lost-time accidents and fifteen fatalities. Mr. Speaker, this represents a reduction in lost-time accidents of 23 per cent over three years, and a reduction of 44 per cent in fatalities in the workplace during the past thirty-six months. While certainly this is a very positive and encouraging trend, we remain committed to seeing this number decrease even further.

Mr. Speaker, government, employers and employees will continue to work together to improve the health and safety of workers and encourage accident and illness prevention in the Province's workplaces.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I ask that we remember as well, the families of victims of workplace accidents or diseases and those who have paid the supreme price while doing their job.

Thank you.

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

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

I join today, on behalf of the Official Opposition, with the government and certainly all people in the Province, to acknowledge a Day of Mourning for injured workers and people who have lost their lives in workplace accidents.

While it is obvious that we have come a great distance in the last twenty years in terms of eliminating many workplace hazards and hazards that exist within our industrial operations of the Province, Mr. Speaker, it is also equally obvious that we have a tremendous way to go. It is clear, and studies indicate in an emphatic way that every dollar that we spend on Occupational Health and Safety, in society today, reaps us back at least $4 over the long term. The impact on health care budgets, the impact on social services budgets and certainly impact on society as a whole, certainly is worth that investment.

Today the Leader of the Opposition, on behalf of our party laid a wreath -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. E. BYRNE: Just a minute to conclude, Mr. Speaker.

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

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. E. BYRNE: Today the Leader of the Opposition, on behalf of the party, laid a wreath to commemorate the Day of Mourning for Injured Workers and I ask all members in the House, before they retire for the evening, to say a small prayer for those families who have lost people through workplace accidents. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi, by leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I was pleased to join with the minister and the Leader of the Opposition in laying a wreath today at the ceremony in the lobby of Confederation Building recognizing the contribution of those killed and injured in workplace accidents and remembering that we have some of the most dangerous working conditions in occupations in the world; at sea, in the fishing industry, in the offshore, in the construction industry and in mining. We have to be particularly vigilant of the need for Occupational Health and Safety and I would urge the minister, in considering a change to the Workers' Compensation legislation this year, that some incentive be given to employers who place a great deal of emphasis on Occupational Health and Safety and revisit a policy the government adopted a few years ago of lowering all injured workers benefits and instead return those benefits and place an emphasis on Occupational Health and Safety which will reduce the cost of Workers' Compensation. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are for the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods. Last spring the Humber River Watershed Management Association accepted responsibility of coordinating the model river planning process for the Humber River watershed. $75,000 of government funding was provided to work on this plan to chart the future of the Humber River and the surrounding networks of ponds, streams, lakes and lands and tremendous effort has been put into developing this plan. A moratorium on building permits was requested until issues could be examined from all sides and a publicly supported plan could be devised. I ask the minister, why has government proceeded, before receiving this report, to approve two commercial outfitting operations on the Humber River?

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman, as usual, is partially right. There was a group put in place and there has been a group in place for some time in the Humber River region to look after and to put forward plans as to what should happen on the Humber River but let me say to him, that at no time have we said to that group that everything is going to stop on the Humber River while we are waiting for a set of plans, and that's where it is.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Crown lands had agreed, in the interim, to a freeze on development up to 1,000 metres from the waters edge. In fact, Crown land had rejected the operation at Camp Nine reef. I ask the minister, why was there intervention and this rejection reversed?

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, as I said to the hon. gentleman before, there are a number of groups, there are a number of departments that are involved in doing this plan, that is part of the process, and when that plan is finalized and we have gone through all of the processes that are involved in government for the safety of the Humber River then that plan will be the plan that will be in effect. Until such time, Crown lands or anybody else can make certain decisions. I say to him, that all government departments will make other decisions as well.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A rejection was overturned, I say to the minister and the minister is well aware of it. In a public alert flyer called, Setting the Record Straight, the Humber River Water Shed Management Association and the Model River Planning Group said they had not been part of decisions to proceed with any development, and they said it seriously undermines public credibility in the process. They further stated in this alert, if everything is a done deal and their opinion is not valued, they must evaluate their purpose.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary now. He is getting into a long preamble. I ask the member to come to his question.

MR. SULLIVAN: I ask the minister: Do you intend to give any weight to their report or is it a waste of everyone's time and money?

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

MR. TULK: The obvious answer to that, Mr. Speaker, is yes.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: A waste of time and money, or are you going to give weight to the report, I ask the minister, which?

AN HON. MEMBER: A waste of time and money.

I will move on to my next question, Mr. Speaker.

In a letter to you recently from their association, it was indicated they are working with no support from their local MHAs, and it states in the letter, in fact at least one member appears to be working to undermine the process. A look at the applicants might reveal a political motivation, I say to the minister.

Now, Minister, why are you permitting politics to interfere with the development of a plan for the Humber River?

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, if I could answer his last question, just to clarify for him a bit more, yes, we will pay attention to their report. As a matter of fact, along with other people, their report will be the final one when it is finalized.

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, let me say to the hon. gentleman, there is no political interference with their report.

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

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are for the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

Minister, over the last several days, and indeed, the latter part of last week, I have been receiving numerous calls in my office, as the transportation critic, regarding the government's plan for a pilot project to privatize certain operations of the department. Given that government's recent plan to conduct a private project using the private sector for highway maintenance, can the minister confirm that the entire District 1, which includes everything east of Clarenville, will close?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

MS BETTNEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the opportunity to address this in this forum today because, of course, there has been some confusion around this issue, and I think it is safe to say that there is a high degree of concern among some of my staff on this issue, which we are trying to address internally, as well, through our department.

In the information circular which my department put out to all of our employees late last week, we informed employees in our department that one area that we are looking at as a department as a result of the program review process is the area of our roads maintenance and operation which, of course, includes summer and winter maintenance operations. We indicated to our staff in the circular that we were looking at a pilot project, which would involve the use of private sector resources for highway maintenance. We went on to say that this may see a series of private contractors having management for both summer and winter maintenance for an entire district.

In response to the member's specific question here with respect to our plans, I want to emphasise at this point that we are developing and preparing a plan for a pilot project to test out the concept of whether or not the private sector can deliver on behalf of government, road maintenance in this Province, more cost effectively then government is able to do internally at this point in time. We have identified that the Avalon area is the area that we are doing the cost analysis of at this point for purposes of preparing that plan. We have also indicated that we have to -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to draw her answer to a conclusion.

MS BETTNEY: In terms of a concluding statement, I would simply reemphasize that we are still developing the details of the plan. We will have to decide over the next couple of months exactly the territory it will apply to, the extent of the pilot project, and that will have to be brought forward for Treasury Board approval. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. FRENCH: I assume, Minister, by your answer, that no final decision has been made. I assume that. I would now like to ask you, Minister, if we put this pilot project in place, then how many jobs will be affected by this project, how will the quality of service be affected by this project, and what will the savings be to this Province? Or, in fact, have we determined those answers as of yet?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated in my first answer, we are in the process of developing the plans for the pilot project. All of that entails determining the quality standards that we will be addressing in defining the contracts and the tenders. It will include defining and finalizing the territory that we will be looking at.

Let me say to the member, as well, in relation to information that we have also provided to all of our staff, we have said clearly to them that no final decision has been made on whether contracting out will occur. That is the whole basis for having a pilot project. With respect to how staff will be affected throughout the pilot project, let me emphasize that any decision regarding this will take into consideration the obligation that government has through its collective agreement. The collective agreement under article 25 simply says that government has an obligation to provide continued employment for employees who would otherwise become redundant where work is contracted out.

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

MS BETTNEY: All these issues -

MR. SPEAKER: I ask the hon. minister to conclude her answer.

MS BETTNEY: - have to be taken into consideration in developing the plan. These are the things that Treasury Board will look at when it determines whether or not to move forward with this pilot project, and all of this will factor into our decision.

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

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, might I say to the minister that there is indeed a great deal of concern by employees of your department, certainly from Clarenville east. The number of phone calls I have received from last Wednesday on is a very clear indication that there is a great deal of concern out there. I trust, before any of this is put into place there certainly will be consultation with these employees. We are affecting families here and family lives, and I think a great deal of concern should be had for these people.

As well, Madam Minister, I would like to ask you what would happen with the equipment should we move forward with this pilot project. Will we dispose of that equipment, would we rent that equipment to private contractors who may wish to bid that job? Exactly what would happen to it? Because if it is a pilot project and we are only going to try it for so long, then certainly goodness we are not going to entertain selling off the equipment, some of which is fairly new. I would like to ask you, as well, what plans we would have, or what we would do with the equipment we presently have.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

MS BETTNEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Clearly, in a pilot project, we would not take any action in designing the project that would put us on a course you could not turn back from. In relation to the specifics of how we will handle the equipment, at this point those are some of the details that are being prepared as we put together a proposal for this project. Simply, I would say to you, as I have said to our employees, this really is one of the factors that has to be considered. Again, we would not structure the pilot project in such a way that we could not have ourselves in a position to go back to providing this internally within the area of the pilot project.

There is certainly a need to test this out. We realize that, and in doing so, we have to know that we can come to a valid conclusion on whether this is an effective way to proceed or not. So at the present time these issues will all be incorporated into the plans for the pilot for further consideration. I believe the other point that the member made was, with respect to the employees and the concerns that they have, and I understand the concerns that people are feeling right now and I want to say to members of the House that, in providing this information to our employees, it was to ensure that they received accurate information first hand, at the beginning of this and yes, they will have a real opportunity to provide input as this goes through.

My officials have met with Mr. Curtis, late last week; I will be meeting with him again this week as well, and I have extended to all of our staff -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS BETTNEY: - the invitation to provide input to -

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

I ask the hon. minister to conclude her answer quickly please.

MS BETTNEY: - our staff and to our officials.

Thank you.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

Mr. Speaker, under the 1997-98 infrastructure program and municipal works program, the breakdown overall was as follows: Liberal districts 91 per cent; PC districts 8 per cent; Others 1 per cent.

The minister can rationalize this blatant partisan distribution of funding but, how can he explain it to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador?

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

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for his question and welcome my hon. critic back to the House and I am glad to see him back in good form. We all missed him and welcome him back.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, to answer the hon. gentleman's question, I think he should go back and check his figures and maybe the media should also check their figures because, if you take into consideration that the majority of seats that are in and around the St. John's area are Progressive Conservative seats and an NDP seat, you will have to take into consideration that the money that went to Mount Pearl and St. John's, your riding and all the ridings around Conception Bay South, then work you figures, you will find out that the percentages are much higher.

I am not going to stand in my place today and argue one way or the other what the Liberal side got or what the Progressive Conservative side got, they got much more but I can honestly say to the hon. -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. A. REID: I can honestly say to the hon. gentleman, if he would just whisper to his colleague who sits to his immediate right and ask him how much he got, it might dispel some of the fallacies that he is trying to create as it relates to PC districts as compared to Liberal districts.

I say quite honestly that if all of the applications were taken into consideration and all of the projects that have been approved in both Tory and Liberal -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

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

MR. A. REID: - districts, you will find the percentages to be much higher in your case than what the hon. gentleman is professing.

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

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

I think the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs should take a few lessons in Math from the Minister of Education.

Mr. Speaker, I say to the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, the application -

AN HON. MEMBER: Read the note.

MR. J. BYRNE: I am going to. The application on the Northeast Avalon arena would truly be a regional facility serving a population of 30,000 people, more growth potential than any of the others approved including the facility approved in your own district, one million dollars of private money which is going to be put into this facility, no where else in the Province, Mr. Speaker. There will be less provincial money going into this application than had gone into one that was applied for in 1994, Mr. Speaker, a study -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member should get to his question. You are getting into a long preamble now.

