March 23, 1998 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIII No. 2


The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

 

Statements by Ministers

 

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, The severe impacts of the groundfish collapse are being felt throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. The scheduled termination of the TAGS Program in August and the establishment of a replacement program remains one of the most significant public policy issues facing this Province today. I wish to assure the people of Newfoundland and Labrador that their provincial government remains vigilant on this issue and intends to continue to press the federal government for a well-structured and substantive response program to replace TAGS.

Mr. Speaker, The Province continues to engage in ongoing dialogue with the federal government on this issue. We intend to remain co-operative in providing our advice on the appropriate structure for a replacement program, while continuing to impress upon the federal government their responsibility for the resolution of the crisis created in rural Newfoundland and Labrador as a result of the groundfish collapse. Given the anxiety being created by the impending ending of TAGS, we also feel it is incumbent upon the federal government to announce its intention with respect to a replacement program as quickly as possible.

The Province has been clear, Mr. Speaker, in stating that a fundamentally different approach to the existing TAGS program is required to address the longer-term challenges related to the collapse of the groundfish stocks. We have consistently stated that we believe that a new program must be comprised of five principal components.

Firstly, it is clearly evident that income replacement must be a major component. Most people will be unable to resume their participation in the traditional fishery in the near future, and in many of our communities there are few employment alternatives available at this time to replace all the jobs lost in the groundfish sector.

Mr. Speaker, this reality gives rise to the second element, namely, economic diversification. A major new program of economic development and diversification is needed to provide new opportunities in our regions. This is absolutely critical to continued viability of families and rural communities which has been most severely affected by the groundfish closures.

Thirdly, a post-TAGS program must support employment adjustment and training for those people who see this as a viable option for themselves. However, this initiative has to be linked to real job opportunities. But, clearly, training is not the solution for everybody, particularly those who are older. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, there must be an early retirement option to allow those older workers who have long-standing attachments to the fishery to have the opportunity to exit the fishery with a measure of dignity.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, there must be a licence buyback program to promote further rationization of the harvesting sector.

Mr. Speaker, given the magnitude of the crisis and the elements necessary to bring about the necessary adjustment, it is clear that substantial new funding will be required. It is inconceivable to even contemplate that these needs can be met through existing government programs.

Mr. Speaker, it has been reported by some media that a TAGS replacement program would be a hard sell in Ottawa. I want to make it clear that the Province does not consider a post tags program to be a hard sell. The Harrigan Report clearly illustrated the profound impacts of the groundfish crisis on our rural families and communities. I understand, the Standing Committee on Fishery and Oceans, in the report it will table today, has confirmed this conclusion and will place the responsibility squarely on the federal government's shoulders. The Province fully concurs. The Committee's expected recommendation of a voluntary retirement and licence buyback program is also consistent with our views, as is the recommendation of the multiyear economic stimulation program and the continuation of income support.

Clearly, the Standing Committee's detailed recommendations will require careful review. This said, the focus on redirection of foreign quotas to Canadian interests will have only marginal benefits for harvesters, processors and communities, given the relatively modest foreign quotas in place today and the enormous losses which accompanied the closure of the groundfish fisheries.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I wish to reiterate that a substantive and well-designed post-TAGS grogram is an absolute necessity and an unquestionable obligation of the federation government. The Province will continue to take all necessary steps to ensure that this obligation is met in a timely and effective manner.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for the copy of his Ministerial Statement and I say thank God for George Baker and Bill Matthews!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: Only for that fisheries committee, Mr. Speaker, we would not hear a squeak from that minister or the opposite side today.

Mr. Speaker, what this government has continued to do is run their silly polls where they have used the taxpayers dollars of this government, the taxpayers dollars of this Province, in order to conduct a poll to tell the people out there that 51 per cent of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians were against further TAGS funding. That is what this government has done, Mr. Speaker.

We support the initiatives put forward by the government here. It is too bad that he did not mention the people who have been taken off this program, I say to the minister, people who have been eliminated from the program because they - women who have been pregnant, people who have been on Workers' Compensation, people with long-term attachments to the industry because they were sick, now find themselves without an income. The minister did not address that.

Mr. Speaker, the minister did say that relatively modest foreign quotas are in place today. Well, let me tell the House about some of those relatively modest foreign quotas: 17,000 tons of turbot in 3L; 850 tons of Northern Cod, Mr. Speaker, as a by-catch; 85 per cent of the quota of turbot in 3L today goes to foreign enterprises.

Let me tell you about another modest quota, Mr. Speaker - 60 per cent of all the redfish caught in 3L and 3N go to foreign allocations; 1,500 tons of redfish quota in 3O, Mr. Speaker, 113 tons of bluefish tuna go to the Japanese market - 113 tons. Consider, Mr. Speaker, that tuna today is worth about $25,000 each and we are giving away 113 tons, while our own people are only allowed to catch 35 tons.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: That is no modest allocation, I say to members opposite.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: Foreign boats, Mr. Speaker, have landed in excess of $100 million-worth of shrimp last year.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

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

No leave.

Order, please!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the minister for making available a copy of his remarks today. I want to add to the thanks that were being given out by the Member for Bonavista South that we should also thank Peter Stoffer, the NDP member of the committee, for also joining with the one Liberal on the committee - not the other four who support another point of view - in roundly denouncing the efforts of the federal department in trying to pretend to be protecting the fisheries of this great part of the country while letting them go the way of the foreign fleets, and letting them go without proper scientific reports and results.

I agree that heads should roll to demonstrate that it is not just ministers that have responsibility, but senior officials in government who do not take their responsibilities to protect the stocks in a proper way. The real responsibility is a political one, and this government has to make a stronger response. What the minister did not talk about in his report was the thousands of people who are going to be off TAGs between now and August.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: If those people have not been mentioned, Mr. Speaker, there will not be any program left for them to extend.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to announced today, on behalf of the Minister of Justice, that government has made a $50,000 donation to the Newfoundland and Labrador Ground Search and Rescue Association.

As all members know, our Province is well served by the volunteers who comprise our search and rescue teams. It is government's intention to give them both the recognition they deserve and the resources they need to carry out their good work.

There are twenty-eight ground search and rescue teams in Newfoundland and Labrador and more than 1,000 volunteers. They play a vital role when it comes to assisting our police forces to seek lost or missing persons.

The hon. the Member for Port au Port has been instrumental in making the House of Assembly and government aware of the services provided by our ground search and rescue teams. It is largely due to his efforts and those of Harry Blackmore, the President of the Newfoundland and Labrador Ground Search and Rescue Association - who, incidentally, is present in the gallery today - that we are making this announcement.

Mr. Speaker, this $50,000 contribution will enable the association to carry out its duties more effectively and efficiently. Mr. Blackmore has advised me that one of his first actions will be to buy additional equipment for the teams and to refurbish existing equipment.

I am pleased to make this announcement today on behalf of the Minister of Justice, and I wish the Newfoundland and Labrador Ground Search and Rescue Association every success in their very worthwhile endeavours.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for a copy of the statement on behalf of the Minister of Justice. This is a good-news announcement; we are looking at a $50,000 donation to the good work of the Newfoundland and Labrador Ground Search and Rescue Association. My question for the minister, though, however: Is this an additional $50,000 than was announced some two weeks ago? So are we now talking a total contribution of $100,000, or is it the same $50,000 that was announced approximately ten days ago?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: In accordance with Section 5 (4) of the Internal Economy Commission Act, I wish to advise the House with respect to the membership of the Commission of Internal Economy.

The members are: The Member for Lewisporte, in his capacity as Deputy Speaker; the hon. the Minister of Development and Rural Renewal, in his capacity as Government House Leader; the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board; and the hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods. Both ministers have been appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council in their capacities as Ministers of the Crown; the Member for Ferryland in his capacity as Opposition House Leader; the Member for Cape St. Francis as a member of the Opposition; and the Speaker, who is Chair of the Commission. These are the members who presently make up the Internal Economy Commission.

Before we commence Oral Questions, I would like to welcome today to the galleries, on behalf of all members, ten Adult Basic Education students from Academy Canada, and they are accompanied by their Instructor, Mr. Harry Bourden.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

Oral Questions

 

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, last week in the Speech from the Throne government set out that this session of the House was going to be paying attention to social programs; the kinder, gentler government. Yet, in the Speech from the Throne, the only initiatives that were announced were ones that had been previously announced on several different occasions.

My question for the minister, or Acting Premier, is: Last week the Minister of Human Resources and Employment was on a public radio program, I believe, and publicly talked about the redesign of the Province's Income Support Program. Why was this program, or the redesign of that program, not mentioned in the Throne Speech? And what action or actions have been taken by government in redesigning this Income Support Program?

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

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, to answer the question as to why it was not announced, I would simply say that this announcement was actually made in last year's Budget Speech.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, that is not quite correct.

I would like to ask the minister this: Government has had a committee of senior civil servants working on a redesign of social services, or the Province's Income Support Program. Is the minister going to commit today to make sure that any recommendations that government puts forward will be aired publicly? Any redesign of this program obviously involves literally thousands upon thousands of people in this Province. Can she make that commitment today?

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

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, there has already been a major public consultation process that has helped to shape the form and the principles that are being employed as we redesign the delivery system for income support. I would also say to the member that the process that we have established for our continuing work on both the delivery system and the Income Support Program is one that involves extensive continued public consultation.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: I would venture to guess that literally thousands of people who depend on income support would be very surprised to hear the minister's comments. How many people has she talked to who depend on this system, for consultation on the type of lives they live? This is the same minister who two weeks ago said that they do not decide what type of apartments people go in with respect to it, but they do decide they will only give them $139 a month for rent.

Let me ask the minister this: Will the redesign of any of these programs integrate any of the federal programs that now exist in the Province?

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

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, I am not quite sure what the hon. member is asking with the question with respect to the linkage between the federal government and the provincial government as it pertains to redesigning our Income Support Program, and perhaps there is a follow-up that he would like to have on this. What I can say to you is that in designing the delivery system to the point that we have right now, there has been extensive consultation. It has involved representation from all of the major stakeholders, including consumers or clients who have been represented in this process. We will continue to have an ongoing dialogue and a validation process that we will work with the public of the Province, with all of the stakeholders who have an interest in this area, and that will help shape and refine both the delivery system and the model itself. Where it is appropriate and possible to work in collaboration with the federal government, we will include that in order to achieve the maximum efficiency with our resources.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: A good point, I say to the minister. Could she say that in English please?

As a member of the Premier's self-described troika, integration of existing provincial programs with federal programs, I think the question would be fairly self evident. Let me ask the minister this: Four years ago the former Premier, former government - many of the same ministers are in place today - introduced a program called the Income Supplementation Program. Is the minister aware of that program? Is the new redesign of the Province's Income Support Program based upon any of the principles outlined in that program; and, if so, what principles?

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

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated in my earlier comments, we are in the process of developing our approach to a new income support model. It will involve considerable consultation. I am sure that it will bring together a variety of different perspectives from anyone who has an interest or something to contribute to this process. We are at the very early stages of redesigning our Income Support Program. We expect it will take at least the next year, if not longer, to develop the program and to ensure it is the best possible program to provide income support to people in this Province. So we are in the very early stages and we welcome all and any input, and we will continue to consider all perspectives as we try and design a model.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: As usual, Mr. Speaker, no answer. Let me go to another part of the Throne Speech where it read clearly: It has always been difficult for young people to find a job. The Province's "Linkages Program assists young people through career-related opportunities with local employers, career planning, and bonuses toward the cost of post-secondary tuition and books." That is it, that is all it says.

I would like to ask the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, in view of the fact that last year the number of young people who left this Province is equivalent to the size and population of Grand Falls, is he so confident the Linkages Program is working?

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

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, the issues associated with youth employment are very complex, as the members opposite would recognize. The strategies we will use, and that we are using, are many. One aspect of the strategies that is directed towards youth is the Linkages Program, and yes, all of our evaluation to date shows this to be a highly successful program.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, when 12,000 young people leave the Province and the minister stands up and says their strategies are working, there is something definitely wrong. I would like to ask the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board and Acting Premier - he talks about the Government of Canada's new Millennium Fund. It is going to help about 6 per cent of the student population of the Province, but it will not kick in until about two years from now.

It says in the Throne Speech that they recognize it will not kick in until two years from now, and that "My Government will address this problem during the course of this current Session." The question to the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board is: What can we expect for students in this Province in your upcoming Budget?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate an opportunity to answer one of the first questions asked by the new Leader of the Opposition in the House, and congratulate him on being successful in attaining the most sought after job in Newfoundland and Labrador. I know the competition was quite tough.

I think the hon. member has been in the House since 1993 and understands that when the Throne Speech is read and there are suggestions that things will be dealt with during this session of the House of Assembly, we will be here until June, July, August, however long we need to stay, and during that period of time one of the prime opportunities to lay out what students can expect in terms of direct help and assistance from this government would be during the speech itself given by my colleague, the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, which is going to happen in a couple of days I understand. I guess the first clues and hints would likely happen in the Budget Speech, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I know the Minister of Education is an example of every other minister over there, because it is difficult to keep up with the Premier; I understand that.

On March 6, at the Federation of Newfoundland and Labrador Students' Conference, the Premier made a commitment that in this year's Budget there would be a $3 million grant program put in place. He made that commitment. In view of the fact the Minister of Education has no idea what the Premier is up to with respect to his department, I would like to ask the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board: Will we see in the Budget the commitment the Premier made on March 6? Will it be reflected in the Budget and, in fact, we will see a $3 million grant program for post-secondary institutions in the Province?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is pretty obvious today that the caucus on the other side decided to let the new Leader of the Opposition ask all the questions. We will do our best to try to answer them as they arise.

