November 26, 1999 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIV No. 40


The House met at 9:00 a.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Statements by Ministers

 

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I rise to update my hon. colleagues on our government's ongoing commitment to the youth of our Province. Once again this year the Department of Education has provided over $500,000 in grants to a wide variety of youth organizations benefitting 35,000 young people across the Province to assist them with their programming for the year.

Monies have been allocated to the Scout and Girl Guide movements in the Province as well as to the provincial Councils of the Boys and Girls Club. Youth Centres were also provided funding, as were the Duke of Edinburgh's Award Program, the Community Services Council Volunteer Centre and the Navy and Army Cadet Leagues of Canada.

These organizations help to foster through fun and learning the qualities that will help the youth of Newfoundland and Labrador become well-rounded individuals and leaders in their communities.

In addition, we have just made the last installment of $50,000 of a three-year $150,000 commitment for the development of a new camp at Northwest Pond for the Newfoundland and Labrador Council of the Girl Guides of Canada.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: The completion of this twenty-five acre campsite will provide an ideal setting for the 13,000 active members, both girls and adults, in Newfoundland and Labra r for adventure and leadership in surroundings that stimulate environmental awareness, physical activity and challenge.

Government has also renewed its commitment of $75,000 to the School Lunch Association. As my hon. colleagues may know, the School Lunch Association helps children take full advantage of their educational opportunities by operating a non-stigmatizing program that provides hot, nutritious lunches to children at school, regardless of their families' ability to pay.

I am pleased that government's financial support of youth programming complements the important work of the over 6,000 adult volunteers who commit their time and talent to the youth of this Province and the 200 staff people who maintain the administration of these organizations.

It is by working together that we can maximize opportunities for the youth of today with enhancement of their future possibilities in mind.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for providing me with a copy of this statement prior to entry. Minister, I say to you that any support for the youth of this Province in the areas which you have identified is certainly welcome. There is not enough that we can do for the youth of this Province.

Minister, I draw attention to the School Lunch Association and the contribution to that. I ask the minister to consider additional support in any way to make this program a universal program. I would ask the minister also to look at supporting these types of lunch programs. In particular, as a caution, it has been brought to my attention that some of the contractors who are going into the schools to get the contract to take care of cafeteria services are asking schools to give them exclusive rights. I'm very much afraid, minister, that it may interfere with the volunteer lunch program that it is there.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HEDDERSON: So I would ask the minister, again, to make sure that the children of this Province are getting the support that they need in the lunch program.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I too wish acknowledge the contribution that the Province is making to young people in the Province, but would like to point out that the Chair of the School Trustees Association last year, Mr. Merle Vokey, has pointed out, as have others, that more than 25,000 children per day go to school hungry in our Province. The School Lunch Program at the present time is only able to supply school lunch programs in 20 per cent of the schools.

Mr. Speaker, I want to call on the minister to announce this program as a universal comprehensive program for every school in the Province so that we can be sure there are no children going to school hungry.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions this morning are directed to the Minister of Mines and Energy. Yesterday, the minister indicated that Inco has proposed a hydrometallurgical technology to process Voisey's Bay ore. In fact, in an article today in The Globe and Mail, the minister is quoted as saying, and in fact he referred to this directly in the House yesterday, that Inco “...is planning a ‘new, leading-edge hydrometallurgical processing plant...that would the first of its kind in the world...'”

It is clear that what Inco has proposed, at least initially, is a pilot plant or a test plant to test its hydrometallurgical technology on Voisey's Bay sulfide ore. My question to the minister is: How long will this test period be?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have just a couple of things. If I seem like I am a little bit sensitive over language then I am, because in the years to come, if people want to find out what this debate was really about - the people who are interested in history and so on, how it developed - they will check Hansard in the Legislature to find out what was actually said rather than what somebody tried to say somebody else said.

Inco has not made a proposal or anything. Let me make that clear. What we have said, and what I did say yesterday in a statement, which Inco has verified, is that if and when they do make a proposal for full processing in Newfoundland and Labrador, it will be for hydrometallurgic processing. If and when they make a proposal it will involve the hydrometallurgic process. That is what was said. The hon. member can suggest that Inco has proposed this. They have proposed nothing. We are awaiting a proposal to see if we can start negotiations.

Mr. Speaker, I know he is obligated to follow on the same line of questioning that the Leader of the Opposition was asking yesterday, to say: That must mean this and this must mean that. We will find out what any of it means if and when we get a detailed comprehensive proposal that puts forward for the consideration of the government -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer.

MR. GRIMES: - on behalf of the people of the Province a full project definition right from taking the first bit of ore out of a mine to shipping the first bit of nickel metal out of the Province. We are willing to wait and see what the proposal is rather than try to speculate.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to sit down.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Minister, you have said that you will accept nothing less than 100 per cent of the ore being processed in this Province. In view of Inco's concerns about financing this project and in view of the fact that what we now understand is a pilot test or a test plant, can you confirm that during this test period no ore will leave this Province to be processed elsewhere?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe I can reference and get quickly to the question by making a comment, again, that is thirty years old in my mind. When I was a university student one of the things we had to do as part of our first-year English course was a supplementary part of the course called Words Are Important.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: There are people in this Legislature, Mr. Speaker, that can certainly recall the little booklet that we had to use at Memorial University. I was very proud to use it. I did not like it much at the time because I thought it was kind of silly, but I have been in politics now long enough to realize that people do want to suggest that you said things you did not say.

Last week, when addressing this issue outside the Legislature, and there is now a copy if he wants to refer to it in The Telegram, I made the point of saying the words that I have put on the public record inside and outside the House is that Newfoundland and Labrador will have full processing. The hon. member gets up this morning and says in starting the question: You said that there will be 100 per cent and nothing less. There is nobody, not a single soul, who can ever find any time, at any point in history, where I ever said any such thing.. What I have always said is that we will have full processing -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer.

 

MR. GRIMES: - in Newfoundland and Labrador or there will not be any project to talk about.

What we said yesterday is that Inco has now acknowledged that they hope to bring a proposal for full processing and it will contain reference to the hydrometallurgical process, and we hope they actually bring us the proposal.

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Minister, you have indicated that this is a new technology that is not in existence anywhere else in the world. If this new technology does not live up to its expectations, what guarantees will you be receiving or have you received from Inco that will ensure that all the ore will be processed in this Province? What guarantees, Minister?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess there is one thing clear, I would expect, and that is that I would understand that the greatest hope and wish for the Opposition is that we fail and that we do not have a deal.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: I understand that completely. Why else would we be in a circumstance and a position whereby days or weeks before we even get a proposal, which we never seen and do not have, that they would suggest that this might be in it or that might be in it; is this acceptable and is that acceptable; do you have a guarantee for this and do you have a guarantee for that? We do not have a proposal. Let me repeat it again, we do not have a proposal.

What Inco has said openly and honesty is that they want to bring a proposal for full processing, that will have the hydrometallurgical process used, and that the product that will leave Newfoundland and Labrador will be nickel metal, which is a significant breakthrough in this discussion from a point two summers ago where the same company said: We will only build a mine in Labrador, build a mill which changes the ore into concentrate, and then ship it out of the Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: We are making some process. We should be happy about that. We are happy about making progress, and we are happy to await a proposal before we either condemn it or accept it. We will wait to see what is actually in the proposal.

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Just to follow up on that comment, Mr. Speaker, I will ask the minister this question. When he receives a proposal - and the people of this Province know what we have. In fact, the minister has said publically he is 80 per cent to 90 per cent there - we are very close - and it is important that the minister relay this information to the people of the Province; but let's use his thinking for a second. When he gets a proposal, will he accept a proposal that does not contain a guarantee from Inco that will ensure that all ore will be processed in this Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, remind me, if I ever have any legal difficulties, not to hire the hon. member, for goodness sake.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: I certainly wouldn't want to think that I would pay valuable money to a lawyer who would spend any time going through that kind of a convoluted thought process on my behalf. I am a very simple, basic person and I don't mind saying that. Maybe my limitations in being simple keep me from the torment of trying to wonder about what might happen some time in the future. I am quite willing to wait until we get a proposal so we can analyze it, see if it is in the best interest of Newfoundland and Labrador, see if it provides full and fair benefits, make a judgement, and then either present it to the Legislature and the people of the Province as something that makes full sense and something that we should support and embrace wholeheartedly or something that should be rejected because it does not meet the objective of getting full and fair benefits for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

Maybe I am stunned, Mr. Speaker, but I am stunned enough to wait instead of trying to guess what might happen next week or the week after.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

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

My questions are for the Minister of Environment and Labour. The minister said the reason he could not release information about THM levels in municipal water supplies was because the municipalities are responsible for the operation of their water supplies and it is their responsibility to make known that information.

My question is this: Have all of the municipalities been supplied with all information on THM levels in their municipalities prior to this month?

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

MR. LANGDON: Mr. Speaker, all of the communities have been given the information on the THMs, and I mentioned communities here in the House. I mentioned places like Clarenville, Gander, Pasadena, Point Leamington, Musgrave Harbour and so on. The answer would be, yes.

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, that is not what we have heard. In fact, we have heard the minister's PR person was calling municipalities just this week to tell them what their THM levels were and to fax them information. In fact, we have heard from municipalities that have said that even though they have received information, other municipalities, that they had no idea what it meant. They did not receive advice from government to supply this information to the people in their municipalities. They did not receive advice whether or not to refrigerate the water or what to do with the water.

Let me ask the minister this. Are there any municipalities in the Province where the provincial government, through the water services division, own and operate water supply systems?

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

MR. LANGDON: Mr. Speaker, there are certain communities in the Province where there were industrial water supplies. I can think of one which was in my own district in Hermitage. I am not sure where the others are. The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs could probably answer that. As far as the THM information is concerned, as soon as the reports are prepared they are given to the municipalities.

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, there are communities in this Province where the residential water supply systems are owned and operated by the provincial government. Why would your department not release the information to the public on THM levels in municipalities where water supply systems are owned and operated by government? Isn't it your responsibility and the responsibility of your department to release information to the public when government own and operate the water supply systems for those municipalities?

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

MR. LANGDON: Mr. Speaker, I want to say again, as I've said in the House every day since the questions have been asked, that the information on THMs has been given to the municipalities and will continue to be given to the municipalities. Once the THM results have been given to them there have been guidelines and so on, and explanations have been given to the communities, and pamphlets from Health Canada.

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

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are for the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. Minister, as we are all aware, your department is responsible for the Fire Commissioner's Office. In 1998, two men were killed during an explosion at the Come by Chance oil refinery. This is now some twenty months later and reports into that explosion still have not been released. I would like to ask you today, sir, why not?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The answer is essentially the same as the one I gave in the House during the last session. As the hon. member is aware, the RCMP investigation was completed in March. Immediately following that, because they concluded that no criminal charges were being recommended by them, we immediately, the very next day, had some charges laid under a couple of our own provincial statues, mainly those falling under the occupation health and safety area. Those charges are currently before the courts. Immediately, as they are disposed of by the courts there will be, as also committed to by government, a judicial inquiry commenced.

We understand the need on behalf of the families involved in this tragic situation to have as much information available to them as they can in order to pursue whatever legal options or other types of activity they want to move forward with. In the context of that, and in partial response to that, while the full report could not be released because it is a police report, as a result of a court order on March 2 there was partial disclosure of the information that was contained in the provincial Fire Commissioner's report. That information has been made available to the families directly and/or through their solicitors, and that level of disclosure is appropriate in these circumstances, and at this point has been fully made available to the families. When the court proceedings conclude, as I said earlier, the judicial inquiry under the auspices of the Minister of Justice, by virtue of making an appointment, will move forward with a judicial inquiry.

We have made available, Mr. Speaker, the maximum level of information that we can appropriately make available at this point in the current circumstances. We understand the concerns of the family, we appreciate their concerns, and we will do everything this is appropriate and within our power to ensure that they have the information that they need as quickly as we can make it available.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Minister, I say to you today that it isn't fair to the families of the deceased who want access to this information. Mrs. Joan Kieley, the widow of the Jerome Kieley, one of the men who was killed in this explosion, has expressed grave concern to me about the lack of information surrounding her husband's tragic death.

Sir, I'm very surprised this morning to hear you say that has been information released. Up to twenty-four hours ago, Mrs. Kieley has heard absolutely nothing from any department of government concerning this incident. Mrs. Kieley says she wants closure to her husband's very tragic death. I say again today: Why not release information to the immediate families who have been struggling to deal with the loss of their loved ones since March 1998? I will repeat again, sir, that Mrs. Kieley has heard absolutely nothing from any department of government about any report with anything in it involving the death of her husband.

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to dispute anything that the hon. member is saying in terms of what level of information the family of one of the deceased may have in their possession. I will simply say this, as I have already said, that we have made available already the maximum level of information that we can make available in the current circumstances and in the context of the court actions that are ongoing.

Let me say to him again, that on March 3, the counsel for the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission, and a expert witness, both acting on behalf of some individuals, reviewed the provincial Fire Commissioner's report, pursuant to the terms of the March 2 court order.