MR. J. BYRNE: I am getting to the question, Mr. Speaker.

The study of $20,000 showed that we needed it, it was affordable. Mr. Speaker, other than the small amount of $18,000 that was withdrawn by the Town of Pouch Cove -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. J. BYRNE: - had four other towns on the Northeast Avalon supporting it, Mr. Speaker. How can the minister justify refusing this application?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, I cannot hear a word.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, can I go up in the other end of the building and answer the question?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to get to his answer.

MR. A. REID: Let me say to the hon. Speaker, I really feel sorry about taking $2.4 million for a regional civic centre for Carbonear. I really feel sorry about that. I apologize to the House for taking that amount of money.

MR. J. BYRNE: Answer the question, now, and give the right answer (inaudible).

MR. A. REID: To answer your last question - that was one of your middle questions; you asked me five - I answered the one about the Carbonear district quite admirably, as far as I am concerned. I will answer the last one.

Mr. Speaker, this hon. gentlemen and a certain community in the hon. member's district asked for $3.5 for a twin-rink stadium.

AN HON. MEMBER: What? Twin rinks?

MR. A. REID: Twin rinks.

I asked the communities in his district for support for the stadium. I did not get it.

AN HON. MEMBER: They wanted two.

MR. A. REID: They did not want one rink; they wanted two.

I spoke also to the City of St. John's and the Department of Recreation, and they told me there was possibly going to be an application for a private development which would not cost the Government of Newfoundland or Canada one cent for a facility in the east end of St. John's.

The hon. member wasn't available at the time to discuss the question with me. I discussed the question with the MP for St. John's East. The MP for St. John's East had $4.2 million to put in her district. I think she did a very good job, considering that $2.5 million had to come out for St. John's.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. A. REID: If the hon. Member for St. John's East - the federal member for St. John's East - had taken their $3.5 million and given it to the hon. gentleman, I would have had to cancel the $4.5 million beginning of the clean-up of the harbour of St. John's. And, Sir, I was not in a position, or this government was not in a position, to build a stadium in that part of St. John's East, knowing full well that there were other areas of that district that needed the money much worse than a two-rink stadium located in Torbay, or wherever it was he applied for.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, the minister is rationalizing his answer over there with respect to this, and with respect to Bonnie Hickey, the federal MP, I wrote her on February 25 and did not even get a response to my letter (inaudible) support. That is what went on here.

Mr. Speaker, does the minister deny that funding of $1 million was set for this project, that it changed at the last minute, Thursday, for two reasons: He had visits from Liberal ministers. Funding for the Northeast Avalon was taken away and given to Liberal districts, and the percentages prove it - and I have that from three sources, very, very good sources who are so close to you it is not even funny.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. J. BYRNE: Does he deny that the second reason it was refused was because of pure vindictiveness on behalf of the minister, because of the fact that the Auditor General went into Pouch Cove and you refused it -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. J. BYRNE: It is passing strange -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's comments are out of order. The hon. member cannot make statements that reflect in any way on members of the House.

I ask the hon. member to get to his question because he is now on a supplementary. He is asking a question and giving his own answer. The hon. the member should get to the question.

MR. J. BYRNE: Does the minister deny that the two reasons I gave for that application being refused are the two reasons that I gave, which were: visits from the Liberal ministers to get money that was allocated for that arena that went to their districts; and the fact that you are still upset over the fact that the Auditor General went into Pouch Cove when you did not want her to go in. It is passing strange -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. J. BYRNE: Answer that question.

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

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, I really don't know how to answer the question. I figure, to be honest about it, I am really taken aback, because I thought, to be quite honest - and I make this comment through the hon. the Speaker to the hon. the Leader of the Opposition - I thought, and in fact, you told me a while ago, that I was the least vindictive on this side. I am confused.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. A. REID: You must have me tangled up with John Efford or someone like that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. A. REID: Let me say to you, Mr. Speaker, that I do not really know how the hon. gentleman thinks, but if he thinks that I am losing sleep at home in my bed in Carbonear or losing, I suppose, my wits over the fact that the Auditor General went in or did not go in to Pouch Cove, I think you had better take a few more days off and consider what you are doing and what you are saying in the House.

MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, that question just basically went to the pettiness of the minister, that is all, and the answer certainly addressed that. Does the minister now deny - from my perspective, and what I am hearing here today from you, and from what I have heard from other people who are so close to you - that as far as I am concerned, are you now telling this House of Assembly bold-faced lies?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

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

I ask the hon. member to withdraw that remark. The hon. member cannot say that. It is totally out of order.

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I did not make the statement, I asked the question -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. J. BYRNE: - but I withdraw the question. I withdraw the question, Mr. Speaker. Will he answer this question? Is the minister now telling this House of Assembly - or is he deliberately misleading this House of Assembly with the answers he gave?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, the hon. member is implying in his question that the hon. member may be deliberately misleading the House. That is unacceptable.

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I withdraw.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get to his question and to withdraw the remark that he made.

MR. J. BYRNE: I withdraw the question, Mr. Speaker, but point made.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to withdraw his statement without any qualification, or without any modification, or anything else.

MR. J. BYRNE: I did that, but I withdraw the question, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to withdraw the statement.

MR. J. BYRNE: I withdraw.

MR. SPEAKER: Good.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is to the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods. Would the minister inform the House as to the status of the privatization of Newfoundland Farm Products, and would he confirm that there are at least two serious expressions of interest? Would he also inform the House as to who those two particular groups are?

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, let me say to the hon. gentlemen that if he were to go back to the Throne Speech, it was stated quite clearly in the Throne Speech that the government was going to seek to privatize Newfoundland Farm Products. We have appointed a chairman, and a board along with that chairman, to do that.

Let me say to him that there are various meetings ongoing, that there are various negotiations taking place, and at this point in time, I am not in a position to say exactly what is happening, because it would perhaps jeopardize some of those negotiations. At the appropriate time, when we are in a position to make a statement to the House, I say to the hon. gentleman, the second group to know will be the Opposition. The government will be the first.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wonder if the minister can confirm that a deal is imminent, and that the sale of Newfoundland Farm Products to Mr. Bill Barry of Barry Fisheries or to the Independent Producers Association of Newfoundland and Labrador are the two proponents who are interested in this particular facility?

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, the answer that I gave to the main question applies to this one as well.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: I guess, Mr. Speaker, the answer must be a positive one. Would the minister inform the House as to what government expects from a new owner of Newfoundland Farm Products? For example, what protection will be offered employees? What will the purchase price be? Will the sale include and guarantee the operations at both St. John's and Corner Brook?

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

MR. TULK: Same answer applies to 1(c) as it did to 1(a) and 1(b).

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!

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

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

Recently, the Terra Nova assessment panel requested information from the developer, Petro Canada, with respect to the Terra Nova oilfield with respect to employment benefits and industrial benefits. One of the responses Terra Nova sent back, in terms of employment benefits, is that it was their assessment that there would be enough skilled personnel in maritime regions around the world, in other regions in Canada and within the Province to fulfil what they had anticipated would be the employment needs. I ask the minister responsible for industrial training in the Province, does he accept Petro Canada's viewpoint that there are enough skills and skilled people outside this Province to fill jobs in this Province? If he does not accept that premise, then what is the government doing to ensure that adequate training is being put in place for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to ensure that the most benefits and most employment benefits that we can get from our resource, in fact, will take place?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think everybody understands that the objective of the government, every time that there is any kind of a project on the horizon, and in particular this case, since we have had notice for some period of time now, that the government's position has always been to meet with the proponents - in this case the developers of the Terra Nova oil field - to ascertain completely and thoroughly what the needs might be and what the opportunities might be for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and to do whatever is necessary, as the Opposition would agree, I am sure, to make sure that we are prepared to maximize the opportunities for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to get the jobs that are available. Those kinds of meetings have been going on with respect to the Terra Nova Project for several years now, since there was some discussion, Mr. Speaker, in a preliminary fashion about the prospects for this development dating back almost a decade. While we are getting closer now and while the details are becoming more obvious as to exactly what types of opportunities are there, we have every confidence that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, already trained, will have very good opportunities to be employed. If there are some gaps where there are specific areas of need, that we have identified a shortage of -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. GRIMES: - qualified Newfoundlanders, that they will be given some opportunity for training to make sure they maximize their chance of getting the jobs.

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

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

The minister has just confirmed really that government has produced nothing substantial, nothing concrete, no plan to ensure that where there are disadvantages or where skills do not exist that a training plan will be put in place. Petro-Canada, themselves, Mr. Speaker, have said to the Terra Nova assessment panel - and if he would like to read it, I can send it over to him - that they do not plan to train Newfoundlanders and Labradorians where skills deficiencies exist.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. E. BYRNE: The question remains, then: What is government doing specifically to ensure that if there are 100 or 200 skills deficiencies, where skills do not exist in the Province to take advantage of technical trades and technical opportunities, what is the Province doing to ensure that that plan is put in place and that, at the end of the day, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians will receive the full and fair share of benefit from Terra Nova development?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I do concur, as the hon. member pointed out, that Terra Nova has indicated that they, themselves, do not plan to do the training because they understand that there are trained personnel available to them from a variety of areas, some of which is Newfoundland and Labrador.

In the government's commitment, Mr. Speaker, what we have looked at, again, as I stated in the first answer, was the areas of need. We have already done some things. It was only about two months ago that I was at the Seal Cove Campus of the community college, the College of the North Atlantic, and we actually participated with the Federal Government in unveiling training programs with respect to drilling to make sure that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, who are made aware of the types of opportunities that are available at Terra Nova -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer. Question Period has now elapsed.

MR. GRIMES: - to take advantage of the training that would make them eligible for the jobs. We understand that Terra Nova, itself, and the consortium doing the development, do not feel any obligation that they, themselves, should particularly train Newfoundlanders. But we know what kinds of jobs are there. We know, Mr. Speaker, that through the college system, through the Marine Institute and the university and so on, that it has been identified, the areas of need. Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who are interested know that the programs are available and they can be trained themselves -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to take his seat.

MR. GRIMES: - through the system in Newfoundland and Labrador.

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

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

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

I want to present a petition today on behalf of a number of people in my district with respect to the privatization of the parks. I will submit it and you can count them later on I say to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. There is enough there, there is enough.

Mr. Speaker, this petition of course concerns the privatization of parks and the prayer is as follows: we the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador wish to petition the Provincial Government, the Minster of Tourism and the Premier to immediately reverse the decision to privatize the provincial parks as they are the peoples resource. We feel that this decision was made in haste without any consultation of the people who own the parks, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, now I have been on my feet on a number of occasions presenting petitions in this House, as have a number of my colleagues on this side of the House, but it does not seem to be cutting water with the Minister of Tourism, as a matter of fact it is more like water off a ducks back, I say to you Mr. Speaker.

Now, I heard the minister in the media recently trying to rationalize the privatization of these parks. Trying to rationalize saying that they have seventy-seven applications for the number of parks that are being privatized. That is less than three applications per park, if you want to average it out. Seventy-seven applicants are supposed to show a great amount of interest in the privatization of the parks, but what the minister does not consider is the number of people that have been opposed to the privatization of these parks. She does not talk about the number of names that have been presented in this House of Assembly. The petitions that have been signed and how many people have signed these petitions. She does not talk about the number of people that have attended public meetings across this Province and the people who have attended demonstrations across this Province to try and put a halt to the privatization of the parks.