Again, I think he has been in the Legislature since 1993. I think he would hardly expect the Minister of Finance to stand up today, on Monday, and say exactly what is going to be in the Budget in three or four days time on Thursday. So, I am sure he has enough interest, Mr. Speaker, to be here for the session on Thursday and he will find out exactly what is stated in the Budget with respect to that issue. And, I know, because I have met with the groups regularly and repeatedly, that the student leaders themselves will be here in the Legislature on Thursday. Because they are looking forward to finding out, as well, the details of exactly what will be in the Budget with respect to student indebtedness and those types of initiatives.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

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

MR. E. BYRNE: That is correct. I am not sure if the Minister of Education listens to the pre-Cabinet commentary weekly Cabinet meetings on Sundays or not.

Mr. Speaker, one final question: Under normal circumstances, up until this point in time, any time that there was an increase for public servants, whatever the increase was negotiated, it was automatically given to pensioners. Now, every member in this House, on both sides of the House, has been receiving calls with respect to this issue. Can pensioners look forward to Thursday, Minister - can they look forward with hope, on Thursday, whatever negotiated increases with respect to the unions representing public service employees, whatever government ends up giving them at the end of the day, that pensioners in this Province, can look forward to the same increase?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, it is never followed that an increase to public servants on the wage package automatically results in an increase to pensioners. There is a different set of criteria at play; one is that public servants have not ever agreed with government on a package that includes indexing for retired personnel. We have discussed that with them, we have never been able to come to an agreement with them.

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, very few pensions if any, pay indexing to their retirees. If government were to do it, you would have to consider that you would be taxing people who are not themselves indexed in order to provide indexing to a small group of people. So, we will consider it, and any decision, along with many others that the government has to include in its overall package of measures in the Province, will be announced on Thursday.

Thank you.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

Minister, recently, many allegations have been brought forward regarding federal fisheries observers routinely reporting irregularities by foreign vessels fishing inside our 200-mile limit. I ask the minister if he is aware of these actions, and what has he done since those actions have been reported to insure that such serious abuse of our fishing regulations immediately end?

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

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, the allegations made by different people around the Province, and particularly by some of the observers to whom the hon. member is relating, are very serious allegations. I take them very seriously. I have taken them very seriously since day one, long before I got into politics, about the fishery problem but in particular, in the last decade, about the allegations made by some observers.

In fact, I have had the opportunity to sit down with a couple of observers in relation to the problem that they have been experiencing on the Grand Banks. I have recently had a meeting with the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans for Canada, one of many meetings I have had over a period of time with the minister concerning the fishery-related problems when it comes to the impact on the fishery, the future of Newfoundland and Labrador, so we will be meeting with the minister again now, since these allegations have recently come out again. I wish, I only wish, that some of these people who are making these statements would have come forward long before now and made us more aware of what they deem to be a problem.

When we research, when we meet with the minister, when his officials come back to us, then we will see exactly how serious they are, and if they are as serious as indicated by the individuals who have made this known to the Standing Committee, then I am sure they will be corrected and I will be part of making sure that happens.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Minister, it is a job, I guess, to relate it to anybody when the federal minister keeps them so close to his side, when he will not release this information and even goes so far as to tell observers to stop making reports, according to the information with which we have been provided.

Minister, in light of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans Report which was released today, we were told some shocking and ridiculous stories regarding foreign fishing inside our 200-mile zone. We were told of fish being in surplus to Canada's needs. I ask the minister, how he can support any government department making such a statement of having surplus fish while thousands of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have to sit at home, Mr. Speaker, go looking and begging for hand-outs, while our fish plants are closed and the boats are tied up to our wharves.

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

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe that the hon. member, being from a fishing community, representing many fishing communities in Newfoundland and Labrador, would stand to his feet here this afternoon and leave the impression that the foreign fishing activity inside the 200-mile limit - which I will get to in a minute - could replace the lost job opportunities and the lost income for 27,000 people in this Province.

MR. FITZGERALD: Nobody said that.

MR. EFFORD: He is leaving the impression out there that a by-catch could employee hundreds of fishermen and hundreds of plant workers. It is totally misleading and a misrepresentation of the true facts about what is taking place. Let me give you some examples, Mr. Speaker. He referred to 17,000 tons of turbot in 3L division. Not one pound of that turbot is caught inside the 200-mile limit. It is all outside the 200-mile limit, most of it over around the Flemish Cap. Not one side -

MR. FITZGERALD: (Inaudible) Black Tickle can see from their community?

MR. EFFORD: Fifteen hundred tons of cod last year, which was allocated to France, caught by National Sea.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: Fifteen hundred tons of redfish going to Newfoundland vessels.

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. FITZGERALD: The minister is deliberately misleading this House, Mr. Speaker. When somebody in Black Tickle can look out through his window -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I told the hon. member that he cannot use that language in the House and I ask him to withdraw.

MR. FITZGERALD: I withdraw that, Mr. Speaker.

When this minister can stand on his feet and say that this allocation is being caught outside the 200-mile limit and people in Black Tickle can look out through their window and see those boats fishing, I suggest to the minister, Mr. Speaker, that those people must have 20/20 vision.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, again, it is one thing to stand in the House of Assembly in Question Period and be political and put questions back and forth across the House to the minister, but it is another thing to mislead the people of this Province. The people in Black Tickle, Mr. Speaker, are desperately looking for work. The people in Black Tickle need the opportunity to fish.

MR. FITZGERALD: On 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, the minister referred to the Member for Bonavista South as misleading this House and I think that was similar to the point of order that you had ruled on earlier, as misleading the people of the Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order. The hon. minister did not say that the Member for Bonavista South deliberately misled the House; therefore, there is no point of order.

MR. EFFORD: It goes to show you, Mr. Speaker, that the hon. member is not listening at all, not listening to what the reality is around the Province. Fifteen hundred tons of cod, referred to by the hon. member as being caught by France - France did not catch 1,500 tons of cod. France gave that cod last year to National Sea. Fifteen hundred tons of redfish will be turned over - negotiations are going on now to turn that fish over to the Canadian vessels and Newfoundland fishing vessels can catch that fish. I have been invited over to 3PS this year, in the next couple of weeks, to have discussions on Newfoundlanders catching that quota of fish and landing it in Newfoundland or landing it in 3PS.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture that the statement I made comes directly from this book which was put together by nine of his own federal cousins in Ottawa, Mr. Speaker, the East Coast Report. The 1,500 tons of fish that was caught in 3PS by National Sea, I say to the minister, according to this report, was processed - he is right, it was caught by National Sea but it was processed in either St. Pierre et Miquelon or France. It was not processed here in this Province. So if this book is wrong maybe the minister can have it rewritten.

Mr. Speaker, I stand here today to make a plea. I make a plea on behalf of the hundreds of rural communities in this Province, Mr. Speaker, I make a plea on behalf of every business in this Province, I make a plea on behalf of the thousands -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. FITZGERALD: - and thousands of fishery workers here today. The plea, Mr. Speaker, is to ask the minister if he would immediately consult with his federal cousin in Ottawa, the hon. David Anderson, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, to put an immediate end to all foreign fishing inside the 200-mile limit, on the Nose and Tail of the Grand Bank and on the Flemish Cap, so that we can have at least some of our people go back to work in that industry.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, I do not need the hon. member to plead with me to represent the fishing industry or fishing interest of Newfoundland and Labrador. I do it every single day of the week and every single hour of the day and I will continue to do that. But I will be fair and I will be honest in the representation I make to Ottawa on opportunities for people in the fishing industry - not only the harvesting, but the processing industry in this Province.

I will not go out there and tell the people of this Province that 17,000 tons of turbot is caught in 3L division inside the 200-mile limit by foreigners when the hon. member and everybody else in Newfoundland and Labrador knows it is absolutely false!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.

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

My questions are for the Minister of Education. Parents in the Province are very supportive of educational reform. They stated their opinions in the referendums. They also recognize, I think, that due to continued decreases in student population some schools will have to close. However, they want the proposed restructuring to reflect the best interest of children at the classroom levels, and they want changes to occur only after there have been appropriate feasibility studies completed that reflect changing student deployment and the best use of the existing facility.

I want to ask the minister, in view of the fact that the school boards have only been elected for a few weeks, and most school boards have not completed those student deployment and facilities studies, will he today give the schools sufficient time and assure them they will have sufficient staff in the interim to facilitate a rational approach to educational reform?

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

MR. GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.

MR. E. BYRNE: That must be the shortest answer from that minister.

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

The shortest answer, Mr. Speaker. I am encouraged by the minister's answer, because in the Throne Speech it said, "The confusion and chaos that plagued our educational system for years has ended." I thought it was going to go on and say the minister had resigned, but it did not. So I will go on with my second question.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. H. HODDER: The entire concept of reform centred around changes in governance and elimination of inefficiencies. We heard a promise, made repeatedly in the public media, that all the savings would be reinvested back into education. Last week we heard the minister say there was going to $18 million savings next year, but only $9 million would be going back into education.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. H. HODDER: I ask the minister: Why will the government not give a commitment to reinvesting the entire $18 million back into education and give the new school boards the time they need to prepare a well-developed plan for educational reform in this Province?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would just like to remind the hon. the Opposition education critic that this government has never ever made a statement suggesting that all of the savings from education would be reinvested in education. It has not been made by this government. There was a platform, a Red Book, from two years ago in 1996, the election was only a couple of years ago, in which a number of items were laid out with respect to education.

Maybe I might take the opportunity, in answering the question, to remind the hon. member that if you look back to last year, as an example of this government's commitment, last year there were some $20 million worth of teachers' salaries savings within the system. And this government, of which I am proud to be a part, in fact immediately put $24 million-worth back into the system to pay off school board debt, which exceeded the total savings for last year. We put $2.5 million last year into a computers for schools program. We put $500,000 last year into a tutoring for tuition program. Also, we increased the capital account last year from $4 million, which it had been for five or six years, to over $14 million.

So last year, which was the first opportunity this government had when we had gone from twenty-seven -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: - school boards to ten, there were $20 million-worth of potential savings in education, and the government reinvested $37 million last year alone. Members opposite -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: - Mr. Speaker, because they were more interested in politics -

MR. SPEAKER: I ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer, please.

MR. GRIMES: - than in anything else, tried to portray to the people of the Province that we did not reinvest the money in education. We did, Mr. Speaker, last year.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: We have taken half of the salary dollars this year -

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

MR. GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

- and reinvested them already. As we indicated to the School Boards and everybody else a few day ago when we did the announcement on teacher allocation, there is a budget coming up in three or four days. We will see if the other $9 million goes back in at that point in time.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to take his seat.

A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.

MR. H. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, in reading that long list of things that the Minister allegedly has achieved, he forgot to note, he is the same minister who sat on the air quality study for eighteen months and denied that it existed until the Member for St. John's East had it released.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. H. HODDER: And then afterwards, he said it was a terrible (inaudible) Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. H. HODDER: I say to the Minister, he stated on the public air waves there could be forty schools closing next year. I ask him: How many of these would be in rural communities in this Province? And how can this minister so dispassionately agree with the closure of these schools and still support what is called rural revitalization, comments made in the Throne Speech. The two things do not seem to go together.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The comment with respect to air quality again demonstrates a perfect example of what I was describing, as members opposite, Mr. Speaker, wanting to suggest and play some political games rather than deal with an issue. With respect to air quality - and the hon. member said it again - he makes the accusation that the minister sat on a report for eighteen months before he was somehow forced to release it.

The actual fact, which was reported and recorded in this House repeatedly last Spring, which the group opposite, for political reasons, do not wish to acknowledge, is that within days after that report was commissioned - which was two-and-one-half years ago, Mr. Speaker, before I even became the minister - the report was in the hands of the twenty-seven school boards at the time but they want to describe that as being a report that was hidden by the Government. It was in the hands of the twenty-seven school boards. What we did, Mr. Speaker, when I became Minister, because of the change from twenty-seven school boards to ten, we then took the same report and sent it out to the ten school boards to make sure that they had it. And this group repeats two years later that a report was hidden, it was sat upon by the minister. Now nothing, Mr. Speaker, could be further from the truth, and it characterizes the kind of approach they take to very serious questions which I would rather answer about the specific issues than have to point out their approach to the issues.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley, a final supplementary.

MR. H. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary is to do with the air quality study. I challenge the minister to find the twenty-seven directors or school board superintendents and get statements from them saying that they ever received it. Our information, and we contacted any number of school boards, nobody could find it, and when they had the information, it was far too late. I say to the minister that this air quality study was released by my colleague here and only then did he have the guts; but I am proud to say, that he is now out there giving Lysol containers, mops and brooms to people and saying clean up the buildings and then we will go in and test them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, Hear!

MR. H. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I tell you, the minister should be more forthright and straightforward in his comments.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

It is obvious the minister is trying to keep me quiet, but it will not work. Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation has been travelling this Province, as have I, listening to the concerns of local manufacturers regarding the Public Tendering Act. The minister tells us that he is as concerned about our local manufacturers as I am.

Mr. Speaker, just after the Throne Speech, last week, there was a reception out in our lobby, as there is every year. Now that there is locally manufactured juice products in our cafeteria and available through our caterer, I ask the minister: Where is his commitment and why has he not requested that local products be made available at that reception, as opposed to imported juice products? Where is his commitment to our local manufacturers?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The member correctly refers to a commitment that I gave in the House last December to consult with respect to appropriate amendments to the Public Tendering Act to, amongst other things, take into account issues such as economic development benefit on account of local manufacturers who have made representation, wanting to get their product into government-funded bodies. I can tell the hon. member, as I think he already knows, as a result of that commitment we have made considerable efforts. We have been around the Province in consultation sessions. Between now and Friday afternoon of this week, I will be receiving ten written briefs, individually, from groups interested in talking about appropriate change to the Public Tendering Act, to deal with things that you are referring to, and hopefully, before too long, we will have amendments proposed such that Cabinet can consider them with a view to introducing legislative amendments in the House to deal with the issue that he raises.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. MATTHEWS: In terms of juice - I was in the lobby last week - I would say that was purchased by the group who provided the product to the reception, probably the CNIB group in the cafeteria downstairs. One of the issues that we are addressing, one of the problems with the Act is that the Act does not extend to subcontractors. So, at the moment, we have no latitude, we have no ability to enforce upon them any particular type of purchase. We hope that we will be able to change that.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister to take his seat.

