May 11, 2004 HOUSE OF ASSEMLBY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 28


The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: This afternoon we have statements by the following members: the Member for Trinity-Bay de Verde; the Member for Grand Bank; the Member for Mount Pearl; the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans; the Member for St. John's North; and the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

The hon. the Member for Trinity-Bay de Verde.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on April 29, 2004, I attended the First Annual Tourism Choice Awards at Brown's Restaurant in Whiteway. Tourists from as far away as Hawaii filled out a ballot in the Baccalieu Trail Tourism Guide to vote on the winners, and these winners were: The number one hotel/motel was Fong's Restaurant in Carbonear. The number one Bed and Breakfast, there was a tie, On The Lake B & B in Blaketown, and Blueberry Hill B & B in Cavendish. The number one family restaurant was the host, Brown's Restaurant in Whiteway. The number one takeout was Pitcher's Takeout in New Harbour. The number one museum to visit was the Winterton Boat Building and Community Museum. The number one town to visit was Bay Roberts. The number one RV Park was the Mountain View RV Park Ltd. in Clarke's Beach. The number one craft shop, again a tie, Emily's Craft and Coffee Shop in Cupids, and the Maple Ridge Folk Arts Studio in Whiteway. The number one place to shop was Wescals in Bay Roberts.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon members to join me in congratulating these winners throughout the Baccalieu Trail and we wish them every success this coming summer.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express sincere thanks to the Lions Clubs International Foundation for committing $100,000 to the Burin Peninsula Health Care Centre's Direct Digital Radiography Unit. This unit will cost $700,000 and this grant is the maximum offered to any group under the Standard Grant Program of LCIF.

The Standard Grant Program helps local Lions Clubs to help fund projects that are too big to fund at the local level. Region G Lions Clubs on the Burin Peninsula have committed $100,000 to this project. To date they have raised $35,000, with other initiatives in place to reach their goal of $100,000.

Mr. Speaker, the previous government committed $350,000 to cover 50 per cent of the total cost. The Burin Peninsula Health Care Foundation undertook to raise the other 50 per cent, and with the support from the Lions Clubs that task has been made that much easier.

A digital radiography unit provides enhanced clarity of X-ray images. Digital technology allows for viewing images within five seconds and allows these images to be provided electronically to other health care facilities with the same technology. Patients in wheelchairs can be treated more easily, while seriously injured patients can be accommodated with a special trauma table.

Mr. Speaker, it is so important for people who live in the rural parts of Newfoundland and Labrador to have access to vital pieces of medical equipment. Some are isolated from the major centres because of geography but, more often than not, bad weather plays a part. This is certainly the case on the Burin Peninsula and explains the need for a Cat Scan as well.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to show their appreciation to Lions Clubs throughout the Province for their continued dedication and commitment to our communities and our people.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DENINE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today, Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the students of Mount Pearl Senior High and Mount Pearl Intermediate on their recent musical production, Etcetera 18.

The show opened on Tuesday, May 4, and ran through to May 8, at the Mount Pearl Glacier. There were approximately 5,000 family, friends and visitors who came to this wonderful celebration of Mount Pearl's youth.

The cast consists of approximately 175 students and they have spent endless hours of practice throughout the year, and this certainly shows, as they have had another successful musical show.

Mr. Speaker, there are three people who give freely of their time to create such a production. They are: Carl Goulding, Musical and Choral Director; Jackie Goulding, Production Manager; and Robert Power, Stage Manager.

Of course, Mr. Speaker, I cannot forget to mention the parent volunteers who help out during the year, as their help is very valuable.

Also, Mr. Speaker, I would like to mention some of the places where the Mount Pearl Show Choir have performed: Disney World, the New Year 2000 Celebrations, and they have travelled across the Province during the Cabot 500 Celebrations.

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud of the energy and enthusiasm shown by these young people and I wish them all the best in the future.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honour and congratulate a well-known citizen of Grand Falls-Windsor who has been presented with a prestigious award for his professional accomplishments.

Mr. Gerald Thompson, manager of Dicks & Company in Grand Falls-Windsor, has been distinguished with the "Premier Dealer Award of Excellence" from the Global Group, Canada's largest office furniture manufacturer and the fifth largest company of its kind in the world. No other dealer in Newfoundland and Labrador has ever been presented with this award, which is given to a carefully selected group of dealers who show outstanding sales and service commitment to the Global group.

Mr. Speaker, through his knowledgeable, courteous, and indeed friendly sales touch, Gerald has gained for himself the reputation of excellence in his field.

I ask all members of this hon. House to join me in congratulating Mr. Gerald Thompson of Grand Falls-Windsor on this significant recognition from the Global Group.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDGLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to offer my congratulations to Melanie Hoskins, a grade six student at Larkhall Academy, who had one of the two winning exhibits at the eighth Annual Avalon Region Historica Fair that took place in St. John's on Saturday past. The Historica Fair is an opportunity for students from Grades 4 to 9 to showcase any heritage projects ranging from family history to historical events or perhaps famous people.