Now, the Minster of Tourism, I believe, is being led down the garden path by some individuals, I am not sure who they may be, but it must be a number of her cabinet colleagues because it seems the word for the minister these days and the members on that side of the House is privatize, privatize, privatize. Now they are into talking about privatizing snow clearing and road maintenance and what have you, in the White Hills area on the Avalon Peninsula as a trial process in probably privatizing the whole Province, all road maintenance, all snow clearing in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Now, feed these things out, these little bits of information out to the public and say we are in the planning process, we are in this process, we are in that process, but they certainly would not be doing this kind of stuff Mr. Speaker, if they were not seriously considering the privatization of these services. The question has to come to rise how far do they go with the privatization of different services in this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador? The question has to be asked, what are people paying their taxes for? How far more are they going to go with this? How much more are the people of this Province going to have to take? How much more down loading is going to come to the municipalities?

We have now, this trial process going on with respect to the privatization of the roads and you can mark it down that it will not be long now before they connect the roads between the municipalities, will be turned over to the municipalities and it is a down loading. Now, if they down load these roads to the municipalities and they privatize certain services, obviously there is going to be a savings of money to the Provincial Government, but the people are still paying the same taxes, they are increasing the taxes all the time. We have something like every license fee permit that you want to look at over the past five or six years, has been doubled, tripled, quadrupled and we have this adminstration saying what a grand job they are doing for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. They are doing a great job of robbing the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. Putting their hands into our pockets very deep down, because now Mr. Speaker, we need deep pockets in this Province to survive. People in this Province are either surviving because of the tactics of this administration and the federal administration that is in power in Ottawa, they are surviving or they are going backwards. The amount of money that people have to spend these days compared to the amount of money they had to spend two, three, four, five years ago is forever becoming less and less and less.

So, the minister gets on now and talks about privatizing these parks and what is going to happen if they privatize the parks?-- people are going to have to dig deeper again into their pockets to utilize these parks, and people in this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, by far, most of them cannot take trips to Florida like the Minister of Health and other ministers around here can take. Their trip to Florida, Mr. Speaker, is their trips to the parks, is the gravel-pit camping, Mr. Speaker, that the minister is on the attack for now. That is what is happening in this Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. J. BYRNE: Just by leave, Mr. Speaker?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. J. BYRNE: In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I want to say that the people of this Province pockets are being raped. This administration has no more human factor in them than that desk there in front of me, Mr. Speaker. All human factor in this Province with respect to the services for the people of this Province have been thrown out the window, and the Administration is handling things blindly and the dollar, the almighty dollar, has become even more almighty in this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand to speak to the petition presented by my hon. colleague from Cape St. Francis.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, we have presented a number of petitions on this particular issue in the past. Now, we are up to somewhere in excess of 15,000 names on petitions, people against the privatization of provincial parks and that speaks for itself, Mr. Speaker. The minister has seventy-seven proposals on the twenty-one parks and seven sites and we have over 15,000 names now, people who are opposed to the privatization of provincial parks. We have hundreds of people out to our meetings that we have hosted across the Province. Mr. Speaker, there is no question about it, this decision, on the part of the minister and the government was made in haste. The park employees, were caught off guard some of them with only weeks left on their Unemployment Insurance benefits and some of those people now are left without jobs for the summer.

Mr. Speaker, the tourism season in this Province is going to open in a matter of weeks and to this date we still have no idea who it is that is taking over these camp grounds to operate them privately and that is very scary, the fact that these camp grounds, these provincial parks are now going into private hands and we have no idea at this point, who is going to be operating them. The people who are going to be the potential operators to this point, have no idea, no clear definitive idea of who is going to be operating those parks and with the season opening up in a matter of three weeks or so, Mr. Speaker, that is a recipe for disaster. This Province faces humility in this tourism season especially in light of the fact that it is a Cabot 500 tourism year and probably one of the busiest tourism season that our Province has ever experienced.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to support this petition and the people who have signed the petition because of the fact that, I truly believe government has gone far beyond their rightful duties in privatizing these parks.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition on behalf of the number of Newfoundlanders who are petitioning the House of Assembly on the issue of School Lunch Program and who ask in the House of Assembly to direct government to establish a universal, comprehensive School Lunch Program for every school in Newfoundland and Labrador to help end the child hunger and to give our children a better chance.

Mr. Speaker, these petitions are from the communities of Bonavista, Catalina and Port Union in Newfoundland, and St. John's and Conception South and other places in the Province, and they are interested in asking the government to look at the issue of child poverty not only as an issue of one which results in hungry children going to school; hungry children being faced with that desperate prospect, Mr. Speaker, in this day and age in this country, one of the wealthiest in the world, supposedly one of the best places in the world to live. If that is so, how can we tolerate the fact of hungry children in our midst?

Something has to be done to address that, and it has to be done by government. It is not something that is so flexible and so malleable, and so unimportant as to be relegated to the area of private charity or volunteer effort. It is something that must be addressed by government as a political mandate from the people of the Province for government to put in place programs and policies that serve the people. And if governments such as this one, which has the means through its programs, through its budgetary measures, through its education budget, through the savings that are being contemplated and accruing daily in the education field - reduction in the number of teachers, closure of schools, shutting down of school bus operations in a number of areas where they are no longer necessary, decreasing enrolments and other factors that are reducing dramatically the cost of primary, elementary and secondary education in the Province - there are, in fact, substantial dollars available to the provincial purse to fund and fully support a universal, comprehensive School Lunch Program. Why members opposite do not get onto the support of this issue, I don't understand.

I see the Member for Burgeo and LaPoile listening intently to my comments. He knows that within his district there are many children who go to school hungry every day, and he knows from reading the report presented to government by Dr. Patricia Canning last fall - as I am sure he diligently reads his reports - he knows that children's ability to learn is affected by their nutritional state and by their state of hunger, which they experience on a daily basis while attending school. It affects their ability to learn. It is going to affect their ability to make the best use of the educational resources that are available through the public school system. It is going to affect their ability to obtain an advanced standing in class. It is going to affect their ability to move on from school to other educational opportunities and training opportunities, and is thereby going to affect as well their ability to earn a living and support their families. So it is not simply a matter of giving a child a meal today; it is a fact of ending and alleviating some aspects of child hunger today and also giving those children a better opportunity for tomorrow. That is what government should be all about, spending money now, using community and common resources now, to alleviate current problems and prevent further problems down the road.

Anyone who knows anything about the effects of poor nutrition and poverty on children knows that it can become a lifelong sentence for a child to be deprived of an opportunity to properly participate in school and to properly learn. It is something that is at the very heart of what government should be about. I would call it a motherhood issue. It is something that is so straightforward and simple that I am shocked and surprised that all hon. members of this House are not on their feet on an ongoing basis speaking in support of it, and I ask the government to take the steps necessary to establish a universal, comprehensive School Lunch Program so that every schoolchild in Newfoundland and Labrador has an opportunity to have a full belly and to learn properly in the schools.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

I rise again today to support the petition of my colleague which advocates that we have a comprehensive School Lunch Program initiated in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, there is conclusive evidence of a direct relationship between nutrition and health, and direct and conclusive evidence of a relationship between educational achievement and nutrition. Therefore, we simply have to say to ourselves: What is it that we should be doing if we in Newfoundland have a problem of poor nutrition, particularly as it relates to young children and children who are in the school system.

Mr. Speaker, we know from the studies that have been done that poverty with its host of attendant problems places children at risk in school. We know that in this Province at least 25 per cent of the children are growing up in poverty. We know that this issue of poverty is at the very heart of special education. We know that more children who are poor go to special education than any other socio-economic group. We know that more children from poor families repeat grades. We know that children from poor families have the highest drop-out rates in school. We know all of this because it has been studied over and over again.

Some children are at risk of not completing school or not doing it to the best of their ability from the very day they enter the school system. Isn't it tragic that when you talk to a grade I or grade II teacher some of these primary school teachers can identify with great accuracy those who will be at risk of dropping out by the time they reach grade X, XI or XII.

Poverty is an educational issue, it is a human issue. It has real children. They have real lives, they live in real families, and they have very real problems. While we stand here day after day and present petitions, we hope that the parents of these children are listening, and we hope as well that the community leaders are listening, but more importantly in this forum, we hope the government is listening, because this problem is not going to go away.

I say to the government that Newfoundland and Labrador has the highest rate of both family poverty and adult illiteracy in all the provinces of Canada. (Inaudible) ask the question: To what extent is adult illiteracy a factor of the family circumstances in which these people grew up? Research will show, if you have a disadvantaged child you are bound to have a disadvantaged adult. It doesn't take any great deal of systematic further research to prove that. It is there. In 1992 the poverty rate for Canadian families was 13.3 per cent. In Newfoundland, over 18 per cent of families, representing over 38,000 children, lived below the poverty line. The poverty rate for children of single parents in 1992 was estimated to be 73 per cent. If you are living in a single-parent family in Newfoundland you have 73 per cent to 75 per cent or maybe higher percentage of that to be living in poverty. Yet we find the minister here in this government who has said to single parents: We aren't going to give you any more help to go to school and make a better life for your children and for yourself. So 40,000 children in Newfoundland live below the poverty line.

We know that children are just like adults when they are hungry. We know that children get headaches, we know that their stomachs roll, we know that they become lethargic, we know they can't concentrate, so we have to say to ourselves: What is it that we can do to give these children -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. H. HODDER: - a fighting chance? We say to members on all sides of the House, let's do something about child poverty and do it now, because the consequences of not doing it are long term and they are humanly detrimental to all involved. Thank you very much.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today in my commitment to continue to present petitions on behalf of my district on the road conditions in the area. Today, I have a petition from the community of Shoe Cove, some 250 names, to the hon. House of Assembly. I will read the prayer:

We, the undersigned residents of Shoe Cove, are disgusted and upset with the road conditions in our community. We demand pavement or upgrading - for example, top quality crushed stone - as soon as possible. We do not intend to settle for anything less, and will not stop before our demands are met.

Mr. Speaker, you notice even in the prayer of the petition - and I mentioned this in the last petition I presented from the Middle Arm - Burlington area - that these people are not looking for major highways. As a matter of fact, in this particular case they would even settle for not having pavement this year, just an upgrade.

Even as we speak today, the protests continue in my district in these communities. This is another community that has to travel over - and I will tell the minister this - just some two-and-a-half kilometres of road. It is not a lot. As a matter of fact, it is one of the examples I have used over the years with the previous minister, Mr. Efford, when we talked about how, for just two-and-a-half kilometres of pavement, this community could be taken care of. As a matter of fact, right across the Baie Verte highway, or the La Scie highway, in two more communities, Brent's Cove and Harbour Round, I have told the minister that with just five kilometres of pavement, he could satisfy three communities. All those communities range from some 250 in Shoe Cove to 300 - 450 in Harbour Round and Brent's Cove, quite a number of people living in a small area, three communities that are only within five kilometres of each other. And with a small amount of pavement, they would not have to, day after day, put their children through the hardship of travelling back and forth on the buses.

As a matter of fact, to make note of it, in this particular petition there is a note at the end that says that high school bus students have also signed this petition because they understand. I will go beyond that and say that they more than understand; they live it every single day when they have to get out of bed early enough to get a bus and go to another community. They have accepted that. They have accepted also that their hospitals and so on have been downgraded. They have accepted downloading in a lot of things, I say to the minister, so what they are asking for now is just a little bit in comparison to all of those things.