The time for Oral Questions has elapsed.

 

Presenting Reports by
Standing and Special Committees

 

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

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker

I hereby tender the Annual Report of the Newfoundland Liquor Corporation for the fiscal year ending 1997.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: In accordance with Section 13 of The Auditor General's Act, I hereby table The Annual Report of The Auditor General for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1997.

 

Notices of Motion

 

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to move the following private member's resolution:

WHEREAS Public Service Pensioners in this Province have not had an increase in benefits in nine years and their pensions are not indexed for automatic adjustments; and

WHEREAS the Government has been clawing back from pensioners, Canada Pension Plan benefits they receive; and

WHEREAS the income many pensioners are left with is so little, that many find themselves far beneath the poverty line; many are forced to rely on food banks and the generosity of the public to survive and many cannot cover the special expenses such as regular medication costs that many seniors encounter; and

WHEREAS like so many seniors in our society, our public service pensioners are a mostly hidden segment of our people who find themselves especially vulnerable to neglect and abuse by those who hold power and make decisions; and

WHEREAS it is unseemly that the employer of people who made a lifetime contribution to their Province as public servants should leave them impoverished in their vulnerable senior years;

BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that this House of Assembly urge the provincial government to provide adequate increases in benefits to public service pensioners which reflect the increases in wages for public servants; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the House of Assembly urge the government to cease clawing back Canada Pension Plan benefits from seniors whose income would then be below the poverty line.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a motion to move the following private member's resolution:

WHEREAS The fishing industry is the mainstay of rural Newfoundland and Labrador; and

WHEREAS the groundfish moratorium has thrown thousands of our people out of work and jeopardizes the future of numerous communities; and

WHEREAS Canada has declared fish within its 200-mile limit to be excess to our needs, despite the tremendous need in local plants for fish to process, and despite the fact that other countries do not declare fish in their waters to be in excess of their needs; and

WHEREAS the just released report of the House of Commons

Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, entitled the East Coast Report, concludes the existing Fisheries Observer Program is inadequate to determine reliably the fishing catches and fishing practices of foreign vessels operating in East Coast waters; and

WHEREAS the East Coast Report recommends, species by species, that Canada reclaim fish quotas within our 200-mile limit that are now given to other countries;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly urge the Government of Canada to immediately end all foreign fishing within Canada's 200-mile limit and on the Nose and the Tail of the Grand Banks and on the Flemish Cap.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will on tomorrow move that the House resolve itself into Committee of the Whole on Ways and Means to consider the raising of supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

I give further notice that I will on tomorrow move that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on Supply to consider certain resolutions for the granting of supply to Her Majesty.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

Petitions

 

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 people in my constituency who wish to address the hon. House of Assembly of this Province on the issue of the closure of schools. The petitioners state that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador proposed the reform of the educational system in this Province in order to benefit the children of the Province, and that in order to benefit these children it is important that all children have access to a neighbourhood or community school.

These petitioners state that the proposed closure of St. Joseph's School means the loss of an important neighbourhood school vital to the well being and education of the children of our area, and any decision to close schools so soon after the school board elections contradicts the democratic process and prevents the newly elected board members from discharging their responsibility.

The petitioners ask the House of Assembly to demand that government take all measures to stop school closures until the newly elected board has had a full opportunity to consider the needs and circumstances of students and schools within their jurisdiction.

These petitioners are parents, friends, students, and relatives of those who attend St. Joseph's School on Quidi Vidi Road. This school is vital to the needs of that neighbourhood, and I would go so far as to say the community that is within that neighbourhood, the communities of Quidi Vidi, of the Battery, of that whole east end of St. John's which has for generations been served by a school, St. Joseph's. In fact the oldest building, which has since been turned over to the School Lunch Program, was built in 1895.

Right now there are two reasonably modern structures which are quite adequate and satisfactory for the operation of the school. As is indicated by the petitioners, and was evident to the Members of the House of Assembly who visited the school a couple of Fridays ago along with school board members, this school performs a very vital and important role for the young students who go there.

These students, almost to a person, almost 100 per cent of them, participate and take advantage of the School Lunch Program. This is recognized by the school council as important and vital to the health and well being and the educational needs of these students. In fact, the school council has asked for help to try and have a school breakfast program as well to ensure the needs are more fully met.

This school pays special attention to the needs of that community. They have a tremendous program with the resources they have. They have a music program, a band program; they have a swimming program available to them at The Battery Hotel. They have a preschool program, a pre-kindergarten, for those who are registered in the kindergarten program who are able to come there several afternoons a week for a period of four or five months in the winter (inaudible), the spring of the year, which is very vital. Anybody who knows anything about education knows that what goes on before kindergarten is often as vital as what happens in the school in determining the success of students in school.

The community and neighbourhood to which this school is responding is in great need of having a school that is going to, in this case, with the closure of St. Joseph's Parish Church, represent a focal point for the parents of that community and the needs those children have in that community.

The actions of the government in essentially placing before the board a few weeks after they were elected - the first democratically elected school boards in the Province of Newfoundland and the first, of course, under the new school reform - placed in their hands is the immediate prospect of the requirement of closing as many as five or six schools almost immediately, without adequate time to really consider what has to be considered, I suppose, by law, the full extent of the consequences of what is happening, the full extent of the effect on the communities that are going to be dealt with, and the needs of the children, particularly here in this situation where these children will be scattered all over town without appropriate transportation.

It is difficult enough as it is. The school bus comes from Quidi Vidi village to the school. Last year the government policy imposed a $10 per month school bus pass on them. Mr. Speaker, the reality is that those parents cannot afford to pay that to have their children brought from Quidi Vidi to St. Joseph's, and the collection of that fee has been almost negligible since Christmas because the parents just cannot afford it.

It is very important to save this school. In fact, this school should be given a lease on life that indicates that this school will continue, and that if that is the case, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: - with the long-term commitment to the continuation of that school, the school population will grow, people will want to be part of that school, and parents will bring their children there and save that school.

I ask, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the parents and children of St. Joseph's School, that the House of Assembly and the minister do everything they can to save this school.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would just like to stand for a moment and second and speak to the comments made by my colleague, the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi. I, too, had an opportunity approximately two weeks ago, along with the Member for Cape St. Francis, to have a tour and spend some time at St. Joseph's School where we met the teachers, many of the students, and many of the concerned parents who feel that it is just perhaps a matter of time before this very important neighbourhood school may be a thing of the past.

As the member indicated, this is truly - although within the City of St. John's - a neighbourhood school. It has serviced hundreds and hundreds of families and school children for many years in our city. It has been a community centre; it has been a service centre; it has been a centre of academic excellence over many years; and it is sad that this school, along with others, is indeed on the chopping block, as it were, without the necessary review and assessment being put in place by what are now duly elected school board members who are obviously given the responsibility to make these very key and important decisions.

In my own district there are, in addition to St. Joseph's School, some two other schools which apparently have been arbitrarily selected by individuals who are no longer on the school board. Now we have these duly elected school board members who are being confronted with making these decisions which will seriously affect these individuals, these students, these parents and families, as it relates to these particular school closures. So I sympathize with the petitioners as it relates to St. Joseph's. I understand truly what they are experiencing. As I have indicated, I too have constituents who are being confronted with this very serious matter and I support the wording of the petition and the words as expressed by my colleague.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just wanted to make a few comments with respect to the petition that was so ably presented on behalf of the parents who have concern with respect to St. Joseph's School.

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that this is one of the few points in time where this Legislature has been very solid and unanimous in its support for an issue, education reform, because the objective is clear. It is to benefit the children in the Province so that we will have a better educational opportunity as a result of the reform being able to play itself out, as a result of school boards being put in a position to operate a single school system for the first time in history, in September of 1998.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to remind everybody here, and anyone who might listen to the comments, with respect to the roles that we have; because the hon. member, in presenting the petition, indicated he would like for the minister to do everything possible to try to make sure that some different decision could be made with respect to St. Joseph's School.

The minister and the government have done a lot to date with respect to that particular issue, but whether St. Joseph's School or any one of the other eighty-three schools that this particular board operates opens or closes is not a decision for this minister or for this Legislature to make. The same Schools Act that we unanimously endorsed at Christmas time leaves the responsibility for organizing schools, closing schools if they need to be, consolidating schools, in the hands of the school boards.

What the government has done as a result of representation made repeatedly throughout the year by school boards, school councils, parents, the Home and School Federation, is to put the Avalon East School Board in a position where it wasn't two weeks ago when it announced it may have to close St. Joseph's - because it has not said that it will; it gave notice that they might have to - and at that point in time they were looking for formulas which would have seen the Avalon East School Board lose sixty-five teachers for next September. They were hoping that number might get down around thirty-five or so.

As a result of the announcement that was made last week by government in reinvesting $9 million in teachers' salaries, they now know they can go back to the drawing board, reconsider some of their potential decisions, because they only have to accommodate twenty-four teacher reductions instead of the thirty-five or forty they were projecting, and instead of the sixty-five that was being feared by everybody.

Another factor is that of those twenty-four, eight of those teachers were given back to the school board because of a decision made by Justice Barry to open a second high school on Bell Island which was closed last year; and everybody understands they can run a single high school on Bell Island with eight fewer teachers and a better program. The Chair of the Avalon East School Board, when she has been speaking publicly on behalf of the group, has indicated repeatedly that if they do make some changes - which they gave notice of, five or six potential changes - they are confident, with this level of teacher reductions, they can make some changes and improve the program.

Now I understand there are particular circumstances, well articulated by the member from the area, with respect to St. Joseph's and that part of the community within the community. Those issues are before the school board, where they should be, because it is their decision to make. They have been well spelled out. I am sure that the group, the school council and others, will make another representation to the school board. I believe at the end of the day the school board will make decisions that in the final analysis will show there is a real opportunity for an improved educational experience for the students who are in the whole area and district covered by Avalon East.

We have done as much as we can in the first instance by taking the teacher reduction from a prospective number of sixty-five, which is what the board was dealing with when they made these tentative announcements, down to a real number, an effective number, of sixteen, provided they implement the changes that were in place last year and reversed because of Justice Barry.

In a school board with 33,000 students, 2,500 next year fewer than they had a couple of years ago, 2,500 empty desks, and with eighty-three schools, we are confident they can accommodate the loss of sixteen teaching units without having a real problem and without having detrimental effects upon the students in this area. We will work with them, Mr. Speaker, to see that occurs.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.

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

I have a petition to present to the hon. House of Assembly on behalf of the parents who gathered here yesterday afternoon, who walked here from Brinton Memorial in very stormy conditions, with rain and ice pellets falling upon them. They were led up the Parkway by the members of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. They felt very strongly about what they wanted to communicate to this Legislature.

In fact, they had written the hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation letting him know they would be here yesterday, and wondering if he would have the doors open to accommodate them. When they arrived they were told they were not allowed in, that they had gotten orders that said: No, you cannot come in. Even when they asked if they could come in to use the phone to call for a taxi, because they would not have to walk back down to Brinton Memorial, they were denied even the opportunity to walk in, one person at a time, to go in and use a telephone. That is the reception they got yesterday afternoon when they came to this Legislature, and in fact, a number of us had to help those parents who had small children. Children who were too young to go to school, children four and five years old, we had to help them, take them in our cars and transport them to their homes or to some other designated place, Brinton Memorial or St. Joseph's or whatever. That is the reception they got. There was no government member here to welcome them and they were denied even the common courtesy of coming into the lobby to use a telephone to look for a taxi, in the kind of inclement weather we had yesterday. Now who, in his right mind, would deny anybody access to go inside yesterday to use a telephone? but, that is what happened here yesterday afternoon.

Now, Mr. Speaker, the petition we have reads as follows:

We, the parents and friends of schools in the Avalon East District assembled at Confederation Building on Sunday, 22 March 1998, request the provincial government to declare a moratorium on the reduction of teaching units for the school year 1998-1999.

We make this request with the conviction if the Avalon East School Board is forced to close schools or severely reduce programs with the benefit of a well-developed and well-vented plan, it will contribute to educational chaos rather than to effective educational reform.

We stress, the petition reads, that we are not opposed to school closures and changes in school configuration. In the context of declining enrolments and infiltration of neighbourhood schools, such changes must and will occur. However, we are convinced that the changes should only be made on the basis of a comprehensive plan that has been thoroughly developed, vetted by extensive consultation with parent groups and schools concerned and implemented with sensitivity to the children and families who will be affected.

The Avalon East School Board has a process in place leading to such a plan. Unfortunately, it will not be completed and available to guide the Board's decisions at this time. We firmly believe that the only reasonable way to deal with this dilemma is a moratorium on teacher reductions for 1998-1999, so that the plan can be developed, vetted and ready for infiltration next year. Our presence here at Confederation Building is evidence of our dedication to this belief, the petition reads.

We sincerely trust that the provincial government will consider our petition as such far-reaching decisions are made.

Now, Mr. Speaker, this petition is supported by the Chairperson of the Avalon East School Board and I have here some of the comments from the Chairperson, Ms Cathy LeGrow. She says: We, the Avalon East School Board, stand in firm support of the area school councils in pursuit of a fair, a just allocation of teachers for the school boards in this school district. The Board has undertaken considerable political action of its own in an attempt to influence government's decisions in this regard.

Mr. Speaker, the Chairperson of the school board continues to write a lengthy commentary in which she says that these parents have legitimate concerns. As a matter of fact, the next three nights -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. H. HODDER: Just a moment to conclude, Mr. Speaker?