Melanie's exhibit focused on ghost stories from old St. John's and, in order to prepare for the fair, she had already done the walking tours, particularly the tour that recounts some of the more unusual, eerie, tales from our past. Of course, she took the time to read some of the ghost stories from our local authors.

Melanie will now join a small group of students who will represent Newfoundland and Labrador at the National Historica Fair in Montreal in July.

I ask all members of the House to join me in congratulating Melanie Hoskins for her industriousness, her creativity, and for her success in this fair.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to recognize a very intelligent and enthusiastic student from Carbonear Collegiate in my district.

Mr. Speaker, Ms Erin Dwyer, a Level One student in Carbonear has distinguished herself for her excellence in the field of mathematics.

Mr. Speaker, recently over 84,000 Level One students from all across Canada wrote the Cayley National Mathematics Test which is sponsored by this same institution. From this group, sixty of the top-achieving students have been invited to attend this prestigious event which will be held from June 13-19.

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to say that Erin will be one of these sixty from all over Canada to attend this event.

Erin has shown that hard work and dedication to academics, even at a young age, can lead to many opportunities on a national scale, and possibly greater career opportunities into the future.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all Members of this hon. House to join me in congratulating Ms Erin Dwyer of Carbonear Collegiate on her recent scholastic achievement, and wish her the best of luck representing this Province at the annual mathematics seminar.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Before we proceed to Statements by Ministers I would like to recognize in the gallery one of Newfoundland and Labrador's longest serving mayors, the Mayor of Grand Falls-Windsor, Mayor Walwin Blackmore, and welcome him to the House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I rise this afternoon to advise this hon. House that May 9-15 has been designated as National Police Week.

During Police Week, both the RNC and the RCMP in this Province will coordinate activities and displays in communities, schools and through a public service campaign promoting the concept of police and community working together to enhance public safety and security.

Mr. Speaker, the theme for Police Week is: Your Community, Your Police and You. Activities planned for this week have been organized to encourage partnerships to build safer communities, and to provide information encouraging the concept that working together is an investment in safety. In recognition of International Peace Officer Memorial Day, a memorial service has been scheduled for Thursday, May 13 at the Seventh Day Adventist Church in St. John's.

Police Week reflects the community-based approach being followed by police agencies across the country, and aims to improve partnerships between policing services and the communities they serve. These partnerships are built through the integration of policing services, individuals and organizations which all share responsibility for the well-being of the community.

Mr. Speaker, in this Province, through the RNC and the RCMP, we have approximately 725 police officers who work hard each and every day to protect communities and the families who live there. I would like to take this opportunity to recognize police officers across the Province for their dedication and commitment to the enhancement of public safety and security. Police Week is a great opportunity to acknowledge our police forces for their active community involvement, both on and off the job.

Mr. Speaker, we are proud of the work being done by the RNC and RCMP and support the efforts of our police officers. I encourage awareness and participation in Police Week activities, and continued support of police officers across the Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is indeed a pleasure to stand and recognize the policewomen and policemen of our Province of the RNC and RCMP on this the National Police Week. Not only to the police officers themselves, but all the special agencies who support them in what they do, as well as the people who work with them, the civilian workers who work with these police forces and make them be as productive and efficient as they are. They are indeed an essential part of our communities and we could not exist properly as communities without them.

I always say the firemen are the ultimate volunteers, because they do so and do so freely. They are prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice without compensation, but the police officers of our communities are certainly a close second, not withstanding that they choose to do that as a job. I point out that not only are they important to our communities from a public safety perspective and protection of our properties, but they also contribute immensely to the communities in many other ways. They give of their time freely in many of these agencies, to crime prevention associations, for example, which they do voluntarily. As well as school programs, such as the DARE program, a thing that has been very effective in this Province, and other community groups. I am sure anyone here in this House or around the Province who knows of an RNC or RCMP officer in their community -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Anyone here who has experienced a police officer living in their community has had to witness the fact that they always play a large role in community events, such as sports, recreational programs and community organizations of development, and Chambers of Commerce, et cetera.

Again, it is a great opportunity and they do indeed deserve to be praised, to be recognized and thanked.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We, too, would like to acknowledge the tremendous work done by the RNC and RCMP in our Province providing protection for all of us.

I would like to relate, Mr. Speaker, if I may, just last October, Halloween night, I was privileged to accompany the RNC officers on the Pumpkin Patrol. It was amazing to see the interaction between the RNC officers and the young people of Labrador West. I think it bodes well for the RNC that they can create that kind of interaction with the young people so that young people know they can approach police officers without fear (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. COLLINS: - much in the way that we used to do when we were growing up. In Labrador West, where we are policed by the RNC, I have to give credit to Inspector Garland in particular, and Officer Karen Hemmings, who operates within the community and is involved with almost all of the groups that are operating within the community.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I would just like to point out and say to the RNC that during the last difficult month, during the strike, the professionalism and the manner in which they acted, in very difficult times, I think says a lot about the professionalism that they bring to the police in our Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

My questions today are for the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment, and the Status of Women.