What they are saying is, for the decency of the people still living in those communities, that they at least have something decent to ride over and, like they have mentioned here, not even pavement at this point but at least upgrading so that every time I have to call a grader to go down there again because the bus will not travel over the road, at least they will have something to grade; because right now it is down to bald rock and there is nothing even left to grade. So let us forget the pavement for a second and just think about at least a decent road to go over; but, I would say to the minister, this road should be considered for paving in her long-term commitment that she is about to make in the next couple of weeks or so.

Mr. Speaker, the point I would like to make to the minister today is that this is another community that is tired of putting their children on buses to be beat around until they get into school. It is hard enough for those parents to convince their children to go to school sometimes these days because they have to travel, but when you add the insult to injury, I guess you could say, of having to travel over a road that is in this condition, you cannot blame parents for thinking that.

I repeat again a statement that a parent made to me the last time I was at one of these protests in another community: they were not sending their children to school to go through this situation day in, day out. We are not talking about just one day. These roads have deteriorated so much now that unless there is something done soon they are going to become impassable.

I commend these people in Shoe Cove, and the students, for taking the time to give me this petition. I present it today in the House while the minister is present, to make sure their concerns also for that community are raised in this House of Assembly, and that they be given every consideration for upgrading and paving in that community.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

I rise to support the petition put forward by the great Member for the District of Baie Verte.

Mr. Speaker, I listened with some attention to what the member has been saying. The petition is particularly on behalf of the residents of Shoe Cove, but when I listened more attentively and after just having a brief conversation with him, he tells me that in his district, out of a total of thirty-three communities, in nineteen of those communities people must drive over dirt roads. That has to be, I suppose, a blight upon the people of that particular part of the Province.

MR. G. REID: Why (inaudible) pave it when they were here for seventeen years?

MR. H. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I say to the hon. House, in spite of the rhetoric being thrown across the House by the Member for Twillingate & Fogo - I just say to the hon. member, the truth is that $300,000 was what was allocated in this member's district. It has been shown conclusively that this district, when it comes to community infrastructure, is among the districts in the Province with the greatest needs. Therefore, the great needs of this district were ignored when the infrastructure program was being considered.

This member has put forward the plea and the petitions on behalf of his constituents. Mr. Speaker, we are going to say to people in this gallery here today - we had the entrepreneurs here from Italy; we are going to say to them: We want you to go out to this district and we want you to invest in rural Newfoundland. Then we would say to them: This is what we are going to offer you by way of a quality of life. We are going to say to these people: This is where we want you to bring in your team and set up, in this part of the Province. Yet, in this part of the Province we still have nineteen communities that are only accessible over dirt roads!

We have to put some common sense to the approach here. We cannot say to entrepreneurs: We want you to invest in rural Newfoundland, and then not bring services up. That is why doctors will not go to rural Newfoundland. That is why you have difficulty getting any professional people to move to rural Newfoundland. It is because we, as a Province, will not recognize that people have to have a certain standard of living before they are willing to move into those places and have their children raised in some of those smaller communities. We have to put money into rural Newfoundland if we are going to be able to attract the entrepreneurs that we had here in the House today.

I say to the hon. member, keep fighting, keep working at it. Three hundred thousand dollars is not enough money for his district. It is an insult to the good people of that district. It really is a significant insult to those rural Newfoundlanders who have worked so long and so hard to keep their communities together. I say to this hon. House, let us reconsider on the basis of everything that we think is fair, that is on a balance - and the former Premier always talked about fairness and balance. Try to tell me where fairness and balance is today, when you have nineteen communities that can be only accessed over dirt roads, and in 1997 we are going to say to them: We are going to give you $300,000 in total for all infrastructure. Yet, at the same time, because of the efforts of this member - this member is the primary person who brought this great group of Italian entrepreneurs to this Province. This member deserves a great deal of the credit, and he is a fantastic member, works hard -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. H. HODDER: - to bring in the jobs, and then we say: For that, Mr. Speaker, we are going to give you a measly $300,000 so we can keep your people in your district perpetually with -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. H. HODDER: - bad roads and poor infrastructure.

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

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, Motion No. 1, the Budget Speech.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion No. 1, the Budget Debate.

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

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just a couple of items that I would like to talk about.

AN HON. MEMBER: Fifteen minutes each.

MR. OSBORNE: Yes, fifteen minutes each. First of all, the out-migration, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) parks.

MR. OSBORNE: I am going to get to parks. Parks is on the list. I am hoping the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation will make her way back so I can talk about the parks.

Mr. Speaker, out-migration: Our Province has suffered probably the heaviest out-migration, over the last couple of years, ever in history. With the percentage of people moving out of our Province, Mr. Speaker, that is a big problem. With the percentage of people moving out of our Province you cannot expect our economy to grow and strengthen and prosper. Our government has to create jobs and create a strong economy here in order to keep people in our Province. We have seen evidence of that. We have probably the most resource-rich Province in Canada. We have seen evidence in Ireland where they have very little natural resources and they have probably the most prosperous region now in Europe. So the out-migration is a big problem in Newfoundland and Labrador today that must be addressed.

The reduction in municipal grants: we are told that there are no new tax increases in the last budget, this year. Last year, we were told very much the same thing but yet there are tremendous cuts in municipal grants, Mr. Speaker, and through the process of reducing municipal grants, the municipalities are passing those reductions through tax increases on to the people in the municipalities. So there are tax increases in both budgets, last year and this year, that are being passed on as a hidden tax through municipal grant decreases.

There have been several cuts through Social Services. The increase that has been passed on by the Federal Government is being clawed back by social services this year. You saw last year the $61 cut in emergency funding through Social Services. The people who can least afford the cuts in our Province are the people who are taking the biggest hit and unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, the people who are moving out of our Province, through out-migration, are the educated people. So what you are finding is through Social Services they are getting less and less money as the cost of living continuously increases, and this is what we are depending on as the backbone of our economy. That is saddening, because our educated people are moving out of our Province and looking for brighter prospects elsewhere. So when you carefully study what is happening, the majority of the people living in our Province today are either on TAGS - which is coming to an end - on social assistance or on UI. Without job creation and without reductions in the number of people being laid off in the civil service, Mr. Speaker, our economy is going to crumble.

The HST has brought further hardships upon the people who can least afford to pay it, through increased cost in electricity bills, increased cost in oil and increased cost in gas and children's clothing. Again, Mr. Speaker, the people who can least afford to pay it are the people who are being hardest hit and that segment of our population are not the people moving away through the out-migration.

Mr. Speaker, our health care is suffering. People needing heart surgery, cardiac care, have waiting lists. Mr. Speaker, the health care system is in turmoil here in the Province.

MR. EFFORD: He should be (inaudible).

MR. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I was going to say something but I could not dignify a louse.

Mr. Speaker, the sanitary conditions in our hospitals are deplorable. I have had relatives in hospital over the last couple of months and there is dust underneath the beds in these hospitals. My colleague, the health critic, has told me of an instance where somebody was admitted and put into a bed where the sheets were not even changed. Mr. Speaker, our health care system here is in crisis. There are long, long waiting lists now for people to get into hospital and many of these people, unfortunately, are dying of heart disease and heart troubles before they ever make it into the hospital.

I was speaking to a gentleman, Mr. Speaker, a war veteran, who has been on a waiting list now for five years. He had a stroke fifteen months ago, and with the stroke, he is paralysed on one side, and still has not been able to get into the hospital. It is not important enough, his case is not severe enough to allow him access to the hospital. That is frightening, Mr. Speaker, because, either one of us in this House, our family members, our children, relatives can fall into the same circumstances where they have a heart attack or stroke and are unable to gain access to proper health care. It is frightening.

On to park privatization, Mr. Speaker. We have twenty-one parks now that are being put into private hands - twenty-one parks. Two years ago, we had twenty-eight parks put into private hands or put up for privatization. Of those, there were fifteen parks that had serious enquiries, twelve parks that were taken over by private individuals and only ten of those are operating today. Now, we are told that we have seventy-seven proposals on the twenty-one parks and seven sites that are up for privatization, Mr. Speaker, seventy-seven proposals on those twenty-one parks, and we are hearing rumours through park employees that those tenders that have gone in on the parks, range anywhere from $9,000 up to about $20,000.

Mr. Speaker, I would venture to guess that any one of those parks would have far more money spent on them than even the $20,000- tender that has been put in. The investment into these parks by the people of our Province, I would say, has been tremendously higher than that $20,000, and the cost of $1.8 million a year to our Budget, while I understand that we have to be fiscally responsible and that our government is scurrying to find ways of cutting back on expenditures, $1.8 million - when tourism is going to be, is supposed to be, one of the brighter outlooks as an enterprise, an industry in our Province, $1.8 million is a small investment by this Province, when you consider we are getting $150 million a year in nature and eco-tourism generated through outside tourists. Over and above $300 million, Mr. Speaker, has been generated through resident tourists.

So we have a $450 million-tourism industry right now in Newfoundland and Labrador and that has the potential to grow significantly. When you look at areas like Prince Edward Island or even areas like the Yukon, that have healthy tourism industries, areas like Alaska, we have the potential here with what we have to offer to have a very strong and vibrant tourism industry and yet, we are not prepared to invest $1.8 million a year into an infrastructure that is already in place, that already employs people and can be improved upon. And the employees, themselves, Mr. Speaker, have said that they can find ways of reducing that $1.8 million significantly. They can find ways of reducing that $1.8-million expenditure on the parks so that it is not as heavy a burden, probably almost even eliminate that $1.8 million through revenue-generating processes such as minor amenities, small amenities in these parks or even in some of the parks, a small number of the parks, putting major amenities, is what will be there through the private sector.

Mr. Speaker, the people of our Province do not want major amenities in all of these twenty-one parks. We already have enough private parks with major amenities, but some of those parks no doubt could take major amenities and all of them could take minor amenities without seriously affecting the nature and eco-tourism experience that is experienced right now through those parks. Those parks with lower visitorship could increase the visitorship. If what we were told in 1995 - through the $1 million a year over the next five years to go into improving the washroom and shower facilities through the parks that are there now, we could increase the visitorship to those parks to the point that a major portion of that $1.8 million cost could be reduced. Because in this day and age, while people want a true nature and eco-tourism experience through the provincial parks, they still want washroom facilities. I think we have gone beyond the day when people accept the regular outhouse as something that they want to experience in a provincial park.

Mr. Speaker, through the privatization of provincial parks there are ninety-two employees being displaced. Of those we are told that roughly forty-five of them will be hired back on through the existing remaining provincial parks. Yet, we are not told the full story of this Mr. Speaker. Many of those employees will get ten or twelve weeks a year. They will be kept on all right, forty-five employees will be keep on, but many of those employees will be given ten or twelve weeks a year, as compared to what they are getting now through the full tourism season and many of those employees will probably within the next year or two move on. Move out of the Province or find different employment elsewhere because they will not be satisfied with just ten or twelve weeks a year. In some cases depending on where they live ten or twelve weeks will not even be enough to allow then to qualify for EI benefits.

Talking on EI Mr. Speaker, I realize that it is a federal issue, EI and TAGS, but the changes to the EI program were changes that were drawn up and proposed while our Premier sat as the Newfoundland representative around the caucus table in Ottawa and he agreed to many of these changes. Devastating changes to a Province where a very large percentage of the workers are seasonal and many of these workers now that are seasonal will find it harder to qualify for EI benefits and when they do qualify it will be for a shorter period of time and with a smaller EI benefit every two weeks. That in itself will be devastating to our economy Mr. Speaker, as well as having our health and social transfer payments reduced to the point that it is a burden on our economy. When you look at the fact that TAGS is going to be cut out within the next year and EI benefits to our Province are cut significantly, that means less dollars in our Province no matter what way you look at it, no matter what way it is sliced, that is less money in our Province and it means more people on social services.