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

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. H. HODDER: For the next three nights, from seven o'clock until ten o'clock, the Avalon East School Board will be meeting at the Holiday Inn here in St. John's, to hear representations from the parent councils and they will be here - it is not advertised very well but the school councils will be able to make their presentations and they have allocated three evenings. However, the decisions on teachers' allocations have been made prior to even the opportunity for the school councils to have a hearing in front of the school board and to put forward their position.

So I say to the minister, when he announced the changes that he had last week, he should have listened to the parents first and then made his decisions, rather than the other way around.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to rise and support the remarks of my colleague on this side of the House, the Member for Waterford Valley.

It is kind of remarkable in a way - many of the people who were here yesterday were the very same people who were out last summer campaigning, working hard on the Yes campaign for the referendum. It would be kind of ironic if the people who were out fighting on the same side as the government for education reform because they believed that was the best way to improve the opportunities for their children in schools were, first of all, shut out of Confederation Building by someone's order; and second, that their voices are not being heard when they say that the school boards - and some of the school board officials were there, because they believe the same thing - that they have told this minister, told this government, that the process of them undertaking a proper review of the commitments and obligations under the schools act, a review of the alternatives open to them, a process that has already been set down in law, a due process that has to be followed when and if schools are to be closed, that they just do not have enough time to do that.

It would be very ironic if the schools these people are fighting to save will be closed when these people have been out fighting to bring about school reform to ensure that more of these schools can stay open. St. Joseph's itself is a good case in point. The school council of St. Joseph's went to the Avalon East School Board last year and said if it came to a choice between a neighbourhood school or a denominational system, they were very much in favour of a neighbourhood system. They were not looked upon very favourably necessarily by some of the other schools in the same situation, but they said: Neighbourhood schools are what we believe in, this is what we are fighting for, and we are prepared to fight on that side along with the government and the government position to support neighbourhood schools.

Other people at the meeting yesterday were front and centre in the Yes campaign supporting the changes we now have with changes to Term 17. Once again, a terribly great irony if those people are not only shut out of Confederation Building but are not given an opportunity within the school boards themselves to be able to carry out the promise of school reform, which is a fully considered set of rules made by democratically-elected people.

I agree with the minister. It should not be a question of political preference or political lobbying to save one school versus another. Enough of that has gone on in the past and a lot of people are unhappy with it. What is being asked for by these petitioners, and by the demonstrators yesterday and, I think, by the school boards, too, is to be given an opportunity to undertake their mandate set down for them within this new schools act and to be able to properly consult, to properly give due process and notice, to properly consider any objections that might come from the people, and to make sure that before any decisions are made a policy that will last will be put in place.

This ought not to be a decision made because of a crisis, or an artificial crisis, brought about this year, another crisis next year, another crisis the year after that. These new school boards have got to be able to undertake their responsibilities as the fourth order of elected representatives in this Province. We only have four. We have Members of Parliament, we have members of this Assembly, we have municipal councils, and now we have school boards. They are playing a very important role as elected officials by a democratic franchise, by a universal franchise, and that is a role they ought to be allowed to play without being hamstrung by arbitrary rules or arbitrary formulas that require them to make hasty decisions without sufficient time to lay a proper policy framework down for the maintaining of community schools in rural communities, and neighbourhood schools in urban communities.

These petitioners ought to be listened to. The plea is for adequate time to carry out their responsibilities under the Schools Act.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I appreciate the comments made by the presenter of the petition and also the speaker to the petition.

The issue again, because it was raised again by the parents for the committee for the school council and so on in the Avalon East area, on the face of it, there is no question, it would sound fairly reasonable to suggest that because a board was just elected a month or so ago they may not have sufficient time to make some decisions for next year.

Last year, when individual schools were given notice that they may be changed in some way, shape or form, the parents - and in any case I don't believe I have experienced very many circumstances, probably not any, where there have been many voluntary closures of schools without someone feeling that there was something else that could have been done or should have been done - the parents are guaranteed under the act, as the hon. member points out, an opportunity to present to the board and to make their case. They will take advantage of that. They will be given that opportunity because the new law says they must be given that opportunity; but, if we look at it again, on the face of it, a call for a moratorium on teacher lay-offs, in this board alone, when the doors open in September there will be 2,000 fewer students in the building than there were when they opened this year, or a year ago in June.

Mr. Speaker, they have lost in excess of 900 students this year over last year. Their projections are that there will be 1,100 fewer students in their buildings next year because of the decline in the student population in this area. They have eighty-two or eighty-three schools that they have been operating, and they are asked, in the face of that, to try to accommodate the loss of sixteen real teacher units; twenty-four, but eight of them, as I characterized, are only in the system because of a judgement in the courts last summer - not a judgement but an injunction granted in the courts last summer - which could quite easily and readily now be implemented because there is no obstacle to it.

I really don't understand, and the government does not understand, why any board, even a much smaller board with smaller numbers, without any panic, without any real difficulties, could not accommodate the loss of sixteen teacher units in some seventy or eighty schools; a move, or two or three.

As I indicated in response to the previous petition, when they were making the tentative plans that they announced a couple of weeks ago they were in a position to lose anywhere from thirty-five to sixty-five teachers. It is now down to twenty-four, which can realistically be shown to be sixteen. We are not asking anybody to do anything drastic. We are not asking anybody to tear the system apart. We are asking people to make reasonable judgements.

Those people who ran for the school boards, the fact that they were just elected does not change the fact that circumstances here have not changed. The staff that has been servicing this board for almost two years now, since we went from twenty-seven boards to ten - the Avalon East Board is almost two years old - their circumstances have not changed. The research that has been done for them has not changed. The staff advice has not changed. It will change in a week or so because they will have a lot more teachers than they expected, and that is always one of the key ingredients with respect to whether or not they have to run five schools, ten schools, fifteen schools, twenty schools, and so on.

Mr. Speaker, I suggest that with the action that the government has taken in reinvesting $9 million directly into the teachers' salary bill, and putting an additional forty or so teachers back into the Avalon East Board that they could not count on when they were making these tentative decisions a couple of weeks ago, means they have a lot more flexibility now and they should be able to make reasonable decisions without causing negative impacts on students and programming.

In fact, I have heard the chair of the board speak publicly. She has said that they do believe they can make some changes, but they expect the changes to produce an improved educational opportunity for the students, not the opposite.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand today to present a petition from 242 residents in the communities of Jamestown and Winter Brook. It reads:

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

WHEREAS the roads in the areas of Jamestown and Winter Brook are in very poor condition and are in desperate need of paving;

WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to pave approximately two kilometres of road in Jamestown and approximately eight kilometres of road leading to and including the community of Winter Brook, as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I think this must be the third or fourth petition that I have brought forward here in this House within the last number of months from those same residents. Those people are getting very anxious now because they know that there is a Budget about to be brought down here in the Province. They know that capital funding for roads is about to be announced and they are asking if we, the 242 people who signed this petition - the 162 people who live in Jamestown, and the 114 people who live in Winter Brook - can kindly be considered for some pavement this year.

Those people pay their way like everybody else. They go out and pay $140 a year to register their private vehicles; they pay eighty dollars for their licences; they pay the same amount for gasoline; they pay the same amount for everything that they buy, but they are not being treated equally when it comes to the type of road on which they have to drive.

I have had supporting letters from the wholesale truck drivers who have to make general deliveries to the stores in this particular area, complaining about broken springs, complaining about damage to tires, damage to the exterior of their vehicles.

I have a supporting letter here from a gentleman who delivers oil on a regular basis to those communities, supporting letters from a lumber company that is situated on the road leading to Winter Brook, employing in excess of eighty-five people for most of the year. I have letters of support from the Anglican minister in the area, from the United Church, from the school boards, from the bus drivers, all people who are asking the government of this Province to kindly look at including those two small roads, small distances in their Budget. One letter was from a ten-year old in the district asking if the government would kindly look at the concerns of the students, look at the concerns of the people, the senior citizens and the people who have to drive over this road on a continuous basis.

Mr. Speaker, I think it was about three years ago this particular road was upgraded to the point where it was made ready for paving. I think all of the upgrading have been completed and all it requires now is class A stone and pavement. We do not have to go down there and do any more ditching, we do not have to go down there to do any more road upgrading and repairs; all that is needed is pavement.

I am glad to see that the minister came back.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: I beg your pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: Where (inaudible)?

MR. FITZGERALD: Jamestown and Winter Brook. I say to the minister, I presented a couple of petitions here at an earlier time concerning this same road. It is approximately eight kilometres out to and including the Town of Winter Brook, and it is approximately two kilometres through Jamestown. It is the only road in that particular area that is left unpaved.

I know that the Department of Works, Services and Transportation in Clarenville and Lethbridge continually get calls from people there complaining about the condition of the road, complaining that the grader goes down and most of the time does part of the road but does not do the road through the community, and they feel they should not have to do this. They are not dying communities. In fact, I would suggest that the population of those two communities have probably even grown over these past number of years, unlike some of our other communities.

I would suggest the communities of Winter Brook and Jamestown probably have some of the lowest unemployment statistics in the Province. Most people there are fortunate enough to have a job. They are fortunate enough to be able to get up every morning and go to work. All they are asking for now is to be treated like everybody else, or most people, I should say, in Newfoundland and Labrador, and to be provided with a decent road over which to drive.

You talk to the housewives there, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. FITZGERALD: - and the first thing they complain about is not being able to put their clothes on the line to dry in the summer time because of the dust.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: Just a minute to clue up, Mr. Speaker?

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

MR. FITZGERALD: You talk to home-owners there who are unable to open their windows in the summertime because of dust coming into the house; they are not asking for anything unreasonable. It is something in which I support them, and I hope that the minister will see fit, in this coming fiscal year, to provide those two communities with a simple request and a simple thing that we all take for granted, just a little bit of pavement to look after the road leading to Winter Brook and the remainder of the road through Jamestown.

Thank you.

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise this afternoon on yet another petition from residents primarily of the District of St. John's East as it relates once again to school closures, and in particular St. Bonaventure's and Brinton Memorial. I would just like to read the prayer of the petition:

We, the parents and friends of schools in the Avalon East district, assembled at Confederation Building on Sunday, 22 March, 1998, request the provincial government to declare a moratorium on the reduction of teaching units for the school year 1998-1999.

We make this request with the conviction that if the Avalon East School Board is forced to close schools or severely reduce programs without the benefit of a well developed and well vetted plan, it will contribute to educational chaos rather than to effective educational reform.

Mr. Speaker, it continues by saying: We stress that we are not opposed to school closures and changes in school configuration. In the context of declining enrolment and the implementation of neighbourhood schools, such changes must and will come. However, we are convinced the changes should only be made on the basis of a comprehensive plan that has been thoroughly developed, vetted by extensive consultation with parent groups and schools concerned, and implemented with sensitivity to the children and families that will be affected.

Mr. Speaker, perhaps those last two sentences are in fact what really this petition is all about. We have individuals who are obviously concerned about the future of their schools and how it relates to education reform in this Province. They want to see in place, Mr. Speaker, a system constituted by the school board which gives assurances to all parents, all children, all supporters of indeed all schools in the school district, that a fair and equitable plan has been put in place to assess that the proper decisions are made.

As the petitioners have indicated, it is obvious - and from the points that were made by the Minister of Education earlier - when there are 2,000 less students, clearly that will have an impact on what classrooms remain open, perhaps even what schools remain open, how many teachers will be in the system, what programs will be offered and so on. However, what the petitioners asked for is a fair and equitable hearing to ensure that all eighty-two or eighty-three schools are treated equally; that three or four or five are not hand-picked, are not singled out, and then an assessment or an appraisal is made of their needs or their deficiencies; but no, all eighty-two or eighty-three schools are looked upon equally with fairness, with equity. Then everybody has an equal say, there is an equal start for all those concerned, and then the parents, and indeed the students and others, can feel that there is some security in such a process and procedure being carried out.

So on behalf of my constituents, the constituents of St. John's East, I ask that the hon. minister convey the message, if he himself is not prepared to take an active role in these decisions, to at least convey the message to the appropriate school board members and school board officials the fact that these parents want assurances that the proper procedures and processes are in place to ensure that the proper and appropriate decisions are made.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.

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

As I have done before, I want to rise for a moment or so to support the petition brought forward by my colleague from St. John's East and to indicate to the House that we have more petitions arriving. In fact, some have arrived since I came into the House this afternoon. I can tell the minister that there is a great concern out there, a great concern on behalf of parents, that this whole reform process be child-centred, and reforms that were advocated by the people who were supporting the government's position last year be implemented in a manner that reflects consultation and due process.

Mr. Speaker, what the parents are asking for from St. Bon's is an opportunity to be assured that their points of view be taken into consideration. What all of these parents recognize is that changes will occur. They have occurred in this area in the past. In fact, the total number of schools that operate in the St. John's region today in comparison with the number that was operating, say, ten years ago, today's number is substantially lower than it was just a few years ago. However, what the parents are finding is that the new school board members who were elected in a democratic vote on February 17 have not had time to really get their minds around all of the issues. That is not a reflection on them. It is a very complicated process.

If I were sitting as a school board member in this Province today, and I was being asked to make a decision on whether or not school A should close and school B should stay open, I would want to have all of the information. I would not be prepared to have some bureaucrat tell me what he or she wanted. I would need to have all of the pros and the cons, and all of the history of the decision. Only then would I be prepared to make a decision, because in the final analysis it is the school board members who have to be answerable to the parents. When push comes to shove that is the bottom line, that it is the school board members who are going to have to say: We supported this decision, or we did not.

That is what democracy is all about. So we hear the parents say, the ones who were here yesterday with their placards, and the ones who had to use their placards for shelter because of the fact they were barred out of their own parliamentary building by orders of the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, these parents are saying: Slow it down a little bit; make sure we make the right decisions.