I have to say that our sources of yesterday, I guess, came to be very correct, only one little error. I predicted that there would be a Ministerial Statement but that changed, Mr. Speaker, at 1:26 p.m. It went out as a news release four minutes before this House opened.

Mr. Speaker, there were very serious backlogs in the department prior to the month long strike which this right-wing Conservative government subjected the people of this Province to. I ask the minister: Will she confirm in this House today, given the fact that twenty offices were slashed from the system, will additional FAO officers and other staff be hired to take care of the serious backlog, or will today's cuts make an already bad situation even worse?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I have been made aware over the months about some of the inefficiencies with offices and the backlog of work. What this change should do today is to consolidate offices to put more workers at sites to help make a more equitable distribution of cases throughout the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BUTLER: It is amazing, Mr. Speaker, the minister stood here in this hon. House before and told me that the backlog had been taken care of. Now, Mr. Speaker, I guess it is further evidence of the heartless right-wing Conservative government that we have in power.

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if the minister actually really knows the seriousness of this problem. People are having to wait long periods of time to get health costs reimbursed, and many are simply going without medical care. I ask the minister: Why should the poorest people of the Province be expected to suffer because you and your government cannot get your act together?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, our department, this department, has dealt with the poorest of poor for many years, and we will continue to do so. We acknowledge that many people have situations that need to be addressed. We will continue to work with these people and provide the services. We should be able, with our new computerized pay system, to have a more equitable distribution of work throughout the Province.

Mr. Speaker, we have always dealt with the people who need services. There is no reduction of services to our clients by these moves today. The same level of service that clients historically have had will remain following this decision.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, I have to say to the minister, they do not have a heart on that side. I admit, she said they are dealing with the poorest of the poor, but can you tell me that they are worried about the poor people of this Province if someone has to drive from Harbour Breton, close to three hours, to Stephenville, for service? Mr. Speaker, that is hardly worth responding to.

Mr. Speaker, the people of this Province and the staff of HRLE finally know which offices are closing. We have a list of them. It came out a few minutes ago. How much are you saving, I say to the minister, on the backs of the poor people of this Province? Your statement, which was released, says twenty-eight people would be laid off. According to my sources, that could go as high as thirty-eight to forty people who will be getting their pink slips from your department, actual layoffs, and not through attrition, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I will confirm that there will be twenty-eight layoffs as a result of the office closures. Twenty-two will be from our district offices and six have been from our provincial office.

Mr. Speaker, I would further like to add that we had to respond to the shift in demographics in this Province. We have an aging population. As well, with our advanced technology, we should be able to process applications more efficiently.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, since 1997 the caseload of Human Resources, Labour and Employment has decreased by approximately 8,500 cases. With this drop in numbers, and the aging population, we have to have our services that will meet the most needs.

Mr. Speaker, in addition to that, in 2003, approximately 50 per cent -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister now to complete her answer quickly.

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, we had approximately 1,800 new applicants last year who were less than twenty-nine years of age. We need to move our services into employment and career services so these people can move from income support into the labour force.

Mr. Speaker, that point was made yesterday in this House when it was identified that there is a skills deficit. It is incumbent upon us to move these people off income support into the labour force.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Minister of Government Services.

I have received some alarming telephone calls from around the Province today, Mr. Speaker. Can the minister inform the House how many weigh scale operators and other public safety staff she has laid off this week, and is she intent on privatizing these operations?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, I have had layoffs in my department today. There has been ten laid off today and we are not privatizing the services.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, that is not the number that I have been receiving but anyway, the truth will come out.

Mr. Speaker, can the minister tell the House if she has laid off all of the staff at the weigh scales in Port aux Basques? Is she closing these weigh scales permanently? Does she realize that thousands and thousands of tractor-trailers arriving by ferry on a daily basis could travel almost halfway across this Island before being weighed and inspected? Now, minister, where is the logic in all of that?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, we will have three weigh scales permanently still in operation: one at Goobies, one at Grand Falls-Windsor and another at Pynns Brook. The vast majority of trucks that are travelling from Port aux Basques are coming into the St. John's area.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS WHALEN: We also have portable weigh scales teams in place as well.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, I do not know if the minister realizes it or not, but she has endangered every single person who travels our highways in this Province; endangered every single person who travels.

Mr. Speaker, the minister has to come clean on all of these issues. She made such an issue of being concerned about public safety when she shut down the companies in her own district. She should realize how important these workers are. She should be hiring more, not laying them off.

Minister, what impact on weigh scale operations will these cuts have? Will the hours be reduced? Tell me that. How many more unsafe and overweight vehicles will be allowed on our highways?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, the bulk of our inspections are done by our inspectors. We have not laid off any inspectors and the inspections will be retained. We do not compromise our highway safety.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the government announced the schedule for the Estimate Committee stage of the Budget and we are anxious to get involved in that detailed discussion in the committees because it is obvious that there will be some amendments to the Budget. The salaries for these people who are laid off today, 217 of them, are still listed in the salary details and I am sure Minister of Finance will want to make the adjustments.