If we had the capacity, Mr. Speaker, today to make additional information available then we would be only too happy to do it. The fact of the matter is that we are constrained by the processes of the court and other processes that have to be followed in the area of dealing with this type of matter. The information from all accounts and reports when it is appropriate, and to whom it is appropriate to make it available, will absolutely be done in a expeditious matter as far as government is responsible to do so.

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

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

My questions are to the Minister of Finance. They relate to the $250 million recently guaranteed by government to a variety of corporations, some of them public, like the St. John's Health Care Corporation, and some of them private, like Integrated Poultry Limited and S.C.B. Fisheries. Last year the government publically stated that taxpayers would not be again asked to extend our public liabilities to either I.P.L. or to S.C.B. Fisheries. What explanation can the minister have for the Cabinet changing its collective mind and issuing a further guarantee of $1.5 million to Integrated Poultry Limited, and a further $1.7 million to S.C.B. Fisheries.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods.

MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I will answer the part of the question as it relates to I.P.L. We have dealt with that in the last two weeks. Again, all those funds were 100 per cent recovered.

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

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

I ask the question again to the Minister of Finance. The government has recently issued a another guarantee to Marble Mountain Corporation, not for capital expenditures but for current account expenditures. Marble Mountain, I say to the minister, gives new meaning to the financial terms “sinking funds.”

Why would this personal interest of the minister in the Marble Mountain Corporation permit them to come into his office and kind of dip right into the public treasury? He has permitted them to do that, I guess, in order to keep Marble Mountain afloat. Why are the people of Marble Mountain continuing to get money, not for capital expenditures but for current account?

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

MR. DICKS: Maybe the hon. member knows more than I do. We have not guaranteed Marble Mountain. Having said that I would like to know if the position of the Leader of the Opposition and his party is that they do not support Marble Mountain. For the public record? Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. DICKS: There is no guarantee for Marble Mountain.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

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

I say to the minister, Order in Council 278-99, authorized a $300,000 loan guarantee to Marble Mountain for current account.

I also want to say to the minister in this matter: Why is it that he has had such a hard-nosed approach to the collective bargaining concerns of nurses, RNC officers, the prison wardens, and the public service in general, and yet your buddies over at Marble Mountain can walk into your office and they can have access to the keys of the public Treasury?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Marble Mountain is a prime winter tourism generator in the Province. It is the showpiece, if you will, for winter tourism inasmuch as you might point to other matters in the summer. One of the difficulties Marble has had over the last several years is that there has not been a lot of snow. Marble Mountain has basically survived on its ticket sales and its other sources of revenue and government has supported it. From our point of view, on this side of the House, Marble Mountain is a necessary and important part of winter tourism product in this Province. It ties in with all the things we are doing, snowmobile trails and everything else.

If the hon. member and his Party's position is that we should close Marble Mountain or give it to friends of his Party for a dollar, that is not the position of this government.

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

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

My questions this morning are for the Minister of Human Resources and Employment. This week, Campaign 2000 released a report showing Newfoundland's child poverty rate has not improved in the past decade and, in fact, is still the worst in the country. When asked in the House Wednesday why the government will not fund the Community Food Sharing Association so hungry children can get meals, the minister said the government responds to the issue in a different way through income support programs and child benefit.

I ask the minister: Is she satisfied that the government is doing enough through its programs to address child poverty? If not, how dissatisfied does she have to be before she decides to do something about it?

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

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, I believe that I indicated in the House when the question was asked, that this government will never be satisfied as long as there are children in this Province, or in fact in this country, who are going hungry. What I did indicate, however, is that there are responses that this Province can take and a level of policy influence that we can exercise that can really impact the cycle of poverty. One of the key issues that has come up over the debate around this for the last couple of days is the fact that the way to really break poverty is to encourage employment and to ensure that families have access to work so that they can support themselves and meet the needs that they have for themselves and their children.

In addition to what we are doing in the area of providing income support when families cannot work, of course, one of the things that we have had great success in is in our initiatives around supporting people towards employment.

In essence, what we are doing is trying to work on any number of fronts to eliminate poverty not only for children but for families and for everyone in this Province, and we will continue those efforts.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

In spite of the employment initiatives, many thousands of our unemployed families have left the Province to find work elsewhere. It is surprising, and isn't the minister surprised, that child poverty figures have not improved in spite of that.

The fact that the child poverty rate has stayed the same indicates that more and more children are falling into poverty to replace the ones that we have lost through out-migration. Won't the minister admit that the programs are not working?

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

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, this needs to be taken in a bigger context, I believe, when you look at the past number of years and what has happened across the country and elsewhere. I think, at this point, to have stayed the same is an achievement in itself. As was indicated in the child poverty report, there are many other provinces which had different experiences here, but I don't think it is productive to focus simply on this issue of rates of child poverty or rates of poverty in general because, as we know, the numbers do not tell the story here.

What we need to do is look at the increases that we have had in people working, the successes that we have had with initiatives like the single parent program, which has to date encouraged and supported dozens, if not hundreds at this point, of women into employment in this Province. It is a success story. In addition to this, we have implemented our National Child Benefit which is putting more money into the hands of families so they can help support their children, and the list of initiatives can go on and on.

I think we have to look to make progress on many fronts and ensure that we continue our work.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS S. OSBORNE: Yes, the numbers have the stayed the same in spite of the fact that a lot of unemployed and poor families have left the Province, and that is a shame.

We know the government's programs to address child poverty are not working to put food in the stomachs of the children who probably went to school this morning hungry. Why won't the minister provide funding to the Community Food Sharing Association so food banks can stock their shelves and the children who are in poverty can focus on learning in school, rather than focus on being hungry?

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

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Education spoke to this morning in her statement, and yesterday as well, I believe, in the House, we are taking initiatives with the School Food Foundation to assist in this very specific area of children and hunger, and children going to school, and ensuring that they can have an opportunity to have good meals as well.

This is something again that is based on a community response. It is a partnership here, because in partnering with the School Food Foundation, we are also partnering with the private sector but it is based very much on the community response in these schools as well.

These programs do not work unless there is community support for them, and community involvement in every facet of it. The food bank system that is in operation in this Province is a community-driven response and government's responses is in many of the other areas that I have mentioned.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

My questions are for the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation again today. A couple of days ago I asked about some questions about the consultation process that is going on with our own provincial ferry service, which continues to be the best kept secret in this Province. Of course, the minister got on his feet to say that why the Labrador end of it was not included in the consultation process in a formal way with the committee was that the minister has been there on his own.

Mr. Speaker, it is the best kept secret because I had that report back from Nain, Labrador, who says: No one has heard of the so-called provincial hearings. As for the claims that the minister or anybody else has been up this way listening intensively to our concerns is living in la-la land. That is Nain, Labrador. That is Nain - Nain, Labrador.

I would like to ask the minister: Why wasn't Labrador included in the formal consultation process on these forums?

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

MR. WOODFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I don't know where the hon. member is getting his information from, but I have been in Nain, met with the council in Nain, and some other groups there as well. I have been in Rigolet, in Hopedale, in Postville, in Makkovik, all over the coast, and met with all the councils, all the development associations in the area. I don't know what the hon. member is talking about, except for the (inaudible). There is one thing I do know he is talking about; if he can get a definition for this la-la land, I would like to know it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has ended.

Notices of Motion

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

MR. LANGDON: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, “Act To Amend The Fisheries Industry Collective Bargaining Act”. (Bill 44)

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

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, “An Act To Amend The Proceedings Against The Crown Act And the Public Officials Garnishee Act”.

I further give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, “An Act To Revise The Law Respecting The Law Society Of Newfoundland”.

I give further notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, “An Act To Amend The Teachers Pensions Act”.

I finally give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, “An Act To Amend The Public Service Pensions Act, 1999".

Thank you.

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

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, “An Act To Amend The Schools Act, 1997".

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Orders of the Day

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, Order 8, “An Act To Amend The Registered Nurses Act”. (Bill 27)

MR. SPEAKER: Order 8.

The hon. the Member for Labrador adjourned the debate.

The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to begin to talk a bit about the health care in the Province, and in Labrador in particular. I would like to say, as I reiterate what I said yesterday when the President of Treasury Board was talking about the new hospital and construction around the Province, I don't know about all of the construction that is taking place but I do know that the hospital she mentioned in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, the new construction of that hospital scheduled to open next year, will have in excess of 30 per cent less beds than the present hospital, and a tremendous increase in the administration offices in the hospital. From what I am told, each one of theses will be equipped with their own washroom facilities in all of the offices that are going to be in that new hospital.

While there is construction taking place, and new hospitals opening, one can question whether or not the health care in this Province is going to improve as a result of that, when we look at the fact that there are going to be less beds available for the people who are going to require them.

Mr. Speaker, closer to home at the Captain William Jackman Memorial Hospital, since the introduction of the hospital boards and the regional board for Labrador, the hospital in Labrador West has suffered greatly. Right now, in order to order the most basis types of medical supplies, it has to be cleared through Goose Bay first. The local hospital in Labrador West does not have the authority to order anything that is required without getting permission from Happy Valley- Goose Bay and the board office there.

In addition to that, when the regional board came into being, the hospital in Labrador West that was run at that time by the Salvation Army had a huge surplus on hand - a surplus of funds. When the hospital board assumed responsibility for the delivery of health care in Labrador, and Labrador West and other parts of Labrador came underneath the jurisdiction of one board, the surplus that we had was swallowed up at that time by the deficits that were being run in other hospitals in other regions of Labrador.

Now we have a deficit. Indeed, as was pointed out, there is great difficulty in attracting nurses and medical professionals to the areas of Labrador, particularly in coastal Labrador and indeed throughout all regions of Labrador, when it comes to having staff levels where they should be in the region.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say there is a long waiting list that applies for people to get into health care institutions today; long waiting lists for even, at times, simple procedures to be carried out. The waiting lists are long. For an MRI, for example, anybody requiring the use of that, who needs to have an MRI done, who is recommended to have one done, many times the waiting list is six to eight months. That is unacceptable in this day and age.

There is only one place in the Province where that can be carried out, and that is at the Health Sciences Complex in St. John's. Of course, people traveling from other areas incur a great expense to have an MRI done for their own benefit.

We look at the hospital boards, and I want to concentrate on them a bit because the minister and government has said that our health care is in great shape. I don't know which bubble they are living in, but I can assure you that it is soon going to break; because health care in this Province is anything but great.

We look at the hospital boards and how they are comprised, how they are appointed. They are not answerable to anyone. The only requirement, I guess, will be a political card in your wallet or handbag.

MR. J. BYRNE: And you take the flack.

MR. COLLINS: And you take the flack for the government, for the people who appointed you.

A few weeks ago, four or five weeks ago, we had a public meeting in Labrador West with the Labrador Health Care Corporation and the board. There were a lot of concerns that were relayed to the board. It was very disturbing to see - in the middle of the concerns being expressed by the residents of Labrador West - that the majority of board members got out of their seats, walked out of the meeting, and did not even have the courtesy or decency to stay and hear the concerns from the residents, from the workers, that were being put forward to them at that time.

It is not uncommon at all for anyone who has occasion to visit the hospital, whether as a patient or to go in to see somebody in there, to witness people on stretchers, on beds, in the corridors of the hospitals.

Not too long ago, a friend of mine had to take her elderly mother in and they were in excess of twenty-four hours in the corridor of a hospital, on a bed, and the next day they moved her into a room and she died shortly after. That is a very undignified death, something that a person should not have to endure, should not have to be subject to, during the last hours of their life. It has gotten to the point in this Province where even death cannot be dignified when you are in a hospital and you have to spend your remaining hours of living in the corridor, on a stretcher or a bed, waiting for a room to become available.

There are other cases I am aware of where young people doing chemotherapy have been allowed out for the weekend, come back for treatment on Tuesday, only to find that there is no bed available for them to have their treatment continued when it was supposed to.

All of these things are totally unacceptable in today's society. There is absolutely no reason for things to be that way. Things have to change. People have to start getting the medical attention that they require.

I would like to talk a bit about the Air Ambulance Program as it pertains to Labrador. Members are probably aware that the Province has an air ambulance aircraft that responds to medical emergencies. In Labrador, any part of Labrador, a medical emergency, the only way to get to a major centre is by air.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) on their own, after they bring you in.

MR. COLLINS: That is right; that is correct.

When people are transported from Labrador, most times to St. John's, they are admitted to hospital and have very serious medical procedures carried out, and there comes a point in time when they are released from hospital. When they are released, they have to find their own way back. That may not be a hindrance, depending on the situation of where you are living and other things.

Let me give you the examples that have happened in Labrador recently where people have been flown out, have had surgeries carried out, have been released from hospitals, but they have been in body casts or for other reasons were unable to sit for prolonged periods of time.

None of the airlines that service Labrador West will take patients on a stretcher, so how does a person get back home, whether they be kids, adults, or very senior people? Everybody has been in this position, from all walks of life, and they have no way to get back home. They are told that if we have to respond to another emergency in Labrador, and if the person is ready to get to the airport immediately, then they will take them back home.