Mr. Speaker, the whole point of this budget debate is the fact that this budget is bad for our Province in many ways and part of the reason this budget is bad for our Province is the fact that there is less money coming from Ottawa, there is less monies going to the municipalities, there are more people on social services, the educated people in our Province are leaving our Province.

Mr. Speaker, the last seven years or eight years, this Province has been devastated and there is one word that can explain the reason why it is has been devastated, it is a contrast really, it is ironic, but there is one word to explain why our economy has been devastated over the last seven or eight years and that word is Liberal and that is very ironic when you look at the meaning of Liberal, it should not mean devastation. It should not mean devastation, people moving out of our Province. It should not mean more people on social assistance, less people working. It should not mean that not only while the Premier was sitting in Ottawa at the caucus table, the Newfoundland representative in Ottawa, that he negotiated a poor deal as far as Newfoundland is concerned for EI benefits, but now he is sitting in the Premiers seat here and he is not fighting against it and I can guarantee you Mr. Speaker, if there were anybody other than he sitting in that Premier's chair, especially if there were a Conservative government in power here in Newfoundland today, we would fight that EI change to Newfoundland and Labrador, because that spells nothing but hardship to the people of our Province.

We would fight the early discontinuation of TAGS benefits to our fisherpeople. We would fight the cuts in health and social transfers to our Province but none of that is being done. This Province is at the beck and call of the Liberal government; we are at the mercy of the Liberal government who are so eager to agree with the Liberal government in Ottawa that it does not matter what devastation it brings to our Province. They are so eager to go along with what the government in Ottawa is saying that it has absolutely no meaning at all. It is just to agree with whatever they send down here.

Mr. Speaker, we have seven Liberal members federally and a majority of Liberal members here in the Provincial House of Assembly, and the seven Liberal members federally, have done absolutely nothing for our Province. They have agreed with every cut coming our way and unfortunately, the provincial government you would think would stand up and fight for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians because they are the ones who have to answer for the cuts at the end of the day, and they have not fought.

There are ways that we can maximize our benefits from our resources and dig ourselves out of this devastating hole that the Liberal government has put the Province in, Mr. Speaker. We have the largest nickel, copper and cobalt find probably in the whole world and this government has not put in place yet a royalty regime on that resource. When we heard rumours that this was going to be the largest nickel find in the world and we had plenty of time to change the Mineral Tax Act, the government did not do it; and while I agree that the members on this side of the House, during that time, I was not here at that time, but the members on this side of the House voted in favour of the Mineral Tax Act, that was before anybody realized that Voisey's Bay was there, before it was discovered.

I mean, that Mineral Tax Act was designed to bring small mining companies in and set up in our Province and create employment and create some royalty revenues, spin-off revenues through the smaller mining companies, but when we heard rumours that Voisey's Bay was going to be the largest nickel find in the world, the government sat back and did nothing. Even though we on this side of the House stood up and said we have to act fast, we have to put in place a royalty regime on Voisey's Bay, even last February when I was first elected, I remember we stood in our places here and said we have to act fast before Falconbridge sells Voisey's Bay to somebody else, we have to act fast. We have to put in place a Mineral Tax Act that will allow us a royalty regime on Voisey's Bay, the largest nickel find in the world and the government sat back and did nothing and now, we are caught in a position where the people of our Province have to trust that Inco is going to give us a satisfactory deal, a satisfactory royalty payment on what is our resource.

Mr. Speaker, we have to start looking the way that the Alberta government does. It is our resource, we have it, you want it, now you play the game by our rules. We have been so eager in this Province to sit back and let the large corporations that are taking our resources call the shots and set the rules but we have to stand up and put in place the rules. We have to put in place the rules on our resources; that is what Alberta has done and Alberta is probably the wealthiest Province in Canada. They control their resources. If you are an oil company and you want to drill in Alberta, you play by their rules and if you do not want to play by their rules, there is another oil company that will, and we have to realize that we have the same leverage here, with the largest nickel find in the world we should have the same leverage but we let that opportunity slip.

Right now we are at the mercy of Inco to give us a good royalty deal on our resource because we failed to put in place a royalty regime when we had the chance.

You look as Gisborne Lake, something else that I have spoken on many times in the House, many times publicly through the media and so on. We have, in our Province, many, many, many lakes with pristine, pure, fresh water that is of the quality that we can bottle it and label it with very, very little processing involved. We can bottle it and label it and retail package it so that it is ready for the retail market. Yet, when our government was presented with two proposals to allow 13.5 billion litres of water a year to be drained out of Gisborne Lake and pumped into a tanker and shipped off somewhere else so that they can bottle it and label it and package it, and create the employment on it, and created the extra royalties on it through the sale of a retail-ready product, we did not say: No we will not accept those proposals unless you are prepared to make that product retail-ready here.

Sure, 13.5 billion litres of water out of one lake is a lot. We have several lakes that can do the same thing - several lakes that are capable of doing the same thing - and if we set a precedent now where we will let a company from Quebec come in and ship out 13.5 billion litres of water a year, then that is going to be hard to break; and we shouldn't even consider one company, not even one project, where the water is shipped out as a raw resource. We have to retail-ready that product right here in our Province. Thirteen-and-a-half billion litres of water a year is the same as 27 billion bottles of water similar to the Evian or Perrier bottles that are being sold throughout the Province today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, this is unhealthy. Can you call order here? This is unhealthy.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, 13.5 billion litres of water a year out of Gisborne Lake is the same as 27 billion bottles. That is a billion dollar industry in our Province to create billions of dollars in royalties.

AN HON. MEMBER: What is the name of that lake (inaudible)?

MR. OSBORNE: Gisborne Lake - billions of dollars in royalties from Gisborne Lake alone.

AN HON. MEMBER: Tom, where is it?

MR. OSBORNE: Billions of dollars a year in royalties from Gisborne Lake over and above the jobs that are created through the packing and bottling, over and above the jobs that are created through the manufacturing of the packaging, over and above the jobs that are created in the shipment of this product, we have a billion dollar industry here and we are willing to send it off in a tanker as a raw resource so that somebody else can make the mass profits, so that somebody else can create the employment on packaging and labelling, and the shipment then of the finished product.

We are looking at, in Gisborne Lake, if the government accepts either of these proposals, maybe three or four jobs. There could be dozens of jobs if we were to retail-ready that product right here in our Province, as well as the extra royalties that we would receive by bottling that product right here in our Province.

Mr. Speaker, there are plenty of resources such as -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's South has asked for the right to engage in the debate without interruption.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I will ignore the rude remarks from some of the rude people on the other side.

Mr. Speaker, we fail to charge stumping fees to the companies that are taking our forest resources.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. OSBORNE: You are absolutely right, I am used to you and that can't be normal and I am used to him and that's not normal. I am not used to normal processes.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, if we were to maximize our benefits from our resources - and I realize that parties of both colours have made mistakes in the past but we are now in a situation in this Province that our economy is in turmoil. There is very little to offer in the way of extra employment. There are people moving out, too many people on social assistance, TAGS is running out and the changes to the EI benefits are devastating. Mr. Speaker, what this amounts to is the fact that we have to start thinking better here. We have to start planning and utilizing and maximizing the benefits from our own resources and that should be very clear to the people of our Province. That should be very clear to this government. Over the last year or so, Mr. Speaker, I have not seen any of that in this Legislature by the government. We have not maximized our benefits from Inco. If we continue to consider these proposals on Gisborne Lake we have not maximized our benefits from Gisborne Lake. We have yet to implement proper stumping fees on our forestry resources. We have to stop sending raw resources out of this Province. We have to start manufacturing our resources and making them retail ready and maximizing our benefits right here.

We are talking about getting less royalties from Voisey's Bay because there are going to be more people employed. We have to look at taking royalties on the mineral as opposed to the profits on Voisey's Bay. It is our resource. We have to take royalties from our minerals not what Inco are going to show us as a bottom line, not what Inco are going to say: this is what we have made as a profit, now take your royalties out of that. I will tell you, Mr. Speaker, we have to maximize the benefits on our resources. This has been the crux of my debate here this afternoon, the fact that we have not yet started maximizing the benefits on our resources. We have let our economy go to the point that even the poorest people in the Province are being devastated and the educated people are moving away. We are allowing Ottawa to implement devastating cuts through all angles to the Province, which the Province cannot afford to take and there has been absolutely no argument through the government on this at all.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I will sit down and let one of my hon. colleagues -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. OSBORNE: I have one minute yet, Mr. Speaker, and I thought I timed myself fairly well but I am being told to stand up for another minute and finish up debate and enlighten the government.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Now the hon. member's time is up.

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in my place today to say a few words on the non-confidence motion put forward by the Opposition with respect to the Budget. Mr. Speaker, I noticed that there are not too many members on the other side of the House getting up to speak. From what I can gather, last week there were not too many members who spoke on the Budget.

Mr. Speaker, what we seen today - we talk about the state that this Province is in today, Mr. Speaker, and the hardship that the people are feeling in this Province today, in Newfoundland and Labrador.

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. TULK: Did the hon. gentleman say that this is the best written resolution that ever came into this Legislature, non-confidence resolution?

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, foolishness as usual from the Government House Leader. Foolishness as usual -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

It is the ruling of the Chair that there is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. OSBORNE: Jack, again it is another example of one of the hon. members on this side dealing with the abnormal.

MR. J. BYRNE: Abnormal, yes. The ultra-abnormal I would say, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, that is the usual point of order from the Government House Leader. He usually stands in his place and makes a point of order, and nine times out of ten the Speaker and the Chair will rule it out of order, that there was no point of order. You would think that the Government House Leader would learn after nine times out of ten, that he would learn not to stand in his place and make a fool of himself. That is what he should do.

In the meantime, I was beginning to say that the state of this Province - no wonder we are in the state that we are in today, with the partisan politics that is going on in this Province today. We have stepped back thirty years since February of last year. It took one year to go back thirty years. With what came down in this Province on Friday, it is nothing other than disgraceful. The Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs and the Premier of this Province should be ashamed of themselves, in the fact that the Premier would allow to happen what happened last week in this House of Assembly, and the statements that were put forward with respect to the infrastructure program in this Province.

We saw that the minister put out in this Province last week 91 per cent, or $58 million, went to the Liberal districts in this Province. When I was asking him questions today he got up and made a statement that the federal Member for St. John's East, Bonnie Hickey, had $4.5 million to spend in her district, and he thought she did a wonderful job. But there are seven federal districts in this Province, and if you take $58 million - that is somewhere over $8 million that the federal member should have had to spend if it was being distributed evenly.

When you look at what was done in this Province last week with 91 per cent of the money that was allocated going to Liberal districts and 8 per cent going to PC districts. Need was not considered last week when these decisions were made. Let me tell you another factor, that decisions were made up to the last minute. I know that the PC districts should have got at least 19 per cent but they only got 8 per cent overall in those districts. The reason for that, I do believe, I think that there was probably allocated along more even lines with respect to the percentage breakdown across the Province, with the PC districts and the Liberal districts and the NDP. But at the last minute there were changes made.

I brought that up today in the House of Assembly and I asked the minister questions. He tried to be smart and get around the answers of course, and he didn't do a very good job. Because I know that last Thursday he had meetings - maybe I should have directed my questions, instead of to the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, to the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation. That is who maybe I should have directed my questions to. Because I know last Thursday she had a meeting with the minister, and after that meeting there were some changes made, from what I can gather, in what was to be allocated.

