May 1, 1997                HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS               Vol. XLIII  No. 18


The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Statements by Ministers.

The hon. the Minister of Justice.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker,

WHEREAS the people of Manitoba -

AN HON. MEMBER: You have to ask leave to introduce a resolution.

MR. DECKER: May I have leave to introduce to a resolution, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: So we are not on Statements by Ministers - the hon. the minister is asking leave?

MR. DECKER: I am asking leave for a resolution. We have the consent of the Opposition and also the NDP.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. DECKER: WHEREAS the people of Manitoba who live in the Red River Valley are facing a monumental challenge brought on by natural causes; and

WHEREAS all Canadians share in the struggle of the people of Manitoba and of the Premier and government, the mayors and municipal councils, relief organizations, water control management authorities and all other emergency teams to minimize the life threatening challenges and the property damages thrust upon them by the unusually high levels of the spring run-off in the flood ravaged areas of Southern Manitoba;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly of Newfoundland and Labrador express our concern and, as members of the Canadian family, want them to know our prayers, thoughts and best wishes are with them as they struggle to control the harsh realities that nature has unleased.

Mr. Speaker, if you will permit me, in the year 1964 I spent a summer in Manitoba. I spent time in practically all the provinces of this great country of ours, and the thing that I remember most about Manitoba is the similarity between that Province and our own. Now, first when you hear that statement, you would think that no two provinces could be more different, because we are surrounded by the ocean, except for the Labrador part of our Province, and Manitoba is completely land-locked. I am not talking about the geographical similarity or dissimilarity, Mr. Speaker, I am talking about the similarity of the people. If you look at Manitoba, for years and years the economy was based upon farming, and synonymous with a farming economy would be rural people. Even with the city of Winnipeg, which is, of course, the largest settlement in the Province of Manitoba, the rural ceiling, the rural ambience permeates the population of Winnipeg just as it does in St. John's, Newfoundland. We are a rural people.

What we all recognize in Newfoundland and Labrador is the way we stand by each other. In rural Newfoundland you will borrow a loaf of bread, you will borrow a garment of clothing, you will borrow an automobile. In Manitoba, the thing that struck me is how they borrow, they loan - they loan tractors, they loan combines. It is that rural ambience which permeates the province. There is so much similarity, and other provinces are similar, as well.

In 1964, I was there as a young man, and even to this very day, I receive Christmas cards and various letter from the people of Manitoba - a very fine group of people.

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are no strangers to tragedies, to natural disasters, if you look back through our history, long before we came a part of this great nation. We have examples of our people who were brought in from the seal hunt, frozen solid, corpses on the sides of sailing ships.

We are no strangers to tragedies, to disasters. So, our hearts go out to anyone in this great country of ours who is threatened by a tragedy; be it from a natural cause, or whatever, we have empathy towards people in such a situation. So, that is why every Newfoundlander and Labradorian is keenly interested in the news of our fellow Canadians who live in Manitoba, fellow Canadian who are threatened by a disaster of natural causes.

It is our hope and prayer that these dykes will hold and that no more hardship will be forced upon the people of Manitoba than they have already had to bear. But we want them to know, that we, their fellow Canadians in this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador are standing solidly behind them and watching them very closely.

AN HON. MEMBER: Do not forget the Newfoundlanders who are up there.

MR. DECKER: Yes. My colleague has pointed out to me also, that there are Newfoundlanders and Labradorians living in Manitoba. I read a letter from a person who was quoted in The Evening Telegram just recently. We also bear them in mind, but as Canadians, the newest members of the Canadian family, we in Newfoundland and Labrador want our fellow citizens in Manitoba to know that we are just as anxious as the people who live right at the edge of these dykes. And when the flood does crest, we are hoping that these dykes will hold and that this thing will have as happy an ending as it is possible to have under such very serious circumstances.

Mr. Speaker, it is our wish that they know that we stand with them.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to say to my colleagues in this House how happy I am that we can have a three-party agreement on this resolution.

Yesterday, I made the suggestion to the Government House Leader. He was very receptive and I want to thank him for that.

Mr. Speaker, as members of the Canadian family, to which the Minister of Justice just referred, we share the anxiety of our friends and families in southern Manitoba and all of the people and residents in that part of that province as they try to cope and try to brace for what will be known as the `Flood of 1997'. All of us have watched with concern in the last few days and the past few weeks as residents, flood control personnel, other emergency agencies including the Canadian military, prepared for the worst case scenarios.

Mr. Speaker, it is our hope and our prayer that the various dykes that surround these communities and particularly around Winnipeg and all the other neighbouring towns, will hold, and that they will be able to control the flood waters. Mr. Speaker, from the experiences up river in the southern region of Manitoba and the areas of North Dakota, we know how precarious and unpredictable these dyke systems can be and how unpredictable events can be.

Last evening on CBC television, in particular, as well as in other media, we saw the determination of residents as they tried their best to cope with the forces of nature. Mr. Speaker, we encourage them and we admire their resolute spirits. More than 25,000 residents in the Province of Manitoba have already been evacuated from their homes, and we have seen and witnessed through television the building of the Ronkite dyke or, as they call it, the Zee dike, because it zigzags south and west of the city of Winnipeg. This dike was built in the past month using everything that was available.

We saw in today's paper the pictures of the school buses. We saw the mile-long bunker that has been built with every resource that was available to them. Mr. Speaker, we hope that everything holds.

So, Mr. Speaker, we want as Canadians, to let the people of Manitoba know that we care, and today we reach out to them and say to them: We, as a Province, know what adversity is, and, as the Minister of Justice said: We are no strangers to the unforgiving forces of nature. As a young boy I well remember growing up on the Burin Peninsula and hearing my mother tell what it was like to be in a little village called (inaudible) during the great earthquake and tidal wave of 1929, as she watched the houses being destroyed and families being floated out to sea as a young girl of fifteen years old. She told us what it was like to see that kind of tragedy. She was there. Mr. Speaker, today we show concern for the physical safety of our Canadian friends, and we also want to show concern for the protection of their property.

Earlier today I spoke with Mr. Albert Pelley the manager of the fund development communications offices with the Red Cross of Newfoundland and Labrador. He informs me that Mr. Desmond Dillon of Gander left this morning. Mr. Dylan is a trained official with the Canadian Red Cross. He left to assume a supervisory position in one of the reception centres in the southern region of Manitoba. Other officials are on standby in this Province. They are ready on a standby basis to go when, where and if they are needed. As some members know, the Newfoundland and Labrador division of the Red Cross functions as part of the Atlantic division. The whole effort for Atlantic Canada has been coordinated through St. John, New Brunswick.

I would like also to note that Mr. Pelley and the regional director for Newfoundland and Labrador, Ms Rhonda Kenney, are in the galleries today. They are here because they are interested in this particular resolution. We welcome them and assure them of our support.

I've also been informed that the Red Cross has begun an appeal for funds. I want to recognize that the Royal Bank of Canada has started with a $100,000 donation. I'm informed that all the major banks across this country are receiving funds to assist the people of Manitoba. Of course, donations can be made directly to the Canadian Red Cross here in this Province.

I've also been in contact today with officials of the Salvation Army. I want to recognize in the gallery as well Major Roland Murphy of the Salvation Army. He informs me the Salvation Army has been on site since day one. They tell me that they will be on site as long as the need exists for them. In fact, today I have a copy of a press release that was issued yesterday by the Salvation Army headquarters in Toronto, and it says: Already over 60,000 people have been served by the Salvation Army since the beginning of their floor relief work in the Winnipeg area. Volunteers have registered and have taken part in working in some way. Workers have been working diligently twelve to fourteen hours a day meeting the needs of the flood victims.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to note, the Salvation Army operation is called `Operation We Care'. I say to my friends in this House, we want to recognize the work of the Red Cross and the Salvation Army in reaching out to our friends in Manitoba.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say to the press as well, with permission from these people, that both Major Murphy and officials of the Red Cross are available to meet the press after Question Period today.

We on this side, and in this Party, and as a Canadian family, feel for the anxieties of the people of Manitoba and we want to thank all hon. members for their support of this very important and crucial resolution.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wish to wholeheartedly support the resolution presented by the Minister of Justice on behalf of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, and commend the Opposition House Leader for suggesting that we send such a message to the people of Manitoba through a resolution of this House.

I am sure all hon. members have been watching with great trepidation the events unfolding in Manitoba over the last number of days. While we all have to deal with sort of our inconveniences of daily life - I am sure there are a lot of people who were not very happy to see twelve inches of snow, or however much we got yesterday after we were expecting a spring come by - but obviously these little inconveniences pale in comparison with the crisis that the people of Winnipeg and area are experiencing these days when their very homes are being threatened by the flood of - well, it is not the flood of the Century - I am told it is the largest flood waters expected since somewhere around 1850 or thereabouts. So we are dealing with a very serious situation which is only mitigated to some extent by the good weather that they have been having in Manitoba, and the lack of rain.

I am reminded, I suppose, of last summer when the people of the Saguenay region of Quebec had to deal with a perhaps more devastating flood situation when an unexpected flood that they were not able to be prepared for caused a great deal of property damage, dislocation, and upset in Quebec. The people of Canada responded with open hearts for their fellow Canadians there in Quebec, laying aside any differences that may be perceived from time to time across this country by reasons of geography, by reasons of politics, by reasons of different cultures and different backgrounds.

It is a recognition that we are all a part of the same Canadian family, and that when one group of family members is going through adversity, the rest of the Canadian family participates in trying to mitigate the problems and seek solutions, and that is what we are doing here today, and through the efforts such as those outlined by the Opposition House Leader of people in this Province offering the support and assistance individually and through their organizations.

They are very lucky to have had the forewarning of some months that this might be happening and the opportunity to prepare and work together. I think what I was struck by looking last night at the extensive coverage on television was how the whole community of Manitoba had worked together to prepare for this. They had built the dikes that were outlined, some built many years ago, but recently have had opportunity to do the same thing. I was also struck by the coming together of people in Manitoba. The native people from a reserve who were staying en masse in a community called Ste. Anne nearby, a Franco-Manitoban community, where they got to know one another and were expressing how important this was for them to understand one another and make friendships, and this was a bringing together of people who were brought together by a potential tragedy and who are learning more about one another.

I hope, along with other hon. members, that the preparations are successful, that the preparations that have been undertaken at great expense and great effort and great community, will be successful in staving off the worst possibilities of this potential disaster. I know it must be a very devastating thing for people to leave behind their homes, even for a short period of time, knowing that they may not be able to come back to them because they may be devastated by a flood. That is a very horrendous experience, and any of us would be tremendously upset and concerned about having to go through that. Our hearts, and my heart, goes out to the families who are experiencing this great uncertainty at having to go through that at this time, and I along with all other members know that there is no worse disaster than having to leave your home for a period of time.

My best wishes, my concerns and my thoughts, are with the people of Manitoba at this time, and I hope that this resolution, and the forwarding of this resolution, gives the people of Manitoba some understanding of how we here in Newfoundland and Labrador feel at this time of crisis for our brothers and sisters in Manitoba.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, as hon. members are aware, Premier Tobin is presently in Aberdeen, leading a delegation of companies -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

We haven't called Statements by Ministers yet. I thought the hon. Minister was speaking to the resolution.

Is the House ready for the question?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: All those in favour of the resolution, `aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: Against?

I declare the resolution unanimously carried.

 

Statements by Ministers

 

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, as hon. members are aware, Premier Tobin is presently in Aberdeen, leading a delegation of companies on a trade mission to Scotland.

The mission is part of our efforts to develop relationships with international partners in an effort to pursue global opportunities. It is an initiative that can be attributed to the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding with North East Scotland, which was signed on June 20, 1995. The purpose of the MOU was to stimulate greater economic activity between the two regions. Areas of specific interest included energy resources, offshore business, marine industries, environmental technologies and information industries.

I am pleased to announce today that as a direct result of this MOU, the Premier has recently participated in the signing of three joint ventures between companies in Newfoundland and Scotland.

The first joint venture is between A. Harvey and Company Limited of St. John's and Consolidated Supply Management of Aberdeen. The new company, Harvey CSM, combines the wealth of North Sea and international experience of CSM in logistics and supply chain management with the first class facilities, resources and local reputation of A. Harvey and Company of St. John's. The company will provide an integrated logistics/supply chain support service to the emerging oil, gas and mining industries in Atlantic Canada and worldwide.

The second partnership is between Specialist Solutions Limited of St. John's and Simul8 Limited of Aberdeen. The new venture, Trans Atlantic Medical Limited, will undertake software research and development projects to capture specific market niches in medical diagnostic imaging. The company's software will be designed for use by radiologists and other medical specialists and will enable the transmission and `rendering' of medical images over existing computer networks. The company's approach to Tele-Radiology will provide access to critical patient data in an inexpensive, unique and user friendly format. Trans Atlantic Medical Limited will be headquartered in St. John's, here in our Province, with a satellite office in Aberdeen.