I think it is disgraceful when a patient's return home is completely dependent upon somebody else in their community having an emergency situation exist. That is totally deplorable. People should not have to depend on somebody else becoming critically ill in order for them to get back to their families and loved ones following very serious medical operations. The stress alone from the operation, the stress created by being away from your support, is bad enough; but when you have to sit and wait for a phone to ring, saying: If you can be at the airport in five minutes, we will get you back home. If not, you may have to wait another month, three months or six months before you are able to get back... It is not acceptable.

If this government were listening, and if they were serious about providing good quality health care, then one of the things that they would do would be to ensure that people who can only get back home by air, following very difficult medical operations, would be taken back the same way that they were brought out, by air, and not waiting for their next door neighbor to have a serious accident or serious illness so they can get back when they are going in to do another Medivac.

Also from Labrador, the cost of travel is extraordinarily high. Air fares going into Labrador today, and coming out from Labrador West, you are looking at about $1,500 return, if you have to go on the spur of the moment. Now there are programs in place. There is a non-emergency medical subsidy plan, through the provincial government, but that only covers 50 per cent of incurred related expenses after the first $500. That still inflicts a very serious financial burden upon the people in Labrador who have to travel to the Island portion of the Province to have medical conditions taken care of, corrected, and other needs; because when we are talking about particularly children, they are not able to travel on their own. A parent must fly with them and attend to them while they are here. Of course, the financial burden that is inflicted then increases because now we are talking about two people who have to be here, sometimes in a hotel while they are waiting and, at the best of times, eating in restaurants. It doesn't take long to add up. So the 50 per cent deduction, after the first $500, does not really provide adequate reimbursement or rebate to people who have to be away from home by necessity in order to have medical things looked at.

The President of Treasury Board also talked yesterday about things related - like tourism and out-migration being slow. I don't know which area of the Province she has visited lately, but I can assure her that in Labrador West out-migration has not slowed. It has increased significantly. It is very difficult, as you walk around the communities in Labrador West - one thing that is evident as you walk around is lack of young people that you see. You can really see the difference. At Christmastime vacation, summertime when students are out, then you see the number of young people who actually live in the area but, through necessity, other than at high points and vacation time, the area is almost void of young people between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five or twenty-six because they all have to leave to find work or to further their education. So out-migration, certainly from my perspective, is not something that is slowing. It is not something that has halted. In fact, it is something that has been continued to increase and people are leaving this Province in numbers unprecedented at any other point in time in our history.

Again, talking about the tourism opportunities, the President of Treasury Board talked about the bed and breakfasts and the opportunities for tourism to be a great industry in this Province. I agree, we do have the potential, but we do need things in place and better services than we have right now. If we look at the Province in whole, if you look at Labrador and the Island, and you follow the routes that connect, then a lot of people would like to make the trip, I would say, make the round trip. Come in through Labrador, cross over from Goose Bay to Lewisporte, and continue on back through the mainland or do the reverse.

With all of the talk about ferry service in this Province in recent months, I can assure you that the ferry service from Goose Bay to Lewisporte on board the Sir Robert Bond - that is certainly not a boat that is equipped to be able to handle tourism. It is not a new boat by any stretch of the imagination. The facilities are very limited. Anyone who has any restrictions whatsoever, or is confined to a wheelchair, or has difficulty walking, certainly would never be able to get from the main deck area to the cafeteria. The ship is also not equipped properly, and it is a long voyage; approximately between thirty-two and thirty-four hours you are on the boat. The cabin facilities and other facilities that are there are certainly not conducive to promoting tourism, to encouraging tourism, or to increase at all the activity that is related to tourism between Labrador and Newfoundland when people want to take the ferry system.

So that ferry as well, although we have not heard much about it, is important to the tourism industry. It is important to the people who live in Newfoundland or Labrador and use that as their transportation to get back and forth between one place to another. Although we have not heard much about it, it is a boat that certainly needs to be looked at as being replaced with a higher quality boat that will provide better services to the people who use it.

When we look at people in this Province who are traveling to hospitals, and the length of time that patients spend in hospitals today with the demands on the health care system and the beds, people are being released from hospitals at earlier points in time than they should be in many cases, certainly earlier than they would have been a dozen years ago. Right now, when somebody is released from the hospital there are times when you almost need a pickup truck to go pick them up, they have that many things to take home to be able to look after themselves when they get there.

We talked in the House not too long ago about the need for expanded services in the rural areas of the Province, such as on the Northern Peninsula, Grand Falls, Labrador, Gander, and other areas of the Province that need equipment to provide service to the residents there. Because one of the fundamental things in a speedy recovery from any type of illness or sickness is having familiar surroundings, where your are surrounded by family and friends and have the type of support that is, again, conducive to your well-being and to your state of mind, reducing stress levels and allowing you to recuperate in a speedier period of time.

I do not believe for a minute, and I do not think the people of this Province believe, that our health care is in great shape. The minister may think so, the government of the day may think so, but the people of the Province certainly do not. There are many examples. There is not one person, and I would suggest not even on the other side of the House, who can't tell you story after story about things that have happened in hospitals, the waiting lists, that even their own family members may have experienced, to get medical procedures carried out. So I cannot say, and I do not see how anyone can say, that our health care is in great shape.

It is not. It is not going to be in great shape for a while, in my opinion. I think that this government had an opportunity last April to take some positive steps forward in making sure our health care system would be better, but I think they missed the boat. Because they had an opportunity to settle with the nurses of this Province to ensure that the nurses who are graduating would stay in the Province and perform a service to the people in the areas they are from. They failed miserably in their attempt to do that and the people of this Province are paying a price today for it, and they will pay a price for many months and probably years to come.

We talk about attracting people to rural areas of the Province to provide health care. I don't know. Maybe this may not sound reasonable to some people but I thought it sounded pretty reasonable. When I watched a newscast one afternoon, or one evening, there was a young medical student who was saying: Listen, I would like to stay in this Province when I graduate but I am going to have to leave and go places where I can get the money required to pay down the debt I'm going to incur. That is through necessity. He did have an idea. He said: Why won't the government today give me a break on my education and I will agree to go anywhere in this Province that I am needed as a physician and practice?

I do not think that is far-fetched. I do think it is probably something that is worthwhile pursuing and to be looked at, because the young people today who are graduating medical school, the people who are from this Province, do not want to leave by choice. They have to leave by necessity. I can assure you that many of them, if not for the debt that they incurred while obtaining their education, would much rather stay in this Province and practice than go to Ontario or to the States, in spite of the fact that they can make more money. Because they have to go to the places where they can make the most money to pay off their debts and get on with their lives as most of us have done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER (Oldford): Order, please!

MR. COLLINS: I would suggest, Mr. Speaker -

AN HON. MEMBER: Less stressful working conditions (inaudible).

MR. COLLINS: Less stressful working conditions too. Mr. Speaker, I do not think that our health care is in great shape. I do not think that it is impossible to put it there. I think there are new ideas that are generated that can be followed through on and I think there are new initiatives that can be taken that will greatly improve the health care we presently provide.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I do not know if it is the Friday morning syndrome, the Friday morning blues, or whatever it is, but all members on the other side have been somewhat different and unusual this morning than they have been all week. I think the Member for Baie Verte summed it all up when he said he was in la-la land. I suspect that is what it was, that is what he was feeling. In particular, the odd couple sitting right there in the corner. Any member to do what the Leader of the NDP Party did this morning, well, there is a word to describe it. The Member for Labrador West just spent twenty minutes condemning the health care system in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I know the role of an opposition. I've been there, I was there for four years. I tell you, and I will speak for all my colleagues who were on the opposite side at that particular time, when we stood we based it on facts. Before we ever asked a question we knew the answer. For someone to stand on their feet in this hon. House of Assembly and talk about the health care system for twenty minutes, condemn it, and put forward a message that the health care system is a total failure in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, is absolutely untrue.

I say to the hon. member he has not traveled very far. If he has come to the conclusion that the health care system is in that state he has not traveled very far. If you ever get the occasion to talk about health care systems and costs, go to the United States. If you ever get the occasion to talk about health care systems and cost, go to the United States, or if you ever get the occasion to go to another province. There was a man from Nova Scotia in the Health Sciences hospital last year as a patient and boasted about the service and the care he got from the Health Sciences here in St. John's compared to what was in his own province. Time after time you can hear people talking about the people who work in those hospitals, the nurses, the attendants, the doctors, the assistant nurses, all of those people getting bragged about, boasted about, and thanked for the good job they do. To totally condemn the health care system in Newfoundland and Labrador is absolutely wrong. Now am I saying -

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: I don't know if the member opposite was listening very well but I certainly did not condemn the entire health care in this Province, and I certainly did not condemn the people who work in the health care profession in this Province. I guess what the member is attempting to do is deflect attention from the realities and compare us to other places. I can tell the member that other people from Nova Scotia came to this Province and had to be airlifted and received a bill for many thousands of dollars for the service. I can tell him that case.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) that happens in every province. (Inaudible).

MR. COLLINS: Exactly, but if you are going to tell it, tell it all. Tell it like it is.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: The hon. member had twenty minutes. I believe twenty minutes is the time limit. You had a full opportunity to explain and I am going to take my twenty minutes. Thirty minutes! He had thirty minutes. So don't waste my time and make frivolous points of order.

You cannot condemn the health care system without condemning the people who work in it unless there is something different than I know. The health care system is made up of buildings, equipment and people. Now it is either right or it is not right. Now, am I saying that the health care system in Newfoundland and Labrador is perfect? Absolutely not. There is no system that is perfect. There is no such thing as a perfect system. The hon. member should know that.

MR. FUREY: Yes there is (inaudible). The Communist crowd had it right.

MR. EFFORD: Sorry?

MR. FUREY: The Communists had it right.

MR. EFFORD: Oh yes. Mr. Speaker, what we are saying here in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador is simply this. We are a province of 560,000 people, approximately. It could be 565,000, but let's say approximately 560,000 people. Look at the geography of Newfoundland and Labrador. Look at where we have to provide health care systems. We have a population the size of one city, Winnipeg for example. We are scattered over a land mass which is four times larger than the country of Japan which has a population of 120 million people. In that health care system you have to provide the services to people no matter where they live in the Province. What is the cost of doing it compared to if the population was concentrated in one area? What do we spend here in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador on a health care system? Approximately $1.3 billion annually on health care alone.

Why is it? Why does it cost that much? One of the reasons, as I just explained, is the geography of Newfoundland. You have to have so many health care centres around the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador to provide the services where people are living. Even though they are in remote areas with small populations they still need the services. So for everybody on the Opposition to condemn the health care system in Newfoundland, that it is absolutely not working, not providing the services, the question I would ask everybody, and I've asked this many times on this side of the House, is: When is enough enough? Is it $1.5 billion? Is it $2 billion? Is it the total budget of Newfoundland and Labrador, $3.5 billion? Will that be enough? Will that satisfy the member opposite? Will that solve all the problems in the health care system?

I think not. I think it is a responsibility on everybody in the institutions around this Province, the health care boards and everybody else, to reevaluate what we are doing in the health care system. This government, the Minister of Health, cannot be in every corridor of every hospital every hour of the day to ensure that there are no problems. I don't care if you had somebody in every corridor, in every room, in every hospital; you are still going to have incidents where people will not be happy. That is a fact of life, but it is the responsibility of the health care boards, the administrators and the medical services to do the best job they possibly can.

I can say very clearly it is not all about money. It is very easy over there to criticize the people who work in those hospitals and to condemn the staff in the hospitals. That is what the Member for Labrador West said. If you condemn the health care system you condemn the people who work in the hospitals. They are the providers of care. They are part of the health care system, Mr. Speaker.

MR. COLLINS: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: I would just like, again, to clarify for the record that at no time did I criticize the people who work in the hospitals in this Province. Just for the minister's purpose.

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, I know the hon. Member for Labrador West is a little thick on Friday mornings. He has to be. He is scurrying backward like a lobster. He said simply this: the health care system is simply not working in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. What makes up the health care system? The hospital buildings, clinics, bricks and mortar, equipment? Isn't that part of it? Isn't it also the staff, the nurses, the doctors, the attendants, are they not part of the health care system? If it is not working, then they must be a part of not making it work? Do you want to argue with that point?

AN HON. MEMBER: Who decides the numbers?

MR. EFFORD: My goodness, you never mentioned numbers once in the thirty minutes. Get Hansard.

I will go back to what I said five minutes ago. Let's go back to money: $1.3 billion, $400 million over four years, an extra $400 million.

MR. TULK: No, $300 million.

MR. EFFORD: Sorry, $300 million. So we are talking about $100 million. What is $100 million here and there, hey, I say to the Member for Labrador West? Give it another $100 million.

Like I just said, the total budget of Newfoundland and Labrador is approximately $3.5 billion, and $1.3 billion goes into health care, so let's take the whole budget. Will that be enough? There will not be one member on that side of the House who will say that is enough. Not a member on that side of the House will say: Government, that is the right thing to do. Now we have an excellent health care system because you have thrown the total budget at it. That is how ludicrous it is over there.

Mr. Speaker, I have respect for the health care system in Newfoundland and Labrador. I have traveled. I remember one time I made a trip to Florida and my wife became sick on the way down. She was in hospital from - I am not sure if it was Tuesday afternoon or Wednesday morning. Friday we had to transfer her to St. John's. The bill for three days in Florida was $9,000. That is the health care system that we would like to have for Newfoundland and Labrador.