As an example of the kind of decision that has to be made, most people will know that the former integrated school board, the Avalon Consolidated system, operated on a kindergarten to grade VI, primary-elementary units, a junior high school system of grades VII, VIII and IX, and a senior high school system of Levels I, II and III. It was a three different school system approach. However, the former Roman Catholic School Board in St. John's operated on a kindergarten to grade VIII, and then had grades IX and Levels I, II and III students in the senior high school system. When you are trying to mesh those things together, it just takes time.

For example, in the former Avalon Consolidated system, in the junior high school sections, there would have been provision for home economics and technology education. While it was true for some of the Roman Catholic school systems, their facilities were not focused in the same direction. If we are going to make sure that every child in the Avalon East area is going to have equal opportunities in their neighbourhood schools, it is just going to take a little while to put it together.

What the school board members who I talked to in the last forty-eight hours - and I talked to several - said to me, was that they need time. They will not be a rubber stamp. They were not elected to be a rubber stamp. What they are saying to the minister is: Give us the time to make the right decisions. They are not failing in their support of the reform initiative. What they are saying is that -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. H. HODDER: - they need more than a few weeks before they have to make all of those very difficult, significant, and long-lasting decisions.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am presenting a petition today on behalf of residents in the community of Biscay Bay. The petition reads:

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

WHEREAS the construction of a Goulds bypass road has been identified as a priority development under the Canada-Newfoundland Transportation Initiative; and

WHEREAS the construction of the Goulds bypass road has not begun despite repeated promises from government; and

WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador has indicated that construction of the Goulds bypass road will not begin this year; and

WHEREAS significant opportunities for development in the region a contingent on the completion of the Gould bypass road; and

WHEREAS the viability of our communities and businesses is dependent upon adequate transportation infrastructure that allows our region access to the opportunities and markets of the capital region; and

WHEREAS the growth of our communities is closely related to the ability of our citizens to commute to work within a reasonable time each day over highways that are in good condition; and

WHEREAS the financial resources to begin the Goulds bypass road has been identified under the Canada Newfoundland Transportation initiative;

WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to begin construction of the Gould bypass road this coming year and, as in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

This is from the community of Biscay Bay, and there are hundreds, in fact, probably thousands will be coming in over the next while. This is the first of many circulated within the communities by the board that has been identified to oversee regional economic development in the area, that is, the Zone 20 board.

The Zone 20 Board sees the Goulds Bypass Road as a means to entice businesses into the area. There is a development underway in Bay Bulls now with hundreds of thousands of dollars expended already, hopefully to be able to land some offshore contracts there that would really expedite businesses. It has storage capacity far superior in space and requirements to here in the City of St. John's, in certain parts here. It has space and what we need is ready access and proper transportation network. That has been on the books for some time. I know, the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation has indicated that it is - I am referring the Minister to a petition that is starting to flow in on the Goulds bypass road. The Minister has indicated and, in writing, too, I might add, that it will be completed by the end of the agreement, year 2002 - 2003 but, I remember back in 1992, just two months after been elected - not this minister, now, not the current minister, I am sure he will be more efficient. I can count on him, I am sure; but former ministers who attended there a meeting, mayors of different municipalities, environment. It was a go. It was identified, it was given endorsement. It got bogged down a little bit between agriculture and environment but that hurdle is cleared.

I have been informed over a year ago by the ministers involved that all we need now is the will to get a good system highway through the Goulds area, because it is really frustrating for people driving here, from the Confederation Building, for example. I can drive to the southern end of the Goulds, to Big Pond area, in about forty-five minutes and it takes another forty-five just to go a very short distance, one-tenth of the distance almost, it takes half the time because the Goulds highway is like Water Street in traffic time. It is very, very difficult. And it is needed. The area has been depressed, devastated by the downturn in the fishery, by the moratorium. And something that will allow people who live in the area, at least to commute to work elsewhere so they can maintain their houses there, live in the area, raise their children and have them attend schools in the area there, at least would keep the communities alive and keep a strong base there in those communities. It is very important.

It is important to areas in the remote end of my district, like Trepassey, the southern end, a town that has gone from 1,500 people down to actually about 750-some people right now. The census in 1996 shows that it has dropped to about 1,000 people from 1,480 in 1991, and that is a massive drop from a census report; but you count how many people left in the last two years there since the census was done - they are in the Northwest Territories, Alberta, Ontario, you name it. There are there in the hundreds. The community now has sixty houses closed down. In a community the size of Trepassey with sixty closed houses, you can buy a house for $3,000. Several have sold from $3,000 to $6,000, some for as high as $8,000, properties that have been put there at a cost in the range of $45,000 to $50,000 many years ago.

So what we need in this area is a commitment to get something done that is already earmarked, that the government has given a commitment to do it, in writing, it has been identified -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. SULLIVAN: Just a minute to finish up?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What we need now is a commitment to get a start on it this year. At least there is a sign of hope for investors. Some investors of one particular company have invested significantly in the Bay Bulls Waterfront Area, an opportunity there to see that there is hope. There is a commitment that government will move to encourage economic development in those areas and certainly follow through with that. There is only one way to do it, that is to follow through with some real dollars to get the project started.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

I rise in my place today to support the petition presented by the Member for Ferryland on behalf of constituents in his district concerning the Goulds bypass.

Mr. Speaker, I have been hearing stories about the Goulds bypass now for years and years.

MR. SULLIVAN: It is almost easier to get a cardiac bypass and that is not very easy.

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, I would say it is probably easier to get a cardiac bypass, Mr. Speaker.

This bypass, Mr. Speaker, from what I understand, has been promised in writing by this Administration, I believe.

MR. SULLIVAN: Well, it has been verbal for years, but I had a letter from the minister saying that it is going to be done within the two (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: A letter from the minister saying it is going to be done, that is good enough for me, Mr. Speaker; that is a commitment. Hopefully, sometime this century, Mr. Speaker, it will be started, by the way things are going now. Maybe it will not happen in the next century - the same type of thing, Mr. Speaker, promises, promises, promises, but nothing ever comes of promises. Now, the Goulds bypass, Mr. Speaker, is very necessary for the people of the Southern Shore.

MR. EFFORD: Sit down, boy!

MR. J. BYRNE: Now, the Member for Port de Grave may not know anything about the Southern Shore; I am certainly sure he knows enough about the Port de Grave area; I was out there last Summer, Mr. Speaker, and they did not have to get on their knees and beg, I can guarantee you, Mr. Speaker. You talk about unfairness in this Administration! Go and take a look or drive through some of the communities in his area, Mr. Speaker, or the roads between their communities, take a look at some of those - talk about unfairness.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I will keep the crowd on that side awake, Mr. Speaker. I have no problem speaking up in this House of Assembly for the people of the Province.

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible) send that to my constituents.

MR. J. BYRNE: Now, Mr. Speaker, he can send it to his constituents, alright, and they will only see the bias of that minister, Mr. Speaker, and they will be ashamed of the man, I say to you, ashamed of that man there seated in the House of Assembly.

We had the Member for Bonavista South, in this House today, asking questions of that minister and he could not answer the questions. So I would not speak up too much if I were him, there in his chair sitting down trying to interrupt and to distract me.

Now, Mr. Speaker, with respect to the Goulds bypass, something that has been promised for years, something that is absolutely necessary. I travel the Southern Shore Highway every now and then, not nearly as often as the Member for Ferryland, of course, or the Member for Kilbride, but the roads in the Goulds and Kilbride are atrocious. They are almost as bad as the roads in my district, Mr. Speaker, which I have been fighting for, for years since I came into this House of Assembly, trying to get some work done on the Marine Drive in my district, and the Outer Cove Road, Torbay Road, the WindGap in Flatrock, the Bauline Road. The longest speed bump in the Province, Mr. Speaker, is the Bauline Road.

So I am here, of course, speaking from experience and sympathy for the people of the Southern Shore with respect to the Goulds bypass. The condition of the road, the amount of traffic on that road is horrendous; trying to get out into the traffic is comparable to trying to get into the traffic on the Torbay Road by someone trying to get off the Pine Line or Middle Cove Road or Quigley's Lane in Torbay. That is the comparison I am making with respect to the Goulds highway and the Torbay highway, the road going to Pouch Cove.

We know it has been planned - we know that the Goulds bypass has been planned for years, and to be in a network of highways with respect to the Outer Ring Road in and around St. John's. The Goulds bypass and the Torbay bypass have been planned for years and years but nothing has ever been done about it since this Administration came to power. The now Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture sitting in his chair, when he was the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, put the Torbay bypass on the back burner. I know. I went to a meeting with that man, Mr. Speaker, and supported him when he was speaking up in support of the Outer Ring Road. But he put the Torbay bypass on the back burner, I can tell you that, Mr. Speaker. There is no loyalty from that man over there, the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, none whatsoever. There is no point in doing that man a favour, he does not give anything in return, I can guarantee you that.

Now, with respect to the Goulds bypass, again, it is a road that is desperately needed. The traffic on the Goulds highway, the existing highway, as I said, is horrendous; the condition of the road - pot holes. Water and sewer went in -

MR. SULLIVAN: It is dangerous for pedestrians in the Goulds.

MR. J. BYRNE: Dangerous, there is no doubt there, Mr. Speaker. With respect to the shoulders of the road, you have pedestrians walking and we have cuts across the road and fill-in where the roads were torn up to put in water and sewer and what have you. You have traffic trying to manoeuvre around these pot holes, putting pedestrians who are walking on the shoulder of the road in the Goulds and that area in danger of being knocked down.

It should not have to come to the House of Assembly. The member for that district should not have to bring a petition to the House of Assembly to be given decent roads in the area.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. J. BYRNE: By leave, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. EFFORD: No leave!

MR. SPEAKER: No leave.

MR. J. BYRNE: Make it known that the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture will not give me leave to speak up for the people of the Southern Shore.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

Orders of the Day

 

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

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, Motion 1.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion 1.

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, I have received a message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor.

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

I, the Lieutenant-Governor of the Province of Newfoundland, transmit estimates of sums required for the public service of the Province for the year ending March 31, 1999 by way of Interim Supply, and in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution Act 1867, I recommend these estimates to the House of Assembly.

Sgd.:______________________

A. M. House, Lieutenant-Governor.

The hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board.

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, I move that the message, together with a bill, be referred to the Committee of Supply.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that the message, together with a bill, be referred to the Committee of Supply.

All those in favour, `aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye!

MR. SPEAKER: Against.

Carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into Committee of Supply on the message and the motion of the hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

 

Committee of the Whole on Supply

 

CHAIR (Mr. Penney): Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board.

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Very briefly, the amounts of Interim Supply are set forth in Bill 2 on the last page. It is roughly 30 per cent of the Province's overall budget, which is generally in the vicinity of $3.4 billion, and is intended to carry government business over until the normal time at which the budget is passed, as one hopes it will be, in mid-to late-June.

The reason it is slightly more than one might presume for this, instead of being just 25 per cent it is around 30 per cent, is that many of the capital expenditures of government take place in the early part of the year. So, for example, there is a fairly substantial amount in here for the roads program, about $46 million. The Trans-Labrador Highway is about $28 million, the provincial roads program is about $8 million, and water and sewer under the Labrador Inuit Agreement is $3.1 million, for a total of about $85,600,000. The rest of the heads of expenditure pretty much equate to about a quarter of the normal amounts allotted over this period of time.

Rather than deal with it in much more detail, Mr Chairman, I would leave it for members to raise any issues or concerns. I should say it is Interim Supply only. It represents about 30 per cent of the budget. If members have any great concerns about the overall thrust of government, then, of course, it remains open to pass this in due course and defeat the government on the main budget. I do not think there would be anything in this that would take away the second right from the former.

I would be pleased to answer any specific questions with regard to any of the departments.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

We are here to debate Bill 2, relating to Interim Supply, an amount in excess $1 billion. That is the amount the members of this House are called upon to debate to allow this government to meet its financial and fiscal obligations up to and including March 31, 1998.

One billion dollars is a figure which is quite significant, and as the minister himself has indicated, even beyond his own expectations with respect to what would be included in the Interim Supply legislation for this year.

Mr. Chairman, when we look carefully at the schedule affixed to the bill - in fact, at Section No. 3 of the bill, we look at the breakdown of each particular department and we see by tradition, health and community services and education resulting in almost - in fact, beyond 50 per cent of the total amount. That is not unusual because, by tradition, both health and education have certainly represented the bulk of expenditure in this Province. That is followed by Works, Services and Transportation of almost $200 million.

Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Finance, I am sure, will have questions raised when we enter into the Budget Debate and, in fact, Mr. Chairman, will have answers, hopefully, with respect to questions raised on education, health and indeed, all departments of the Province. However, on the education issue, Mr. Chairman, it is interesting we note that on today's date we have filed in this hon. House the report of the Auditor General and this, of course, is a review of departments and Crown agencies of government. It is government's report card, Mr. Chairman. The report of the Auditor General is the financial or fiscal report card which is an assessment of government's track record, as it were, with respect to all departments.

It is interesting that we look at the Department of Education in particular because last year, Mr. Chairman, was an historic year in education in this Province. It was referred to earlier by members on this side of the House and, indeed, the minister himself referred to education reform and the great advances and the great changes that have been made in the education system and the education department in our Province. We note the commentary, Mr. Chairman, of the Auditor General with respect to, in particular the Department of Education and school districts. There is a list of the ten new boards and I would just like to briefly refer to what the report of the Auditor General has to say.

In May, 1997, we completed a review of the restructuring of the twenty-seven school boards into ten district boards. The objective of this review was to assess whether financial controls and practices during the wind-up were adequate and whether transactions were made in accordance with government and board policies and procedures. This review included an examination, Mr. Chairman, of staff remuneration, operating expenses and capital asset controls of three former school boards and a review of staff remuneration for seven other former boards during the eighteen-month period prior to the dissolution of these boards. As a result of the findings during the review of the old boards, the review was expanded to review compensation practices of three of the new district boards.