I know from very good sources that the arena on the northeast Avalon, there was $1 million allocated for that facility. I'm going to have to give a bit of history on this to show what the minister said to be inaccurate and that he was just trying to play with figures and try to skate around the issue. Okay? I know from sources so close to him, three individuals, that would make the hair on his head stand on edge.

AN HON. MEMBER: You wouldn't have that worry.

MR. J. BYRNE: No, that is a good point, I say to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. I don't have to worry about hair standing on my head, and I have no problems with that. Do you have a problem with it, I say to the minister?

AN HON. MEMBER: Not much!

MR. J. BYRNE: Not much, good. But the history of this, Mr. Speaker, the northeast Avalon arena, this all started ten years ago.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible)!

MR. J. BYRNE: Now, there are a few ministers on the other side trying to lead me astray with respect to the point I'm going to make, but I will always get back to what I want to say.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I would say it would take ten ministers on that side of the House to make one good one, Mr. Speaker. As a matter of fact, when I'm talking about ministers on that side of the House, I've been let down by a number of them, let me tell you.

I thought some of those ministers had a bit of integrity, but obviously I had to put that in question today in this House of Assembly, let me tell you that. Because I had discussions with at least five ministers on that side of the House on this issue. I won't name them. I know that the member for Conception Bay East & Bell Island supported the arena on the North East Avalon. He fully supported it, he supported it from day one. I had him in meetings in Portugal Cove - St. Phillips and he supported it. As a matter of fact, he thought this was a go this time, he really did. How many arenas, Mr. Speaker, how many facilities in this Province had $1 million of private money going into it? The whole intent of the infrastructure program is to create jobs, not only to create jobs with government money, but to create jobs with private money, and that was the only project in this Province that I am aware of that had $1 million of private dollars going into it. But, no, it was refused, Mr. Speaker.

Ten years ago, almost ten years ago in 1988, we started to try to get this facility and we were not successful. I was the mayor of the small town of Logy Bay - Middle Cove - Outer Cove at the time, and I approached all the towns in the region to support this regional facility - a true regional facility, by the way. And the towns would not come onside, being a bit fearful because of all the horrific stories about arenas losing money. And they did not come onside. When I became MHA in 1993, I approached the towns again, knowing that there would be a Canada-Newfoundland Infrastructure Program coming. I talked to the towns. They saw that it would make sense to support such a facility and they came onside. In 1994, we made application for a $2 million project, $2 million, Mr. Speaker, and it was a very good proposal. Everyone who looked at it in Municipal Affairs, Tourism and Culture, and what have you, thought it was such a good plan also, but no, it did not go at that point in time because of politics Mr. Speaker, partisan politics.

In 1997, we made another application, and in the two years prior to this, I spoke to a number of private developers from St. John's to B.C., and they all said that a twin arena would be more viable on Torbay Road. We sat down and did the number crunching and the number that wanted to use it, the different leagues, the North East Avalon Minor League, the Avalon East Senior League, leagues in St. John's, figure skating clubs, we could not fit them in to the time schedules. We did not have enough time to allot, so we looked at two and it was more viable.

Now, a single arena was viable, there was no doubt about that, make no mistake about that, Mr. Speaker, with the five towns, and the five towns did not have to put in very much money - they only had to put in $100,000 between them, $100,000 total. A one-shot deal and we had the facility there. Now, when we applied for this one, it was a $3.6 million project, but we had $1 million of private money going into it. The Province would have to put in less money this time than they put in the last time. Now, in the meantime, one of the towns wrote a letter to the minister withdrawing their support. Now, out of five towns, we have one town withdrawing their support. We still have a regional facility with four towns and the people in the town of Pouch Cove would definitely support the arena, Mr. Speaker, but the minister, looking for an out, looking for a way to say no to it, tried to infer in this House today that there was a number of towns opposed to it, which is completely inaccurate. He tried to lead the people in this House of Assembly to believe that the towns did not support it. I know the Town of Torbay supported it, I know the Town of Logy Bay -Middle Cove - Outer Cove supported, I know the Town of Bauline supports it and the Town of Flatrock, I believe, had a question they wanted to ask me, a question. So, that is what he was trying to get around today. So, we had all the towns supporting it and we have the minister saying no to it. Now, I know this was included, the money, the funding was allocated for this arena and it was changed last Thursday, and the minister can say what he wants. It is absolutely disgusting.

This facility would service 30,000 people on the North East Avalon, a true regional facility. It had more growth potential over the population of that area than any other area in the Province, and it has been proven. Torbay is growing, Logy Bay - Middle Cove -Outer Cove is growing. The whole North East St. John's is growing, more probably than any other area in the Province, and yet, there are other areas in the Province that got funding, that do not have near the potential for population growth as this area does. As a matter of fact, some of the areas are probably declining in population, and that is a major factor, Mr. Speaker.

Now, as I said earlier, we had $1 million approved, private money going into it. Can anybody tell me anywhere else in this Province where there is an allocation of one million dollars of private money? Not likely, Mr. Speaker.

Also, this application -

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: There are people who will be listening and there are people who will be reading, that is the point to this, I say to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. People can read.

Mr. Speaker, there was less money from the Province in this application back in 1994. A study we had done in 1988 said - and that is back ten years ago and the population was starting to go (inaudible) we wanted it, Mr. Speaker, we needed it and we could afford it, and the five towns could easily afford it. As I said, we had one town, the Town of Pouch Cove - the Mayor of Pouch Cove, speaking with the minister, I would imagine, wrote a letter saying that - as a matter of fact, I have a copy of the letter here, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: Read it out, `Jack'.

MR. J. BYRNE: This is what he said - and I discussed this letter with the minister, by the way, Mr. Speaker, before the House closed in the last sitting.

I discussed this with the minister, and he knows the difference, but he was trying to use it to say `no' so he could give more money to a Liberal district. That is what he did, Mr. Speaker. But the letter that the mayor wrote said that the initial proposals were for an arena similar to the arena being built in the Goulds, which is absolutely false. It is not correct at all, because the facility we were looking for was to house at least 1,400 fans, so we could play for the Herder in this arena. That was one point. The other point was, the total cost of the structure was to be approximately $1 million; the mayor says that the arena they applied for in 1994 was $1 million. In actual fact, it was $2 million, Mr. Speaker. The other point, he said: and we were not notified of the change nor given the chance to consider this new proposal.

Now, Mr. Speaker, last Fall, in the Town of Torbay, in the Council Chambers in Torbay, we had a meeting of all the towns in the area. All the mayors and/or councils were invited to attend. All the mayors attended except the Mayor of Pouch Cove, but he sent his deputy mayor and a councillor, and this was discussed. As a matter of fact, it was clearly pointed out that there was the same amount of money from the town, that is all we were asking for, $18,000, the same allocation of funds that was submitted and asked for back in 1994. And I said: If you have any problems, please get back to me, but nobody got back to me. And the minister was aware of that, I discussed that with him, but he is trying to use this letter to say that we never had the support, which is absolutely incorrect, inaccurate and false, Mr. Speaker.

So, obviously, if he is going to use this letter to say `no' to it, he wanted to give the money elsewhere. I made a statement in the House today and I stand by it, Mr. Speaker, that, that is vindictiveness on the part of the minister that this money was not allocated and was withdrawn. I was told by people so close to him that the reason why I did not get the funding was because it was politics and last-minute changes, Mr. Speaker, and that is absolutely disgusting. The need was not considered by any stretch of the imagination.

MR. EFFORD: I know what that (inaudible) from 1985 to 1989.

MR. J. BYRNE: And you will know again, maybe in 1999, I would say. Maybe in 1999, you will know again, I say to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture that you will sitting on this side of the House.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Now the Government House Leader and Minister of Forestry Resources and Agrifoods says that there would be neither bit of water and sewer required in Bonavista. Is that what you said, Bonavista North? That is why he made the statement, because he could take care of it before the next election, and that is again, only confirming, Mr. Speaker, the statements and the questions I had in the House today with respect to partisan politics going on in this Province today.

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I know the hon. gentleman does not mean to misquote me. What I did say was that there would be neither bit of water and sewer, I do not believe, left in any of the major municipalities in Bonavista North, or I hope there will not by next year. What I did not say is that it had to take care of me for the next election. I won election after election from the Tories from 1979 to 1989 when Brian Peckford and his cohorts tried to starve everybody to death.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

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

There is no point of order.

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Hon. members –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order. Hon. members were taking advantage of the opportunity for further clarification.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, now that goes right back to what I was saying earlier about the Government House Leader. He was up twice today on two points of order and again, no point of order, ruled by the Speaker of the House. Nine out of ten points of order. You should know better, I say to the Government House Leader. You're the Government House Leader. Have a bit of respect for the position that you hold. Don't you know the rules and regulations yet? You are here, what, forty years now?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Right? So you should know them by now, unless you are a pretty slow learner.

AN HON. MEMBER: I am, boy.

MR. J. BYRNE: A slow learner?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible), like you.

MR. J. BYRNE: Anyway, Mr. Speaker, back to the arena. As I was saying, the letter that came from the Mayor of Pouch Cove - and I actually have to question this letter. Because I find it more than passing strange that the town of Pouch Cove would be the one town that would withdraw its support.

AN HON. MEMBER: Why?

MR. J. BYRNE: That is the question I asked, why? I have an idea. I can only assume, but I'm pretty -

AN HON. MEMBER: Why do you find it passing strange?

MR. J. BYRNE: I find it passing strange. Because I think that the Mayor of Pouch Cove is quite upset with Mr. Byrne for asking the Public Accounts Committee to go in and do an investigation by the Auditor General. He is quite upset with that. I know the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs has always been quite upset over it, and he was adamant that she wasn't going in there. So maybe - was the letter requested? I don't know.

AN HON. MEMBER: Jack, you know something? You're dreaming in technicolor.

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, I would say to the minister, dreaming in technicolor. I can't dream as good as you guys can dream, I would say.

Mr. Speaker, the arena on the northeast Avalon - and I'm not giving up on this yet, I can guarantee you that. This has been a project of mine for ten years. I see the need of it. I saw it back ten years ago. I know that most anybody who looks at that application proposal supports it and knows it is a good proposal. They know that it is an area that is growing in population. They know that it is probably the only facility, the only arena in this Province, that - it is in a good location, it will be for young people who are growing up. There are young families moving in there all the time, so the life potential is great.

As a matter of fact, I have the people who are supposed to be the competition for this facility coming to me and telling me it is a good idea to put it there. That the demand for ice time in the St. John's region is unreal, that it cannot be met, and that the facility would be a boost to the area and to the people of the District of Cape St. Francis, and the whole northeast Avalon. Not only that district but St. John's East, St. John's North, Virginia Waters, Conception Bay East & Bell Island, all these areas. All the people want this facility and they support it. Not everybody in the districts, because a lot of people have different concerns, but anybody who is involved with sports in that area definitely supports that facility. I've had people coming to me wanting to book ice time at the facility now, and it isn't even started, and it is being talked about.

I want to say that I'm very disappointed in the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. I'm very disappointed in a number of the ministers on that side of the House who I spoke to who said they supported this.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who cares?

MR. J. BYRNE: I will tell you who cares. The people in the district care. Bonnie Hickey, the federal member, will be caring, I would say to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. I want to speak about that. She has been a big disappointment to the people in the northeast Avalon. I wrote the minister -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: What does the Minister of Social Services have to say?

AN HON. MEMBER: There is no such thing.