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

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, it has nothing to do with insurance. What about people living in places like the United States who have to mortgage their homes in order to get into hospital? If they are in hospital and they do not have the money to pay, they will not let them out and they have to mortgage their homes or draw every last nickel out of the savings account. It is people who cannot afford to get into a hospital in a place like the United States, who do not have the money, will die.

I tell you, there is not too much of that happening in Newfoundland and Labrador. There is not too much of that happening in Canada, because for the most part everybody who needs health service will get it. Will they get exactly, every time, a perfect situation? Absolutely not. You go over to the Health Sciences on any given day at 8:00 a.m. and look at the lineups. I have never seen anybody turned away over there. Do people have to wait? Yes, they have to wait, but it is better to have to wait than not to get in hospital at all and have to die at home because of the lack of services.

I have been in hospital myself. I tell you, the service I have received in hospital has been excellent. The nursing care, the attendant care, the attention from the doctors has been excellent service. I do not condemn those people for the hard work which they do in the hospitals -

MR. TULK: Here is some information. (Inaudible). Tell them what is happening in the (inaudible). These aren't our figures either.

MR. EFFORD: Yes, there we go. One hundred per cent of our health facilities are accredited by the Canadian Council on Health Services Accreditation. Listen to this one. Health and Community Services in St. John's is the first community health board in Canada to receive accreditation from the Canadian Council on Health Service Accreditation. The remaining health community service boards are in the process of undergoing the accreditation process. The first one in all of Canada to receive accreditation.

The hon. member stood for thirty minutes and condemned the heath care system in Newfoundland. Here we have this right here, and this happened in 1998, is it?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. EFFORD: The Newfoundland Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation will undergo its first accreditation in November - as we are talking now - in 1999. That is bad. They are now undergoing accreditation. The first place to get it in Canada was Newfoundland and Labrador.

Now, on to budget items. We have increased our health and community services budget every year for the past four years despite decreased transfer of payments from the federal government. In other words, we have less money from the federal government, but year over year for the last four years we have increased the health care budget in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Let me list it off. Government allotted: $40 million to pay down the accumulated deficit of institutional boards in March 1998; $21 million in additional funding for hospital equipment, Year 2000 issues, and enabled these three boards to implement integrated management information systems. The top in Canada, Mr. Speaker. Not third, fourth or fifth, but top in Canada.

There was $15 million in additional funding for board budgets and $4.1 million to recruit salaried physicians. The hon. member took five minutes condemning, saying there is not enough money for salaried physicians to go around, to move in rural areas or to attract them to rural Newfoundland and Labrador. There was $4.1 million just to attract salaried physicians. There was $1.8 million for new drug therapies approved last year. There is $1.3 million included to implement the new Child, Youth and Family Services Act. The Leader of the NDP should listen to that one. There was $900,000 over three years for the tobacco reduction strategy, announced by the Minister of Health.

AN HON. MEMBER: Are you reading that?

MR. EFFORD: Yes, I am reading that, and I can read some more. Close to $90 million - now, this is the one you all should listen to - will be spent for hospital facilities in St. John's, Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Gander, Harbour Breton, Stephenville, Old Pelican, Fogo, Bonne Bay, Grand Bank and Grand Falls-Windsor.

AN HON. MEMBER: What about the Health Sciences?

MR. EFFORD: What about the facilities, the Janeway, the Health Science Centre, the re-organization of institutions here in St. John's? That is over $100 million.

Now, on to financial capital expenditures. Government spends $1.2 billion on health and community service: the highest expenditures in government, one-third of all government expenditures.

This is an interesting one, Mr. Speaker. CIHI's July (inaudible) stats show that Newfoundland and Labrador spent $1,780 per person in 1998, up from $1,519 in 1992. The Province spent almost $90 per person above -

MR. TULK: Above what?

MR. EFFORD: I will repeat it again to the odd couple. Just listen to facts and figures. The Province spent almost $90 per person above the Canadian average on health care in 1998. In other words, little old Newfoundland and Labrador spent $90 more per Canadian average than any other province in the whole of Canada.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Newfoundland. You have to spend more money.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, the bottom line is they are grasping for straws, trying to find something to complain about, trying to -

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member took up five minutes of his thirty-minutes talking about the problems with the nurses, that government is not paying attention to the lack of the numbers of nurses in the Province. I will conclude by just making these couple of remarks. First, $7.5 million was allotted to create 125 new permanent nursing positions.

MR. TULK: When? This year.

MR. EFFORD: This year, and $2.3 million was allotted to convert up to 540 casual nursing positions to permanent positions. As well, $4 million is allotted for additional support staff? What do we get? A cry from the Opposition that Newfoundland's economy is going down. We cannot create jobs in the Province. Here is an example here. This year, $7.5 million, $2.3 million, and $4 million, totaling $13.8 million, is there for extra staffing, nursing care and additional support staff in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I will ask the hon. member one more question. When is enough enough? When is he going to start boasting about the health care system in Newfoundland and Labrador instead of condemning all of the people and the health care system?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to speak on Bill 27, too. I am not going to stand here today and condemn totally the health care system in Newfoundland and Labrador. I have to commend and thank the health care workers in Newfoundland and Labrador for the great job these people are doing under the circumstances they are doing them under. If the hon. member wants examples of things that are wrong, I can certainly give them. I have seen in the past two years in my own family, when I went to the hospital when my father was in the hospital before he died, crying because he could not get help from anybody on that floor to take him to the washroom. I had to go all over that floor, with almost forty patients on that floor, and found one worker. I tell you, that was not very nice, and I take exception to anybody -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HUNTER: I am not condemning the health care work workers, but I think that -

AN HON. MEMBER: Who is?

MR. HUNTER: The hon. member said that the hon. member over there was condemning them.

Mr. Speaker, I can tell a lot of stories like that. I have a friend -

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. TULK: I do not want to interrupt the hon. gentleman, but I would like for him to clarify who he says in this House is condemning the health care workers in the Province. It is not this side, I can assure the hon. gentleman. It is not this side.

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MR. HUNTER: Mr. Speaker, I had a friend not too long ago who was in the hospital and she fell out of bed because she tried ringing a bell for a full hour. She tried to get someone to come to her assistance and take her to a washroom. She fell out of bed and broke her hip. I don't think that is what you call good health care in our country today. I think she should have had someone there to help her out of that bed to get to the washroom. I can think of dozens of incidents where people needed services that they did not get. I'm not reflecting on the people working there, because I sympathize with them, I sympathize with the stressful working hours that they have, but when you go there it can only make you mad to see what is going on. Another person that is in there is in a bed, his condition so serious that he cannot he even listen to a radio. He is sitting in a bed waiting to get to St. John's to see a heart specialist and get surgery done.

There are all kinds of stories I can tell like that, even one of my own. A little while ago I was in a car accident on the other side of Stephenville at 2:00 a.m. and struck a patch of black ice. I demolished a vehicle there and got a ride to Western Memorial Hospital with a tractor trailer driver. They took me and stitched me up and I was in a lot of pain, and the nurse said to me: You are going to have to sit in the lobby. I said: I'm in too much pain to sit in the lobby. She said: We have orders not to call in anybody this hour in the morning. I said I needed an x-ray on my back because I felt my back, if it was not broken, was damaged, and no way would they call in someone to do an x-ray on my back. Not only that, they asked me to leave the hospital, stitched up, face swollen out like that. They required me to leave that hospital. I said: This is not good enough.

In my years I haven't used the health care system that much for my own use, and I've paid taxes for many years and worked hard. At that particular time I needed that service. No, they would not do it. The doctor came in and he said: No, I cannot do it. I have strict orders not to call in somebody to do x-rays at this hour in the morning. You will have to wait until 8:00 a.m. and then you will have to come back. They would not even admit me. I thought that was very unfair, and I was pretty sick that day.

There are lots of cases. I have another one of a gentleman who called me a month ago, dying with cancer. This gentleman was very desperate for personal care and personal things for his own use, particularly, I would say, like pampers, and stuff like that. I went to try to get help for him and they said: No, you do not fall within the policy. This man worked most of his life in the woods, worked very hard, paid taxes all his life, and at this time he needed the system to help him. He was a man who was very generous. He worked hard and helped a lot of people in his day, and didn't mind paying his taxes. At this point in time in his life when he needed some help from the health care, he could not get it. Last week he died. I tell you, I felt very sorry for that man who cried out for someone to listen and nobody would listen to him.

We all know the health care system and our social programs are not the best, but sometimes we have to stop and listen. Sometimes we have to stop and look at the people who are really crying out for help, and recognize these people. Sometimes we have to look at our policies and say: Well, maybe it does not fall within the policy but this person deserves the help that he is asking for.

It is never going to be enough, no matter what we say. Because of our geographical position in this world, in this Province, where people are spread out so much, they are all over, in long areas, long ways from health care facilities. Some people might have to drive for four or five hours to get to a hospital. It is important that we do provide the service when they get there. Even though they may spend hours on the road trying to get to those facilities, when they get there they are told: Sorry we cannot take you in today, you will have to come back tomorrow or next week.

I know several like that. I know of one man who drove in a snowstorm for an hour-and-a-half. He went to the hospital and they said: Sorry, we cannot admit you tonight, you are going to have to come back tomorrow. Because he had nowhere to stay, no friends, no relatives and no money to get a hotel room, he had to drive an hour-and-a-half back to his home again and then turn around the next morning - there was still a snow storm coming on - to drive right back to that facility again and still not get in. Those are the kinds of things we have to look at when people are looking for services. It is important that if someone needs the service then something has to be done to help that person. At least if he could not be admitted, there should be something done where he would not have to jeopardize his life to drive for three hours that day just to be said no to.

I have had dozens and dozens of calls from people calling me about the health care system. If there is no problem in the health care system, then why are people calling? I don't understand it. People call me and say: Look, I drove to St. John's to see a specialist, and I was supposed to be admitted, but when I got there they said: Sorry, we cannot admit you. There are no beds available.

We can have all kinds of infrastructures. We have them now on the Island today. We have the infrastructures that have been developing for ten years. The beds are there but there is no support for these services that we need. If we are going to have the facilities, if we are going to have the infrastructures, then we need the money to put in for the support to allow people to use the services that they need.

Mr. Speaker, I don't know if there is a dollar value that we can put on how much we should spend, a dollar value on how much each life is worth. I don't know that answer, but I know that people expect services. People work hard all their lives, paying taxes, and expect that when the time comes for them to get that service then they want it; and so they should get it.

I know it is hard for members to get up and say: Well, we spend this much money, we spend that much money and we cannot supply that service. But, because of our unique situation in this Province, where people are spread out so much and there are so few facilities - I can sympathize with our hon. Member for Labrador West, with the situation in Labrador. I talk to people even from Labrador, friends of mine, who say it is a nightmare trying to get out of Labrador to get services. I sympathize with them. I say to the member, he has done a good job presenting some of the concerns that he has on it.

It is not always easy for a politician to get up and criticize. I don't like criticizing for the sake of criticizing, but sometimes when you see the circumstances that are involved in your daily work - like, each one of us get so many calls and we look at so many situations, so many cases - sometimes you just get a bit frustrated with trying to deal with them. When you are making calls on their behalf, you get frustrated with the system, frustrated with the employees, the government employees in the system, even though it is not their fault. I sympathize with them, but I have for two weeks been calling the social services department, home, to get some things clarified. They are under so much stress that most of them are off most of the time. It is hard to get answers. It is hard to get to talk to the people you need to talk to, because there are not enough there working to handle the workloads.

It is difficult for us to do our job when the system and the government, I would say, are not supporting in areas where they should be supporting, particularly when it comes to rural Newfoundland. It is so easy for anybody here in this area, on the Avalon, to jump aboard their car and go wherever they want to go, to look into a problem or get services, but when you are in rural Newfoundland it is hard to do that. You have to rely on somebody else to get things done for you, particularly when it comes to elected people. You have council members and politicians who - people rely on us to look into their problems and help them out with their problems.

 

Our hon. member, when he presented yesterday on the Ombudsman -

AN HON. MEMBER: The private member's resolution.

MR. HUNTER: The private member's resolution on the Ombudsman.

Sometimes there are a lot of things that we cannot do, and that third party certainly could be an important party and an important avenue for people to get important problems looked into and taken care of. I have to give our hon. member congratulations on taking that initiative to present that. I think it is very important that, even though the cost may seem high in the interim, in the long run, for the number of things that could be done - and some of the important things. Maybe there -

AN HON. MEMBER: If there were an Ombudsman in place, (inaudible).

MR. HUNTER: The hon. member just reminded me, if there were an Ombudsman in place, the millions of dollars we could have saved in the Murray Premises dispute. There are a lot of other things like that, where an Ombudsman could have saved taxpayers of this Province thousands or millions of dollars, more than justifying the cost of having it.

I listened to the hon. Member for Grand Falls-Buchans yesterday -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I will ask the hon. member to take his seat.

The hon. member has the right to speak in this House, and I would ask other members to respect his right to speak.