Mr. Speaker, with respect to these committees, Thursday evening the Estimate Committee for the Premier's personal pet project, the new Department of Business, is scheduled to take place. The normal practice, as you would know, Mr. Speaker, is that the minister responsible for a department is expected to be present and answer questions on behalf of the government.

I ask the Government House Leader: Will the Premier, who is responsible for this department, the new Department of Business, be present for the committee examination on Thursday evening? If not, can we reschedule some other time so that the Premier can be here to answer detailed questions about his personal pet project, the new Department of Business?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

When I was first elected an old MHA told me that you should never ask a question in the House unless you know the answer to it. The Leader of the Opposition knows full well the answer to the question he asked me today.

The Resource Estimates Committee is meeting Thursday night. The Department of Business - which is not established, it is in its infancy - is part of that committee process. I informed the Opposition House Leader yesterday that our plan would be to proceed with that Estimate Committee on Thursday evening, and either myself - this is what I informed the Opposition House Leader yesterday - or the Minister of Finance would be there on Thursday evening to answer any and all questions related to that department.

Since that time it has been confirmed that the Minister of Finance will attend the Estimates Thursday evening. Along with the Minister of Finance will be senior staff from Executive Council, so that the Resources Estimates Committee can answer any questions they want.

It should also be clear, Mr. Speaker, and in summary saying this, that the Leader of the Opposition is not a member of any of the Estimates Committee meetings. If he has any questions whatsoever on this department, or any other, that there are more than ample opportunities through Question Period -

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

MR. E. BYRNE: - or otherwise to ask the Premier any questions that he wishes on this particular and important department, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Government House Leader makes my point for me perfectly, and I will pursue it again with this additional question.

The purpose, as he knows and members here would know, of these committees is to analyze each government departments budget and plan expenditures in detail, and it has been practiced in the full fifteen years that I have here, other than when an acting minister has shown up because the real minister is ill and cannot be present.

The question is, since everybody in Newfoundland and Labrador knows that the Premier himself personally has created this new Department of Business, and we are convinced that he would want the opportunity to come to the committee and explain to the people of the Province himself, personally, we are willing to defer to another time to accommodate the Premier's schedule. I am sure, Mr. Speaker - the question again is: Will the Government House Leader take us up on our offer to accommodate the Premier's schedule so that the Premier himself can answer the questions about his own personal pet project, the new Department of Business? Will he take us up on that offer so the Premier can have the opportunity to explain to the people of the Province how wonderful this new department is going to be?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

The Leader of the Opposition is correct in as much as this, the Estimate Committee is about discussing the estimates for any department. Now this department is the smallest one in all government because it is not entirely formed yet. It represents one page in a Budget book of about 300 to 400 pages.

Let me say this to him - let me say this to the question. Ministers who are not available - I have been here eleven years and I have appeared before Estimate Committee meetings where ministers, who were responsible for those departments, were not here because they were not available. It did not mean that the process did not proceed. It did not mean that it was cancelled or deferred. It meant that the process went according to the plan that was outlined. It will be no different now than it was when you were in government. The Estimates Committee procedure will proceed on department business on Thursday night. The Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board will be there. If the Leader of the Opposition -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the Government House Leader to complete his answer now, quickly.

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

Amongst the shouts and yells of the members opposite, I will do my best to complete my answer.

If the Resource Estimates Committee meetings, if they conclude Thursday night - if the Leader of the Opposition, who is not part of that process but is leading the political charge today - because that is all it can be described as. If he has any questions about the Department of Business, this is the forum, right here during Question Period, or any other piece of legislation related to the Finance Bill, that the Leader of the Opposition can stand and ask the Premier directly any question and I am sure he will be provided with the answers, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me just ask one more time, Mr. Speaker. What I am saying is that I am sure that the Premier - would the Government House Leader check with the Premier himself to see whether or not he, as the Premier of the Province and the minister responsible for a brand new initiative in the Blue Book that he is so proud of, would like an opportunity to answer the questions, as the Premier of the Province, himself, rather than have old Mini-Me try to the answer the questions -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: - when he cannot even answer his own questions, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: Let me ask one more time -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Yesterday, I cautioned members about using expressions or words that can take away from the integrity of members. I would ask all members if they would be more selective in their wording so that we can proceed in a very normal parliamentary manner.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, to finish his question.

MR. GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Again, it is quite point blank. Would the Government House Leader like to ask the Premier himself, on our behalf, if he would like, as the Premier, to be provided an opportunity, which we will accommodate?

Mr. Speaker, this morning - for the record - the Opposition parties, in conjunction with the Government House Leader, rescheduled a meeting for one department because officials were not available. We are offering to reschedule from Thursday night, for an opportunity for the Premier.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the member now to complete his question.

MR. GRIMES: Would he ask the Premier if he would like an opportunity to tout himself, personally, the benefits of the news business department?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, again, I think this is more about theatrics today, but I will try to answer it as honestly as I can. The long answer -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: I sat down and listened to the question. I would hope that members would like to hear the answer. They may not agree with it, they may agree with it, but I would like the opportunity to answer it, Mr. Speaker.