MR. J. BYRNE: As what? Of whatever. The minister, the one who is speaking over there now, the person speaking there now. Human Resources and Employment. You have a question or a problem or a concern?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Alright then. Anyway, the federal Member for St. John's East. I contacted her back in 1994 asking for -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I'm telling the facts. There are the facts. In 1994 when she was contacted and asked to support the facility, there wasn't a bleat, not a sound, not a murmur from her. I wrote her in February of this year, and I have a copy of the letter here, February 25, asking for her support and telling her about the project, sending her a copy of the application. It says: We would like for you to publicly support this arena as it is long overdue for St. John's East.

Not even a response to my letter, Mr. Speaker. Not a response, not a murmur, not a word in the public (inaudible). So where is she with respect to the arena on the northeast Avalon?

The Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs tried to say she had $4.5 million and she spent it well. As I said earlier, $58 million spent in this Province, seven federal districts, that would work out over $8 million. Why didn't she get more? Why, I ask? Because the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs wanted it handed out to a few other Liberal ministers. I already noted one - I mentioned her already - who got funding that, my sources tell me, was not allocated before Thursday but was in the paper on Friday.

AN HON. MEMBER: You are letting him off too easy.

MR. J. BYRNE: Am I letting him off too easy? We shall see. This is not over yet, I say to the Member for Topsail, because I can tell you now that I am a believer in `What goes around comes around'.

I had meetings with the minister, and he knows that this was a good project. He knows there was no other project in this Province that had $1 million private funding. He knows it. I had meetings with at least four other ministers, had discussions with them, who supported this project, who told me they supported it.

It is sad to see that we have taken a step back thirty years in the time of one year, thirty years backwards, partisan politics like you would not believe. Then you have to wonder why - well, I don't have to wonder why, but there are some people, I suppose, who have to wonder why - the Province is in the shape it is in today. Why are people in this Province today surviving - many of them surviving, and many of them are going backwards.

As I said earlier in speaking to a petition, there are people in this Province today, the disposal income that they had is decreasing and decreasing and decreasing almost monthly because of this administration, because of what they are taking out of people's pockets in this Province.

You take a driver's licence for your car. In 1989 I believe they were $65; now they are $140. That is just one. Last year we had something like one page of licence fees and permit increases, but there were no tax increases in the Budget. This year I think we have two, maybe three, pages of licence fees and permit increases. The Minister of Government Services and Lands is well aware of the attack on the pocket books of the people of this Province. He is well aware of it, with the bluff he pulled last year with respect to the converting of Crown lands, cottage leases and residential leases to grants and then, as soon as they get that done, now they are not going to take care of Class 4 roads. They are not going to maintain and snow clear Class 4 roads, all part of a plan to download onto the public of this Province. It is nothing less than sickening. Sickening is the word I would use. The only problem with that is that if something is sickening in this Province today, people would do very well to try and do their best not to get sick in this Province today because of the tactics and the administrative skills of the Minister of Health.

What is going on in this Province today with respect to Health, as I said earlier, is nothing less than ludicrous. We have people going in hospital and waiting six or seven weeks for heart surgery. Now, how can that be considered as health care improving? As the minister says many, many times when he is asked a question in this House of Assembly: Health care is improving. That was his favourite line for the past year or year-and-a-half: Health care is improving, but recently I believe I saw him in the media, on television, saying: Health care in the Province is adequate - adequate. Now there is a big jump from health care improving to: health care is adequate in the Province.

Why is it just adequate? One of the reasons, of course, is the cuts to the health care budget. Now the minister will say there are no cuts. He will get up and make all kinds of fancy statements and try to play with figures. You can do anything with figures, I suppose, but the transfer payments to the Province from the federal government are being cut daily, almost, since this administration took power. The sitting Premier of this Province today played a part, hand-in-hand, with cutting transfer payments to this Province. Now he is here on the receiving end as basically, from my perspective, when I talk to people, as a mouthpiece for the Prime Minister of this country. Anything that they want to do, any cuts they want to make, is accepted, no questions asked.

He is a pretty slick politician, I give him that, because he has set up the scenario, a situation, where: I am going to go to Ottawa and I am going to ask for this because things are so bad here. We had a prime example of that today, Mr. Speaker, in this House where they made some announcements with respect to the health care system. Another few million dollars here and there, after taking away millions and millions and millions, three times what they are going to give us back. A big announcement today that the Prime Minister is going to give us a few dollars. Well I say thank God for elections, Mr. Speaker. Thank God for elections. Only for elections, Mr. Speaker, this Province would be left hung out to dry.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: You were, yes you were.

Mr. Speaker, I have so many points to make here now. I hope I have another couple of hours.

Mr. Speaker, another major factor playing a part in this now of course is the out-migration. Now the Member for St. John's South mentioned this earlier, Mr. Speaker, the out-migration that is happening in this Province today. The number of people leaving this Province today is scary, nothing less than scary.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I will remind all hon. members that it is unacceptable and unparliamentary to have the chairs back to the speaker.

MR. J. BYRNE: Can I name a few ministers that had that done, Mr. Speaker? Can I name a few ministers? I will leave that to you.

MR. SPEAKER: If the Chair wished to have them named the Chair would have named them, I say to the hon. member.

MR. J. BYRNE: I will leave that to you, Mr. Speaker, good stuff.

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

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

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, I was speaking on out-migration, 17,000 people since our last census, I believe. Can you imagine how many people have left this Province? That is the net out-migration, 17,000 people. Now that is going to affect our transfer payments of course and how much money we get. It will affect the amount of taxes that the Province will receive in RST and HST at this point in time now. The wonderful HST, Mr. Speaker, that we did so much debating on here in the House of Assembly last fall before Christmas when the Government House Leader brought in legislation and limited the debate. Brought in closure on the HST when we were making all the points in this House of Assembly that the people are now realizing - when it is hitting the people right between the eyes, Mr. Speaker, they now understand why we kept the House of Assembly open all night long last fall to discuss the HST.

We talked about home heating fuel being hit. Now I will not get into the home heating fuel because I am doing a little bit of investigation on the home heating fuel now to be honest with you, Mr. Speaker. So I will probably give some people here that should be here, a bit of forewarning on that. There was a bit of skulduggery that went on there, I tell you, Mr. Speaker. The electricity rates are being hit hard, gone up, Mr. Speaker. People in the Province, people on social services, the working poor are being nailed to the cross in this Province today with the HST. Clothing is being hit now, Mr. Speaker.

So I have to say that if you want to look at this Budget, that we are discussing - well we are discussing the non-confidence motion at this point in time but the Budget itself, it is all well and good for the Minister of Finance to stand in his place and announce in the Budget that there are no new tax increases. Now I don't know if that makes sense anyway, Mr. Speaker, but he said there were no new tax increases. We seen an unlimited amount of money that is going to be taken out of the people's pockets in this Province, as I said earlier, with the licenses, fees and probably the increases. He was so proud of the Budget, that he balanced the Budget. Then he got this $30 million, a slush fund that was set aside for emergencies. Now the Opposition Leader brought up a point last week that maybe they should take some of this money and put it into health care in the Province because it is an emergency. If this slush fund is for emergencies there is no bigger emergency in this Province today than health care.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. J. BYRNE: By leave, Mr. Speaker. I can go on.

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

MR. TULK: No.

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

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. J. BYRNE: Okay, I got my leave. Thank you, Mr -

MR. SPEAKER: Leave must be granted by all hon. members of this House and I distinctly heard one member say no.

MR. J. BYRNE: Ask again.

MR. SPEAKER: I will ask again, does the hon. member have leave?

MR. TULK: No.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair distinctly heard a no again. I ask the hon. member to take his seat.

MR. J. BYRNE: I want to make note that the Government House Leader would not give me leave.

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

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today, I really did not think I would get the opportunity to respond to some of the statements that were made by my colleague from Topsail. I have tried to be nice to this gentlemen, but after the other day I am not so sure that I can do that. I got up on a point of order and of course I retracted the statement I made, but I waited until today to get Hansard and to go back through Hansard and review it and to find out exactly what my colleague did say and what he had to say.

He talked about private partner funding in Conception Bay South and how pleased he was that eleven months after the fact I would raise the issue in the House of Assembly. Just imagine, Mr. Speaker, eleven months after the fact that I would raise the issue in the House of Assembly. I would like to remind the member that in question period last year I had three questions of the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs regarding private partner funding. I had two private conversations with the Premier of this Province and yet the member says he is glad, well I guess he is glad he must sit in the back and fall asleep and I guess he really does not know what is going on or maybe he just does not care, but I raised the issue last year and I have raised it on several occasions this year and I have also written the Premier and I have also written the Council concerning this matter. I have done that, but I guess the hon. member does not understand that, I suppose he does not understand that.

As well, he talked about a council that I was a member of and how I would not put a cent into Foxtrap and a good reason for why Mr. Speaker, because that particular year when they eventually put Foxtrap into the town, before they did that we could not spend any money in Foxtrap because they were not members of the municipality. So, I would assume that any member with any knowledge at all of what was going on in the district, and I would have assumed he would have had some knowledge, but now I know that he did not. He would have had some knowledge of what went on. He claims he was the EA for the greatest member we ever had and I will debate that with him forever and a day, but we could not put money into Foxtrap because Foxtrap and Seal Cove were not part of the town of Conception Bay South.

Now, if he would really like to know why they were not part of the town go back to when the first vote was held in Conception Bay South. Go from Topsail to Seal Cove, I know that he does not understand it, but I will give him a bit of a history lesson. No, he does not understand this, but the vote came in overall for the whole town, some fifty odd per cent in favour of water and sewer. I was one of the people who went around and collected the ballots and then it came down and ended up over here and the hon. John Mahoney was one of the members here at the time, a fine gentlemen he is today, he sits as a Justice in the Supreme Court and the late P.J. Lewis was the other member and P.J. Lewis sat in the Department of Municipal Affairs and pounded the desk and said if the people in Seal Cove do not want to go in they are not going in and so that is why when the first incorporation happened in Conception Bay South, Foxtrap and Seal Cove were not part. I can put my time in the community of Conception Bay South up against the hon. members any day of the week, of my commitment to not only Foxtrap, but any community in that district, any year, any day, any day of the week and let him know Mr. Speaker, exactly what went on.

So, when he says that I approached him eleven months later, he is wrong! He is misleading this House, in my opinion. I will stop short of probably saying deliberately, Mr. Speaker. It annoyed me the other day, it still annoys me, that I raised that issue here last year and I continue to raise that issue here today, and I will continue to raise that issue forever and a day while I'm here.

The other day the town of Conception Bay South under the municipal infrastructure received, and I pointed this out again the other day, and I say it again today, for water and sewer funding, $3.5 million, to run a water main from Fowlers Road in the east end of the district to Middle Bight Road in Kelligrews. A water main that I've spoken to members of council on since they have been elected, and they have informed me that this is something that they have to do, has to be done for water pressure and various other reasons. Unfortunately, they also tell me that we are probably not going to pick up a house in the town of Conception Bay South with water and sewer services in 1997. In 1997 we aren't going to pick up one single house.

That is very sad and very wrong. So how do we do it? If we took, I suppose, the total that the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs announced the other day, if we left $10 million of it alone, and took $60 million - which we couldn't do, because it is only one-third, one-third, one-third, I understand, or most of it. The water and sewer project for Conception Bay South is 50-50, or the information that came to me said it was. What do we do in a town such as mine, and the Member for Topsail? What do we do? How do we get the town serviced? Because at the rate of $2 million or $3 million a year, as I said the other day, we are really going nowhere. It has a price tag of approximately $60 million. That fluctuates up or down. The only way to do a town such as ours has to be private partner funding.