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I was listening to the hon. Member for Grand Falls-Buchans yesterday. I would like to tell the rest of the people on her side that they should watch her very carefully because they could learn an awful lot from that member. I have to congratulate her. She is a good member for her area, and the money that she gets for her district - the thousands and hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars that she gets for her district - I think there is probably a lesson that the other members should get from that member. Even though she might be a little bit jealous that, if I attend too many functions, I might get more recognition than she does; but I assure the hon. minister that I am not interested in running in Grand Falls-Buchans at this time.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HUNTER: I remind the hon. minister that I did win Buchans, Badger and Millertown, or Buchans Junction in 1989. I did win those three areas, and I took Windsor also in 1989. So probably if I did want to run in that district I would have a good shot at winning it, if I could convince the people of Buchans returning their vote.

AN HON. MEMBER: Why don't you give it a go?

MR. HUNTER: I am quite happy where I am.

We talk about the millions of dollars that was put in support for the health care records. I think there is still a lot of pay inequity in our health care system, in our workers. I think sometime we must look at that problem so that if we had -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HUNTER: I thought it very funny when they turned the sod on the new Carmelite House in Grand Falls-Windsor and I never even got an invitation. I would say that the territory by the hon. member is very protected.

AN HON. MEMBER: Because you had nothing to do with it.

MR. HUNTER: I would like to remind the hon. member that maybe I had nothing to do with it but there are a lot of people in my district who want to use that facility. I think I should have been invited to that function, not only because people in my district need the services of that facility too, but it was just another Liberal love-in to make themselves look good. Certainly, they did not want me or any other PC there to make it look like we did have something to do with it.

It still seems awfully funny, when they do have functions in Grand Falls-Windsor, that the hon. Member for Exploits seems to show up sometimes and he doesn't have anything to do with it; but he shows up there, his picture in the paper, smiling, as if he financed the whole project himself. I remind the hon. minister that -

AN HON. MEMBER: You wouldn't know but he found it.

MR. HUNTER: If he could find that kind of money, I would like to have a talk to him later. I know the hon. Member for Grand Falls-Buchans knows how to find money when she wants it. The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans certainly knows how to find a penney when she needs it.

Yesterday, the hon. member mentioned about the scenery in the Gaff Topsail. I have to agree with her. Central Newfoundland is certainly a beautiful place. It is a place that I do a lot of traveling in, in the wilderness and in the interior in Central Newfoundland. I have to agree with her that the Gaff Topsail is a beautiful place. In that whole area up there, the people and the area, it is certainly a joy to go in there and I would recommend to anybody, if they want to see some nice scenery, meet some good people, certainly the Buchans and the Millertown area is the place to go. I do recommend that.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) in you district.

MR. HUNTER: My district is certainly a beautiful place too, I say to the minister.

The hon. member - how many times do you take credit for doing something? How many times do you get your picture in the paper for doing something that everybody knows is good, but every time you open the paper they are announcing - the picture is on the same project that had been done months ago and they still try to take credit for stuff - I guess they do take credit for stuff that is done - but they like bragging about it. For some reason - I don't know why - the advertiser seems like they are obligated to take pictures of the hon. minister and have them in the paper. Every time you open the paper, the picture is there two and three times, and the next day the same picture is there again. I do not know if money has anything to do with it or if there are any goodies given out to certain people in the community, but I think sometimes you look at this stuff and you wonder what is going on. Is there favoritism being done by the minister or not?

Mr. Speaker, when I get into social programs and health care, it brings me back to Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation and the problems that I see in that. It is an area where certainly more attention should be put, particularly when it comes to seniors and people who require urgent home repair.

I am so frustrated with the system, I don't know how to deal with this. When I go to someone's house to look at their problems and I see five gallon buckets all over the place catching water, and I go to the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation and present the case to them, and a man looks up at me and says: That is not an urgent repair. Does this man have to move out of his house? I said: No, the man cannot afford to move out. He has to live in that house. Well, sorry, we can't help him.

Mr. Speaker, that presents health care problems.

One particular man was on social services and had so many problems with his House that he took a heart attack. I went back to the department again and asked: What can you do for this man? He was under so much stress that he took a heart attack and now he is in the hospital. They said: Sorry, we still cannot help this man. I said: If he is coming back to live in that house, then we need something done for him. Sorry, we have no money. Our budget ran out.

This is one of the incidents I alluded to earlier, where a person should be looked at on the merits and a person should be -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MHA.

MR. HUNTER: They have a good MHA. Probably we need something done in the department.

I say that if we do not look at these people individually, and look at their circumstances, then there is going to be more of a burden on our health care; because if the department had to spend probably $3,000 or $4,000 to help this man with his problems, to alleviate the stress that he had, he probably would not been in the hospital costing thousands and thousands of dollars per day.

If an ounce of prevention could stop this kind of stuff, I think it is important that we go back to the housing issue, go back to the minister - I have talked to him on this issue before - and see where we can put more money into that system so that we can help these people with their problems, to alleviate other problems that come after this. I do not know about the rest of the areas or regions in Newfoundland, but I know that the central region is pretty desperate right now. The hon. minister knows that herself, and the hon. minister from Exploits knows that himself.

AN HON. MEMBER: What did you say?

MR. HUNTER: With the desperate situation of urgent repair -

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, no.

MR. HUNTER: Oh, no? I meet with housing on a regular basis on behalf of my constituents, and the manager there tells me -

MS THISTLE: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: I would like to respond to the statement just made by the Member for Windsor-Springdale. He is quite inaccurate in his comments in saying how there is a desperate situation in Central Newfoundland regarding Newfoundland and Labrador Housing RRAP program. Central Newfoundland is well served by Newfoundland and Labrador Housing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MR. HUNTER: (Inaudible) is what I was talking to. The minister knows, herself, and the hon. minister from Exploits knows, himself, the problems we have in that regional office. If he doesn't know, then he is not in his district; he doesn't know what is going on in this district about the Urgent Repair Program in the central regional office of Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation. If you don't know that, you are out of touch with your district.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HUNTER: I am talking about the Urgent Repair Program in the regional district, in Central Newfoundland. If I am getting dozens of calls every week, and sometimes every day, then you are getting them and every minister is getting them. There is no point in phoning the minister -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HUNTER: Mr. Speaker, they know I am telling the truth. I do not have to try to defend what I am saying because they know the truth. They are just trying to throw me off track. Maybe I am not that good at presenting the case right now but, I tell you, I am going to be around here for a long time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUNTER: And I am going to get better at it. If I can shut anybody up who is trying to present something that is not true, I will do it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HUNTER: I am going to be a long-term member, I am sorry to tell you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUNTER: I have to say to the hon. Member for Exploits, if he is looking for my support for the leadership, I think he had better be very careful of what he is saying. I could remind the hon. minister that he never had that great of a victory in the last election.

AN HON. MEMBER: What bill are you speaking on?

MR. HUNTER: Bill 27.

AN HON. MEMBER: What is the name of it?

MR. HUNTER: Don't you have it there? Have you got it there? I know what it is; do you know what it is?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HUNTER: I will get back to speaking again.

I can still come up with a lot of circumstances, incidences where people require better health care services. It is not everybody who can afford to come into St. John's and get the services that they require. I get many calls from people who need to come out here for services and surgeries and they find it very difficult paying the money to get here. When they get here, there is nowhere to stay. They have to come up with extra money, trying to get places in hotels, hostels, and everything.

I think, if we are going to supply a service, we have to look the other aspect of that service. It is not only to get the bed and get the person in the bed; it is to get them there from the outlying areas of Newfoundland and Labrador where it is very difficult to get from their home to a facility where they need the services.

That brings back to mind the dialysis for areas of Newfoundland and Labrador where people have to really put themselves out on a limb and financially strap themselves to get to where they need these services. I must admit, we don't have that problem in Grand Falls-Windsor, but there are certainly a lot of other areas in Newfoundland and Labrador today where we should be looking at supplying that service - thanks to a person who died, because they never had the service.

I could give you lots of news clippings, hon. minister, to prove that if it was not for this gentleman, who put his life on the line, who gave up his life for the fight for dialysis, that probably would have never happened. It was only because of public pressure and this one particular person whom we all know of, and I certainly have to respect what he did when he was alive.

It is very important, but we do not want that to happen any more. These things cannot continue to go on. When someone has to get in their vehicle and drive for four, five or six hours to get to a facility for dialysis, that is ridiculous in this day and age. I realize and understand the situation where we are all spread out so much and we cannot have big, major hospitals everywhere, but there have to be some things like that which we can have at a reasonably close distance.

There are a lot of other things in our social programs that really concern people in the rural areas of Newfoundland and Labrador, particularly other services when it comes to paying bills and paying for licence fees and stuff like that, when people have the same problems they have in the health care system. They still have to drive long distances and they still have to rely on us, as politicians, sometimes to help them with their problems, when they find little problems in their particular situations where they need us to go on their behalf to find out the problem and help them with the problem. I don't mind doing that. I realize that is part of my job, and I enjoy doing that part of the job. I certainly wouldn't turn anybody away because I felt that their problem wasn't important enough for me; because I take every problem, every phone call, no matter how big or how small it is. I regard that problem as the biggest one that person could have. It is my job to work on their behalf, and I do that.

I don't mind getting up here and saying to the hon. people on the other side that it is all of our jobs to service our constituents the best way we can. In order to do that, we have to have facilities, we have to have programs, and we have to have some compassion on the part of government to sit down and look at these problems and say: Yes, maybe this is not in our policy but we have to look at this case on an individual basis and do something for that person. That person has worked all of their life, paid into our system, paying taxes, and expects some day that when I need, and when they need our system, when they need our government to do something for them, they expect it done. Dollars do not make any difference to people who need the service. I think it is important that we recognize that fact. Even though we do not have a money tree here, there are a lot of things that we could be doing and there are a lot of things that we should be doing to help people in their time of need. The time of need to them is most important to them. It may not seem much to us, as politicians, but to them it is a very big need. It is very important that they have someone to talk to and someone to go to.

Mr. Speaker, that is why I am not against the Ombudsman. I think there are times when I cannot do stuff, when other people cannot do things, and the problems are so great that I think an Ombudsman - it would be great to have him. Half-a-million dollars or less, whatever it is, I think could be a better benefit to us and save millions and millions if the Ombudsman was there in place; a third person for that person to go to. We cannot always go to a minister because we do not get the right answers and we do not get the right reaction to the problems that we present to them. There is somewhere else that we should go. We need somewhere else to go. People need somewhere to go and someone to talk to so that, when they do not get satisfaction from government, they could have someone to go and present their case to the government, to make sure that their needs, their services and their requirements - that are just as important to the person they are talking to as they are to themselves.

I think that hon. ministers sometimes overlook the fact that these problems are very important. No matter what district you are in, no matter what situation, no matter what area or what department you are dealing with, every problem is an important problem. I think the Ombudsman would certainly be a good way to deal with some of these things.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It was certainly a pleasure to speak to the House today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I could speak to the health care with a great degree of emotion, with a great degree of passion, but I hope that I do not revert to emotion. I want to use rationality and talk about it from the knowledge that I have gained over the last two years. I expect there is not a member in this House who has been more associated with the health care than I, not on a provincial basis but more on a national basis, in the last two years.

I want to say this: The greatest lesson that I learned in politics in 1975, from a leader, an opposition leader, - a great lesson I learned, and one that I practiced right throughout the twenty-three years that I have been in politics - I had come upon, by fluke and by accident, that the Public Utilities Board was going to increase, or had given approval to Newfoundland Light and Power to increase the rates by 10 per cent and the Cabinet was about to approve it. I thought this was a great story, that the PUB had approved the application - it was not as wide open as they are today - that the PUB had approved the application for a 10 per cent increase and the Cabinet was about to approve it.

I wanted to get going on this, and it became a big issue at the time. My leader said: Tom, you know, we are going to be in government one day and we are going to have to grant increases to Newfoundland Light and Power, so be very careful. When you are going to say something to condemn the government, do not say anything that is irresponsible. Do not say anything that is going to come back and fly in your face; because, when we sit in government as sure as you are sitting in front of me, we are going to give increases to Newfoundland Light and Power, and by condemning it you are raising the expectations of the people of this Province unnecessarily by saying: When we get in government we are not going to do that, and that is not about to happen.

I called my press conference. I gave the essence of what was going on, but the point of the matter was it was a great lesson. Every time I was to do something publicly, I always operated on that basis. You are going to be in government one day. Make sure what you say now is not going to affect what you do then, and that what you say now is not going to have the affect of unnecessarily giving the wrong impression to the public, of unnecessarily raising the expectations of the public.

MR. TULK: Playing on their emotions.

MR. LUSH: I would say, playing on people's emotions, and to a large degree, their lack of information.

Mr. Speaker, in health, where can we go? What is a good health system? What is it that we are looking for? Are we looking for the whole range of health services that we can offer the people of this Province? I suggest it is like education. We go out and we give misinformation about education. There is only a certain level that we can reach in this Province. We talk about quality education in our small communities, and how we must do this, and how it must apply to what we doing; and what we offer in the urban areas must be the same as what we offer in the rural areas. By talking about this sometimes we give misinformation. We could be talking about quality education; we confuse that with quantity.