Mr. Speaker, the third joint venture is between Net.f/x Marketing Technologies of Mount Pearl and ACS Design and Telematics of Banff, Scotland. These companies have formed a strategic alliance to develop a virtual trade zone to facilitate communication and trade between the two regions.

Mr. Speaker, a significant amount of work has been undertaken in the last eighteen months on both sides under the Memorandum of Understanding. It demonstrates that building relationships and developing partnerships is critical to pursuing global markets. The companies I have just referred to will open new markets for each other and provide direct economic benefits to their regions.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my hon. colleagues to join me in congratulating these Newfoundland companies and the Aberdonian companies on both sides of this agreement, and we wish the Premier well as he pursues new global opportunities for our economy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I commend the government on their recycling program. I read this release yesterday and I heard it on the news again today.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to congratulate the companies that have signed agreements with those in Scotland, but I guess the real question here is: How many jobs have been created through the signing of these joint ventures? After the investment that the Province has made to trade missions now to Aberdeen, Scotland - who signed these Memorandum of Understandings - how many jobs have been created through these joint ventures, that is the real question?

Mr. Speaker, the fact that our Province is reaching out globally to sign agreements with other countries and companies in other countries is commendable but again, the important thing to Newfoundland and Labrador is what are we getting as a return on our investment? What economic benefit is it going to create to Newfoundland in the terms of employment, something that Newfoundland is seriously lacking? Again, Mr. Speaker, I commend the companies in Newfoundland that have signed these agreements with the companies in Scotland. Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I too am pleased to see that Newfoundland companies are engaging in partnerships internationally. It has been a feature of the business relationships in Newfoundland for many, many years for Newfoundland business people to have international connections throughout the world with the salt fish trade, with the fishing industry in general and we have a great history of that which has died off in the last number of years. So these efforts of Newfoundland business ventures and international connections are very important to make and I hope that they bear fruit. They may not be immediate but I hope that they bear fruit in the long run because we do have, as part of this Province, to spread our wings to get involved in ventures throughout the world, to bring our talents and our assets into the international marketplace and this is one example of how it can be done.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, health care is the highest priority of the people of this Province and it is the highest priority of the government of this Province. I stand today to provide details of the upcoming provincial health forum announced by the Premier last week. This forum is intended to address specific problems which have stressed the system and the clients who need, expect and deserve quality health care.

The provincial Health Forum will serve several important functions. It will discuss specific problems in the system today and seek input which can be used to reduce or eliminate these problems. It will allow front-line health care providers the opportunity to voice their concerns and offer suggestions for improvement to health care provision in Newfoundland and Labrador. It will provide advice on how new or reallocated funding from this year's health budget can be best used to meet the health care needs of the people of this Province. It will not address all areas of health care delivery at one time, but it will address major issues such as the reorganization of primary health care. It will also discuss many concerns of front-line workers and clients.

Mr. Speaker, the health forum will take place on May 9 and 10, at the Littledale Conference Centre in St. John's. The forum will have representation from health care providers, front-line workers and the general public to provide frank and substantive input which will result in optimal solutions. Since it would be impractical, in this forum, to include every person and group associated with health care, we will continue to encourage ongoing input from all health care providers throughout the Province.

We recognize the merit of their advice and are prepared to meet with these people and other representatives of front-line workers and the general public to productively meet the challenges we are facing today. I am also pleased that the Nurses Union and the Medical Association have recognized the Premier's role in the federal government's announcement this week that there will be an increase in the cash floor of the CHST. The extra $66 million that this means to our Province is critical and it adds value, Mr. Speaker, to the forum process.

Delegates to the forum include: representative of the Newfoundland and Labrador Nurses' Union; NAPE; Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association; CUPE; Allied Health; PAIRN; the Association of Registered Nurses of Newfoundland and Labrador; the medical school at Memorial University; institutional and community health boards; and health care consumers from the general public. These qualified and capable people are volunteering their time and expertise to work, in partnership with government, towards positive outcomes for the problems we have identified. Government appreciates their participation in this process and we expect to receive positive feedback. It reinforces government's commitment to provide quality health care services to the people throughout Newfoundland and Labrador and to improving the system, wherever necessary and possible.

Mr. Speaker, the health care system in this Province today is fundamentally sound and government is committed to improving that system to the extent possible.

Mr. Speaker, in this year's budget we allocated funds for a number of improvements over and above the flat line budget which was announced last year. We approved $2.6 million for salary physicians who work in rural Newfoundland. We are providing $400,000 to operate a dialysis program in Central Newfoundland. We have also committed funding to update the programming documents and the redesign of the James Paton expansion, as per the recommendations of the Central Newfoundland health services review, along with the other work that will be done this year. In addition, work has commenced on the redevelopment of the Melville Hospital in Goose Bay. Preliminary work will be carried out for the planning of health facilities in Bonne Bay and Stephenville, subject to a review of services in Western Newfoundland. Mr. Speaker, $2.5 million is allocated to institutional boards for the purchase of new medical equipment, over and above what is in our normal budgetary allocation for that specific purpose.

Throughout this year, health boards and their foundations will be asked to match the government's contribution for a total of $5 million for the purchase of capital equipment.

Mr. Speaker, government is working for and with the people of this Province. At the conclusion of this forum, we will inform the people of this Province of its outcome. I expect that with the input of these people who will be at the forum, those who are directly associated with health care delivery, that government will be able to continue to provide the best possible health care services to all citizen's of this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I always thought that the minister had done a course in how to recycle the news, now I am sure that the minister has done a course in how to recycle the news.

The funding that he talks about in here, he has now announced for the tenth or twelfth time and the minister knows full well, of the $66 million that is coming into this Province, not one dime, not one new cent of that, there is not one new cent of that for health care in this Province. The only thing the minister is doing is trying to get seven of his cousins sent back to Ottawa and let me tell you, Mr. Speaker, that is not going to work this time. The people of this Province will not be fooled this time, especially by the Minister of Health, any more in this Province. We will not be fooled any more by this minister.

We now have another study, we did a study in education by Dr. Canning, that is probably gathering dust somewhere on his shelf. I just hope minister, that if we are going to do this one, this one does not go on the shelf like most of the ones that you have done before. More recycled, absolutely telling us nothing, the only thing you are doing is out again campaigning for your cousins and hoping that they are going to get back to Ottawa, this is one of the biggest loads of garbage that we have heard in this House in a long, long time. The Minister of Health in this Province should be ashamed of himself, should be ashamed of himself, that is what he should be, Mr. Speaker. The minister who sits there, who thinks there is no problem in health care, it really shows how out of touch he is with the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

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.

The upcoming forum on health care at the Littledale Conference Centre sounds to me like a public relations forum, as apposed to a health care forum. It seems to me from the description of the minister that this is a 'by invitation only event', which with the comments of the minster, if the minister thinks that there is an extra $66 million in the health care system, the same minister who did not complain when the Government of Canada took hundreds of millions out of the health care system, then he is really embarking upon a public relation's campaign and not really interested in finding solutions to the health care needs of the people of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, there are solutions that have been presented to this minister and the Social Policy Committee of Cabinet. The minister was not even aware of them when he was asked questions in the House in the last few days. So, Mr. Speaker, I don't see how a public relations forum is going to change all of that, but we may well hear some ideas that the minister will be required to speak of because they will be publicly mentioned to implement if they come from sensible people who may be available, may be allowed to participate in this forum.

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

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A good news item.

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to inform the House today that Newfoundland and Labrador will be hosting a major international conference on sealing.

When I learned last fall that the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO) was planning this major conference, and was considering several Canadian sites, including Toronto and Montreal, I immediately invited the Commission to hold the conference in this Province. As the Province on the doorstep of one of the largest seal herds in the world, and considering our historic economic and cultural links to the seal fishery, this Province is an appropriate location for this conference. The fact that we are this year celebrating the 500th anniversary of Cabot's arrival is another good reason for holding the conference here.

I am delighted that the Commission has accepted my invitation to hold the conference here in November, bringing to St. John's participants from twelve to fifteen countries. To date, approximately 250 participants are expected to attend. Ms Kate Sanderson, secretary to NAMMCO, is in St. John's now to finalize some preparations for the conference.

This international conference on sealing will not only serve as an excellent information and technology exchange, but will give world-wide promotion to the overall efforts of many countries to revitalize the sealing industry. It will also be an opportunity to showcase how the Newfoundland and Labrador seal fishery has been revitalized because of tremendous research and development efforts being undertaken here.

At a time when markets for seal oil and meat products, as well as leather and fur products are being expanded and strengthened, the international conference will be a timely one.

It is estimated that the Newfoundland and Labrador seal fishery will have an export value of $25 million or more this year. Fur markets are strong, and commercial markets in the Far East have been successfully expanded to accommodate a portion of the seal oil capsule production. Mr. Speaker, considerable success has also been achieved in producing such products as seal salami, pepperoni and sausage, as well as prime meat cuts for markets in China, Korea and Japan. Market opportunities are also being explored for canned seal meat, prime cuts, and vacuum-packed flippers. Prices to sealers this year have been the best in many years. This shows enormous promise for our seal fishery in 1998 and beyond. About 5,000 sealers are engaged in the fishery, with another 500 people involved in the processing-related jobs.

So at this time when our seal fishery has reached the stage where there is utilization and marketing of the entire animal, we take pride in hosting an international conference.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for providing me with a copy of the Ministerial Statement prior to the House's opening and, I commend the minister, Mr. Speaker, for taking the initiative to bring this conference right here to Newfoundland, which is where it should be held because there is no other profession I suppose, at least here in Newfoundland today that has had the unfair and negative publicity as this particular hunt and this particular activity has had, Mr. Speaker, and the people who are bringing it about are people who are being motivated and doing it for their own personal financial gain.

Mr. Speaker, this is one hunt today that is carried out in this Province in a very humane, professional way, and whatever we can do to show the rest of the world that it is being done in a responsible manner, then I think the onus is on each and every one of us to go forward and do that. I compliment the minister and I think he should also bring forward the great benefits that are being brought about to our people with this particular hunt. It was only last weekend I was down in my district when the boats, because of the ice conditions, landed in Catalina and in three days there was something between 50,000 and 60,000 pelts and carcasses delivered over the wharf there. Tractor=trailers were going, local people were working, the hotel was full and it showed a different community from what I saw the week before and those are just some

of the benefits. It is a hunt, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, just to clue up. It is a hunt that was held at a time of the year when it bestowed many positive things to our fishermen in order to give them money to get geared up to prosecute the cod fishery and the lobster fishery, et cetera. I say to the minister in cluing up that he should check the credentials of each and every one of those individuals, and if there is any doubt there whatsoever, tell them to leave their cameras at home. Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm, pleased that the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission will be meeting here in Newfoundland and Labrador next fall. I think the minister has done well to secure their attendance here.

The seal hunt was once known as the greatest hunt in the world. It has in recent years received a lot of negative publicity throughout - particulary North America and Europe. I think it is fitting that this Commission is coming here with a number of countries participating. I hope that it is an opportunity to put a different spin on the seal fishery, and a different spin on the use of the products that are available from the seal, and to highlight the efforts that are being made by this Province to turn this industry into a modern industry which is viable, humane -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HARRIS: - and advantageous -

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

MR. HARRIS: - to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

 

Oral Questions

 

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are to the Minister of Health. In Corner Brook, Labrador City - Wabush, Happy Valley - Goose Bay, Grand Falls - Windsor, Clarenville, Marystown, Gander and St. John's - the pre-Budget consultations travelled all around the Province where people told you: Don't cut health care. The Budget document even admitted that people told you: Don't cut health care. So what is it about `don't cut health care' that you don't understand, minister?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The hon. member is living in pre-Budget announcement times in his mind, I believe. He is right that the hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board went around the Province and visited - I imagine he got the names of the places right. In any event, he did consult. The people said: Don't cut health care. When the Budget was presented in the House the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board announced that we were not going to cut the health care budget as previously committed to.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: But, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board went further than that. The Minister of Finance and Treasury Board proceeded to outline a number of new initiatives that would be undertaken this year in the health care budget, and announced new funding to be added to the previously committed funding to the health care budget. In simple terms, for the benefit of the hon. member, government didn't cut the health care budget. It increased the health care budget.

Now, in simple mathematics, when you cut something you put a stroke in front of it, minus. When you add something to it you put an x in front of it. We put a big x in front of the health care budget. We added money to it, A-D-D-E-D!

AN HON. MEMBER: Plus, plus sign.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible)!

MR. MATTHEWS: Oh, a plus sign, alright. Mr. Speaker, there is some difference as to - there is a little rural versus urban debate as to whether plus and add is the same thing. But I will undertake to commit to everybody that in my judgement -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MATTHEWS: - plussing and adding are the same thing!

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

MR. MATTHEWS: It means more money for health care, and let the hon. member hear that loud and clear and understand what it means.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The minister is a little mixed up in his pronunciation. It isn't x, it is axe that the minister put by it, I say to him.