The Auditor General, in conclusion, Mr. Chairman, has made the following submission: Financial controls and practices during the wind-up of the Provinces old twenty-seven school boards and the start-up of the ten new district school boards were not adequate. We have the Auditor General essentially saying to the people of this Province that the procedure that was used, Mr. Chairman, by this government in implementing education reform, in the dissolution of the twenty-seven old boards and the start-up of the new ten boards - the procedure was not adequate or the controls and the practices that were put in place were not adequate.

In addition, the Auditor General continues: In areas where it was apparent that boards were not complying with Department of Education policy, the department did not initiate any action to ensure boards adhered to its policies. Now, this is a fundamental statement, Mr. Chairman. It is a fundamental statement. We have an independent body, the Auditor General of this Province, an independent person, who is saying that the department did not initiate any action to ensure that boards adhere to its policies. That is a critical comment, I would say, Mr. Chairman. What it is saying to this government and in fact what it is saying in particular to the Ministry of Education is, it is not necessary, Mr. Chairman, at all times to simply wash ones hands. It is not necessary to say, Mr. Chairman, that we will not get involved. Let the boards do what they have to do. Let the boards make the tough decisions. Let the boards gather all the information, collect all the data and then, as a result of this collecting of data, make the tough choices; because we have an independent body simply saying that the department did not initiate any action to ensure boards adhere to the policies with respect to the transfer and the transition of the old system of twenty-seven boards to the new system of ten.

So I say to the minister, if we can just bring this example and narrow this example to something much more basic and much more recent, and that is with respect to decisions that are being made, the tough decisions on school closures, on the reduction of programming, on the reduction of teachers, on the allocation of teachers, we say to the minister: Be not afraid to become involved. Don't be afraid, Mr. Minister, to lend a hand to boards who need your help. Don't be afraid to say to the new school board members: You are new, the process is new, you have just been duly elected; however, if you need our assistance in the Department of Education, we are here to guide you, we are here to work with you, we are here to ensure that the best possible results are in fact a result of what education reform is all about.

This is just one small example. It ties in, Mr. Chairman. I am interested in knowing what either the Minister of Education or the Minister of Finance can say in justification of in excess of $200 million being required at this time as a part of Interim Supply legislation. Exactly what are the details? What are the particulars? What is the rationale behind such a significant expenditure being required at this time to allow the Province to conduct its affairs as it relates to education in the Province?

Mr. Chairman, the one example that I have given from the independent Report of the Auditor General is asking the minister to become involved. It is asking the minister to play an important role in the transition process. It is asking the minister to say, once again: We are not afraid to make tough decisions; we are not afraid to make recommendations to school boards. In fact, we are there as your minister, we are there as the ministry of education, to show leadership, to show guidance, and to show that we are willing, as part of a team, to help in this whole educational process in our Province.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: The hon. Minister of Education.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have a couple of comments in this particular debate on Interim Supply in Committee. I somewhat appreciate the question by the hon. member with respect to why we would need, at this point in time, $212 million for education on an interim basis, and would offer some answer shortly; but as the Finance critic, in standing up and singling out education in his initial presentation during Committee, I understand that he misses being my critic already and would like to be back in education. Maybe I will talk to your caucus chair and your new leader and see if I can get you back.

AN HON. MEMBER: He is caucus chair.

MR. GRIMES: Oh, you are the caucus chair? You got bought off easily in the race, eh? Don't run and I will make your caucus chair; very good.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. GRIMES: That is how much attention we pay to those kinds of things on this side of the House. Well, we do miss you as the critic for Education. Maybe you can look for a reassignment of duties.

Mr. Chairman, with respect to the issues raised from the Auditor Generals Report, and with respect to the proposition that the minister should be more hands-on with respect to education matters, the hon. member, when he was Education critic and debated the new Schools Act last fall, leading up to the passage of it at Christmas, I don't remember him making that proposition or suggesting that we should change the Act.

In fact, if he wants to make a proposal at some point in the future, or if his party wants to put the proposition forward, that in fact we should not have school boards and the Minister of Education should do everything with respect to organizing education in the Province, I would invite the Opposition party, at any point in the future, to bring that forward as the official position of the Opposition, that we should not have school boards and that the Minister of Education should do everything, including deciding which schools should open and close, and which students should go to which building. If that is the position, I would gladly entertain it for debate at some future point for possible amendment to the Act.

What we decided to do, and what was supported unanimously before Christmas, was that there would be defined roles for the ministry of Education, which are laid out in the Schools Act; there would be defined roles for the school boards which would give them greater autonomy, greater involvement, because they are the parents. Now we have the member, for whatever reason - political reasons, I guess - standing up and saying the minister should get more involved, the minister should be more hands-on, the minister should do it all. Only a couple of months ago, before we recessed, he, as the Education critic, jumped up and voted for a Schools Act that said the minister should do this and the school board should do that. So why he has changed his mind during the period of recess, maybe he will enlighten us some time in the future.

With respect to the commentary again - selective reading, I would suggest, from the Auditor General's Report - talking about: the department did not initiate any action to ensure boards adhere to its policies and so on... It did go on, and if he reads the whole piece, which I hope the public of the Province will read, it will acknowledge exactly what the department did. The department instructed the school boards, under the legislation, to put the senior staff on the salary scales that had been agreed to by the Cabinet, by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council.

The ten school boards, individually and through their provincial organization, the Newfoundland and Labrador School Board Association, each individually and collectively came to the minister that the hon. member just said should get more hands-on, should be more helpful, should work with them, and should do stuff instead of just saying, `You do it and I will do what I am going to do', and wash my hands. He just said, do something. We did something. We said: We will give you permission - if you think it is a priority as a school board, because you are out there empowered to make these decisions - if you think it is a priority to give these senior executives in your board higher salaries than what the Cabinet has debated and agreed they should have, then you can do so up to a certain limit, but we will not give you the money from the salary vote for those positions; because there is again a section in the act that says the salaries for those positions, director and assistant director, will be set by an Order in Council, by the government, by the Cabinet of the Province. The boards then came back and said, we would like to give them a raise. We said, well, we disagree.

So the minister was hands-on. The minister did exactly what the hon. member just said. The minister took an active role and said no. They came back again and said, we still disagree. We said, well, if you think it is a priority, you explain to the parents why you are taking money that the government would give you for other things - running schools, buying supplies, getting textbooks, getting lab materials - and if you think it is a priority to take that money and up their salaries then you can do it up to this maximum - again, not what they asked for - but you explain to the people why you are spending that money in that way.

That is what the Auditor General details; that is what the Department of Education did. It did not say, absolutely no, you cannot do it. It said, if you do it then you must take the money from some other grant and you must justify to the people, as school boards with authority under the act, as to why that is a priority instead of keeping another school open, keeping some (inaudible) staff in the school, having some more money for student assistants, having some more money to buy equipment and materials. If you think you should give these people a raise instead, go ahead; because we are not giving you the money and you will have to explain to the people why you thought that was the most important thing and the most pressing issue in front of and confronting your board at this time, to give these senior executives a raise.

That is what that whole issue is about, Mr. Chairman. So the member has to make up his mind whether he really is going to plead that the minster do something or not do something, because if the minister just sat there and washed his hands then he would not have done anything and there would be no commentary in here; except you would have ten boards out there with staff who are paid less than they currently are, still disgruntled and so on. Mr. Chairman, there is a fuller story behind that.

A shorter response and a shorter issue with respect to: Why would the Department of Education, of all departments, need $200 million, roughly, in Interim Supply? The answer is clearly this: Because we do want to make sure that the boards, the ten school boards, have the funding that they need to finish out the school year for starters - because this funding usually takes us through to the end of June - to accommodate all of the issues that they need to in planning for next year, because it is one of the areas where you have to spend money now in order to be ready for the opening of school in September. You have to make commitments to teachers for salaries; you have to make commitment for your support staff; you have to keep the things functioning through the summer; you have to pre-order textbooks which are millions and millions of dollars that you have to pay for in the next few weeks and months in order that they be in the Province and distributed to the schools for September.

So the education system works in such a fashion that there is... You would think that for a few months you might get by with one-fifth or one-sixth of the allocation, but because of pre-commitments, the things to which you must give a commitment today in order to plan for school for September, annually it is requested that the budget for the Department of Education be approved to about one-quarter to one-third of what will be needed for the whole of the functions of next year, because there are a whole series of pre-commitments that are necessary to guarantee the boards that will be made at this point in time.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

Before I get into this bill with respect to funding for Interim Supply, I listened very attentively to the Minister of Education on the few words he had to say. He was only up for a few minutes, less than ten minutes, and I had to fight to stay awake; but the question that came to my mind was this: Who is he trying to convince? He has the Auditor General's Report there now and he is awfully concerned about some facts and figures that the Auditor General discovered with respect to the department and the school boards, and people being given certain amounts of monies. He is up now trying to defend that, and trying to deflect any questions that may be forthcoming from this side of the House - any good, thought-out questions, logical questions, from the critic for Education. That is what he is trying to defend now.

You do not normally see the minister get up unless he is asked a question, but today he was up on his feet as soon as he read the report and saw something in it that may be a little bit negative towards himself.

With respect to Bill 2, I will not get into the long title of it, basically government is looking for $1,010,089,200 for Interim Supply, quite a lot of money - 30 per cent of the Budget - that the Minister of Finance would like us to approve right now, today, tomorrow, whenever the case may be, so he can pay the civil servants. Maybe what we should be doing is not giving him so much money. Maybe we should divide the budget, the $3.-something billion, into twelfths, and each month give it to him; give him around $300 million of that today or tomorrow for the upcoming month, and make him come back here and work for the other money.

Mr. Chairman, the whole problem goes back again to the sitting of the House of Assembly. If this administration had opened the House of Assembly two weeks ago, or a month ago, all of this could have been debated - the budget could have been debated - and you would not have to wait until the last minute and try to force it through the House of Assembly. Get us here to discuss the finance of this Province properly, logically, sequentially, whatever the case may be, and look at where the money will be going. Now they want us to approve over a billion dollars, 30 per cent of the Budget, Mr. Chairman, not really knowing where it is going to be spent. I think that is unreasonable, Mr. Chairman, and I think that this Administration should be looking at calling back the House earlier in the year, each year, to deal with this.

We have had a similar problem in December, just before the House closed for Christmas. We were here sitting all night long, thirty-six hours in one sitting alone, Mr. Chairman - ten members on this side of the House kept this House of Assembly going for thirty-six hours. It was not from the input of the members on the other side, all they did was sit there and listen to what we had to say. They would not get up and take part in the discussion, no, they could not do that. All they wanted, Mr. Chairman, was to ram legislation through the House of Assembly - ram it through, but we did not allow that to happen.

MR. McLEAN: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: What are you saying, Minister of Government Services and Lands? Speak up.

MR. McLEAN: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: You were listening - you were? Well, a few seats over there were occupied just enough to keep the quota in the House of Assembly. But then again, Mr. Chairman, the questions asked of me a minute ago - did you say, we were listening? Well, Mr. Chairman, what they normally do over there is, sit there in the chairs and vegetate; they do not get up and partake in discussion. For example, I can name any one of the members, but I will not - but this is their normal participation in the House of Assembly, Mr. Chairman.

I am going to imitate now, the discussion that the majority of members on that side of the House does in this House of Assembly on any issue. Are you ready, Mr. Chairman? Listen now ---- that is it, `nothing'. Very seldom, Mr. Chairman, do we have any members on the other side get up and speak on the bills in this House of Assembly. But, with respect to this bill, as I said, Mr. Chairman - I wish you (inaudible) up and down in the chair, so I would not have to (inaudible) myself all the time.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I did. Okay, come on and sit down and I will show you. I will do an imitation of the discussion that goes on in the House of Assembly by members on the other side of the House on most bills that are brought to the House of Assembly on the instructions of the Premier. So are you ready now? Are you ready?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Okay. Here is the discussion that should take place from members on that side of the House ---- that is it, Mr. Chairman, `nothing'. The Minister of Works, Services and Transportation missed that.

With respect to this - and this is a very important point - we have seen the Minister of Finance and the Premier of this Province, recently, partaking in negotiations with the unions, Mr. Chairman, with a certain percentage of this money for salaries, what they are negotiating in public. And they lay out the law to the unions, NAPE and CUPE and what have you, the Minister of Finance saying, for example, the other day, 7 per cent, take it, leave it, do whatever you want, but you are not getting any more than 7 per cent. Now, that is fair negotiations, I would say to you, Mr. Chairman, to tell the unions who are elected by the people whom they represent, the workers of this Administration, government employees, Crown corporations and what have you, being told: You have 7 per cent, you will accept that or we will take it off the table altogether.

Now, the Member for Conception Bay South was in the media, The Evening Telegram, the other day, making some comments with respect to how outrageous this tactic is, and I have to agree with him. Now we have the government coming to this House of Assembly, asking us to approve a billion dollars to pay these civil servants and workers and we do not know what their increases are going to be. We really do not know. Is it going to be 7 per cent, 6 per cent or nothing? I know that one person is getting overpaid and he is walking out now; he has been grossly overpaid, that is okay. We will not mention his name.

Anyway, Mr. Chairman, we have one billion dollars being asked for now by this Administration. Another point that needs to be addressed, of course, is the Throne Speech. And this all relates to the money that is going to be spent out of this $1,010,089,200, Mr. Chairman. What needs to be addressed, of course, is the Throne Speech. We had the Premier, who said they will now concentrate on social programs - socials programs, Mr. Chairman - and we have been harping on this. How many times have I stood in this House of Assembly and said that we need to be addressing the bread-and-butter issues of the people of this Province? We have people out there who do not know where their next loaf of bread, pound of butter, can of milk, cup of tea is coming from. Now we have the Premier standing and saying he is going to concentrate on social programs.

Well, it is about time, I would say. We on this side of the House are sick and tired of talking about it, and it is finally starting to sink in.