We have to honest in those things. There are things that we cannot do in education on a provincial basis. In some specialities we have to go to other provinces. Why have we not done law in this university? Why have we not granted law degrees? Because we felt it is a luxury we cannot afford. So people have to go to other universities in other places in Canada and in other parts of the world to do that. We had to do it in medicine until a Liberal government brought in a School of Medicine. We thought that was an absolute necessity. So this is what we do. We do it on a basis of priority, and there are certain things we cannot do in this Province. There are certain things that we cannot afford. In education, in health, and right throughout the whole field of human endeavor, there are things we cannot do. We have to evaluate what it is that we can do, what are the absolute necessities, and do them well.

Some of the issues that I have heard raised in terms of condemning health, I could have done it when I was over there twenty years ago. The same things: a waiting list, trying to get in to the hospital. I'm not suggesting that everything is perfect. There are some areas when our waiting lists are too long. Again, I'm talking about exercising the obligation of people in public office, elected office, exercising responsibility. Yes, there are some areas where the waiting list is too long. There are other areas where we rank right up there in terms of efficiency with other provinces in Canada.

I have heard people talking about patients in a room in a hospital not being able to get this and not being able to get that immediately, or having to wait an hour. I can tell hon. members, I have waited many hours. Many I have spent, many wrenching hours, and the only thing that could have solved that was a private nurse. Had I been able to afford a private nurse, I would have had a private nurse for the last two years. The only place in Canada, the only place in our hospitals where we get twenty-four hour surveillance, is in intensive care. That is the only place in the whole - I do not but if it is the only place in the whole of the world. Once you come out of intensive care you are downgraded. You get downgraded to where you are not required to have service every hour, and you can make it, and you can call. Everybody expects that there is going to have to be a little wait. That is the way it is right throughout the country. I suggest that is the way it is right throughout the world.

AN HON. MEMBER: North America.

MR. LUSH: North America, certainly. We will never get into a situation where there is going to be somebody there all the time once we are out of intensive care and gradually downgraded. To give that impression, that we have a nurse on call the minute you press your button, is giving the wrong message, Mr. Speaker.. It is absolutely irresponsible.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: I have gone to waiting rooms, hospitals in Manitoba, in the Isle of Man, in Bombay, India, in Churchill Falls and in St. John's, and I have never seen one yet that I never had to sit down in a waiting room and wait my turn. I never ever saw it, Mr. Speaker. People expect that. It may have been, it may stem from, a certain arrogance that doctors themselves have established by making you and I wait for appointments. All hon. members here can walk in and see the doctor when they like? I have gone in, and the system is they call you in. Come in tomorrow at 9:00 a.m., and you go in at 11:00 a.m. That is a certain arrogance established by the medical profession that has to be stopped.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, that flows into the hospital. They think sometimes they are the only people who work. I have a job, and I told my doctor. If he wants to see me at 9:00 a.m., he sees me at 9:00 a.m. I have a job. There is no necessity to keep me in that office until 11:00 a.m. I think that kind of arrogance is a structural thing and that they do not probably do it as quickly as they should.

For what we do in this Province, my observance has been this. As I have said, I have waited in Winnipeg when to me it was an utmost emergency, but I could not see the doctor or the nurse. That is the way it is. If we get to the position where nobody has to wait anymore, hon. members will use not the total provincial treasury, but they will use the total federal treasury, if we have to get to that position in health care where we are going to get admitted when we want, when we are going to get people to attend to people when we want. It is an irresponsible position to take, and hon. member have an obligation to be responsible.

Having said that, let me tell you, having waited in hospitals all my life, outside of this Province and inside, let me tell you this: I would rather wait inside this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: I spent three agonizing months in Winnipeg. I do not want to get on to that to much. Let me tell you, it was a welcome day when I got back here in Newfoundland. I tell you this, after the three months in the Health Sciences - I did not have to wait three months - my wife and I concluded that what we do in the Health Sciences we do as well and better than anywhere else in Canada.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: What we have in this Province, Mr. Speaker, more than anywhere else that I have been, among our nurses and our doctors, is compassion. It is compassion, and we found that along with knowledge in the areas in which they work.

Hon. members do a discredit. I tell you from my own experience, I did not want to come back to Newfoundland, though there was a great hurry by the doctors in Winnipeg to push us out of the hospital. They did not want us there when they knew we were from Newfoundland. That is a fact. I did not want to come to Newfoundland because I said: According to what I hear about our health system, we do not want to go back there. We want to give our son the very best. Because of the public pronouncements I had heard, I thought our health service was not worth a plugged nickel. I pled with them not to come back. Talking to officials here, they guaranteed me. They said: Mr. Lush, we can look after your son at the level that he is at as well as anywhere in Canada. I came and found out that they were absolutely true. I said: Where is all of this information coming from about our health care not being worth a plugged nickel? If I thought that, a person who is supposedly intelligent, what are the rest of our people thinking? Where is it coming from?

I tell hon. members they do the Province a disservice. We have one of the best health care systems in the whole of the country

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: What we do in this Province we do as well and better than anywhere else in Canada. It is time that we acknowledged that.

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

MR. LUSH: Yes, of course we need some refinement, of course there is room for improvement, of course we can have more speciality areas, of course we need to keep paying our doctors a good salary so that we can attract them into this Province. We need to pay our nurses a good salary, but the notion being used in Newfoundland today that nurses and doctors are leaving because of the salary and going to the U.S. - they are leaving every other province in Canada and going to the U.S.! They are leaving Ontario, they are leaving New Brunswick, they are leaving P.E.I. and they are leaving Nova Scotia, all for the same reason: being underpaid. It is a national problem and should be addressed in a national manner.

Hon. members forget - they use it politically - that the federal government, for a number of years, participated in a big way in giving to this Province money for social services, health and education. In 1990, we came to the realization that we had to wrestle the deficit and the debt to the ground, otherwise Canada was headed for a bankruptcy position if we did not do this. Countries in the Western world, all of them, acknowledged that we had been on one large spending spree and we had to stop. The federal government reduced its spending to this Province dramatically. Hundreds of millions of dollars were taken from health, education and social services. The wonder was that we were able to keep it going as well as we did. The wonder was that we were able to maintain the kind and quality of level of services that we provided our people. It was great pain, it was a great struggle. Of course, what happened? Those in the position of not having to exercise that responsibility, those in the position of not having to care about the deficit and the debt, started jumping on the government. They wanted it done but they criticized those who were doing it.

That is what I talk about being responsible. I know the role of the Opposition. I spent enough time there, more than most members over there. I was there for thirteen years. As I said, there comes a point when we have to realize what is responsible. I think yesterday was the first time since we got into what we call the surplus position. We are not in a surplus position, believe you me. We are only in a surplus position in terms of the deficit, not in terms of the debt. I don't know if hon. members understand that jargon. We are only in a surplus in the sense of the deficit, and not in sense of the debt.

If hon. members want a delineation, a distinction between them, I will tell them what it is. Let's take your monthly salary, for example. If you get $2,000 a month and you are spending $2,200 you have yourself in a deficit. That is $200 a month in the deficit.

MR. FITZGERALD: Go back to the bill! Relevance, Mr. Speaker! We do not need lectures from that hon. member about what the debt of this Province is all about!

MR. SPEAKER (Oldford): Order, please!

MR. FITZGERALD: Get back to the bill (inaudible).

MR. LUSH: I tell the hon. member -

MR. FITZGERALD: (Inaudible) a kickoff to the member's campaign for Bonavista-Trinity-Conception, this is not the day to do it, I say to hon. members here in the House.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. LUSH: If the hon. gentleman has made a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I will speak to the point of order.

MR. SPEAKER: No, he did not.

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. TULK: This bill is about changing the name of the nurses union and so on in the Province, and the people over there are speaking to the principle of the bill. I want to inform them that this side has sat and listened to them criticize the government, criticize the health care system, and we have listened to them quietly -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: Here we go again. There we go again. When the hon. gentleman -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: When the hon. gentleman from Terra Nova stands up and makes a very impassioned speech, makes a very logic speech and a very sensible speech, and when the truth starts to come out then we get the member from Bonavista being called in to try and interrupt the hon. gentleman from speaking. So, on behalf -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: On behalf of my colleague from Tera Nova, who is too much of a gentleman to ask anybody for protection, I would ask the Chair to protect him from the hon. gentleman on the other side.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

Are you rising on a new point of order?

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

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, we have listened to the Member for Terra Nova. He made a lot of sense and he was relevant to the bill when he talked about hospital care and his experiences in dealing with it. It was a lesson probably we all learned, but I say to the Member for Terra Nova that this side over here does not need to take any lecture from him on what the deficit and the debt of this Province is all about.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: If the member is going to speak to the bill, then let him speak to the relevance of the bill and not lecture the House of Assembly.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

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

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

MR. TULK: I was not going to interrupt, but the hon. gentleman is clearly out (inaudible) how this bill is relevant to what we can spend in the Province.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

MR. LUSH: In a recent poll conducted, it was discovered that 80 per cent of Canadians did not know the difference between the deficit and the debt. Unless the hon. member is in the higher IQ of society, he is among those.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: Eighty percent did not know the difference in the debt and the deficit. I would suggest that there may be some among the 80 per cent in this House, on both sides. There may be some.

The deficit, because this is relevant to this bill, I want to tell how health fits into this. The deficit is - using the argument that if a person makes $2,000 a month and spends $2,200, that is $200 of a deficit. Out of that money, of course, they bought cars and fridges; so that continues next month, the same thing. They spend $2,100 and now there is another $100 deficit. If you went on like that for twelve months, when you total all of those deficits, that is your debt. When you total those deficits, that is your debt.

All we have done with the budget is balance our books for the year. We have not addressed that debt that we have. All of those deficits that we have built up over the years, accumulated into the large debt, we have not addressed that at all. All we have done is balance our books. Our income and our expenditures are equal for that year, but we have not addressed the debt. Canada's debt at this moment is $583 billion, and ours is -

AN HON. MEMBER: Six point five.

MR. LUSH: Six point five.

We are talking about a surplus now, and what we should do is spend that money in one of three ways: debt reduction, tax reduction, or spending on the services that governments spend their money on.

In the last little while, I have taken that as an objective of mine, asking the federal government to start now spending money in services, spending money on education, spending money on health, and I would hope that hon. members would help me in my fight. I would hope that hon. members will join me, understanding that we really have not gotten to a position of a surplus that we would like to be in. So what is the reasonable approach? What is the reasonable approach?

Being a political centrist, my suggestion is that we have to take a three-pronged approach. We have to do a little tax reduction, we have to do a little debt reduction, and we have to spend a little more on services - social services, education and health. The only way we are going to reach a reasonable proximity of the level of services that hon. members opposite are advocating for health is that the federal government has to get back into funding. They have to get back into helping the Province. They have to get back into giving the funding that they were giving in the 1980s and the 1970s.

We have to get back to that level of funding. Then we may be able to reach some degree of the kind of expectations that hon. members have been creating for health. That is where we have to go. I have never heard them call upon the federal government to increase their spending in those areas. I have never heard hon. members say, now this is what we have to do, that we are in a surplus position. The Province has made great effort. The Province has made tremendous effort. It spent $1.2 billion this year out of a budget of $3.5 billion.

Mr. Speaker, what kind of an effort is that? Are hon. members saying they are going to spend $2 billion on health? Because that is where they are going to have to go. Yes, and more than that. That is where they are going to have to go to be able to live up to the expectations that they have created in the public.

The waiting list I can accept, the general waiting list to get into hospital, but when they start talking about bedside attendance, almost twenty-four hours, no lineups in an emergency room, all this kind of thing. If they were ever to rid the Province of all of that stuff, as I said earlier, I think they would need the federal Treasury to be able to give us that kind of a service.

Mr. Speaker, I again say that we have to have a degree of responsibility, and what they have done is created the attitude in Newfoundland that our health care is the worst in Canada, that our health care is not worth talking about. That is the kind of attitude they have spread, and that is not correct. We have a high level of health care, as I have said, the best in the country in what we do. There are some things we do not do, there are some things we will not do, and there are some things we will never be able to do, but what we have to look at is taking care of the most prominent, the most occurring, health care needs in the Province, and do that well.

When you look at the kind of money that this government has spent over the last several years, in the Tobin Administration in particular, I think we have come from something like $980 million to now $1.2 billion. If you subtract that, you will find out that was a tremendous increase, a tremendous effort by this government.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. LUSH: They need to be commended, and the people of Newfoundland need to know that we have tremendous health care in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, a point of order.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: A point of order on information that was portrayed that was not accurate.

We have come there because the Department of Health and Community Services had taken over divisions from Human Resources and Employment. They had taken over Family Rehabilitative Services, Youth Corrections, Child Protection. These areas that have been taken over have been responsible for a significant portion of the increase, and some things are not accurate. It is the money inefficiently spent in the system. Forty per cent, Maclean's Magazine says, is inappropriately spent. It is not that it is necessarily more money; it is that you have to start spending right. I will get the examples in the House next week in Question Period on how it is inappropriately spent, I say.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Is the Government House Leader rising on a new point of order?

MR. TULK: Yes, Mr. Speaker, on a new point of order.