The health facilities operation budget for last year, here in the very Estimates, including hospitals in this Province, there was a total of $598 million.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Health facility operations, I say to the member, for 1997, is $587 million. That is $11 million less funding for health care this year, not even counting the impact that inflation will be having on the value of the health care dollars.

I say to the minister, and I ask you once again: What is it about, `Don't cut health care' that you don't seem to understand?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: The most obvious thing about it is that it boggles the mind of the hon. member to be able to understand plain English and common figures on a piece of white paper, put down in black print.

The hon. member chooses to ignore conveniently, which is one step short of putting forward something that would have to be described in unparliamentary language so I won't do it, but basically what he is putting forward is an infactual proposition. The health care budget has been increased.

Now, within that health care envelope of $910 million or so, we move around money where we appropriately should. There is a little bit less in the institutions this year -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MATTHEWS: There is a little bit less in the institutional side of the health care budget because the boards are operating on a three-year planning cycle which commenced the previous year. What the hon. member chooses to conveniently not acknowledge is that there is more money in the community health side of the budget this year. There is more money going into new programming this year, such as the dialysis service. There is new money going into the equipment part of the budget this year. In short, Mr. Speaker -

AN HON. MEMBER: More money into (inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: More money into the rural doctor's pot. He conveniently ignores the fact that there is $6 million or $7 million more gone into the MCP budget.

He can be selective in picking pieces out of the budget, but it is such a - I don't know - silly type of proposition to try and put forward the fact that $903 last year is not as much as $910 this year.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to finish his answer quickly.

MR. MATTHEWS: Nine hundred and three last year is not as much as $910 this year. Nine hundred and ten this year is $7 million more than $903 last year - more money, more money, for health care.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I ask the hon. minister to take his seat.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, a supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To stand here, to sit in this House and take that utter nonsense that the minister is trying to tell us, it is nonsense.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Money from the health care budget used to pay legal fees to Trans City because this government circumvented the Public Tender Act.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: That is where money is going from the health care budget.

Today we have heard again about chaos in our system on the West Coast. Family practitioners in Corner Brook are telling us they cannot continue to help cover for the hospital emergency department there, and unless the government addresses this concern within the next week they are going to refuse to do shifts at the hospital's emergency departments where now there is only one doctor on staff.

Minister, how much more information do you need before you finally admit that successive years of deep cuts to health care funding are the root of the crisis that we are facing in health care in our Province today?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, cuts to health care, or cuts that he alleges which are infactual????, is not the problem in Corner Brook with emergency room coverage. We do have two shortages in casualty officers who work in the emergency department, that is true, but I would remind the hon. member that there are just as many family practising physicians in the community, practising fee-for-service, in Corner Brook today as there was last year at this time and as there has been historically on average.

I would also remind the hon. member, in case he doesn't know, that by virtue of the principles under which doctors operate, by virtue of principles that are laid out by the NLMA and the Medical Board, family practitioners who operate in the community have always participated in emergency room coverage. There are just as many doctors there to do that now as there was heretofore. The doctors who practice in the community have an obligation to ensure that their patients are cared for well beyond the nine to five hours of their clinic. They have an obligation to ensure that their patients are cared for on a twenty-four hour basis, and the doctors in the Corner Brook area, while they may be finding it difficult to have all of them participate at this point in time in emergency room coverage, they nonetheless do recognize that responsibility. They are providing coverage, and I have every confidence that there will be adequate coverage as best they can help us provide it in the emergency room on an ongoing basis.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That is not what we are hearing from doctors, doctors having to work all night long and go to work again the next day in their own practice. That is not what happened before minister, and you know it.

Where has the minister been? Where have you been that you need a forum here on health care to be convinced there is a crisis in our Province today? Hasn't the minister heard of waiting lists to see specialists, hospitals closing due to doctor shortages, operating rooms closing, patients being transferred because of equipment failure, patients waiting on stretchers in hallways, patients dying while waiting for cardiac surgery, a boy whose appendix burst in a hospital -

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

MR. SULLIVAN: When people search frantically for a doctor -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Hasn't the minister already heard of burnt-out and utter frustration among health care professionals -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, I'm (inaudible) the question... Where have the minister's ears been for the past fifteen months, I ask him? How much more must the system deteriorate and people suffer before you admit that there is a crisis here and you start doing something about it?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There is a crisis here, but as I said last week, the crisis is largely between the ears of the hon. Leader of the Opposition. When a person who is elected to this House and appointed to the responsible position of Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, with that honour, I would suggest, comes a fair degree of responsibility.

One of the responsibilities is not to be an undue fearmongerer so as to be, at the end of the day, in some instances, so has to be challenged because of the inaccuracy of the statements he puts forward. About two weeks ago the hon. member was alleging this, that and the other thing in the health care system. It took the strong voice of one of our CEOs, Sister Elizabeth, to tell the hon. member that he was whacko, that he didn't know what he was talking about, he was putting forward false information, inaccurate information, and information that he couldn't validate. We are still waiting in this Province for either an apology or a validation of the nonsense that he was getting on with!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The minister should try to get first-hand information and not over fax machines from remote places, I say to the minister. A family practitioner, Dr. Edward Fitzgibbons of Corner Brook, said on the news today he is angry, minister, at comments made last week that suggest the health care system is not in a crisis. Now why, when the crisis in Corner Brook minister has been boiling over for months, has the minister made absolutely no effort whatsoever to contact the health care professionals there like Dr. Fitzgibbons, say, to find out what is going on and what needs to be done?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, quite the opposite is true. As a matter of fact, our health care boards around the Province are doing yeoman's service, as volunteers, like our school board trustees, to help manage health care on behalf of the people in their region.

I've been in touch with the Western Health Care Corporation ongoingly regarding issues in their region, as I am in touch with other boards. I was in Port aux Basques last week to discuss the doctor situation. Yesterday afternoon I met with the CEO and the chair of the Western Health Care Corporation, along with a couple of my colleagues, to discuss issues of importance. So let the hon. member be aware and take at least some comfort in the fact that this government is not asleep at the switch when it comes to health care services.

We do have difficulties in certain areas, we do have problems in certain areas. That is why today I was proud on behalf of the Premier and the government to announce the Health Care Forum which will take place next week. We expect fully to hear from not only doctors, but nurses and other health care providers, as to how better we can do what we are already doing, and that is to try and provide quality health care to the people of the Province.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I said to the minister before, I never accused you of being asleep at the switch, because you are never at the switch to fall asleep at! Now minister, you are the Minister of Health in this Province and you are ultimately responsible. We have had hundreds of health care forums around this Province. They are in newscasts, on open-lines, they are in letters to the editor, they are in letters to you, minister, and responses you haven't responded to, in phone calls, public meetings, vocal demonstrations out there, unignorable actions by patients and families, and by doctors and nurses daily throughout this Province.

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

The hon. member is on a supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Why is the Minister of Health not doing his job of responding to the crisis? How much longer will this daily charade of denials and delays have to go on before the minister wakes up and does the job that he was appointed and elected to do?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The hon. member's supporting cast over there a few minutes ago was talking about recycling. Well, if ever I heard of a good recycling initiative, it has to be Question Period from the Leader of the Opposition today because it is as Yogi Berra once said: it is déjà vu all over again in terms of his questions.

I am telling the hon. member again and I am telling the people of this Province through the voice of this House that this government understands the needs in health care; it understands its responsibilities; this minister understands his needs and his responsibilities; I am prepared to put my work-time sheet up against yours any day, hon. Leader of the Opposition, and I can assure you that the people on this side of the House likewise who serve in this government are prepared to put their commitment and their level of input and effort and compare it with yours any day at any point in time and I am sure that we will demonstrate, if we have to, on black and white paper, that our effort is as good as or better than anything that you will ever be able to produce on behalf of the people of this Province.

The fortunate thing for the people of the Province, Mr. Speaker, is that the aspirant Premier will never in fact have to worry about delivering on anything that he propositions or promises because this century will long pass off the calendar -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MATTHEWS: - before he will ever even have the opportunity to again present himself and if I were him I wouldn't turn my back too far to the south.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think it is very unfortunate for the people in this Province and the people who are sick out there, that they have to depend on this minister to do something. I think it is very, very unfortunate I say to the minister.

Minister, will you admit today that you are humiliated by your failure to fulfil your responsibilities and that the Health portfolio is far mare than you are capable of handling? Now I ask you today: Will you do the honourable thing and submit your resignation and pass this critical portfolio over to somebody who is prepared to do the job that needs to be done?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: I would say, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would say that if there is any one person in this Province let alone this House, who is still in a position where he needs to offer an apology for anything, it is that Leader of the Opposition over there. An individual who has been challenged and told by those who run our health care system, of great repute, that he did not know what he was talking about; his facts were wrong. He was perpetuating an `infactuality' that bordered on lying to the people of the Province, and I would suggest that he do the honourable thing, apologize for the two-week long apology that has been in waiting or else, he resigns from his seat and let somebody else of some calibre, quality and quantity take over the job that he is trying to do.

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

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today of course, are for the Minister of Health.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, let me apologize to the minister because when I got up earlier, in my zeal again to just contradict what he said, I want to thank the minister for providing me with a copy of his statement. As a matter of fact, I suppose he thought so much of it, he actually hand-delivered it to me.

But, Mr. Minister, you are aware that $10 million can be taken out of the Contingency Reserve without having to borrow. Will the minister agree today to take that amount out of the Contingency and to replace the $10 million that you have cut from the health facilities operation fund for this year?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will remind the hon. member that while the Minister of Health has considerable responsibilities, he does not in any way nor does he need to even wish to be the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board because we have a capable, quality Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, who can answer the question as to whether or not money will be moved around within the global provincial Budget.

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

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Minister, let us recap briefly this past year.

We have had problems on the Burin Peninsula, in the Clarenville area, we have had problems in St. John's, Corner Brook, in Bonavista, in Gander, in Port Saunders, in Port aux Basques and now we are back to Corner Brook again.

You must be embarrassed by this if you have any credibility.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary.

MR. FRENCH: If you have the nerve, Mr. Minister, and if you really give a darn about the people of this Province, you would do something today, so I ask you today: Will you commit to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador to put the much needed funds back into the health care of this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board.

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. member has asked a question that is not formally a health question but one relating to finance, and we have said and as members of the House know, the federal government has committed to putting another $66 million back into what is essentially health care, education and social services programming in terms of funding over the next three years. Although it does not give us any money in the current year it does give us some latitude to consider whether or not appropriate adjustments can be made in this year's Budget to meet any urgent and pressing health care needs.

As the minister announced today, we have asked the health care forum to review the state of health care at the front-line with the province's hospitals, and once we receive the results of that forum, we will make a decision as to what, if any money, should be put back into the system. If that requires dipping into the contingency fund, as the member referred to, then that is certainly something Cabinet will consider.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I go back to the Minister of Health. The $66 million, as the Minister of Finance readily knows, is not new money that is coming into this Province. I say to the minister today that the health system in this Province is in chaos. I have written numerous letters, Mr. Minister, and I still receive numerous calls. I think the greatest thing that can be done for health care in this Province today, and I ask you to do it, is to submit your resignation as Minister of Health in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would simply say to the hon. member, an unlikely proposition at best.

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

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

My question today is for the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday past, I asked questions re the distribution of the infrastructure money. The reason for refusal for an arena on the Northeast Avalon, given by the minister, is that he asked communities for support and he did not receive it. Can the minister now name the towns which refused support, and produce letters of non-support?

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

MR. A. REID: No, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. J. BYRNE: Is the minister saying now that what he said in the House of Assembly the other day was not true?

Mr. Speaker, I have four letters of support from four towns, letters supporting the project through the infrastructure program - which was supported since 1994, by the way. Another project, an arena in Clarenville, was approved for $1.43 million. Will the minister admit that this private project was approved even though it was not supported by the town, through the infrastructure program, at the cost of water and sewer for the town?

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

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table a letter from the town of Clarenville, supporting the sports complex.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. J. BYRNE: I believe, Mr. Speaker, the letter he is referring to supports the project as a private project, not for the infrastructure program money.

Can the minister explain how a project supported by four towns, through the infrastructure program, with $1 million of private money, could be refused, when a project, not really supported through the infrastructure program by the town, for more money, was accepted? Are we looking at pure, partisan politics and Liberal patronage to the uppermost levels?

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

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, the hon. federal MP, Bonnie Hickey, representing St. John's East, had approximately $4.5 million total money out of the infrastructure. All you have to do is take $31 million and divide it equally among seven MPs, and some MPs got a little more than others, but it works out to be $4.5 million - $5 million. Mrs. Hickey immediately made the commitment - and it was made here in the House during the Budget Speech - that we were going to put $4.5 million into the harbour clean-up. So I guess half that went to - it was her responsibility, and the other half was for the member from the West, Mrs. Jean Payne. So $2.5 million or $4.5 million was gone. We had the hon. member - and a good member he is - and my hon. colleague who represents part of the district of CBS, asking for $3.5 million. We had five communities in the hon. member's riding, asking for millions of dollars.