MR. GRIMES: You have not spoken about the price of a loaf of bread since you got elected. The first time you mentioned it was today.

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Chairman, I have to correct the Minister of Education. He is trying to detract - and sobeit, I have no problem with that - saying I never ever mentioned the price of a loaf of bread in this House of Assembly, and a pound of butter.

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes, you did.

MR. J. BYRNE: I did, many, many times. The problem is, the Minister of Education is always asleep in his chair and not listening. That is why he does not think it was ever brought up. That is the only logical explanation. I hope that is not the case, but it is either that or he is very forgetful.

Anyway, with respect to the social programs here, we have the Premier talking about: we have to get away from the mega-projects. Can you believe that coming out of the mouth of the Premier, getting away from the mega-projects? We saw him going across the country last year talking about the Upper Churchill, how he was going to renegotiate the Upper Churchill, how he was going to basically force the people in Quebec to see their error, to understand the injustice of that Upper Churchill agreement, and he was going to go across the country talking about that and see what he could do. What did he do? Not a lot, Mr. Chairman.

He talked about Voisey's Bay, how there would not be an ounce of ore mined up in Labrador in Voisey's Bay unless there was a smelter in Argentia. Now, this is March 23, 1998. I do not see the start on a smelter yet, I do not see a lot of activity as to what is going on in Voisey's Bay. That is another mega-project that was announced.

Last year, I believe it was, it was the big Kodak deal, another mega-project that was going to create hundreds of jobs. We saw the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology, at the time, and the Premier going to Marystown to talk about what? this big project they had down there, gas production down there, hundreds of jobs. Where are the jobs? None.

Now, finally coming to the realization after untold hours of the Opposition, the former Leader, the Member for Ferryland, the Member for Kilbride now, talking when he responded to the Throne Speech - finally coming to the realization that we have -

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. J. BYRNE: By leave.

- finally coming -

CHAIR: Does the member have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed.

MR. J. BYRNE: - finally coming to the realization, Mr. Chairman, that we have to deal with the bread-and-butter issues of the people of the Province. It is about time, I would say, that the Premier agreed to do this, and agreed to what we have been saying.

Now, the Budget is coming down on Thursday. The Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, how many has he presented? How many people in this Province can say they are better off today than they were in 1989? How many in this Province can say they are better off today because of the Budgets that have been brought down by this Administration and the previous Administration? Not too many, I would say, can say: Well, I am better off today. Here is one who can honestly say that I am not better off financially today than I was back in 1989. Because we saw no increase in salaries in this Province. All we saw were increases in taxes, income tax, HST brought in there last year, licence fees, permits, all that stuff has increased, doubled, quadrupled, and whatever the case may be. It went on and on.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) going down.

MR. J. BYRNE: And, Mr. Chairman, because of the policies of this Administration we see professionals out there, workers in the different fields, it could be the legal field, it could be carpentry, plumbing, electrical, whatever the case may be, and everybody is fighting tooth-and-nail to get a bit of work. They see the rates they charge going down. Therefore, now they have to lay people off because they cannot keep them on. We have less revenue coming in, all because of the policies of this Administration.

I do not know how the Premier can stand in his place and smile and say everything going on in this Province today is hunky-dory. I do not know how he can keep a straight face and say that, I honestly do not know. He is a great actor. There is no doubt about it, Mr. Chairman, the man is a great actor. It is strange that I brought that up, Mr. Chairman, by the way. It was mentioned today, that tonight, Oscars are being awarded for all the movies. I am wondering, is that where the Premier is today? in Hollywood somewhere, I suppose, waiting to get an Oscar on his performance here in the past couple of years. He gets up to answer questions in the House of Assembly but we cannot get an answer out of the man. He is off telling people how well-off they are in this Province, Mr. Chairman - unreal.

The Throne Speech: Something that was not included in the Throne Speech, that when I heard it I could not believe, was that the Premier did not mention out-migration. Did I hear the word out-migration the other day in the Throne Speech? I do not think so. Maybe I might have missed it, Mr. Chairman, but -

AN HON. MEMBER: You must have missed it.

MR. J. BYRNE: I must have missed it. He did not put too much emphasis on it if he did mention it, I can tell you that, Mr. Chairman. The single most important issue in this Province today is out-migration because it has such an impact on everything that is happening in this Province, everything from revenues - for the Province and for the municipalities.

We saw a story the other day on one of the television stations, on Trepassey. The population decreased from 1,500 down to 750-800 - 50 per cent of the people gone from Trepassey, and that is happening right across this Province, in every community.

I represent a district, a part of which is in St. John's. It is partly urban, close to St. John's, the largest city in the Province, Mr. Chairman, and there are people in my district leaving every single day. Can you imagine? Can you fathom, Mr. Chairman, how many people are leaving rural Newfoundland and Labrador? It is something that needs to be addressed. You have to use your imagination, some ingenuity that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are famous for, Mr. Chairman. We have to sit back and ask: How do we keep the people in this Province?

Now, years ago, Mr. Chairman, over the years, traditionally, we saw a man, a father, a mother, leave the Province and come back looking for work. Get their (inaudible) and come back to spend time with their family, but now what we are seeing is whole families leaving, young and old. One of the groups that I see leaving that is really impacting on me, is the younger people, families in their thirties and forties, who have young children, are uprooting and leaving this Province and it is not likely that they are coming back here unless we see some drastic changes in the way we manage this Province. One of the changes we have to have, in my mind, Mr. Chairman, is an attitude change, that we cannot be defeatist, Mr. Chairman.

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: The Minister of Fisheries is there now interjecting again, as he normally does. There is no problem there, Mr. Chairman, but the Minister of Fisheries -

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible) be positive for a change.

MR. J. BYRNE: Oh now, talking about me being positive. Well, that is a good one now that is coming out of the mouth of the Minister of Fisheries, about me being positive, I who stood in this House of Assembly and tried to give some direction and constructive criticism to the Administration over the past five years, since 1993, that I have been elected in this House of Assembly. I know what the people of this Province can do, Mr. Chairman, but you have to have some support. You cannot have the municipalities in this Province being downloaded on all the time, Mr. Chairman, and saying now half your population is gone but your taxes have to double and triple and quadruple. We cannot have that going on in this Province. We have to have support for these municipalities, Mr. Chairman. We have to encourage people to stay in this Province. We have to find ways to create jobs in rural Newfoundland. We cannot have small businesses in this Province trying to start up and hitting red tape.

The government put something in place a few years ago, the government services centres, Mr. Chairman, to decrease the red tape for people in this Province. The Minister of Government Services and Lands is looking at me and he cannot honestly stand in his place today and say that they are working. He cannot say that those centres are working, that they are cutting down on red tape, Mr. Chairman. They are not.

I brought up - again, talking about rural Newfoundland - last Fall, questions in the House of Assembly. This may seem to be a simple issue to some people, but I brought it up in this House of Assembly with respect to inspections for septic waste for new houses being built in this Province. I asked the minister about that, and I told him how much it was going to cost for people building new houses in this Province, anywhere from $1,000 to $2,000. They would not listen, could not comprehend, the reasons why it would cost so much money. Because the government is doing it now, how can it cost that kind of money?

Because if you understood the system and what was going to be required, and who was going to do the inspections, and what have you, you could understand why it would cost Joe Blow down the road who is going to build a new house an extra $1,000 or $2,000.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who?

MR. J. BYRNE: Not you. I can say to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture it is not going to be him having to worry about $1,000, is it? It is not going to cost him $1,000.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I would say to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, pay attention. If you want to get up and speak on this Interim Supply bill, Bill 2, where you are looking for $1 billion, get up and speak to it, I say to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

I was just getting going on a nice roll, Mr. Chairman, with respect to what is going on in this Province today. Back to the municipalities, back to the inspections for the people.

Here is another one, Municipal and Provincial Affairs again, with respect to the municipalities. They let go of their planners. I had a person today phone me with respect to a town plan. Town clerks now are expected to make amendments to the town plan, to be planners. They have no training. The towns cannot afford to hire these consultants. It is great for places like the City of St. John's, maybe Corner Brook, Mount Pearl, and what have you, but the smaller municipalities cannot afford to hire planners. They either have to have the town manager try to do something with it, or the town clerk, to make amendments for rezoning and what have you, or they have to hire a planner from outside.

They can pass this cost on to the developer, if a person wants to have an area rezoned so they can build a house. Now they have to pay more for the rezoning, they have to pay for the planner to make the amendment, they have to pay for the septic inspection, to look at it for approval -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Definitely, it is happening out there. Now we can be up to $2,000 or $3,000 for a person to build a house in rural Newfoundland. That is what this Administration is doing. The Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture talks about being positive? If you want to be positive, bring back some of the stuff this government cut; that is how you can be positive.

I am not sure, but I think I must be getting close to my time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Anyway, Mr. Chairman, I can go on for another few minutes -

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. member has been speaking with leave.

MR. J. BYRNE: I am speaking with leave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: Are you withdrawing leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave!

CHAIR: Leave is withdrawn.

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I can't believe, with the fine speech that the Member for Cape St. Francis was making, that they would withdraw leave. They (inaudible) give leave over leave to make the points he has been making today.

MR. GRIMES: It was one of his better ones.

MR. SHELLEY: It was one of his better ones; I agree with the Minister of Education. He made a lot of good points.

With Bill 2, Interim Supply, for over $1 billion, you cannot afford to let time slip by without making a few comments as we come back to this hon. House to discuss the great social debate which is about to start. That is according to the Throne Speech. Mega-projects and the cameras and props are going to be put away for a few weeks. Push aside the props and the directors and the Oscar awards. All of the mega-projects, for now anyway, are going to be pushed aside while we sit down and we talk about the social debate.

We begin today in Question Period with the social debate and we look across to seven or eight of the ministers not in their seats, to start discussing the social debate, and then as the Leader started to ask questions on it, of course, there is nothing new; we find out that the answers were not forthcoming. We will continue to ask those questions. We are more interested in the social programs.

What inspired me to get up today was the Minister of Education, after having listened to the Minister of Education. We talk about the debate that is about to unfold with respect to educational reform in the Province. We are just starting to see it now here in St. John's. As of yesterday, we saw that apparently there was a protest outside the building here, and we started to hear more and more about people in St. John's, how they are starting to see it now unfold, Mr. Chairman.

AN HON. MEMBER: The Member for Waterford Valley was there.

MR. SHELLEY: The Member for Waterford Valley was there, very well represented, but it was so funny just to watch it unfold. It started in rural Newfoundland some time ago - in my district I know it started - and the real impact of education reform is just starting to come to the forefront. People are just starting to see it for what it really is.

Mr. Chairman, there is not a person in this Province, after the debate that we have gone through in this House of Assembly - I know in two different sessions that I have been involved with here with our caucus, and I am sure with the caucus opposite, the ongoing debate on education reform - what everybody has said from day one - everybody, whether you are a yes or no or what campaign you took part in - was that at the end of the day your children and my children would go to a classroom that was better equipped, with better teachers, more qualified, better resources, better buildings. So at the end of the day that child would graduate from a grade XII education in this Province, and we could turn and say to all of those, now you will get a better education.

That is what the whole debate was all about. It was not about religion; it was not about all the propaganda and the different groups that went around. It had nothing to do with it. As a matter of fact, what was left out of this debate, what I have always said from day one, was the child, and what would happen at the end of the day, when he walks into the classroom at 9:00 in the morning until he leaves at 3:00 in the afternoon. What was it all about?

The Minister of Education knows full well that what we have seen now are, I suppose, in technical terms, the changes that have to take place as far as schools closing. Oh, yes, there is no doubt about it. I do not think anybody can disagree that if you had declining numbers in schools it is obvious, it is the common sense thing to do, that a number of schools will have to close.

There is nobody going to dispute that, but we are really going to find out at the end of the day is if the child still has the proper teacher who is qualified to teach those special skills, and that he has a full-rounded education. The last thing the people of this Province are going to put up with after they have put up with so many changes, schools closing and so on... My district, and I have spoken to the minister about it, is no different than any others. The people who have sucked in and said: Okay, we will see that our one school will close. We will see that things are going to change; the structure of schooling as we have known it for years is going to change. A lot of history, a lot of proud tradition went on.

When you pass by a school that you have gone to for years... Like in my home town, when I look at a school now that is boarded up, a beautiful building, good structure, it is gone, but we have accepted that in our area now. We have said, okay, that is one of the things that had to happen; but it is just a warning. That is the only way to describe it; it is a warning.

I can sense it out there every time I talk to somebody. Okay, we have done all of this; we have done our changes. But what people are saying in their warning is that with all that we have taken, and all that we have done, at the end of the day my child had better be going to a better equipped classroom with teachers that are more qualified to do the specialities, so that there is music, so that there is physical education, and there are all of those things that make a student complete.

Anybody in this Province who follows education closely knows that a full education is not just the science and the math that you get in the classroom. If anybody here thinks that your child from kindergarten to grade XII is going to school because he can't wait to get to math class, or can't wait to go to biology lab, you are mistaken.

What keeps a lot of people in school is this - and I was one of them - I was one of them who stayed in school for such things as sports; yes, no big shock. I am sure it is no shock to a lot of people. I stayed in school for sports, stayed in school for the extra-curricular activities. I was that young buck running around the school who wanted to make the basketball teams and the hockey teams, and wanted to go with the science club that was going.

Because the truth was that was the only time we got out of town.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: The Member for Waterford Valley didn't make the basketball team, but we can see why.

Mr. Chairman, I don't think I am saying anything that is shocking. I just wanted to make the point on it here today in this debate that we have to remember what the whole development of the child is all about. It is not being in the classroom for forty minutes doing math and science. Yes, they are necessities; yes, they are going to need that to progress and go on to post-secondary education and so on; but what the Minister of Education has to keep in mind is that as we see all of these changes to education, and see a school closed down up the road, and so on, that it is more than the academics in that every school in this Province, just because you live in Springdale or live in Kings Point or somewhere, doesn't mean that they should not have a physical education teacher. It doesn't mean that they shouldn't have an upgraded computer specialist. It is nice to say that you have five 486- computers in a classroom, but in five years from now we cannot keep up with the changing computer system then we have lost it.