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

MR. TULK: It is customary in this House to go back and forth, but I will raise a new one.

Mr. Speaker, let me say to the hon. gentleman that he cannot have it both ways. He has made his speech. The hon. gentleman from Terra Nova is making his. He has listed -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TULK: They are interrupting again. They are at it again. They are over there - I was going to use a word that I cannot use.

The truth is that this government has increased spending, I say to the hon. gentleman, and if he cannot swallow it quietly, and if he cannot take his medicine quietly, he should walk out through that door. Be a gentleman. Take your medicine quietly. If you are going to dish it out, take it quietly, I say to the hon. gentleman. Be a man. This is not a hockey game. He is not in the bleachers.

Let me list off for him - I will give the list back to the hon. gentleman -

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: The hockey game is on again. He believes he is in the Southern Shore arena, playing hockey. Look, there he goes. The hon. gentleman believes he is in the bleachers. He knows that what he is doing under a point of order is giving false information.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

I want to say a few works on Bill 27, “An Act To Amend The Registered Nurses Act”. We just had the Government House Leader on his feet talking about hockey, trying to compare the House of Assembly to hockey.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I have recognized the hon. Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

We just had the Government House Leader on his feet comparing this House of Assembly to a hockey game. He talked about the Member for Ferryland being in the bleachers. Why is the Government House Leader acting like a bleacher creature, Mr. Speaker?

I want to be heard on this today, because we are talking about health care in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. What is happening in this Province with respect to this piece of legislation?

We had a very serious piece of legislation back on April 1, April Fool's Day, Bill 3, brought to this House. Who did we see stand on that side of the House of Assembly to speak to the bill? We saw the bill being introduced, and we saw the Minister of Mines and Energy up time after time, making a fool of himself, asking the question: Who phoned into Open Line? We were talking about a very serious piece of legislation.

Today and yesterday, we have had the Minister of Fisheries on his feet on this particular piece of legislation, and we saw the President of Treasury Board and the Member for Terra Nova. I want to address some of the points that those two ministers and the member mentioned. The one I want to start with is the Member for Terra Nova. I understand the situation in which that man and his family found themselves in the past two years, and I understand that he has been involved with the health care system in this Province personally for the past two years. We have sympathy for that man and his family, no doubt, and empathy, but he is not the only one who has had personal experience with the health care system. I am one who has been through it myself.

Let me tell you something. The health care system that is in the Province today is not the same health care system that was in the Province ten years ago. It is not, by any stretch of the imagination, and I am going to get into that. It is not the same health care system, and you have to ask the question: Why is it not the same health care system? One is accessability, and the waits. Why do we have such long waits? It is because of the bottom line, of course, with the budget - dollars and cents.

We had this Member for Terra Nova on his feet this morning, basically saying that this side of the House are being irresponsible for expecting good health care in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. That is a word that this government loves to throw out whenever we, on this side of the House, get up in the House of Assembly and ask questions. When the Member for Ferryland gets on his feet and asks questions with respect to health care, we are being irresponsible and fearmongering. When the Leader of the Opposition gets on his feet and asks questions with respect to Voisey's Bay or Churchill Falls, we are being irresponsible and fearmongering. When the Leader of the Opposition gets on his feet and asks questions about IPL, we are fearmongering, we are irresponsible.

I would like to tell that side of the House over there, the so-called government of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, that is our job. That is what we are being paid to do. That is what the Minister of Fisheries was on his feet about yesterday, saying that we are being paid as Ombudsmen. All Members in the House of Assembly are Ombudsmen. That is what our job is. We are doing it, and they try and criticize and spin it back to us. It is shameful for them.

The Member for Terra Nova, when he was on his feet, made this point - trying to throw it back at us - that by us asking these questions in the House of Assembly with respect to health care, we are raising the expectations of the public, and we are being irresponsible by raising the expectations of the public. Answer me this question: What did the Premier of this Province do during the last election? When the polls started to turn on him, what did he do? The Premier of the Province went to Ottawa and, two days before the election, comes back and says: I have $40 million for health care in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. That is what he said. That is on record. That cannot be denied.

AN HON. MEMBER: Was it (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I will get into that.

Forty million. The Member for Terra Nova has the gall to say that we are raising people's expectations by asking questions in this House of Assembly, and the Premier comes back, two days before an election, $40 million for health care. Right after that, what happened? The Premier was a member of the Cabinet that was involved with changing the formula for health care transfer payments to the Province. He was the Premier involved with that before he came back to Newfoundland and Labrador. What did it end up - $3.6 million. That is what it was. The 40 per cent was cut back to $3.6 million - shrank - and they have the gall and the audacity to say that we are raising people's expectations in this Province.

Now, let's talk about the health care itself, once people are fortunate enough to get into the hospitals in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Talk about personal experience, if you want to get into that, I have had two deaths in my family this summer, in my immediate family, and I have been in hospital since 1990 many, many times. I can address the point with respect to the level of care. It is not because we are, on this side of the House, saying that the nurses, the doctors, the lab technicians, the x-ray technicians, the front staff, are not doing their job. We are talking about the shortages there. That is what is causing the problem - and the money.

Let me give you an example of what is going on in the hospitals in this Province. This is from personal experience, involving a death, and I am not trying to exaggerate this. This if fact.

My mother died on June 5. A month before that, she was in hospital diagnosed with cancer in two locations, two places. She had a private room. We got her a private room when she went in first, and what happened? Because they needed a room for a man, an individual - he had a room on a ward with three people, three women on it - they wanted to put a female into that ward and a gentleman into the private room. They went in after the family had left - after the family had left - and told her they had another individual, a lady who was seventy-eight years old, who was more sick than her, and they needed a private room; and they moved her out into the ward. The next day, when the diagnosis came in, the doctors came in and told her, with three other people in the room - and visitors - that she is diagnosed with cancer in two locations after moving her out of the private room.

MR. SULLIVAN: I (inaudible) moved out of ICU. They needed a room. The person died in his room this next day.

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, exactly. Now, that very evening, the next night when we found out about it, what happened, Mr. Speaker?

MR. WISEMAN: Oh, oh!

MR. J. BYRNE: This is serious, I say to the Member for Topsail. Listen, you might learn something. You get over there in this la-la land that was referred to this morning. That evening, when one of my brothers was walking along, this individual who was moved, because he was so sick, into the private room said: I have my diagnosis back today. Everything is good.

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. J. BYRNE: His diagnosis. Everything was clear and good. That is the kind of stuff that is going on in the hospitals of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Let me tell you something else. When we talk about equipment, I was up visiting people in the hospitals. The nurses came in and they were looking for an electronic thermometer. They had one for the whole floor. They had to go all over the place trying to find out where it was.

MR. MATTHEWS: Oh, oh!

MR. J. BYRNE: Ninety-eight point six Fahrenheit.

MR. MATTHEWS: Oh, oh!

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, and whatever that converts to in Celsius.

MR. MATTHEWS: Oh, you are (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Not at all, I say to the member. Come over and measure my blood pressure and it will be perfect. Let me tell you now, you do not have to worry about my blood pressure, I say to the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

The Minister of Fisheries was on his feet and he was talking about the health care system here versus the health care system in the U.S. Yesterday, or the day before in this House, we had a bill brought in by the Minister of Health. What were they doing? They were talking about taking a certain responsibility out of one department and moving it to another department, but there is something on that that nobody in this Province knew, or very few people. I did not know until it came to this House that there is a tax on every vehicle in this Province. It is a hidden tax, basically, that we pay. So if there is an insurance claim the government can come back to the insurance companies and have the individual pay for health care. In this country in the past number of years - and the Member for Ferryland was on this - insurance companies were paying for health care, but it has gone from 25 per cent to 30 per cent. So I say to the Minister of Fisheries that we are heading that way towards what is happening in the U.S. with respect to health care.

What else did he say? He spoke about respect for the health care system. I do not think there is anyone on this side of the House who does not have respect for the health care system, does not have respect for the health care workers, from doctors to nurses to lab technicians, to the front workers, the receptionists and what have you in the clinics over there. They are all doing their job. He is trying to twist it back by asking questions on this side of the House, saying that we do not care or we do not have respect for the health care system. Ludicrous. Foolishness.

The Minister of Fisheries talked about accreditation in the Province when he was on his feet. What he did not say - and I will not mention the hospital - is that there was one hospital in the Province, in this city, that when the accreditation people went in they left and said: We will come back in two months. They came back in two months to do a proper accreditation because they never had the information available to them. That is only one of the reasons. The government can get up and put up their ministers all they want and try and say things are what they are not.

The Minister for Treasury Board was on her feet yesterday for a half-hour talking about the health care system in the Province. One of the points that she made was that she talked about bricks and mortar. Let's talk about bricks and mortar. What did we see a few years ago when we saw untold millions of dollars being put into the Trans City fiasco, a hospital built and the matter gone to court? Millions of dollars were wasted there that should not have been gone. The people that sued won their case. That is money that could have gone into the health care system. Hospitals have been built and their beds not opened yet. We have the hospital in Gander, that every time I drive through Gander it is still out there and still not finished. That is bricks and mortar.

There is more to health care than bricks and mortar. If you are going to open hospitals, open them or don't build them. Don't give people false expectations like we have been accused of on this side of the House. That is the kind of stuff we have to look at. Now let me see, what else is on the go?

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

MR. J. BYRNE: Oh I know, I can tell you that.

During the last election - again, I have to go back to that - the public relations campaign that was put on, and shortly after, and the amount of dollars that was put into that to try and make the nurses look like the culprits in the Province because they were on strike, how much money was put into that that could have been into the health care system, Mr. Speaker?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I would not venture to guess, but I bet you have a number on it over there.

Now, let's talk about equipment in the hospitals. I mentioned that already. We talk about staff, the different staff. It is not only the nurses and the doctors that we have to worry about and shortages thereof -

MR. REID: Don't get carried away. (Inaudible) your buddy over there, your House Leader, just said over there (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I say to the Member for Twillingate & Fogo - I think that's the district he represents, Mr. Speaker - that if he wants to get up and speak to this bill he is certainly welcome to do so. When the minister is over there trying to throw in remarks here that shows he is either not listening or not heeding or deliberately misunderstanding what has been said on this side of the House, he can get on his feet and speak for five minutes, ten minutes or a half hour. Let him do it.

One of the problems here of course is retention and recruitment of the health care workers in the Province, and yes, it impacts. It is the dollars, it is the money that is being put into the system. It is not enough. No, it is not. Sure it is not, I say to the member. The question has been asked: What is enough? I can tell you one thing, that what is enough is at least put the health care to the same level that it was ten years ago. Let's go back to the federal government and talk about the cuts to the provinces with respect to health care. Let's get some of that money back in the system, which I think is in the billions of dollars across the country. Let's talk about that. You cannot expect to be taking money out of the system and saying you are getting a better system. It is illogical. It is not happening, I say to the members on the other side of the House.

The minister was on her feet here the other day, answering or not answering questions, whatever way you want to look at it, from the Member for Ferryland, and she talked about how the problem with placing the nurses is a union problem. That is typical of this Administration. If there is a problem in Education it is the school boards. If there is a problem in Health it is usually the health boards. If it is a problem with development in the Province, regional development and bringing the communities back to life, it is the RED boards. Yesterday, or the other day, it was the union's problem because they have a situation here that if you have 150 jobs they have so many thousands of people applying. From my understanding, and I stand to be corrected on this, that minister was the president of the nurses' union, so she had a hand in creating the problem we have today, if you follow her logic. If you follow her logic, she had a hand in it. I am sure if they sit down with the nurses they could work out some kind of a situation where they could get the nurses back in the health care system.

Again, we have a situation where every time the Member for Ferryland is on his feet, the Opposition House Leader, he is being accused of being irresponsible and he should not be bringing issues to the House of Assembly. I want to say again - and I said it when I first got up - that is our job and we are going to do it. We are going to continue to do it for at least, maybe, another two years. We will do it for at least another two years, I expect, unless the Premier leaves all of a sudden and we get a new leader on that side of the House and we will be into an election. We will do it for another two years and hopefully at that time we will be on that side of the House. This Administration, if you want to look at it, are listening to what we have to say. They are adopting many of our policies and trying to say that they are their policies, but they do not fully adopt our policies. They put their own little spin and twist on it. One is the income tax, the reduction there, and the payroll tax we wanted cut back.

They can say what they want when it comes to health care in this Province but, in my personal view, we do not have the same level of care in this Province as we had ten years ago.

I want to make it clear again, because I know they will be on their feet saying the reverse of what we are saying, but we have not complained or said anything negative to any of the workers in the heath care system, to the doctors, or about the nurses, or about the staff, none whatsoever. Because, once you get in a system, once you get in there, they do what they can do.

I will give you an example of a couple of years ago when I was in hospital. In special care - not intensive care but special care, which is pretty close to intensive care - there were four people who had just had surgery, major surgery, and they had one young nurse in there trying to take care of all those individuals. I had to say - I was a patient at the time - to the head nurse: Listen, you are going to have to get someone else to help this lady. This is really too much. Anyway, we ended up getting someone else in there to help out, but that is because they are short staffed, not because they cannot do the job or do not want to do the job, or do not have compassion. That is not the problem.