The long answer to the question is this: On Thursday night, the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board will be here at the Resource Estimates to answer questions with the Department of Business.

The short answer to the Leader of the Opposition's question, and running the risk of being a one-man show myself: No, I do not want to consult with the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair notes that - I will not take any time from Question Period - these last exchanges have been averaging about one minute and twenty seconds, one minute and thirty seconds, on both sides the House. I ask members if they could keep their questions shorter and also keep their answers shorter.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We understand that the Premier does not like to spend much time in the Legislature, and now his House Leader is saying he is not going to show up to answer for his own new department.

Mr. Speaker, a totally different issue. On April 23, the Minister of Education - without consultation with any of the stakeholders - announced the appointment of the new Chairs and some members for the school board transition teams in the Province. Several of these individuals, Mr. Speaker, have little or no experience with the education system in our Province, but they do have very well-recognized ties to the Progressive Conservative Party.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. GRIMES: I ask the minister, Mr. Speaker - you can tell from the groans opposite that we are getting close to an issue that they do not like to talk about - why has he, as the Minister of Education, made these blatant political appointments to these transition boards and broken another election promise when the Premier and the leader of that Party promised a new approach that would eliminate political patronage appointments?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. Leader of the Opposition for the question. I touched on this very topic yesterday. The vast majority of those individuals who have been appointed to our new three interim school boards, the Eastern Board, the Western Board and the Central Board, are comprised of what are today duly elected school board members from the representative boards that now comprise the boards - the vast majority - and I am prepared, if the hon. Leader of the Opposition will allow me, I will address the issue of the Chair, if that is permissible and if time will allow me.

The vast majority, Mr. Speaker - the vast majority - are from the duly elected school boards and they are there for that reason.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the acknowledgment that while the vast majority - maybe he is admitting that several of them, several key ones, have no experience in education, and he is nodding in approval of that, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs mentions the name of June Alteen, who was elected by the people in District 3 - elected by the people - and he does not seem to know the difference.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Education about Ms Nada Borden in particular, Chair of the Transitional Committee for the Western School District. She is a member of the Humber West Progressive Conservative Association. She is President of the Humber-St. Barbe-Baie Verte Federal Progressive Conservative Association. She was the Chief Financial Officer for the Premier, himself, during the recent election. She has no experience in the school board system at all. Can he explain why that person is not one of the ones -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to complete his question.

MR. GRIMES: - that was a vast majority, the ones that have some experience? How did she get the job? Is it just a reward for being such a dedicated member of the Premier's own District Association?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The volunteer Chair of the Eastern School Board is Mr. Bruce Peckford, a well-respected and well-regarded retired public servant and former deputy minister. The volunteer Chair of the Central School Board is Chief Misel Joe of Conne River, a spiritual and community leader, well known throughout all of Newfoundland and Labrador. The volunteer Chair of the Western School Board is Ms Nada Borden, and you have referenced her. She is a community leader, she has been involved in Rotary, she has been involved with Junior Achievement and, yes, Mr. Speaker, she has some political involvement.

I ask the hon. Leader of the Opposition, why is it, or how is it, that a person who may have been involved politically should be deprived just because of that? Do we totally disregard other volunteer activity?

Mr. Speaker, I am proud, as the Minister of Education, to recognize those three individuals -

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

I ask the minister now to complete his answer quickly.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: - and to thank them individually for their commitment to volunteerism.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: This is not a plum appointment. They receive, actually, zero for their commitment, and I thank them for it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We can see the arrogance of the government in terms of now, Mr. Speaker, standing up and bragging about the fact that they have broken an election promise, admitting that it is their political affiliation and connections that have gotten them these appointments, and that they have no involvement with the education system at all.

He mentioned Mr. Peckford. Maybe the minister might ask: Who was it - or was it he personally? - who recommended people like Mr. Bruce Peckford, whose last job was a policy adviser in the PC Opposition office, and he admits had no involvement in the education system whatsoever, and is nothing other than a blatant political appointment. Who was it who recommended this breaking of the election promise to the government? Was it this minister?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, I stand here proudly today and support wholeheartedly those three independent and voluntarily individuals, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, with solid backgrounds in public service and in a variety of areas.

I can assure the hon. members opposite, and I can assure the public of this Province, that through their leadership, the transition that we are now experiencing from the eleven school boards to the number five, will be a smooth transition, and with confidence and optimism we will arrive at a smooth transition come September 1, 2004.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today, with the announcement of over 300 job loses, which probably represents the tip of the iceberg in this Province, the cuts are devastating to the people who are losing their jobs but also to the residents of our Province who require their service.

My question is for the Minister of Government Services.

Details from the recent Budget are starting to become apparent. One issue of concern is driver examiner locations that are being cut drastically. No longer will they be available in areas such as Bonavista, Bay d'Espoir, Grand Bank, Deer Lake, Stephenville, or Labrador West. Would the minister not agree that the people of our Province are being treated unfairly simply because they live in rural or remote areas?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, my department right now is looking at different programs that we offer. I have not made the final decisions on the program examiners yet.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I am totally surprised with the response from the minister. We have Budget documents that clearly express that these services are being cancelled. I want to say to the minister, the worse example is in my district. The very worst example where, under the new system, you are going to require people to drive 1,200 kilometres of gravel road, dirt road, the same distance from St. John's to Deer Lake return, in order to do a driver exam and get their licence.