MR. TULK: Five million?

AN HON. MEMBER: Five communities.

MR. A. REID: And I say this quite sincerely, Mr. Speaker, I sat with the hon. member, I sat with representatives from ACOA and both my provincial people and from the Premier's Office, and the hon. lady did not have the money to do a $3.5 million stadium, that the hon. member is talking about. I suppose, what the hon. gentleman was basically saying, and has been saying to the people of Newfoundland and to the people of St. John's East, is that all of Bonnie Hickey's money this year should have been given for that stadium.

Now, I do not think that the citizens of the city of St. John's, the people who live in Paradise, in Mount Pearl, in Conception Bay South -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. A. REID: - in anywhere in St. John's East, would want Bonnie Hickey to put $3.5 million into a stadium.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis, a final supplementary.

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

Will the minister confirm that between the two projects, the infrastructure money and the municipal capital works money, that there is $70 million being spent in this Province; and there are districts in this Province that got as low as $300,000 and other districts got $500,000 and there are districts in this Province that got as much as $3.5 to $4 million, out of that money? And does the minister agree that that is proper distribution of the funds, from his perspective? Would he also admit, that the monies that came forward for the district of Cape St. Francis, through the federal member, Bonnie Hickey, was adequate for that district compared to the districts across the Province?

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

MR. A. REID: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I will agree. In fact, the hon. member who represents Conception Bay South got over $5 million.

AN HON. MEMBER: What, you never!

MR. A. REID: And the member is right here.

AN HON. MEMBER: Are you a Liberal?

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, I have to be careful, because my hon. colleague here to the right will have to be - someone will have to confine him if I tell how much money some of the Progressive Conservative districts got. My hon. and good friend from Bonavista got in excess of $1 million for his district.

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. A. REID: The members representing St. John's got every cent that the City of St. John's asked for. So, Mr. Speaker, I have no problem in admitting to him that yes, certain districts in the Province got more money then others.

MR. J. BYRNE: Answer the question. You did not answer the question.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question today is to the Minister of Forestry and Agrifoods.

Mr. Speaker, during the past few days I have been asking questions of the minister regarding the sale of Newfoundland Farm Products. I have been receiving calls from all across the Province, from people wondering why this government never called for proposals for the for sale.

I ask the minister if the real reason for this secret transaction has anything to do with the fact that the lobbyist for the chicken producers is the former Premier, Mr. Wells, and the Chairman of Newfoundland Farm Products is the Liberal bagman, Mr. Norval Blair.

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, let me answer the hon. gentleman's question by telling him that an assertion he made here in this House yesterday, concerning the former Premier of this Province, is totally wrong. He is not, I have found out today - it is none of my business, really, but I had to go and find out because the hon. member brought it up - but he is not the lawyer for the Integrated Poultry Producers Limited, let me tell him that.

Let me also correct some other statements that have been made by the hon. gentleman, raised by the hon. gentleman, and raised by some of the media in this Province; and that is concerning the status of Seafreez in this whole process. Let me read to him a press release that Bill Barry put out today, signed by William Barry, on May 1, 1997, when he says: `Our preliminary discussions about the future of Newfoundland Farm Products did involve a position of fine utilization for the Corner Brook facility outside of the poultry industry.' Let me also read another phrase to him that he raised yesterday. This is Mr. Barry speaking now, that gentleman he quoted in this House yesterday: `I am still having discussions with government about the future use of the Corner Brook plant.'

Let me also tell him, Mr. Speaker, some more good news to break his heart, so that he falls over backwards in his seat, so that `Chicken Little' cannot go around singing out -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: - the sky is falling in!

MR. SPEAKER: I ask the hon. the minister to quickly finish his answer.

MR. TULK: I will conclude, Mr. Speaker, by telling him that the employees today have asked us not to rush to call for more proposals for Newfoundland Farm Products in Corner Brook because they would like to have some time to see if there can be an employee takeover of that plant. Let me say to him -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: - and my concluding remark to him will be, we have agreed that that should be the case.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Calling for one proposal back in 1995 is not a rush, I say to the hon. minister. I would not consider that a rush. Mr. Speaker, I referred to the former Premier as the lobbyist. I did not refer to him as the lawyer today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: Maybe he is the government's lawyer, yes, maybe he is. I ask the minister if the cosiness between bagman Blair, lobbyist Wells and this government is more important than the jobs for the employees of Newfoundland Farm Products at Corner Brook. Which is more important?

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman's question is absolutely disgusting. I have no idea what the former Premier of this Province is doing. Let me say to him unequivocally that there is nobody in this Province who doubts the qualifications of Norval Blair as a businessman in this Province when it comes to analyzing the food industry. He is the person, by the way, for the education of the hon. gentleman, and anybody here who does not know it, who took Lewisporte Wholesalers in Lewisporte - from the time when I was a boy going in there, it was a little small place that used to sell a few groceries. He took it to become one of the largest wholesalers, I suppose, in Canada.

AN HON. MEMBER: Casting aspersions.

MR. TULK: Casting aspersions. Here is the hon. gentleman, in his desperation, Mr. Speaker, to get a few political points for his Leader tomorrow, the person he is choosing -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: - trying to cast aspersions on that hon. gentleman. Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Question Period has elapsed.

 

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Special Committees

 

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

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the annual report for Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, in my acting role.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services and Lands.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wish to table the annual report of the Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities on the operations carried out under the Automobile Insurance Act for the period April 1, 1996 to March 31, 1997.

 

Notices of Motion

 

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Judgment Enforcement Act."

Further, Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Remove Anomalies And Errors In The Statute Law."

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Development and Rural Renewal.

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleague, the hon, the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Wilderness And Ecological Reserves Act."

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright - L'Anse au-Clair.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following private member's resolution:

WHEREAS low-income families, particularly people on social assistance, find it impossible to provide themselves with an adequate diet; and

WHEREAS food prices in Labrador are between 40 per cent and 165 per cent higher than those in the St. John's area; and

WHEREAS there is a lack of competition and fewer specials in many communities in Coastal Labrador, there are no food banks to fall back on; and

WHEREAS social assistance recipients in Coastal Labrador are also burdened with a higher general cost of living than elsewhere in the Province; and

WHEREAS a nutritious diet is essential to comfort, good health and children's ability to learn. If children are not properly fed now, society will pay in the future in terms of added health care costs and unemployment;

BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that this House of Assembly direct the government to establish a food adjustment allowance for social assistance recipients in Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

Petitions

 

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

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

I am glad to rise today and present this petition from some people in my district, from Jackson's Cove, Silverdale, Nick's Nose, and also one other community, Langdon's Cove. I will read the petition because they have done a very job on this petition. I will read the entire petition so we will get the point across.

To the hon. House of Assembly:

WHEREAS regional councils may be feasible in some areas, it will not be feasible in this area because of the distance between communities and the scattered population; and

WHEREAS in this area the cost of living is already high because of the distance we travel to work on a daily basis, and to essential services on a frequent basis; the result, extremely high gas bills and vehicle repairs. Since all telephone calls are long distance, except for a few local calls, we have extremely high telephone bills; and

WHEREAS regional councils or service authorities will raise our cost of living so high that it would be impossible for us to survive here, it will result in extra taxes without additional services, which we cannot afford. Property tax will result in the loss of property for which we have worked so hard. It will cause forced resettlement, heartaches and sorrow. Honest, hard-working people who have worked so hard and paid their fair share of taxes will be ignored. The high tax on gas, vehicles, tires, broken windshields, etc., should be sufficient for snow-clearing, road maintenance, etc.; and

WHEREAS regional councils will not be able to provide additional service to our area because of high costs associated with the distance involved, we are opposed to the paying off of other debts which will be at the detriment and destruction of our own communities; and

WHEREAS the Federation of Municipalities does not support the local service districts, they will continue to undermine and destroy our small communities once they have been bled financially; and

WHEREAS the government continues to download to the town councils, and has admitted it, they will destroy many little communities financially and physically in the near future. Government should stop the senseless, ruthless, savage attack and financial grab on rural areas.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that your hon. House may be pleased to request the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador not to force any areas under regional government as special local service districts.

Mr. Speaker, as we know, the minister has been going around the Province in the last little while in so-called consultations with councils and so on. He has been in my area. The funny thing is that local service districts and these other people were not invited to these. As consultation was going on to the people who were going to be affected the most by this regionalization, the people who were going to be affected the most were left out of the consultation.

Mr. Speaker, a lot of these people in my district, and I am sure in lots of parts of rural Newfoundland, are simply saying it is tough enough as it is. As I mentioned in this House yesterday, they are not looking for major highways or so on; they are just looking for necessities. It is so strange today, the timing of this petition which I was asked to present, that we talk about infrastructure funding, and to connect that to it.

No matter what district, or where it is, people are looking for necessities and that should be the priority. When you talk about water and sewer, and when the person invites you to their home to look at sewage running out their back garden, or they cannot turn on the tap and have water, or they have to put a child on a bus to go over a dirt road, there is something wrong. The priorities should be with these people.

Like I also said before, the commitment to rural Newfoundland had better come soon because, I say to the Minister of Rural Renewal, even in the last days, weeks, that the situation in rural Newfoundland over the last few weeks - and I do not know if it is timing or what; now we are into the middle of a federal election, and the truth is, people could not care less about elections or politicians right now. What I have heard in the last three weeks alone is, `Nobody had better come knocking on my door, and that includes Liberals, Reform, NDP, PC, or whatever they are.' They are simply saying, `We just had our school closed; we cannot get through our road; the hospitals are in a mess.' It is all coming at the one time.

What I am saying to the government provincially and federally is that they had better start looking at real rural Newfoundland and say: Yes, if we believe in rural Newfoundland we had better see something concrete. What they mean by concrete is the necessities of life. They have been living out in those communities for thirty, forty, fifty years, have their homes there, and they still do not have water and sewer. There is something wrong.

If we do commit to that, and funds are directed into things like that instead of civic centres or arenas or whatever, then the people are going to say, `Well, government have their priorities right.'

I really, firmly believe in that, that once we show rural Newfoundland that we are committed to necessities - like a community that asked me yesterday not for a paved road but just to get their gravel road upgraded. They are not asking for the world, Mr. Speaker, they are just asking for basic necessities.

It is a warning, that is what it is, a warning coming from this member today, and it is a warning from a lot of members in this House. I know they are on both sides because I have talked to them. The warning is: time is crucial. This spring and this summer, if people in rural Newfoundland do not start seeing a concrete example of a commitment to rural Newfoundland and Labrador through what the member even mentioned today in her motion, then there is going to be a big, big problem in this Province, and nothing is going to settle them down. No civic centre is going to settle people down.

We are just getting back to the fishery. We hope that is going to be positive. We hope Voisey's Bay - we hope on all these things, but I am telling you, time is crucial right now. Over these spring months and during this federal election -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. SHELLEY: To clue up, Mr. Speaker. During this federal election, if people do not see some concrete commitments to rural Newfoundland, there is going to be a problem, and there is going to be an uprising in this Province.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to support the petition as put forward by my friend and colleague, the Member for Baie Verte.

Just this past number of weeks there have been many meetings held across Newfoundland and Labrador on regionalization, I say to the minister. Down in my particular district we had two meetings, one in Port Union and one which concerned Trinity North and Bonavista South, up in Clarenville. They were two of the biggest meetings the committee had heard throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. I would think, had they been better advertised, or people had been made aware that the meetings were happening, you would have seen many more people out, because they have grave concerns.

It is a situation whereby the minister had gone out to rural areas just a few weeks prior, had met with the town councils, and refused to meet with the people from local service districts and the general public. One particular person, the chairman of one local service district, picked up the phone and called the minister himself and asked if he could come to the meeting. He was told no, in no uncertain terms. You are not invited to the meeting. It is only for town councils, it is not for local service districts, it is not for the general public. The committee will follow me and you will have an opportunity there and then.

What those people are saying is that it should be our choice to live in the Plate Coves, it should be our choice to live in the Dunterras and the other small communities out there. We chose to live here knowing full well we were not going to get sidewalks, we were not going to get street lights, we were not going to get a Cadillac sewer system, unless we paid for it, and we are prepared to do that. But do not come and tell me that if I am going to continue to live here and I am not going to be able to get those amenities, I also must pay the debt other towns have acquired over the years.

I believe in town councils, I will make that perfectly clear here now. I believe in forms of municipal government. But I believe in it by people having a choice, I believe in it - if that particular community wants to have a form of local government, and collectively they come together and form a town council, then God bless them, so they should have a local government. That is the way many of our communities have moved ahead. In fact, some of the bigger communities cannot exist without that form of local government.