What it is going to come down to, yes, is a more tightened system of education, but it has to be now focused on quality so that every child in this Province, no matter what nook or cranny they are in, if that school is staying open then they deserve as high a quality of education as somebody in St. John's, Corner Brook, Gander, Labrador City, or the bigger centres of this Province. That is what reform is all about. That is why we cannot lose focus.

While we went through the pains and went through the divisions throughout this Province, every child in this Province has to be afforded the same opportunities because of the changes we have gone through. Yes, there are schools that will be closed; yes, there might be less teachers in some classrooms and so on. But let's not, at the end of the day, find that we have forty or forty-five children in a classroom.

For any the teachers in this Assembly today, and I know there are many here, when you start to walk into a classroom of forty students, let me tell you, it is not education any more. You know what it is? It is survival. I have been there. You walk into a classroom on a Friday morning at 9:00 a.m., where you have forty kids, and you have to teach a biology class. You are going to do everything you can to control that class for forty minutes and get out alive. That is what happens, Mr. Chairman.

When you start jamming students into a classroom, pack them in, they are not getting quality education. If that what the means is to education reform then we have lost sight, and we have lost sight of the whole focus which is a quality education: the right number of students with the ratios the minister keeps using all the time, but at the same time the resources to develop that child. And do not ever again lose sight of the things like music, drama, physical education, science clubs, and all those things... I am telling you now that a lot of students would leave school very quickly if you took those extra-curriculum activities out of the classroom, and that is why we cannot lose sight of it.

On the same debate of education, and to jump right into it, from high school education right into post-secondary, I have talked to more students on this in the last couple of months than ever. I have always discussed it with them, but especially recently, and that is the student debt. It is almost like a ticking time bomb. Here we are trying to encourage - and I am sure there are members here today who have children at sixteen, seventeen, or eighteen years of age who are ready now to plunge into the post-secondary. All they can say to you when they come to you, is: I cannot believe that I am going to go to Memorial University and come out with a mortgage, $30.000 and $40,000.

Mr. Chairman, I graduated in 1987 with a $27,000 debt.

MR. MERCER: Is that all?

MR. SHELLEY: Is that all? I say to the Member from Humber East, he had better go back and shake his head again and get back in his right seat if he is going to say: Is that all?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Forth thousand? That is different, if you have to do the first year over four times. I can understand why $40,000.

Mr. Chairman, $27,000 at that age. I can imagine now, ten years later. Go ask the same student who is going to do the same program as I did, what he going to end up with. If I am not mistaken, and we did do some comparison with some of the students I have talked to, is now it would be somewhere between $36,000 to $37,000; an increase of $10,000 for the same course I did ten years ago, a Bachelor of Education and Physical Education.

Mr. Chairman, what the students of this Province are saying, and they are saying it with a lot of passion, is that the government had better get control of this. They had better get control of what is happening with the people of this Province because the only way out - we can talk about all mega-projects, and we can talk about incentives and about great programs that the government are doing, and there are some good ones; there is no doubt about that. I have seen successes, but I have seen failures also; but there is nothing more important and there is nothing more futuristic to look forward to than a population of young people that is going to come out of our post-secondary institutions and say: I can handle the debt that I can incurred and I am going to stay in this Province. That is the second thing I want to talk about, Mr. Chairman.

Now I am gone from student debt, which is a concern for all of us in this Province -

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon member's time is up.

MR. SHELLEY: By leave, Mr. Chairman, to clue up?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

CHAIR: No leave?

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again I rise to say a few words with respect to the Interim Supply Bill.

Is the Member for Humber East in his chair? Okay, he is not in his chair.

AN HON. MEMBER: That is alright. He hasn't said anything in two years, so he cannot say anything (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: He does not say much, but I heard him say something today and I was shocked.

MR. SULLIVAN: He got sandbagged by the Premier.

MR. J. BYRNE: Oh, he got sandbagged by the Premier. That is no problem; it is not too hard to sandbag the Member for Humber East. In the meantime, today our member was up on a petition with respect to the parents here in St. John's - there are a couple of schools closing down - who came here yesterday and were not permitted to come into the lobby.

The Member for Humber East made a statement something along the lines - now I am not going to quote him verbatim - when someone said about the bad weather, hail and rain and what have you, and he said: They should not even have been out walking yesterday.

That will tell you, Mr. Chairman, the sensitivity of that member with respect to the education of the students in this Province.

AN HON. MEMBER: As sharp as a bowling ball.

MR. J. BYRNE: As one member said, about as sharp as a bowling ball.

Mr. Chairman, I want say a few more words with respect to this Interim Supply and Health and Community Services. I am just looking at this here now, $358,472,100; $358 million going into Health and Community Services in the Province on our Interim Supply. With respect to the health care being supplied to the people of this Province today since this Administration took over, I personally believe that it has gone down hill.

If you walk through the hospitals in this Province - and I have done it as recently as last night, visiting people from my district. I have been a patient in hospitals, and I see a distinct difference.

MR. EFFORD: What hospital, the Waterford?

MR. J. BYRNE: Well, I would say to the minister, I have not been there yet but I heard you just recently got out.

MR. EFFORD: What?

MR. J. BYRNE: I heard you just recently got out of the Waterford; is that right?

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: You.

MR. EFFORD: Who, me?

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes.

MR. EFFORD: I didn't see you there.

MR. J. BYRNE: There you go, you just recently got out.

Mr. Chairman, we often hear now of the lineups for people waiting to get into hospital in this Province today, and the response is that the hospital beds are full - that is what the response is - but if you walk through the hospital corridors you will see hospital rooms with beds vacant.

As a matter of fact, I can bring you up to the Health Sciences here now and show you rooms where I was when I was there a few years ago, that there are now no beds in the rooms. They are vacant, empty, and they talk about the hospital beds being full.

Take a jaunt down to the Miller Centre and walk through the place and see empty rooms. Then they talk about beds being occupied and full, and how they do not have the money to open up these rooms. The general public out there is of the opinion or the belief that all the hospital beds, all the hospital rooms in this Province, are completely full and occupied; but it is not the case, and something needs to be done with respect to an attitude change from this Administration.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: When I was up fifteen or twenty minutes ago speaking, the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation basically said that I was giving a very good speech, that he was really very interested, and he was paying very -

MR. MATTHEWS: (Inaudible) flashes of brilliance.

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Chairman, he is saying those were flashes of brilliance. Well, if I had one flash of brilliance, it is 1,000 per cent more than he has ever had or is ever likely to have. I would say you would never see any brilliance come out of that minister.

Anyway, the health care in this Province is a very serious issue. I have people phoning me all the time, and we all do. All members of the House of Assembly have people in their districts phoning them with respect to concerns they have with respect to health care, trying to get into hospital, or transportation to hospitals; there are any number of issues.

Here is a concern that I have that just came to my mind, one of my flashes, I say to the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation. Now, more than ever before, we see people fund-raising to send patients out of the Province - children, adults, or what have you - for things that are not available here in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We see people fund-raising to send these patients out of the Province. I don't think that is right. They should not have to fund-raise to do that. If the service is not available in St. John's, or in Newfoundland and Labrador, then I think it should be paid for by the government of the day. Whatever Administration that may or may not be is irrelevant.

I have a constituent in my district, a young child, who has to go away for major, major surgery. They had to have fund-raising in the school to help that child go away. They had to have fund-raising in the school and in the community for the parents to go and be able to stay any length of time with the child. The surgery may only be - it is a very serious and necessary surgery, but the last time that the lady went away with the child she expected to go for three weeks and was away for nine weeks.

I think the health care in this Province, although they are looking for $358 million in this Interim Supply, hopefully when the minister brings down his Budget on Thursday this concern of mine might be addressed. It may or may not be addressed. I am sure that he has had representation from other individuals on this very serious matter, Mr. Chairman. Hopefully when the Budget is brought down it will address that concern because I think it is not right, really, to have to fund-raise to get proper medical care.

Another example I had some time last year, I had a call from people in Labrador trying to get transportation to the Island, to the Health Sciences Centre here. I don't have all the details, and I am not really fully informed on this, but I think the military actually paid for the transportation of the patient's accompaniment, the people who travelled here to the Health Sciences.

That is a very serious concern with respect to health care. There are many, many more. We brought them up here in the House of Assembly - our critics - over the past years. The Premier and the Minister of Finance have talked about better times ahead, and they talked about turning the corner; the Province has turned a corner and we will get more revenues in. Maybe some of these concerns that have been, I cannot say neglected, I suppose, but they have not been addressed because the monies were not there - at least we were told the monies were not there - maybe they can be addressed in due course.

With that I am going to sit down now and maybe see if anybody else would like to address the Interim Supply bill. Thank you.

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

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. T. OSBORNE: Still, Mr. Chairman, they are trying to keep me quiet but they can't do that. I hear the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture saying adjourn debate.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) eternity.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Oh, eternity. In that case I will adjourn debate.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: Order, please!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Has debate been adjourned?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: No.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am pleased to have an opportunity to speak early in this debate on Interim Supply. I take the opportunity, I suppose, to ask the minister whether or not in his Interim Supply, in the 30 per cent of his budget, he is planning to provide more money for the public post-secondary education system. There has been, over the past number of months in this House and in the public, both in the media and elsewhere, a large amount of information and concern about the operation of the post-secondary system in this Province, or I suppose the fact that the system is not operating the way it should be.

We have had a policy adopted without any public debate. We have had government gradually, over a period of four or five years, replace the public post-secondary system, the college system, which provided an opportunity for high school graduates to get training at the community college level in a wide variety of subjects, some of them directly job related, others of a slightly more general nature but consistent with the community college concept that has been a vital and valid part of post-secondary education in Canada.

We were just starting into this, Mr. Chairman, when this government and the previous government adopted - without any public debate, without any real consultation, without any opportunity for the public to have any say or students to be involved - adopted a policy of taking the guts out of public post-secondary education and allowing and fostering and promoting the development of private sector post-secondary education, to the great detriment of education in the Province.

We have situations now, Mr. Chairman, where students are left with no choice on the post-secondary level. If they do not wish to or do not want to go to university for a course, or the course that they want is one that is not offered by the university, they are forced to go to a private training institution and pay for tuition what is often the minimum of four times what is charged by the now-called College of the North Atlantic. The tuition cost for a program at the College of the North Atlantic is about $600 per semester. In the private colleges, in the private sector, the fee is from $2,500 to $3,000 per semester, for tuition alone, Mr. Chairman, but this is the policy of this government. They have never written it down. They have never said it is our policy to steer students away from the public system into the private system but they have acted in a manner where this has become the reality for more than half the students.

In 1992, there were about 1,800 students who were attending courses in the private college sector. There are now in excess of 12,000 -more than half, Mr. Chairman. How has government done this? They have done this by cutting back on the commitment of public post-secondary education and they have done it by offering licences to the private sector colleges, without very much monitoring.

I spoke to one college president who invited me to visit their school and I took the tour of the college. I am not painting with a brush, saying that every private college and every course is bad or wrong, but I went to this particular school that has been in operation for fifteen years and I was told that not once has there been an inspector from the Department of Education to come and see how the programs are being run or whether they are meeting the obligations of their operating license, whether they are providing the training that they say they are, whether they are charging the fees that they say they are, whether they are providing the educational instructional qualifications for teachers that they said they were going to or whether they are delivering a program that is worth what it costs, Mr. Chairman.

So, number one, government has given to these organizations the right to go around and say: We have gotten the government's stamp of approval, we are a government-approved program and a government-approved school. Second, their students have access to the student loan program. So what has happened is that government has said: Okay, students, you go to these private colleges, you can borrow the money, because you would never be able to borrow it otherwise, but the student loan program is there. It is very expensive training in many cases. The tuition is four and sometimes five times what it is in the public sector colleges. The students, at the end of the day, may have nothing to show for what they have paid for, except a big fat student loan debt.

We have even gone so far in the ministry of social services as to encourage social assistance recipients to go and borrow money to get off the social assistance, borrow money to go to university and other courses, thereby saving the government money in the short term, because they now have a student loan that they have to repay.

We went further. Last year this government told those students who were allowed to go there just borrowing for their tuition and books, and continue to have their living expenses paid for - let us say a single parents, because this is mostly what we are talking about here. Young women who are on social services, who have no prospects because they have no education, who wish to obtain an education, who are prepared to go to school and undertake that education, are now being asked to borrow money to feed and clothe and house their children for the period of an education, because government has decided it is not prepared to let them collect social assistance while they are attending university.

This is wrong. What the government has done is wrong. It is putting a whole generation of young people in a situation which is excruciatingly bad for them. I had a couple in my office a couple of weeks ago, two young people, a young man aged twenty-three and a young woman aged twenty-one, who had gotten married a year or so ago, and they are going to have a child this year. They have both been attending a number of courses at the private colleges at the post-secondary level. Between the two of them, they had incurred a debt of $55,000 in student loans, Mr. Chairman, and had no jobs, no job prospects. Because the courses they were doing - in one case, the young lady did not finish the course in veterinary assistance or animal care, because not only were there no jobs available for the graduates, Mr. Chairman, there were no work terms even for nothing for these people to be able to finish their course.

Now, I see, Mr. Chairman, that the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture would like me to go on for another hour or so -

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: - but I see that not only is my time up but that I would like to also adjourn the debate, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Finance.

MR. DICKS: Mr. Chairman, I move that we adjourn debate.

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

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

MR. PENNEY: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole have considered the matters to them referred, have directed me to report progress and ask leave to sit again.

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

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

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn until tomorrow at 2:00 p.m.

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