Will the minister not agree that is totally ludicrous, and will she make sure, when she is reviewing this, that people in Labrador West will not have to drive 1,200 kilometres, or ask somebody to drive them - because, let's not forget, they do not have a licence yet. They have to ask someone to drive them 1,200 kilometres. Will the minister commit that will not happen, that will not take place, in the District of Labrador West?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, there will be some people who will have to drive distances with the reviewing of the driver examiners, but -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is asking for members to remain relatively quiet and silent while the hon. the minister is attempting to make the response for the government.

The hon. the minister.

MS WHALEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say to the hon. member that we are looking at the distance, and the decisions have not been finalized. There have been other factors that we have to consider. Once they are finalized, I will announce in this House the finding. I will keep that in mind, hon. member.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Budget documents that I am referring to, and the information that we have been provided with, came from the Clerk of the Executive Council. We take that to be actual fact. So, while I appreciate the minister's answer to the previous question, I want to remind her that some people, as she said, may have to drive distances, but would the minister not agree that 1,200 kilometres, that involves an overnight stay, is a bit unreasonable and will not happen?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, as I stated, there are some factors that have to still be finalized. I will take under advisement what the hon. member has said, and I will notify this House when the decisions are made.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Minister of Education, and they concern his commitment to education and his word as a individual.

Mr. Speaker, just prior to the election last fall, the minister and some of his colleagues met with the Newfoundland and Labrador School Boards Association and, when asked whether or not the Tory government would be reducing the number of school boards, the minister said: No, we certainly would not be reducing the number of school boards.

In January, he told reporters on the West Coast that he would not be amalgamating school boards. In fact, Mr. Speaker, just one week prior to this year's Budget coming down, the minister met with the Gander school board and informed the individual there that there would be no reduction in the number of school boards. I ask the minister: Was he deliberately misleading these individuals or was he like other members of his Cabinet, left out of the loop in the pre-Budget discussions?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

The hon. member who just asked the question, a former Minister of Education, he knows the budgetary process, he knows what is involved, he knows what discussions and deliberations are taken -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: - he knows the procedure, I say, Mr. Speaker, and he know full well that as part of that budgetary process there are issues that are debated, there are issues that are discussed, there are deliberations and then there are decisions taken. At that particular time, decisions are taken which represent what is in the overall best interest of the public, keeping in mind, Mr. Speaker, the fiscal reality in which we live. It was upon that basis, I say, Mr. Speaker, that a decision was made to reduce the number of school boards in this Province from eleven to five. It is a decision, I might add, that is being well-received by many partners in education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, tomorrow -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister now to complete his answer.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: We have had constant discussions with our directors and school board representatives, Mr. Speaker, and on tomorrow's date I am meeting with the directors and the chairs of the new Central Newfoundland school board to discuss that very issue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, indeed I do know the budget process, but I would not be in Gander a week before the Budget came down giving a commitment that there would be no cuts. I would at least have the decency to say all of that would be known in a week from now. Not like you did and committed that they would not be cut one week before the Budget came down.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, the minister is on record as saying that by reducing the number of boards from eleven to six he will save between $6 million and $7 million. Mr. Speaker, now that he has botched this whole process and he is leaving six satellite boards around the Province, can he tell us how much he, in fact, is going to save? Will those savings be reinvested into the education and the youth of this Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, there is no botching of the process. We have identified headquarters throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, and we have recognized and identified important and prominent regional educational centres. These centres will house our itinerant teachers. They will have an administrator. In addition to that, there will be consultants and program advisors. They will maintain the continuation of supervision and maintenance. I say to the hon. member opposite, there is no botching here. There is a well-planned method to deal with the reform of education in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: A plan, Mr. Speaker, that was began some six or seven years ago by the Leader of the Opposition, as then Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Given the number of interruptions that the Chair had to make, the Chair will allow one more question and one more response.

The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

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

The hon. minister speaks a lot, but I have asked him two questions and he has answered neither of them. Let me try one more.

Mr. Speaker, there was no consultation by this government with anybody before embarking on this unilateral, unrealistic and undemocratic process of reorganizing school boards. Minister, now that it has been shown that your plan is not going to work, there will not be any savings realized, will you do what the President of the NLTA suggested, and that is to shelve this botched program until at least you have the decency to speak with all the affected stakeholders in education in this Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: We will not shelve or delay this plan, Mr. Speaker. The reason why is we have committed individuals, committed volunteers -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: - the existing board members. We have, Mr. Speaker, in addition, our transitional committees along with a strong (inaudible) office staff, along with interim directors who will soon be appointed. Mr. Speaker, with those partners in education this plan will work, this transition will work and there will be no delay in the plan that we have for September 1.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question Period has expired.