I do not believe in small communities having to assume a form of government if it is not their wish. Some of the incorporated communities now are complaining and saying it is unfair for those other small communities to be getting a certain lane ploughed in the wintertime, or it is unfair for the Department of Works, Services and Transportation's truck to be putting a load of stone on a certain roadway. There is a very good reason for that. It is because those road component grants now have all but disappeared. Nobody was complaining a few years ago when they were getting $2,000 per kilometre for each kilometre of local road in their community. You did not hear anybody complaining then, because there was ample funding. That particular road component grant could be taken and spent elsewhere.

Now that it is diminished, some of those communities are obviously putting pressure on the minister and coming out and saying: We want to tax other communities because they are getting their work done for free. Mr. Speaker, a lot of them are not getting their work done for free. When you talk to some senior citizens out there today, who are paying in access of $500 for a small water supply, a garbage collection and fire protection, which is not uncommon, that is not services for free. When you look at the taxes that people are paying, when you look at the fees that people are paying to license their car on an annual basis, when you look at the taxes they are paying for gasoline and for every other thing that they purchase when they go to the local store, or buy supplies, they are getting nothing for free. People are already taxed enough in this Province and they are paying ample for the services they are getting. They are paying enough money, I say to the people opposite.

Those people should have a say. They came out in the community in Clarenville, and they spoke very loud and very clear. They said: we are paying enough taxes, we do not want any more services. We do not want to be burdened by a cadillac water and sewer system, if we want a street light, we will put up our own. This is Newfoundland, this is not mainland Canada. People live in those communities because they want to live there.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. members time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: They want to live there, Mr. Speaker. It is the place, in most cases, that many of them have returned to. They went away to the mainland or they went away to the bigger centres in Newfoundland and Labrador and they choose to go back to those communities and retire.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. members time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: They choose to go back to those communities and retire and they should be granted -

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

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. FITZGERALD: - they should be granted that opportunity, I say to the people opposite.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. members time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: And that is all they are asking for, is to be listened to and to have their advice heeded.

Thank you.

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

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to take a couple of minutes to speak to the petition, but to speak from a different point of view of what both members opposite just spoke and saying that nothing should change, everything should remain as it is and people living in communities, not lose their identity, and people in communities not pay any more taxes or any more cost of what they are already paying for services.

One problem that we have in this Province, that everybody should and I think most everybody recognizes, is our geography. We have 500,000-plus people, 550,000 - 560,000 people, spread over a geography four times larger than a country like Japan or as large or larger than Great Britain, Scotland, Ireland, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia. Just imagine, out of that small population and that vast land, becomes the same demand of services by people as if they were living in a concentrated area. There lies the problem, there is no magic wand to be waved, there is no magic printing press to print off money that is not available and out of 550,000 people, with the economy the way it is and people not working, if people are not working they are not paying taxes, becomes a problem for a government or whatever the stripe is, where do you get the money to provide the services to all of the communities, all over Newfoundland and Labrador?

Okay, changes are taking place. A better way to govern, a better way to manage and changes will take place and if you do move with change, then we lose again and I think that has been one of the problems here in Newfoundland and Labrador, we have been not willing to move with change. There has got to be a better way of running this Province, with the people living in the communities scattered all around this vast land of Newfoundland and Labrador then we have.

AN HON. MEMBER: Bring them all together (inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: No, I said there has to be a better way to manage because where people are living and with the geography and the costal communities scattered all over this vast land, there has to be a better way to manage and if that is regional government, if that is some form of regional government, we should at least take a look at it with an open mind. We should take a look at it with an open mind and if people oppose it, then they should offer up a better alternative. A better alternative in a manner in which you can manage and you can govern the Province in a better way to take advantage of the amount of money that is available. Nobody is forcing anything on anybody, but to date I have not heard of anything better. We are 500 years old, celebrating the 500th birthday this year and we are still in a financial mess, there is something wrong and we have to ask what is wrong and we have to try to improve on it, recognizing the problem and finding a solution.

Now, the hon. member points at this side and says: this is wrong. Well, let me tell the hon.member what we inherited in 1989 from the former government -

AN HON. MEMBER: Give it up boy!

MR. EFFORD: You don't want to hear the truth do you?

AN HON. MEMBER: Why don't you go back to (inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: You don't want to hear the truth. A $7 billion debt with a $585 million annual payment of interest. Mr. Speaker, if we had that to put into infrastructure and into communities we would not get half the complaints that we have today!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: Reaction, reaction.

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

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I present a petition today to the hon. House of Assembly, in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned residents of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador ask the House of Assembly to accept the following prayer;

We the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador wish to petition the provincial government, the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation and the Premier to immediately reverse the decision to privatize the provincial parks as they are the people's resource. We feel that this decision was made in haste without any consultation of the people of the Province and the people who own the parks.

Mr. Speaker, I have presented many petitions in the House to date against the privatization of provincial parks, over 15,000 names. There are seventy-seven people who have put in proposals for the takeover of these parks. We are told by the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation that the reason the parks are being privatized is to save $1.8 million. Well, Mr. Speaker, in the estimates meeting this week I questioned the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation as to what the actual savings would be this year. It is actually far less than $1.8 million. Of the ninety-two employees that have been displaced, forty-five of those employees will be rehired through the provincial parks that are going to remain in place at a cost of $100,000 plus the cost of what the Province would normally have provided through student employment. So that's a double loss. First of all the $100,000 that it is going to cost the Province and secondly, the fact that it is going to cost what it would cost the students and the fact that the students will not find that employment this year through the provincial park system.

Secondly, the minister has informed me that this year, being the Cabot 500 year, being an important tourism year for Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, a year that we cannot afford to have something go wrong with the provincial parks, she is putting in place a support system and staff to help the new owners, the new operators of these provincial parks - once they become privatized -to make sure that they operate at the same standard or as close to the same standard as possible that our provincial parks are operated at.

So, Mr. Speaker, she was unable to give me the actual amount of what was going to be saved this year but she did say it would be far less than $1.8 million. In fact, it is going to be less than $1.8 million every year because of the forty-five employees that are hired through the existing provincial parks. So the fact of the matter is, the program review that was put forth by the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation and accepted by the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation which outlined the reasons not to privatize our provincial parks, most especially during 1997, our Cabot year, the program review actually said that 1997 would not be a good year to privatize or experiment with the privatization of provincial parks. The minister actually agrees with that because she is putting in place a support staff and a support system to help the new operators of these provincial parks - once they become privatized - to make sure that the standards are not compromised this year. If that is the case, Mr. Speaker, should we not reverse this decision immediately and look at privatization maybe next year? If we are not going to save the $1.8 million this year, nowhere close to the $1.8 million this year because the minister does not want to jeopardize the standards in the park this year and she is going out to pay for support and pay for support staff this year, to make sure that that standard is not jeopardize, why do we not look at waiting until next year to experiment with privatization?

There is not a member in this House, probably not a person in the Province who would disagree with the fact that experimenting with privatization this year is a dangerous thing. We are putting in jeopardy our tourism industry in the Province; we are putting in jeopardy -

MR. SPEAKER: (Inaudible).

MR. OSBORNE: Just a couple of minutes to clue up, Mr. Speaker?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: No leave.

MR. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to support this petition on behalf of the people who have signed it.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to support the petition as put forward by the Member for St. John's South, a member who has put a lot of time and effort in going out and listening to the people, consulting with the people and finding out their views. A member who travelled across this Province, talked to the people who were concerned, talked about the people affected and what he heard, Mr. Speaker, I can assure you that it was not the same as what the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board heard.

The Minister of Finance and Treasury Board went out and supposedly consulted and talked with people and implemented a Budget that was supposed to reflect what people thought, reflect people's views, be a people's Budget, Mr. Speaker, but I can assure you that out in rural Newfoundland and Labrador today, if each one of us went back to our district and talked about the cuts that were being brought forward by this government and the things that were being privatized, such as the parks, you won't find many people who came forward and told the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board that they wanted their parks privatized. You won't find too many people who came forward and told the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board that we would like our parks now passed back to private enterprise for $9,000. I have been hearing the price of $9,000 for a provincial park - unheard of. The Member for St. John's South asked the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation if she would submit some information regarding what those particular parks have cost us over the past number of years. We have no information, Mr. Speaker, no information whatsoever.

I was listening to the Open Line show one night and I heard the Member for Grand Falls - Buchans, call in to the Open Line show about the parks in the area that were being privatized and she called back twice, Mr. Speaker, the same night, because of what she had said and then somebody else called in and she had to call back, was it twice or three times?... you were in Corner Brook and finally, she had to call back again at the end of the program and try to clarify her position. She was very, I suppose, agitated because naturally she would like to be a good member, like all of us here we would like to please our constituents, and I can understand where she is coming from; she did not want to come out and say she disagreed with it because I suppose she has hopes to get into Cabinet some day, and does not want to take on the government so she had to call back a couple of times to try to pacify her constituents and try to tell them: No, I don't believe in it but yes, I support it. That is what she was trying to say, but she was very agitated, she was very concerned about it because she knows that her constituents were dead set against this privatization plan.

She knew, Mr. Speaker, that many of those same people who went out to vote for her and whom she is expecting to go out and vote for her again, will now probably be deprived of an opportunity to take their children and be able to afford to go to those parks. These are not parks, Mr. Speaker, where you see Newfoundlanders pulling up with their big motor homes, their 33-footers, for the most part they were parks that people took their hardtop campers or their canvas tents and went and enjoyed a family outing. For the most part, it is a situation where people took the pot and the Coleman stove and went out on a Sunday evening and had a meal of salt beef and cabbage out in the provincial parks.

Young people, seniors, the poor people of this Province, Mr. Speaker, this was their trip down to Florida. You don't see them tanned like the Minister of Health this time of the year, if they are, it is wind burn I say to members opposite. Those are the people who use those parks and who will now be deprived of going out with their families and using those government-owned facilities. They are going to be deprived of that –

MR. EFFORD: Why?

MR. FITZGERALD: - because the minister knows very well that once you privatize something then it becomes profit-driven and then, Mr. Speaker, up go the fees in order for them to make their profits and make it a viable operation. Why else would somebody buy a park if they did not want to turn a profit? So if government is losing money and if those people are expected to go back here and do different things, then they are going to have to put the price up and what they will be doing by doing that, is drive the common Newfoundlander, drive a gentleman and the family who would like to take their family out for a Sunday afternoon or a weekend, what they are going to do is, drive them out of it altogether and that is a shame. It is a shame.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: Just to clue up, Mr. Speaker. I would like to touch on the employees of those parks.

MR. EFFORD: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member does not have leave.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to pass up this opportunity to make a few comments on the petition presented by my good friend from St. John's South, the quiet man, and -

AN HON. MEMBER: The man from the dark side.

MR. EFFORD: The man from the dark side.

- and my good friend from Bonavista who is not so quiet but very seldom talks and points it out as it is.

I think my good friend, the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods, pointed that out very clearly today in Question Period and put the hon. member in his place. I think when he comes in with a question from now on, I don't think it will be one written by Sue and not researched. I think when they ask another question it will be written and researched by the member himself. He won't allow that to happen again.

Mr. Speaker, privatizing the parks and closing the parks, I keep hearing the word `closing' parks. There are no parks going to be closed; and what is wrong with privatization?

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South on a point of order.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, I listened to the Member for St. John's South, and I know what I said myself, and I never heard one person talk about closing parks. What we talked about and what the prayer of the petition was, was privatizing parks, I say to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, just for clarification, a point of clarification.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member has stated himself it is not a point of order. He took advantage of the opportunity for clarification.

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, if you are going to talk about privatization of parks, and in the same tone or the same voice say that because of privatization there is nobody going to go in the parks, then I don't know what the word means, if closed does not mean that; the parks are not going to be in operation.

Both members said very clearly in their remarks that because you privatize it, it is going to cost too much for Newfoundlanders to be able to avail of the use of the parks. Therefore, if that is the case, the parks are not going to be in operation if nobody is going to use them. That is the reference to which I was referring. I don't know what is wrong with privatization, and I don't know why we should be fearmongering.

Gushue's Park, in the area in which I live -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, protect me.

Mr. Speaker, Gushue's Park, in the area in which I live, which I pass every single day coming to and from St. John's, I had numerous calls from people in my district who wanted to apply to take over Gushue's Park. I visited Gushue's Park many times. What is in there? Government has operated that park for years. You go in there, there is a place to pull in a camper. There are no services, nothing there, just go and park your vehicle. If a private operation takes over that park, in which I know there is a great deal of interest, and puts in services over and beyond the normal services that you would expect to have in a park, and they charge a reasonable - because competition will cause that to happen - a reasonable fee, and if people don't use it they would have to drop their prices if their prices were too high, then the parks would be better utilized and more things in the parks for those people who visit the parks.

Mr. Speaker, times are changing. Government does not have the dollars - and the Opposition is complaining all the time - in infrastructure and roads and health care and education. Put your priorities right. Where should you best spend the dollars that you have available to you? If private operators could operate those parks and provide the service, then, Mr. Speaker, it is the right thing to do.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition on behalf of a number of Newfoundlanders who are petitioning the House on the issue of a school lunch program.