I also say to my colleague that I've also had a conversation with not only the Premier but as well with the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, and both of them have assured me that they will certainly have a second look at this particular project. I hope they do. I hope they do for the sake of the people in Foxtrap, the people in Kelligrews, Upper Gullies, Seal Cove and Holyrood. I hope we do have a second look at it, because if we don't we are going to be forever and a day trying to service the town of Conception Bay South. A large part of it is in my district, and a fair part of it in the District of the Member for Topsail. A very large part of it.

I wanted to correct that today. That impression that was left certainly was the wrong impression. When he talks about me not being here or away on holidays, I will put my record again on the line any day of the week. But I can leave that for now and talk about, for a brief while, the questions that I asked today. I must say, it was a refreshing opportunity to ask the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation some questions. I'm usually questioning the Minister of Health, and usually from the Minister of Health I don't get too many answers. It was refreshing today to get some answers from the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

That is a very big issue, as I stated to her earlier today. She was kind enough as well to send me over some information which has been very helpful, and so on, and information which they have sent to their employees, and as well to the local union which represents these workers, N.A.P.E., of course. If we ever do this then I would certainly like to see a very detailed cost analysis as to what is going to happen. As one gentleman put it to me today, four members of his family left this Province last year to go out, went off to the mainland to find employment, four members out of one family. It is a shame that four people would have to move out of this Province to find work.

I have been told that if we ever do this pilot project and we take from Clarenville east, then might I suggest that there are a lot of us members who are going to be affected. The jobs, I believe, will range somewhere close to 300, somewhere between 300 and 400 jobs, and that will just take in from Clarenville on to St. John's.

I say to the Member who represents Clarenville that I have had calls from his district concerning it. I have had calls from most members in that particular region - I have had calls from all of their districts - because in the end we will all be affected. So it is going to be very interesting as to the level of service that we are going to be able to provide, very interesting indeed of how much service we are going to be able to provide. Then the work if it does become a pilot project: Will we go to tender? Will we cut that district, which I think is District 1, into five pieces or ten pieces, or twelve pieces? Will we place it then in the local papers for public tender where everybody in the Province will have the opportunity to bid on this work, this maintenance of highways and this work as well?

I hope it is not done. I hope we can protect the work of the workers for this Province. I hope we can protect that work. If we don't, I guess then all of us in our own way will answer as to where we stood on this particular issue. But I guess over time we will get the answers to that particular problem. Will we then, if we do that, if we use that as a pilot project, will we then download the roads in the municipalities of all of this area? Will we download that onto all of the municipalities? All of the roads that are now being done by Works, Services and Transportation in those areas, will we download them onto the municipalities? And if we do that will we then increase the cost to the municipalities and, of course, eventually to the taxpayers of Newfoundland and Labrador?

Last night I had the opportunity to attend a function for the Candlelighters Association, which dealt with a very dreaded disease, the disease of AIDS. It was the second year in a row that I have attended this particular function, and I guess it is a very eye-opening thing when you attend. It is a very eye-opening thing to talk to people, to talk to one lady, as I had the opportunity to do last night, who is HIV infected, to talk to the Executive Director who tells me that by 1998 the Federal Government of Canada is going to cut out certain funds that are going to go to the AIDS community.

I asked one gentleman in particular: How much money do you receive from the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador? He told me the figure was $9,000. It just blew me away. If you could have sat there last night and listened to the list of names of people who have died over the past twelve months from this dreaded disease, you would really be amazed.

As a matter of fact, at the particular function, very enjoyable, by the way, and quite an eye-opener, and a very interesting speaker, was the wife of the Premier. She was one of the people last night who spoke at this function and her background, of course, as a nurse and so on, and her words to the Candlelighters and the Aids community were very interesting and, I have to say, Mr. Speaker, very, very eye-opening and very, very informative. She was quite knowledgeable in what she spoke about, her work, also, with children who have had this dreaded disease and, of course, some who have died from this, and her first experience in Ontario with somebody who contracted this disease.

It was very interesting. But I was very interested to learn that our Province only put $9,000 into this. I think, again, Mr. Speaker, that is a shame. We should really be doing more for these people. As I said, I had the opportunity afterwards to talk to some of them and it was very interesting - people with families; one lady who contracted the disease while she was expecting, and the trauma in her life while she waited for the child to be born and had to wait sixteen months to find out that child was not infected.

Also, with me, my wife and another couple attended, and my own personal friend had the problem in his family where somebody died from this dreaded disease. So I think that we should take a very serious look at our contribution. I would implore the Minister of Health and members opposite to write to their federal counterparts and ask their federal counterparts in Ottawa not to cancel funding to the Aids community in this Province, Mr. Speaker, but if anything, to increase it. I talked to people there last night who, because of this disease and because at this time they cannot work anymore, they have problems with mortgages and things like that, and they need help. They need all of our help, Mr. Speaker, and I implore the Minister of Health, certainly to write his federal counterparts and, as well, open a line of communication between this community and his department, that we would open a line of communication between the Candlelighters and the Department of Health in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, as well, of course, the announcement today on health care: We take all the money that we can get, and goodness knows, we need it in health care. Of course, it was great, I guess, on behalf of the Federal Government, a nice little election kick to start off the campaign in this Province, a nice little kick-off to get some of the campaigns going, and I guess when the Prime Minister eventually comes in here, it will be one of these things that he will talk about it. The only thing, I guess, we question is, where has he been for the past four years? Where has he been? With cuts to health care, cuts to education, where has he been? Where has his Cabinet been and, more importantly, where have our MPs been? I guess probably in hiding or probably toeing somebody else's line, and some of them certainly forgot where they came from; some of them certainly forgot where they ended up. But the one thing they should remember, these same people can take it back and I think we will find that in the next provincial election, just too little too late. So I just say that, Mr. Speaker, in passing.

I guess, on education, as I said the other day, there are schools in this Province that are slated to close. School boards that are presently making these decisions have all been appointed, none of them elected, Mr. Speaker, but all of them have been appointed.

I do not know if I mentioned it the other day, but I will certainly mention it now, a school in Jacques Fontaine, where I had the opportunity to meet with some of the parents from that particular area, and they are going to close the school in their community. The school in their community has a gymnasium, it has a cafeteria, and the school is equipped to deal with handicapped children. But we are going to close that school, close that school up, and we are going to move those children out of there and take them to St. Brendan's. I think I am right, `John' - St. Brendan's?

AN HON. MEMBER: St. Bernard's.

MR. FRENCH: St. Bernard's, I am sorry. We are going to take them to St. Bernard's. And the school in St. Bernard's has no gymnasium, has no cafeteria and has no facilities whatsoever to handle handicapped children - has absolutely no facilities to handle handicapped children. Now, why would this happen? Why would we allow this to happen in Newfoundland and Labrador? Why would we even allow this to happen? Some of the parents told me, whether rightly or wrongly, I do not know, that this was being done because the mayor was chairman of the local school board and he said it would be a foggy day in so and so before he would allow the school in his community to close. Yet, the school in his community cannot provide the services. So, when my colleague the other day mentioned that we should probably have an ombudsman or somebody to look into the education issues of this Province, then, Mr. Speaker, we should have that, because somebody has got to intervene on behalf of these people. Somebody has got to intervene and to point out to this school board that there will be times and there are going to be times when we are going to make a mistake, and I feel that in this case a mistake is certainly going to be made.

Mr. Speaker, we look at the number of people who are moving out of our Province today. We look at the editorials in our local paper: Population decline is expensive - and they go on to talk about our students who can't find jobs in this Province, and they are moving out of here. Most of them, Mr. Speaker, outside of visits are never coming back. They have to go to British Columbia or they have to go to Alberta. I had a call today from a young man in my district who has a job in British Columbia who was a social assistance recipient who wanted to know if there was government funding available to help him out. There isn't. One time there was. It is no longer.

I had the opportunity on Saturday night to sit next to a retired schoolteacher whose sister is living in a group home. We are going to take her out of her environment and we are going to put her, as they say, in a family environment, we are going to put her in a foster home. There has been no consultation with anybody, absolutely nobody. She assured me they are not going to give up the fight. They are going to continue to fight. They are going to have meetings, they are going to call MHAs on both sides of this House, and they are going to ask them to stand up in meetings and say where they are on this particular issue. I say to members opposite that this is coming.

I had a call from another chap in my district who talked about the group home that he worked in, and how over the last year or so that they have worked in this home they have become used to the residents of this home. In actual fact, one of the people who lives there has been violent, has been on some occasions very violent to the point where he has had to be restrained. We are going to take that individual, we are probably going to put him in a foster home too. I will tell you what, if we do he will spend most of his time probably going off with the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. That is what that individual will spend most of his time doing, because he is getting used to the environment that he is in, he is settled in the environment that he is in, and he is going to stay there.

Unfortunately we are going to take him out of that and we are going to force that individual to go into a group home, and I really and truly believe that when he goes into a group home we are going to create a problem for this particular individual.

AN HON. MEMBER: The anxiety (inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: For the family, and for the lady I spoke with on Saturday night, the anxiety that we are causing to them, and what are they going to do? They tell me that they are not going to give up this fight. They are going to work at this. They are going to stay on top of this, and they are going to keep going. They are going to keep up the fight; they are going to keep up the struggle.

I guess over the next week or so they are hoping, I think, some of their group, to arrange a meeting with the Minister of Human Resources. I am sure that she will grant them such a meeting to hear their concerns, and once their concerns have been heard I hope the Minister of Human Resources takes a very serious look at what they are going to be doing to these people. I hope they take a very serious look at what they are going to do.

Mr. Speaker, that is about it for me for today. I would just like to mention and to, as well of course, tell the Government House Leader that if he would like a copy of Let the Future Begin, I will certainly see that he gets one.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: Well, I think it would make some good reading for him. I think it will be -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: Oh, no, I think he can do that on his own. I am sure it would make some very interesting reading for him. We also have a disc, of course, which we could send on over to the Government House Leader. I say to him, when he wants a copy just let me know and I will be only too glad to see that he gets one.

Mr. Speaker, for the time that I have left, I guess I should probably talk about the exodus from Newfoundland and, of course, the decline in our population. A lot of students in this Province, as I said a few minutes ago, are going west, are going out of this Province, are going out to British Columbia, and some of them, I guess, are going to have trouble in making it because some of them, unfortunately, are on social assistance. They are trying to get off it and are finding jobs in other provinces. As I said earlier, the chap who called me this morning wondered if the department now had a program which would assist people to move on if they had a job and could prove that they had a job and so on but unfortunately that is not the case.

Also, Mr. Speaker, I had a call from a young man in my district who is twenty years old and who cannot find a job in this Province. This young man has spent the last three nights sleeping in a car. Not his own car, somebody's car. Every once in a while some friends take him in for a night or two and then he moves on. I am hoping over today and tomorrow to address this particular chaps situation, to address this serious situation, Mr. Speaker, with a view to at least having some kind of funding reinstated for that particular individual.

So I thank the Speaker for his time again this afternoon. I know it is a very difficult task to straighten out the Member for Topsail and to correct the inaccuracies in what he had to say the other day about private-partner funding and believe you me, I did not run around Conception Bay South, Mr. Speaker, before the last election - as the fellow who was running against me did - promising people water and sewer and talking about private-partner funding when they knew in their own heart and soul that it could never happen but yet it did happen. I was very much aware of private-partner funding ever before I got elected to this hon. House, let me tell you that. I have had many meetings with many people, with engineers and other people, developers and so on about private-partner funding. If my colleague some day needs a lesson in it, I will be only too glad to give it to him. So on that note, Mr. Speaker, thank you.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will adjourn debate until tomorrow.

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

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

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