Petitions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wanted to rise today and present a petition to the House of Assembly from people in my district with regard to the Labrador Marine Service. People in my district are very upset with the recent decision of this government to base the Labrador ferry, the Sir Robert Bond, out of the port of Lewisporte. People in my district have been told since 1997 that with the construction of a highway through Southern Labrador than the ferry services would then move to the closest points of service in Labrador, which would mean the Goose Bay and the Cartwright ports. Mr. Speaker, that happened last year and as a result of it there were some real economic opportunities generated for people in that particular area. There was a tremendous amount of investment made in new businesses. Actually, Mr. Speaker, more than $6 million in small business was invested in my district alone last year in order to accommodate this new service.

Mr. Speaker, government went out and hired a consultant, a consultant that looked at every single aspect of this particular service and made a recommendation to the government. That recommendation was quite clear and it was written concisely saying that the Sir Robert Bond, the Labrador passenger ferry, should operate between Cartwright and Goose Bay for the benefit of people in the Labrador region. What government chose to do was ignore the recommendation of the consultant; ignore the recommendations of a group that they paid $150,000 to for advice. They ignored that. Instead, what they did was they opted for a service that would operate out of the Port of Lewisporte to service the people of Labrador at an additional expense of $1.7 million a year.

Mr. Speaker, this money belongs to the communities of Labrador. That money was there to upgrade roads, to provide better services for the communities. It was not there to subsidize a ferry to the community of Lewisporte or to subsidize onshore jobs in the community of Lewisporte, Mr. Speaker. That is an entirely different issue. The money was there to assist Labrador communities in building their own infrastructure.

We have hundreds of kilometres of gravel roads in Labrador and this money could better be used to upgrade those roads or to start paving them. We have communities that do not have any road connections and the money could definitely be used to do that, but that will not be the case. We will see almost $6 million over the next three years wasted by this Administration across the way simply because they tried to satisfy the political commitment of one minister that was made during an election.

Well, Mr. Speaker, when the minister stood in this House he told people of this Province that this decision of their government was supported by other people in Labrador and by other people on the Island, but I am going to read to you a list of people who have supported maintaining the ferry service at Cartwright and Goose Bay.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will have to get to the list tomorrow as I am out of time today.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition on behalf of the constituents of my district. The petition states:

WHEREAS parents and students in Carbonear do not want to have their school close and unnecessarily bus students to Harbour Grace; and

WHEREAS existing school boards now cease to exist; and

WHEREAS a decision to close St. Mary's primary school in St. John's has been reversed; and

WHEREAS a new school in Carbonear is deemed necessary by the parents;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to reverse the decision of the Avalon West School Board to close St. Joseph's school, reverse the decision to bus students to Harbour Grace and commit funds to construct a new school in Carbonear.

Mr. Speaker, this petition has been presented to me by parents and students from my district concerned about the inappropriateness of what is happening and what is going to happen to them come this September.

This September, Mr. Speaker -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I am wondering if we could have the tone of the House a little quieter so that the Chair can hear the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

The hon. the member.

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a sad testimony this afternoon that, from the level and volume of noise that is coming from the other side over there, it just shows the undue care and concern that they share for this very important issue. It is little wonder that the parents and the teachers and the committee out there cannot get any results from this government. It is very indicative of what is happening here in this Province today, Mr. Speaker, when a member has to stand here and try to shout and drown out the noise and the din coming from the government members.

MR. E. BYRNE: The Opposition members (inaudible).

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, the Government House Leader, if he wants to get up and have his commentary, he can wait until I present my petition on behalf of my constituents, because I do not want to be interfered with and they do not want to be interfered with.

That is why it is so very, very important that government listen to the people of this Province, and especially to the people of my district, when this tragic event is going to take place in September, when kids are going to be moved from one school to a school that is not even ready for them; a school down the street that is not ready, where students have to climb in over desks in the classroom to get to a seat where there is no window; a peaceful library chopped off and walls put up so it can be used as a classroom to accommodate the students. That is the good school that they are going to be moved to. The school in Harbour Grace, St. Francis, needs drastic repairs. No money has been committed to date to do this.

Mr. Speaker, with the announcement of the board last week, the new government-appointed board, I call upon the Minister of Education to put this decision on hold, that St. Joseph's be allowed to operate for at least one more year to give the new board, I say to the minister - I am glad you are listening to me - to give the people out there some assurance that their case will be reviewed by this new board, not by the board that is just being dismissed, the new board that is in place right now.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MR. SWEENEY: By leave, just to conclude, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, this is an important issue and I will be standing to speak again on this, I say to the minister. I would like for you to come out -

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible) waste of time.

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance is telling me it is a waste of time, but I will say to the Minister of Finance that it was not a waste of time.

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

MR. SPEAKER: A point of order has been raised.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: I just want to indicate that we would give him leave, I said, for a short while, and I said that he is wasting his time talking about something else. If he wants leave to finish it, I said we are prepared to give leave.

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

The member has a moment or so to conclude.