These petitioners say as follows: that

WHEREAS poverty and its effects are serious problems for so many in this Province and things are getting worse; now more than one-third of Newfoundland and Labrador children live in families on social assistance; and

WHEREAS child poverty and hunger are a sad reality which hurts children today in their chances for the future in education and in life, and hungry children cannot learn; and

WHEREAS a universal school lunch program would provide a stigma-free way of ensuring every schoolchild a good, nutritional meal every day;

We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to direct the government to establish a universal comprehensive school lunch program for every school in Newfoundland and Labrador to help end child hunger and to give our children a better chance.

Mr. Speaker, these petitioners are asking the government to recognize what I think common sense would tell even the most cold-hearted and cruel person, that if you go to school hungry you cannot learn properly. It has to be recognized that something must be done about that. I noted earlier today the Member for Cartwright - L'Anse au Clair gave notice of a motion to be presented to this House regarding the circumstances in Labrador, and the special circumstances that people on social assistance find themselves in there because of the excessive cost of food in Labrador. The estimates that have been given is that the cost of food in Labrador is from 40 per cent to 165 per cent higher than that in St. John's, Newfoundland.

That is astounding, and points out the gross inadequacies of the social assistance rates. Because it has been estimated by the Newfoundland Dietetic Association in a survey done last Fall that the cost of providing a nutritious diet for a family of four, based on St. John's prices, would use up 85 per cent of the basic social assistance rate available to people outside of the cost of rent. That represents a substantial amount of money just for St. John's alone. If the prices of food in Labrador, the Labrador Coast, are 40 per cent to 165 per cent over the prices in St. John's, we can see that people on social assistance in Labrador are in very dire straits, that they cannot possibly get sufficient food for a nutritious diet.

Neither can the communities. Many communities in this Province cannot come up with a voluntary charity-based program to provide a school lunch program for their schools. It cannot be done. Government has to recognize that.

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: It is pretty obvious. Even the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture would know that every community in this Province does not have the resources, does not have the community base, to provide a charity-based school lunch program in their communities. The ones that are in the most dire need are the ones who are least able to provide a school lunch program for their schoolchildren. The parents are at risk, the children are at risk, and it is not possible to come up with this program without the support of government.

These petitioners recognize that and they are asking the House to direct government to establish a universal comprehensive school lunch program for every school in the Province - not just ones which happen to have an active P.T.A., not just ones which happen to be in a place where there might be a Lions Club or a Kinsmen club or a social group that is prepared to take it on, but for every single school in the Province, Mr. Speaker, so that each child has access to a nutritious, healthy meal every day that they are in school; so that they can go some way to help them attack the child hunger that they are facing so they can take advantage and learn in school that is being provided by the public. The funds for this, Mr. Speaker, can clearly come -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. HARRIS: - from the money that is being saved in the education system today.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will sit down and allow the Government House Leader to address the petition that is being presented by these petitioners.

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I stand today in support of the petition, as I have done on a number of other occasions and as has been done by my colleague, the Opposition House Leader, on several other occasions. This is an issue which has been brought forward by my colleague, the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi, on numerous occasions, and it is one which requires attention and requires, I would suggest, serious consideration by members opposite. What I find happens so often is that when issues are presented in this House repeatedly, it tends to give the impression that they are unimportant, because familiarity often gives one the impression that it is just repeated information, it cannot be that serious, it is just another petition in a long list of petitions, one after the other. But, obviously, when you seriously consider the content and when you seriously review the prayer of this petition, it can be readily seen that it is of utmost importance. Mr. Speaker, although this has been presented on numerous occasions, it does not in any way, take away from the seriousness of the intent and the importance of the prayer. Because we are dealing with perhaps our greatest resource, that being the children of our Province.

The petition states that the effects of poverty are serious problems for many in this Province and that things are getting worse. That is an understatement, I would suggest, Mr. Speaker. All we have to do is read the report that was recently prepared by Dr. Canning. In that report there was an entire chapter which is dedicated to poverty and how children who come from poor families are simply not in a position and do not have the ability or the capacity to readily learn as effectively as children who come from another income level. So, obviously, Mr. Speaker, the issue of poverty and the issue of hungry children is an essential issue that has to be considered at all times when one reviews the educational opportunity and benefit of an education to these children.

Mr. Speaker, this particular petition deals with a universal health care program and it is one that I personally endorse because there is no need, when we are dealing with children, to be selective. There is no need to say, `this child needs it and that child does not.' We are dealing with young children. We are dealing with children who require a basis, who require a minimal amount of protection and a universal health care program would do that. A universal school lunch program would provide a stigma-free way of ensuring every schoolchild a good nutritional meal every day. So, not only does it have educational benefit, the universal lunch program, Mr. Speaker, would allow each and every child in our school system to be treated equally and fairly. There is no discrimination. There is no selectivity. There is just one child being considered and regarded on an equal basis with every other child, regardless whether it is a boy or girl, regardless of the grade, regardless of the community, regardless of the home, equality throughout and that is what this universality program, Mr. Speaker, is all about.

So I support the prayer of this petition. I support it once again and, as I have indicated, we have done this on this side of the House on many occasions. It is an important issue. Why, Mr. Speaker, is it important? Because it deals with our children and nothing more can be said about it. It is something that has to be given serious consideration by members opposite. It has great value for our young people and it will give these children nutritional well-being and a sense of equality, which every child in this Province deserves.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious issue, the petition put forward by my hon. colleague opposite and supported by the Member for St. John's East.

I had the opportunity and the privilege and the honour of being Minister of Social Services in 1989, for a short time, for two years. During that two years, I spent untold hours meeting with groups of people about hungry children. In fact, I played a major role into the first school lunch program introduced in St. John's, down at Gower Street United Church.

I was invited to visit a school, and the first place I visited where the school lunch program was put in place, I saw children - the staff and the people who were getting the school lunch program involved, pointed out to me how they were so quiet and so removed from the rest of the class and how their grades had not been up to the expectations that the instructors thought they should be.

Mr. Speaker, we introduced at that time, a school lunch program. I think, if I remember correctly, it was about $28,000 that we put into it that year, through the Department of Social Services, in co-operation with the community groups.

Six months later, I visited that same school and just walked in around, not to be seen as being someone looking at people to see how they were, and the staff pointed out the same three children that they had pointed out before the school lunch program had begun. And, Mr. Speaker, emotions - you cannot hide your emotions, when I saw at the beginning and then, six months later, saw those same children, and such a difference, such a difference in those three children. They had been fed on a regular basis, on a morning and a daily basis, and their ability to mix with other children and their getting involved and their learning ability really came alive. We are only talking, in this case -

MR. TULK: There is no doubt about it, there was never a minister that went into more (inaudible) and when in looking for more children than that minister, there.

MR. EFFORD: Exactly. Mr. Speaker, I am only using the example of three children, here. You can apply that to any school in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and you can multiply the numbers - you just cannot imagine what is happening out there. And it is not only the social services client, it is the low-income wage earners, those people who are working for minimum wage, probably worse off, in a lot of cases, than social assistance recipients, if you can be any worse off. Nevertheless, it is a real factor.

One time, I had a call from a constituent of mine in Shearstown, and my son was in high school at the same time that this young boy was in there. His dad called me. He had been out of work and had to go on social assistance. He called me, and I knew the emotion, you could hear it in his voice when he was talking on the phone. He said to me: `John, I understand that you are working and that you are earning money and that your son, Lee, is going to school and he is fed well; but let me tell you how my son' - four nights that week, the most he had for supper was Kraft dinner. Four nights in one week, that was the most he had for supper. That was all he could afford, and you could hear the emotion in the dad's voice when he was telling me - not because he wanted to be in that position, but he had no other choice.

It is a serious problem, Mr. Speaker, and we all have to do more. The Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods just told me, this year the School Milk Program - $200,000, and if I remember correctly, I think the Department of Social Services last year put in $125,000. It is still not enough.

MR. TULK: By the way, the milk producers in this Province have contributed substantially to the milk program.

MR. EFFORD: Exactly, the milk producers in the Province. But, Mr. Speaker, we all, industry, governments, community groups, we all have to do more. We have to continue giving more until every child, every child in this Province of ours has enough food to put in their stomach. The very least we do.

Mr. Speaker, we support the attempt of what we are trying to do, and we will continue to do more to make sure that our children are fed properly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: There was an item on the Order Paper under Routine Proceedings that was overlooked by the Speaker, so I will revert to Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

 

Answers to Questions

For which Notice has been Given

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Development and Rural Renewal.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to table in the House on behalf of my colleague the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation the response to the question about the Newfoundland and Labrador delegation travelling to Bristol to attend the departure of the Matthew.

MR. SPEAKER: It being Thursday and 4:00 p.m, I will read the three questions we will be debating in the Late Show.

Number one, from the Member for Cape St. Francis: I am dissatisfied with the answer provided by the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs re: my question concerning the infrastructure funding.

Number two, from the Member for Kilbride: I am dissatisfied with the answer provided by the Minister of Education re: my question on training concerning the Terra Nova development.

Number three, from the Member for Waterford Valley: I am dissatisfied with the answer provided by the Minister of Health re: my question on Dietetic Association recommendations to government.

 

Orders of the Day

 

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker.

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

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

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

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Actually it isn't the Budget speech, but it is an amendment to the Budget speech that is presently before the floor. I believe I have only a couple of minutes left so I won't be able to launch into a very long addition to my remarks on Tuesday.

I do want to say that the economy of this Province, and the true state of the economy, is not really accurately represented by the Province's response, and by the government's response in the Budget. As an example, and going back to the discussion we were just having about children and poor children - I know the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture has a very serious concern there.

Let me say that I was shocked to discover, from reading a report from the National Council on Welfare which was released recently, that based on its study and its comparisons in poverty rates across the country, it has shown that in 1989, Mr. Speaker, 17.9 per cent of the children in this Province were living below the poverty line. Just shy of 18 per cent in 1989.

In 1995, the last year for which figures are available to this study, the poverty rate for children in Newfoundland and Labrador was 26 per cent, fully 8 percentage points higher. Nearly one-third more children living in poverty in Newfoundland and Labrador in 1995 than there was in 1989. That is a very substantial and significant increase in poor children over a six-year period, from 18 per cent in 1989 when the Liberal government took office to 26 per cent in 1995.

When you look at how that poverty rate is experienced by children of single-parent mothers, 77.5 per cent of the children of single mothers live in poverty. Mr. Speaker, that is the reality that is faced by children in this Province. The number of children that I referred to is over 36,000 poor children in Newfoundland and Labrador and, as the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture says, it is not just children of families on social assistance; it is children, in some cases, where the parents are both working. In some cases only one parent is working; in some cases they are on social assistance. Thirty-six thousand children in 1995 were living in poverty -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: - and this government and the government's budgets ought to address that very serious concern.

I understand my time is up, Mr. Speaker, unless I have a few minutes leave.

MR. TULK: No.

MR. HARRIS: The Government House Leader is not giving any leave to talk about the number of poor children in the Province, so I therefore will have to sit down.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright - L'Anse-au-Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wanted to have some comments, of course, on the Budget Debate and also as it relates to, I guess, poverty and the situation a lot of people in my district are in as well as others in the Province, and I refer specifically to people on social assistance who live on the Coast of Labrador. I am sure the hon. Member for Torngat can attest to the information I am going to provide.

In recent weeks I took a serious look at all of the communities and what the people in these communities were paying in terms of food costs and the cost of living and so on. I refer specifically to the people on social assistance, and I broke this down for a family of four who would live in various parts of Coastal Labrador. Now, we are talking families here who receive about $600 a month on which to live. First of all, they are paying the highest prices for diesel generated power in the Province, they have the highest energy costs of anywhere in the Province, and that equals to about $100 a month of their expenses. Then they also have to contend with the prices, and these prices that are reflected here include the air subsidy that has been calculated.

I think it was this year - no, last year - the Newfoundland Dietetic Association did a survey in the St. John's area, and they looked at what it would cost to feed a family of four nutritional meals for a full week, and the cost was just over $120 a week, and that was in the St. John's area. That calculated to be about 84 per cent of the assistance rate that they were receiving. Now the assistance rate is the same all over the Province, and if it was equalling 84 per cent of that rate in St. John's it equals anywhere from 45 per cent to 165 per cent greater than that rate in Coastal Labrador.

I looked at oranges, for example, and this will amaze you. In St. John's you can buy those oranges for $3.29 a dozen. When you work your way up through the Coast of Labrador in terms of Mary's Harbour, you are paying $5.40 a dozen. You move further up to Black Tickle and you are paying $8.90 a dozen. You equal out those grocery rates for a week and you are paying 165 per cent greater for those groceries in that community.