We have nurses leaving the Province, as I said earlier. Why? I had a call two weeks ago from a nurse who had left the health care system, who was in the intensive care over there a year or so ago, to go down to the states. She took a two-year leave of absence and they decided to stay - gone.

MR. SULLIVAN: They cannot get leave now. They don't give you leave now. You have to resign now.

MR. J. BYRNE: Something was just told to me that I will put on the record. The Member for Ferryland says that now they will not give you leave to go anywhere else; you have to resign to go.

MR. SULLIVAN: They won't give you leave to transfer from one area to another that you want to do training in. You have to resign. I have letters in my office (inaudible).

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I am doing alright..

I just made a few notes when I was listening to some of these people who were up on their feet trying to ridicule us and put us down. I pretty well have said what I want to say with respect to this piece of legislation. I think that it is -

MR. MATTHEWS: Is your time up yet?

MR. J. BYRNE: No, it is not up yet, I say to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. My time is not up yet. I am just trying to check a few of my notes here to make sure that I have covered all the points that I wanted to cover; and I have, I think.

It is getting close to twelve o'clock. I do not know if anybody else wants to speak. Does anyone else want to speak on this now?

With those comments that I have made here today, maybe we have cleared up some of the accusations that have been coming from that side of the House trying to put us down, ridicule us, or say we are being irresponsible, or that we are fearmongering when we are talking about health care. It is not the case. We are acting responsibly, doing the job that we are here to do. If you look at what democracy is all about, that is what we are here for.

November 11, two weeks ago, many of us were out laying wreaths in honor of the people, the men, the women, who had gone off to war, the First World War, the Second World War, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, fighting for the very right that we have to stand up in this House of Assembly and to ask questions of the government. That is what democracy is all about.

With that note, Mr. Speaker, I will sit down and say thank you for your time.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you colleagues.

I don't normally speak a lot in debate in the House, not that I am lost for words for the most part, but there are times when the level of rhetoric, the total lack of logic, and the inability of those on the other side to put forward common sense and totally honest and transparent positions, compels one to have to rise and put forward a few comments.

The hon. member said a few minutes ago that he expects, in two years' time, to be sitting on this side of the House. One of two things will have to happen for that occurrence to take place. Either he will have to call an election long before I anticipate one, or he will have to admit in two years' time that he has finally seen the light and that he is going to ask leave of this caucus to accept him on this side of the House. I would suggest that either one of these eventualities are remote at best and probably non-existent in terms of their potential.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I want to stand on my feet today and say to the Minister of Municipal Affairs that he is half right for once, in that it is a pretty remote chance that he will ever see me crossing to that side with that member.

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: I would say that in order for such an occurrence to happen, there has to be an inviter and an invitee. I can tell you that while he may want to be the invitee, there is not much of a prospect that we will be the inviters, because on this side of the House we have no intention of deliberately lowering the average level of the IQ on this side of the House, or the average level of intelligence in terms of the activity of the debate. We want to maintain the highest possible standards on this side of the House on all respects and on every account. So the hon. member, I would think, has a long future on that side of the House, if indeed the people of the Province intend to keep him around at all.

If the hon. member has his packing boxes ordered for a move in two years' time, I would suggest that he do one very simple mathematical addition or calculation or adjustment: that he put another two in front of the two he is talking about, and maybe in twenty-two years' time I may be sitting up there in the gallery, just after qualifying for my old age pension, looking down and seeing them on this side of the House. The chances of that happening are so remote, and not being a betting man, I am still prepared to put money on the fact that he will never see this side of the House in terms of sitting his backside over here. He may wander over once in awhile to ask for some measure of largesse or some benefit for a constituent, and we accept that as being appropriate because we understand that he has to do his job as well.

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the more serious and substantive matter that has been raised in the House today, the matter of debating the health care matters of the Province, it is a very serious matter. I think it is a matter that is so serious, the issue of health care, that the members on the other side of the House who get up in laborious and continuous and sometimes even extraneous dribbling and diatribe with respect to what is wrong with the health care system, should at least take stock of what they are doing and operate in the context of some honesty, some integrity, some sincerity, and on some factual basis talk about some of the things they want to talk about.

We operate in this House under rules. They are called rules of the House. They are called rules that govern the operation of this House. I guess, if all of us had one regret, it is this: That the rules of the House do not include and do not have the ability to ensure that people operate on the basis of the utmost standard of morality, of fairness, of common sense and of decency.

We know we cannot legislate morality, we know we cannot legislate honesty, and we know we cannot legislate common sense, but if I had to pick one of these I would like to be able to legislate on the basis of common sense, to be able to operate on that basis in this House, because the members on the other side of the House are totally, totally, out to lunch when they get up sometimes and make some propositions.

It is no coincidence that the people on that side of the House sometimes appear as though they are indeed living, as was referred to this morning, in a state of being in la-la land, because some of the things they put forward are totally foolish. They get up over there, on the other side of the House, and they want to reduce taxes by $900 million. They want to increase expenditures by a like amount. They want to reduce everything that can be reduced in terms of taxes, increase everything that can be increased in terms of expenditures, and they do not have the decency to take into account their obligation to put it in the context of what is achievable and fair and reasonable. They make propositions that are totally out to lunch - and I guess in fifteen minutes' time, in fact, we will all be out to lunch - but it is unfortunate that we cannot operate on a little higher level of rationality and fairness.

Mr. Speaker, there has been no one who has ever said, I don't think, on this side of the House that the health care system in this Province is perfect. As a matter of fact, I am not sure that we could say that about any level of government service we provide, whether it is in health care, transportation, education or any other of the array of services we operate. No one would make the suggestion that the health care system in this Province is perfect, any more than it could be said it is perfect anywhere else across the country.

As a matter of fact, it would be a stretch I think to even imagine on a daily basis, when you have 15,000-plus people every day seeing a doctor in this Province, that every diagnosis will be 100 per cent correct the first time around. It is unreasonable to expect that when people go into the hospital every single diagnosis and interaction with the system will result in a perfect and an appropriate outcome at the first visit, or on that first occasion. The fact of the matter is that the health care system is operated and run by individuals, and I would say very competent, very professional people. I would agree with hon. members when they say very caring and very dedicated health care professionals in the Province.

The people on the other side of the House usually get up and they start to pontificate on the anecdotal, sometimes, but I am sure very factual, individual occurrences that happen when people go into the health care system. If it is fair for them to talk about how the health care system works, I think it is fair that we also talk about the health care system.

I was reminded just about two months ago when my brother, who lives in Fredericton, New Brunswick, came home for a visit to see my aged mother. He arrived at 4:30 on a Saturday afternoon. He had dinner with my mother, and he went over to visit my two sisters who live in Mount Pearl. A nice little community, I would say to my hon. colleague. No reflection on that community through what I am about to say. At about 8:30 p.m. when he should have been probably thinking about relaxing for the evening he decided to go out for a walk with my two sisters.

AN HON. MEMBER: Nice little trails.

MR. MATTHEWS: They went down a nice little trail. The problem was that in the nice little trail that, for all of the many kilometers existing that are near perfect, there was one little pothole in one little section of one little trail. Being akin to me, and having some of the genes that I have, he is basically, notwithstanding his good qualities, about as clumsy as a cat. He shoved his foot down in the pothole and went head over heels, and the next thing he knew he was half-stunned. When he came to his senses -

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: I say to my hon. members my brother was only half-stunned. Most days I am fully stunned. In any event, he had the misfortune of breaking his ankle. That was the bottom line. He fell down and he broke his ankle. My two sisters gathered him up, the 220 pounds of him that he is, and got him down to St. Clare's Hospital. I went over to see him about 10:30 p.m., and I have to tell you in all honesty, without very much conversation, he immediately brought up the issue of the health care service he had received that evening at St. Clare's outpatients. He said: Lloyd, I can't believe the level of service that was afforded me tonight in the St. Clare's Mercy Hospital.

AN HON. MEMBER: Did they know he was your brother?

MR. MATTHEWS: They did not know that. He said: I have to tell you that if I were in Fredericton, New Brunswick, tonight I would anticipate a six-hour waiting time in the outpatients to get what I achieved in forty-five minutes down at the health care down at the St. Clare's Mercy Hospital. He said: I was in and out. I have this temporary cast on my foot, having being x-rayed, inside of forty-five minutes. He said: I do not know what the average health care response is in this Province, I do not live here, but I can tell you that if what I've experienced tonight is an indication of the service of the health care system in this Province I have absolutely nothing but excellent things to say about it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: I said: Dave, why don't you make that more publicly known? He said: I will, I will go on the public record. He went down Monday morning -

AN HON. MEMBER: Did you write the letter or did (inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: I did not write the letter and I do not know if he did. He went down Monday morning to get the permanent cast on his foot because the swelling had gone down and that sort of thing. He went down Monday morning - Mr. Speaker, this is factual and I am telling it exactly as it is - at 9:00. At 10:30 a.m. he had been x-rayed again, he had had a permanent cast applied, and he came home. While I did not know this until the afternoon, he said: I picked up the phone and I called the open line, 726-5590.

This is without any disrespect to the media, but maybe this is part of the problem we have in this Province today with respect to the perception of health care. He said: I picked up the phone, the operator came on and I said I want to go on your show. The operator said: What do you want to speak about? My brother said: I want to speak about health care. The operator said: Do you have a problem, sir, with the health care system? He said: No, sir, I have something positive to say about the health care system. The operator said: Oh. Then he put him on hold and fifteen minutes later he came back and said: I am sorry, we are out of time, sir, we cannot get you on the show this morning.

That is an honest, factual incident, a chronology of what happened between 8:30 p.m. on one Saturday afternoon and 11:30 a.m. the next Monday morning. I am suggesting that part of the problem - not all of the problem, but part of the problem - with the perception is what people hear because of what comes on some of these open line shows. It does not suggest or convey the reality of the circumstance that is in our health care system.

Two weeks ago a friend of mine, a gentleman much older than me - this is an honest circumstance -

MR. GRIMES: He must be some old.

MR. MATTHEWS: He is quite old, seventy-three, so I won't give you his name. He went out to his former home in Green Bay, out in the area not too far from where the hon. Member for Baie Verte lives. He went out with his wife to go rabbit catching with his brother. He was getting up Monday morning to go in the woods, to tail a few slips. At about 4 a.m. he took seriously ill. He ended up in the Central Newfoundland hospital in Grand Falls at about 7 a.m. or 8 a.m. when they drove in and they kept him there. He was there from Monday until Friday morning when they had an opportunity to do a series of tests.

I phoned him two or three times and rhetorically, every time I called him - I think on three occasions - I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, he is not amongst those stunned people. This is a very intelligent, very bright, very articulate and a very objective man who tells it like it is. All I heard from him in the three conversations: How are you doing? He said: Listen, I don't know how I am doing, but I have to tell you that the level of care that is being afforded me in the Central Newfoundland health care centre, I simply could not ask for better if I was home with my wife.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: He said it is absolutely excellent. It is beyond complaint. It is a level of service, giving attention to my need, that could not be better afforded me.

MR. J. BYRNE: Is he divorced?

MR. MATTHEWS: He is not divorced. I'm happy to say that at the end of the tests that they did they found nothing seriously wrong with him, although he did have a serious incident, and he is now back in St. John's being followed up by his doctor.

I could go on. I could tell you about my wive's uncle. He would not mind me mentioning his name, but I will not. He went to the doctor to have a check-up for some chest pains. He is seventy-one years old. It was around August 1, just around Regatta Day. The doctor said: You need to go to the hospital and get checked out. They put him in the hospital and they did the work on him. They said: You need bypass surgery, and we will not let you leave this hospital until you get the bypass surgery. They put him over to the Health Sciences. I went out of town for a few days. When I came back I went over, and he had had the procedure done.

I asked: How are things going, Ron? He said: I have to tell you that I have not been in the hospital for thirty years. As a matter of fact, I know very little about the health care system - although his wife is a retired nurse. He said: Personally, I have had excellent health all my life. I don't know if what I've heard on open line is correct by people who make those comments. I don't know if what I read in The Telegram is correct. He said: I don't know if what I hear the people on the other side of the House talking about is correct. The only thing I do know is that in the forty-five days, from the time I have been diagnosed to the time that I had this operation - and he showed me his unfortunate zipper job, the scar - the only thing I can tell you is that in my judgement, and I'm an average joe, living in St. John's, as objective as you can get - the only thing I know, is that the health care system in this Province, or at least the health care that I have received in the last forty-five days, is as near to perfect as I can describe. He said: There is absolutely nothing that I can say of a negative nature with respect to the care I have gotten, or to the level of service I have gotten, in the health care system of this Province.

If the men on the other side of the House choose to ignore the good things then I think it is incumbent on us on this side of the House to share some of those anecdotal but very honest, very factual positive stories with them.

Mr. Speaker, I could say a lot more, but given the fact that it is 11:59 on Friday morning, and given the fact that we are approaching the Christmas season, and given the fact that I would like for the hon. members to have a good weekend, as I would wish everybody on this side of the House, I adjourn debate on Bill 27.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): The hon. the Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I move that the House adjourn until Monday at 2:00 p.m.

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