These are instances where we have to look at the assistance rate for these families, totally inadequate. They do not have the support services and mechanisms in these communities to be able to offset their cost of living. They don't have food banks. They don't have places where they can go and get second-hand clothing and things like that for their children. They don't have lunch programs in school, on which the hon. members presented petitions today and spoke. These are all issues which have to be dealt with to try and alleviate the cost of living for the people up in that area.

Also, when I looked at this, I looked at the fuel allowances that they were receiving to heat their home and offset that cost. Those allowances were set at $90 a month, and I couldn't believe that they have not been looked at since 1992, and there have been no increases in those rates. If you look at a family up there which is burning oil to heat their home, they are looking at anywhere from $300 to $400 a month. The $90 is very inadequate in trying to supplement that cost.

If you were looking at it in terms of wood, which is the cheapest fuel heating supply that they could have, you are still looking at in excess of $100 a month to provide that. Depending on where you live, there are some places where you spend at least twenty-five dollars in gas just to get to where there is woods where you can cut firewood. So these are the kinds of situations that communities up there are faced with.

We talk about child poverty in the Province and making adjustments and I think that the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture spoke - and he probably knows all too well and used examples - specific examples of things that he has seen and conditions that he has seen, and that was since 1989 when he was the minister, so I say we still have a long way to go in trying to correct some of these inequities and see that these things are done and addressed properly.

In looking at what it is costing these people, not only in terms of food, in terms of diesel power, in terms of clothing for their children, in terms of the fuel supply for their homes, we all have to pay a price I know in society, but I think the price should be at least equitable to all residents and looking at it from a provincial perspective, as a government, that can be controlled and a quality can prevail in being able to provide some sort of equal terms and effective standards for the cost of living of people in the Province.

Also, look at health care and what the health care system means to these people. Yesterday I spoke about the fact that for simple things like x-rays you have to travel to St. Anthony to have it done at a cost to the individual of about $100. If there is a kid involved and a parent, you are looking at $200 so the cost doubles. But there are a number of incidents like that. For example: We have no paediatrician services, not even in St. Anthony, and these people have to fly down to St. John's every time they need that service and to get proper medical treatment for their children and I mean, we look at a cost of anywhere from $500 to $1,000 for a one-day trip, so I mean those are the kinds of things and costs that they have to incur in trying to avail of everyday services as well as trying to put food on the table and clothes on their children's backs.

We talked in the last few weeks of debate about the lack of doctors in the Province and the problems that people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador are suffering because of these setbacks. This is an ongoing problem that we have had for a number of years and I think we have to put corrective strategies in place to try and fix the problem. I look at Forteau for instance, in the Labrador Straits, where there are two positions for doctors in that area. The salaries are there, they have been allocated, we cannot fill the positions, impossible. We have tried everything. We get one doctor in there, that doctor becomes overworked; there are so many demands put on their time, so much stress and pressure put on them that they just up and leave in no time and locums are insufficient to fulfil the medical needs of the entire area. There is absolutely no consistency in that type of a medical system. So I think that we have to look at a program specifically designed for rural doctors, to keep them in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

A few years ago we were having similar problems with the nursing stations in Coastal Labrador and the fact that we could not get nurses to come up there to stay and work and so on. There was a program that was designed, A Nursing Access Program, and that was a successful program. It took people from rural communities and the Coast of Labrador, it put them through nursing school through the program, ensured that they were qualified, capable individuals who came out of that program and they gave back service to the coastal clinics in Labrador and that was their payment for their education in that particular field. This program is working and is working well and I think that we should look at a program for rural doctors that could be modelled after that.

We talked about rural Newfoundland and Labrador and yesterday there was a motion on the floor that discussed the commitment to communities in these areas and so on. It is pretty heartbreaking sometimes when you travel throughout your district and my district being all rural in all communities and see the state that people are in, the state that families are in, to see the increasing number of people who are becoming dependant on social assistance, who do not have stable incomes and you know, these are people who always had a job, they could always find a job, they never ever had that stress in their lives, that amount of pressure in their lives but today, people in these communities cannot find employment. They are trying to find employment and they cannot. They have trained and trained. They have retrained and they have degrees. They have years of technical and academic experience but what is happening to them? What is happening in this Province?

Every single day we hear the same speech over and over that there is development in this Province, that there are wonderful opportunities in oil, gas and mineral development, that there are new and innovative technology advancement and yes, I agree that the opportunities are there. There are endless opportunities. I agree that the potential is overwhelming, that the prospects could be out of this world but it has to be managed properly. It has to be implemented properly. It has to be effective and it has to be driven to the peak of opportunity for all people in all communities that are involved but to do these things we need more than good intentions. We need capital, we need financial stability and we are not going to achieve it by just raising petty fees and permits in this Province. You would have to issue a good many moose licences to make up for the revenue that we are going to need to put this Province back in line.

AN HON. MEMBER: What are you getting on with now?

MS JONES: You should be listening. If you were listening you would know exactly what I was getting on with.

In order to put this back in line we need more than the dollars that are going to come in from moose licences and from woodcutting permits. We need big dollars. We need guaranteed dollars. We need dollars for the future.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS JONES: Yes, but we are only going to get it if we implement proper taxes and proper royalties on our resources -

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: - by demanding that our resources be developed to the full potential of the Province. We need those revenues and we need those taxes. That is why we can't stall and delay on implementing mining and mineral taxes for operations -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I would ask the hon. member if she would take her seat?

MS JONES: - like Voisey's Bay and other developments. Sorry.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright - L'Anse au-Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I was saying, this Province needs more than petty dollars to solve the problems that we have. We need to start looking at where we can increase our revenue and where we can guarantee revenues for the future. We cannot continue to impose small taxes on petty permits and things like that in this Province that are just driving up the cost to the consumer and not providing extra revenue for them.

MR. EFFORD: Where is Danny Dumaresque when we need him?

MS JONES: The Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture is wondering where Danny Dumaresque is, well if the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture had been around in February of last year, he would have seen where Danny Dumaresque was.

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: I was not going to comment on this but I think I will comment, for a couple of reasons, I am going to clarify what the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture had to say yesterday. I am going to do this, Mr. Speaker, not only for the record but because I know the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture listens when I speak. I know he listens to what I have to say and he is interested in what I have to say. That was yesterday when we were talking about the issues of the fishery and I say to the minister and he knows this, he knows that I want to see each and every plant in my district in operation. I want to see them operating to the full capacity that they can operate. I want them to be able to avail of every resource that is off its shore and I want to make sure that the minister follows his policy of adjacency in harvesting and processing and ensures that that happens. I was extremely pleased, I say to the minister, when I heard him on the radio, when he came out and said that all plants in Labrador will have core status, that they will all be treated equally. That was a happy day for me, I say to the minister, because then I knew that they were competitive, that they had the opportunities -

MR. TULK: (Inaudible) taken away all you ammunition, that's your problem.

MS JONES: Just a second now, I will get to the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods in just a minute.

AN HON. MEMBER: Give it to him, give it to him!

MS JONES: But I say to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture - he is wondering where the previous member went - the previous member could not have been concerned or he would still be here today. I made a commitment, I say to the minister, to the people of my district when I got elected that I was going to ensure that every opportunity and every possibility for employment, for economic diversification, was available to them, and if it means challenging policies that this minister brings down, then sobeit, that will be done.

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible).

MS JONES: I would say to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, he has sat in enough meetings with me to know where I am coming from on the fishery in Labrador. He knows that the people of the Coast of Labrador have never gotten a fair deal in the fishery of this Province. He knows that, and he knows that I know it, and he knows that we are going to watch every decision, every angle, every policy, every criteria, every licence, every quota, that comes down. We are going to watch it and we are going to see that it is developed for the benefit of the people on that coast.

MR. EFFORD: I gave them the licences because of Danny Dumaresque.

MS JONES: The minister knows that the people on the Coast of Labrador are getting these licences because they worked damn hard to get them themselves. They lobbied and they fought, and they knew what they wanted, and they came and sold their ideas. They helped implement the plan for the fishery on the Coast of Labrador. They set it out for you because they knew, and they have known for a long time, where they are going with it.

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible) people in Labrador that I am not doing anything for them? (Inaudible). They would throw you out.

MS JONES: The minister seems to have a great deal of problems in listening. I don't know if it is his listening or his hearing, but he obviously keeps getting things out of context. Nevertheless, the people in my district know where I stand on the issue. The minister knows where I stand on the issue. He knows that we are going to guarantee to see that the fishery on the Coast of Labrador is developed to the fullest for the people who live there, that we are going to ensure that every plant that can possibly be open is going to be open. We are going to ensure that the quotas that are deserving to these people are going to be brought to those shores. Then I won't have to stand in this House and talk about social assistance policies; I won't have to stand up here and ask for increased income support in social assistance for the people on my coast, because if this is done right they will have secure income support. They will have stability. That is not what they have now, and I hope that when I stand in this House -

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible).

MS JONES: I say to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I would like to see the level of decorum in this House raised at least a little.

The hon. the Member for Cartwright - L'Anse-au-Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will just take a minute to conclude.

In terms of the economic development and diversity of the communities in my district, and I will be talking about it to a great extent in the days to come, not only on the issue of the fishery but on the issue of the forestry, on the possibility and the potential with the Trans-Labrador Highway as it goes through the district, and I hope that at the end of the day these developments will be done in the best interest of the people who live there, that the gains that they make are significant, are economical. Then we won't have to stand in this House and talk about policies of social assistance and increasing fuel allowances and so on and so forth, because the people in my district will be self-sufficient. They will be able to play their part and carry their role in the jurisdiction of this Province as well.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I rise today to participate in the motion put forward by my colleague from Baie Verte, the motion of non-confidence in the government. It gives me an opportunity, I say to my most belligerent constituent in the District of Kilbride -

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

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I apologize to my member.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: I appreciate the apology, I say to the Government House Leader.

It gives me an opportunity to discuss some issues, to put forward –

MR. TULK: I won't be voting for you, though.

MR. E. BYRNE: The only house on Chesley Drive that didn't vote for me in the last election, the only house on Chesley Drive in the Goulds that didn't vote for me, was the members house right there and there is a good reason for it, because there was no one in the house, he was down in his own district, but had he been there, had he been in that house, I am confident, I am told from a very good source and I am confident that I would have, at least, split the vote in the house on Chesley Drive. From what I understand -

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Yes, from what I understand, I say to the Government House Leader, I am confident I would have split the vote and it is a good thing, I say, because I understand the Government House Leader was recently married and we would not want to have caused any kerfuffle whatsoever in -

MR. EFFORD: If anybody in my house voted for you, I would burn the house.

MR. E. BYRNE: What it that? Everyone what?

MR. EFFORD: Anybody in my house voted for you, I would burn the house.

AN HON. MEMBER: All the pictures would fall of the wall, the whole thing would come apart.

MR. E. BYRNE: The Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, I believe that, I believe he would burn the house, I believe that the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture would in fact burn his house.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Gone, not going to do it.

The minister knows full well. It is too bad the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology is not here because there has been a shift in government, a fundamental shift since the new Premier was elected. From May 3, 1993, when I was first elected, up until the last election, the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology was never in this House, he was in Chili, he was in Japan, he was in other Asian parts, he was in the states, in short Mr. Speaker, he was globe trotting. He was the government salesman, the economic czar, supposedly, and the present Premier or the former Premier at the time, was more content to stay at home and take care of matters on the local front, but things have changed.

If there was one member in this House that I had seen, that has been in the assemble since I have been here of May `93, who has the most improved attendance record since `93, it is the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology. He has been in this House more since February 22, 1996, than the previous sitting of the House and for good reason because it is not him anymore that does the globe trotting. It is not the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology who is on the road week after week, but it is the Premier. It is the Premier who travels tremendously from coast to coast, from one country to another, from the far western depths of the nation of Canada to the most eastern points in Europe and beyond and I am told too, that the minister is getting some relief from the Premier, but there it is.

The question underlines an important issue, that what has it produced and what are we producing in terms of trade missions? Are we increasing the revenue generation for the Province? Are those trips producing opportunities for new business to come in and diversify our provincial economy?

We have seen this week for example, the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture announce a tannery for Baie Verte, which is the beginning of other things, I am led to believe, and it was probably the closest time that I have heard since I have been in the House, that the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture came to, actually publicly in this chamber, I understand at the press conference he might have done it, actually complemented a Tory.

MR. EFFORD: No, I did not.

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes, you did.

MR. E. BYRNE: I think he did and with good reason. It was the closest time in this chamber, he had to even acknowledge him, he had to acknowledge the impact that that member played in ensuring that that business came to this Province because I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, on at least two or three occasions.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: On at least two or three occasions, he did, yes he did on at least two or three occasions, throughout the process of trying to get that business opportunity here, that member saved the day for that business and for the people of his district. He did what was required and he should not be doing anything less and neither should government, but it was also an example where, at least at times, some civility amongst members, some civility can take place between government, in terms of pursing its policies of regional or economic development and people who are playing in the Opposition.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: I'm sorry. Mr. Speaker, I understand it is now the Late Show. It is 4:30 p.m. I will conclude my remarks. I won't conclude them, I will adjourn for the day and conclude my remarks on Monday.

 

Debate on the Adjournment

[Late Show]

 

MR. SPEAKER: It being 4:30 p.m. on Thursday, I will call on the hon. Member for Cape St. Francis who has left a note with the Speaker saying: I am dissatisfied with the answer provided by the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs re: my question on infrastructure funding.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In the House of Assembly on Monday I asked questions of the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs regarding the distribution of the infrastructure money and the municipal capital works money for 1997-1998. The answer that the minister gave I don't believe was really forthcoming and forthright. I asked questions again today, and he tried to put a spin on the answers to make it look like the towns in my district did not support the arena.

If I look at Hansard, page 481, I asked the minister why the application wasn't supported and did not get funding, and he said, and this is straight from Hansard: "I asked the communities in his district for support for the stadium. I did not get it." He put this out for the public to hear in this House of Assembly. I asked him today to name the towns that did not support this facility. There was one municipality at the last minute a few weeks before the announcements came withdrew support for the arena, one town that was going to commit $18,000 to a $3 million project.

By the way, I met with the minister and I told him what was going on with that application, and how that one mayor was playing nothing but pure politics with the situation. I explained it to him that the people in the town supported the arena, and he knows that and I know it. So we had the support of four municipalities, and the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs stood in this House and said: "I asked the communities in his district for support for the stadium. I did not get it." Now when I asked him today to name the four towns he stood in his place and said he couldn't name the four towns, he couldn't produce any correspondence where they had withdrawn support for the arena. I would have to ask the minister - I won't say that he deliberately misled the House, but he certainly, by making that statement, inadvertently, to say the least, misled this House of Assembly, and in so doing misled the people of the Province and the people in the District of Cape St. Francis who wanted that arena very –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I would say to the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods that if I'm driving him nuts - I take no more pleasure in doing anything else than driving that man nuts. If I am, I must be doing my job. Because the ministers on that side of the House certainly have shown that they have not been doing their job in the past five years, I say to the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods. The Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods gives his word on something in this House of Assembly and doesn't live up to it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious situation with respect to the arena.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Good for them, I would say, I don't want it anyway. I say to the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, I asked the question today with respect to the town of Clarenville, with the support of a private application that went through the infrastructure program. The minister stood up and wanted to lead the people to believe that they had support for it from the town of Clarenville.

What he has here is a letter that was submitted in this House today, signed by the town clerk, dated back in November 1996, before the new infrastructure program was even thought of, before it was even approved, and they were trying to make this out that this was support through the infrastructure program. It is clearly not. The infrastructure program is not even mentioned here. But the application that went in from the District of Cape St. Francis had letters from five towns in the application supporting the arena through the infrastructure program.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)!

MR. J. BYRNE: The Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods talks about a double arena. Now what is going on there, I know that there was funding allocated for one arena. We would have accepted one. One arena in the area is certainly viable, two is more viable! That is why there was an application made for two. It was more viable than one.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: The minister skates on thin ice when he skates - he does a lot of skating in this House of Assembly, around the issues.

Mr. Speaker, basically what I'm saying is there was not another application in the infrastructure program nearly as good, as viable, as feasible and as needed and wanted as this application, Mr. Speaker, yet it did not get the funding the second time around. But there are other areas that got funding in this Province that is certainly questionable, to say the least. On that note, Mr. Speaker, I will sit down and let the minister address this issue in his usual smug -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: What are you saying to the - The Minister of Injustice, what are you talking about now?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

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

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

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, there were five towns that supported the application. One withdrew at the last moment and the hon. member knows the town that withdrew, because he came and told me before we got the letter. So he does not have to ask that question in the House. I do not think anyone else in the House is really concerned or worried about what town it was. There was a town that withdrew.

After the assessment by Recreation and speaking to me while we were doing the recreational projects, the Department of Recreation did not feel at this particular point in time that it was a good idea to recommend that project. Because the City of St. John's recreation in and around the St. John's area are now suffering because, believe it or not, the St. John's people say, because of the opening of the Goulds stadium last year - they have lost money because of that.

MR. J. BYRNE: That is not factual, because the competition came to me (inaudible).

MR. A. REID: I did not say it.

MR. J. BYRNE: The competition said it was a good idea (inaudible).

MR. A. REID: Well, I am lying. I guess the hon. member is calling me a liar, Mr. Speaker, like he tried to do the other day.

Mr. Speaker, I thought I answered today, I guess, why the hon. member - but for the record, I would be quite willing at this time to ask the Member for St. John's East to divert the $3.5 million that has been awarded to Conception Bay South because we do not have any money left in the infrastructure program. If the citizens of Conception Bay South or the citizens of St. John's want to give up the $3.5 million so this hon. gentleman can open up a stadium in his district, I am certainly willing to entertain it and I would suggest that we start with our hon. Member for Waterford Valley - he can give up $900,000.

MR. J. BYRNE: What about (inaudible).

MR. A. REID: Yes, and I tell you, I will start it right now. I will give up, Mr. Speaker, $500,000 of my infrastructure money from the Town of Carbonear, if the Town of Mount Pearl follows with a million, if the Town of CBS follows with a million and if the City of St. John's will put in the remainder.

Mr. Speaker, some three or four years ago there was a letter circulating around the Town of Fogo on Fogo Island, a letter addressed to the residents of Fogo Island by the PC Party of Newfoundland saying: Your stadium is coming in, in fact, the cheque is in the mail to start your stadium. That was in 1988, Mr. Speaker, and I can prove that to you. And if you vote Tory on Fogo Island -

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. A. REID: If you vote Tory on Fogo Island, you will have your stadium. Now, Mr. Speaker, I say to the hon. member: take it or leave it. Maybe if the residents in that honourable district were sitting on this side of the House they might have a better chance in convincing a federal Liberal member who represents that area, they might have a better chance of securing the money. It is all hogwash as far as the hon. member is concerned, he has gone out and has made the commitment they were going to get the money and now, all of a sudden, he cannot fulfil his commitment and cannot fulfil the commitments he has made to his district -

MR. J. BYRNE: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. A. REID: - and now it is, all of a sudden a reflection on me.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs is misleading the House again.

I never, ever made a commitment that they would have an arena there. I made a commitment that I would do my best and only for the workings of the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, we would have had one down there.

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order. The hon. member for Cape St. Francis wished to add clarification to the debate.

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

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South, on a point of order.

MR. FRENCH: The minister stated, how members on Fogo Island went around with a letter. Let me tell you, Mr. Speaker, in the District of Conception Bay South, his Party went around the last time and said that if they voted Liberal they would clean her and if they voted for me, they would get nothing.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) letter.

MR. FRENCH: I said there was no letter. They went around and did it verbally in my district and I will bring you up - come up and I will take you to the people's houses and show you and introduce you to them.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FRENCH: I will introduce you to them.

MR. FUREY: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: I laughed at him, `Chuck'. I laughed at him.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind all hon. members that when the Speaker stands in the House of Assembly there is to be silence.

The hon. the Government House Leader, to that point of order.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, to that point of order.

I had the unfortunate but yet somewhat fortunate privilege to be the Member for Fogo in 1989 when the government of the day, the cousins, the brothers, the friends, the people who believed in the same political philosophy, the cukes, the nukes or whatever you want to call them, sent out a letter to the Fogo Island people saying, `If you do not vote Tory -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: - there is nothing for you, and if you vote Tory, the letter and the cheque is in the mail!'

MR. FRENCH: (Inaudible) disgraceful!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Speaker has already ruled that there is no point of order. I say to the Government House Leader and I say to the Member for Conception Bay South that there is no point of order. We are now into what we refer to as the Late Show and the next hon. member is the hon. the Member for Kilbride, but I understand that he is withdrawing the question. So I call on the hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.

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

MR. SPEAKER: He has presented a note to the Speaker saying: I am dissatisfied with the answer provided by the Minister of Health, re my question on the Dietetic Association recommendations to government.

The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.

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

Yesterday in the House, I was asking some questions towards the end of Question Period and the minister, in his reply, kind of got sidetracked and he did not have sufficient time to give a response. In particular, the questions that I was submitting yesterday were contained in the report that was submitted to government by the Newfoundland Dietetic Association and basically dealt with the high incidence of low birth weight babies in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I asked some of these questions in the estimates committee a few days ago and basically the concern is that Newfoundland could really improve the health, not only of those children but we could save real substantial dollars. The report of the Dietetic Association says that it is costing us about $10 million to $12 million a year to take care of low birth weight babies, and low birth weight babies cost about $200,000 each in the first few months of their lives. Mr. Speaker, their estimate is that the savings would be around $3,500,000 a year. Now, Mr. Speaker, with that kind of savings - and also because we know there is a direct relationship between having a birth of normal weight and future complications. We know, for example, that low birth weight babies are three times more likely to have neo-developmental problems such as cerebral palsy, vision and hearing impairment and learning disabilities. We know all of that. So, Mr. Speaker, what I was asking the government, contained in the Dietetic Association report, is what kinds of programs are going to be introduced to try to reduce the high incidence of low birth weight babies?

Prince Edward Island, at one point, had the highest rate of low birth weight babies, they now have the lowest rate. Newfoundland is average, you might say, of the country. We could be doing a lot more. If we were more proactive, not only would we do a better job for those young children but we would also save a lot of dollars in the meantime. So I am wondering if the minister could comment on that further? For example, the Dietetic Association says that for every dollar invested, $20 could be saved in health care costs. This is not my information data; it is the data of the Dietetic Association and it is shared also by Dr. Chandra. So if we were to put more money into prevention, the report said that for every dollar you put in, you can save twenty. With that kind of data, it not only makes good fiscal sense; it makes good economic sense, it makes good social sense, good health sense, and we should be doing a little bit more about it.

I ask the minister if he would be able to continue what he was supposed to be doing yesterday instead of getting into a dialogue at the end of Question Period that was pretty unrelated to the question that was asked. In fact, he never did get to that at all. He had a dialogue with my colleague, the Member for Kilbride.

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I cannot disagree fundamentally with a lot of the information that the hon. member has put out in terms of the value of good nutrition, good nutritional policies, that sort of thing. I want to tell him, by way of a little story, very quickly, how far we have come in this Province in terms of how people think about nutrition and that sort of thing.

I remember going to school, and one of the major achievements for me, as a kid, in getting to school, was, being in a family of seven kids, being able to access twelve cents for recess. If I could get twelve cents for recess, it meant that I could buy a bottle of Coke and a bag of chips. That was considered -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MATTHEWS: That was considered to be sort of a luxurious recess break treat, if you could get twelve cents to get a bottle of Coke and a bag of chips. Then it went to fourteen cents and I used to have a bottle of Coke and a krinkle, because a krinkle was a little bigger than a bag of chips.

The point struck me this morning how far we are coming in nutritional policy when, about 8:30 this morning - I was a little late leaving the House... My oldest granddaughter slept over for the night because her mother is in Toronto doing something or other.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: I do not know what she is doing up there.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

AN HON. MEMBER: What is she doing in Toronto? Is this your daughter you are talking about? I hope it is your daughter-in-law and not your daughter.

MR. MATTHEWS: Actually, her mother is my daughter-in-law so I had better be very careful. She is on specific business there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, to finish the little story I was going to tell about recess time, I asked my granddaughter this morning as I was going out the door, `Do you need some money for recess, Rayelle?' She said, `No, Poppy, I have my recess' in those bags they carry on their backs, like Minister Dion has, you know, those knapsacks. I asked, `Now, what are you having for recess?' She looked at me as straight-faced as anything and said, `A bottle of watah and baby cawwot sticks.' And I thought to myself, how far we have come in this Province in nutritional policy. The kids now who go to school in Kindergarten consider a good recess to be a bottle of water and fresh carrot sticks. I thought to myself, `very good'.

I thought I would share that with the hon. member to indicate that not only have we made great progress in the Province; the kids are accepting the education, they are getting the message, and they are being positively, in a health sense, impacted upon by what they are hearing.

I agree with what the nutritional people put forward, I agree with the comments that it is valuable, and I agree that it is also having an effect on our children. That is the most important evidence, I think, that we can see and would like to see as a result of our nutritional policies.

My daughter-in-law is coming back. I will find out what she is doing precisely and I can report back to the House.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader, before we put the adjournment motion.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I understand the Member for Kilbride has withdrawn his question. I wish the Member for Waterford - Kenmount had withdrawn his, not because of the question, but I do not know what happened back there.

Mr. Speaker, let me just say before we close that I wish the people on the other side a good weekend - there will be few left for them - and that the House will not open tomorrow but that we are adjourned, I take it, until Monday at 2:00 p.m., at which time we will again debate the Budget.

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