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, just to conclude, it is never a waste of time when you are speaking on behalf of your constituents.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SWEENEY: I say to the Minister of Finance, it is not a waste of time for him to sit there and get a school in his district that was not even approved by the board.

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Leave has been withdrawn.

Orders of the Day

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole to consider certain resolutions relating to advancing or guaranteeing of certain loans made under The Loan Guarantee Act, 1957. (Bill 14)

It has been moved and seconded that I do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on the said Bill 14. Is it the pleasure of the House that I do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on the said Bill 14.

All those in favour, aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay.

Motion carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

Bill 14, An Act To Amend The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957.

Should clause 1 carry?

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MR. GRIMES: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Chairman, we intend to participate fully in the Committee stage of this particular finance bill. I understand the Minister of Finance is going to give some introductory remarks on behalf of the government at this point in time. Consistent with our lack of confidence in what he says, and the lack of credibility that he believes we have, we will be leaving our first speaker, the Finance critic, here, and the rest of us will be leaving the Legislature because we have no intention of listening to the Minister of Finance.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: To the point of order, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Order, please!

To the point of order, the hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Chairman, if that is the attitude of the Leader of the Opposition, the sooner he leaves the better off we will all be.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board, on Bill 14.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am pleased to introduce an amendment to the Loan and Guarantee Act, 1957. A lot of this information and things were transacted when they were in government, so if they do not want to be around for bills that pertain to action that they took, and future bills, decisions that they made, I can see why they do not want to be here, because they do not want to own up to the responsibilities that were entrusted to them and they failed to fulfill. That is why they do not want to be here.

Mr. Chairman, this bill here, Bill 14, allows for the legislative authority for new loan guarantees and for revisions to existing guarantees. This act was last amended in December, 2001, so it was over two years ago since the former government brought in amendments to deal with this. Now, I am entrusted with the responsibility to bring forth to this House here amendments that have occurred in a two-year period when they were in power, that they failed to bring to this House of Assembly. Why? I think they can more truly answer those questions.

Under this act, Mr. Chairman, it is a fairly brief act, and subsequent to approval of the Lieutenant-Governor in Council, my responsibility is to provide guarantees on behalf of private sector or Crown Corporations in order to achieve specific policy objectives or benefit regions of the Province.

Historically, Mr. Chairman, these guarantees have covered a variety of financing arrangements, with the most common being operating and term financing credits. This is basically a housekeeping amendment and requires that all guarantees must be approved and must be ratified by the House of Assembly through amendments to the schedules of the act. Once they are ratified, any guarantees that have to be honoured as a result of default will then become statutory payments. We do not have to come back to the House, Mr. Chairman, for approval then.

I expected to see, last year, amendments brought forward. In 2002, I expected to see a bill come before the House to deal with this, or in 2003. They pushed everything off. Dozens of bills died on the Order Paper.

I might add, while I am speaking, that authority to borrow for their Budget last year, the Budget that they brought in last year, they brought a bill to this House, it did not even pass, borrowing authority for last year's Budget. We have to come to this House now, in this session, and get borrowing authority for their last year's Budget, for our Budget, and any future requirements we might need to be able to meet debt requirements out there, or money to meet ongoing costs of future borrowing. That is abdicating responsibility given to them in this House.

Anyway, Mr. Chairman, I am not going to elaborate. It is fairly straightforward here. These bills are listed. They have been ongoing, these clauses, and recognition of these particular parts which we are looking at under this act on guarantees. They have seen the Education Investment Corporation, for example, continue with school borrowing programs, to continue with programs. In fact, this increase was given to increase this authority to the Marble Mountain Development Corporation, $1.45 million and $1.7 million, subsequently $2.1 million. These decisions are on numerous initiatives, some affecting members in their district. The Torngat Fish Producers Co-operative Society Limited, for example - ones the Member for Torngat Mountains should know - and Health Labrador Corporation and various other areas. Newfoundland Ocean Enterprises Limited, many of these, Mr. Chair. Decisions the former government made but never came to this House to be able to get approval for. Whether they felt guilty in bringing it to the House where they did not want to own up to the responsibility, whatever it was, I am not sure. As I said, they will have to answer for that, but I am presenting this bill here to get authority from the Legislature so we can deal with these particular guarantees and be able to carry on and get specific work done, and honouring those commitments that were made previously to it.

With that, Mr. Chair, I will conclude for this moment, anyway, any comments on this bill. I know I have the right in Committee to come back again for any particular comments here. I will leave it at that. I am sure people may want to get on and discuss this. It is doing work primarily, Mr. Chair, that the former government did not do and would not bring to this House.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am responding today to Bill 14, An Act to Amend The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957.

It is interesting how the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board prefaced his remarks on this bill. It is also interesting to know that it is almost a year since this House has been open; almost a year. Now, he prefaced his remarks by saying that the previous government did not deal with these bills. Well, I would say to the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board, the first time this House was opened this year was March 18, 2004. When were you elected, I would say to this new government? It was October 21, 2003. You had plenty of time to get to this House if you wanted to. But, no, you did not want to. That was clear January 5, when the Premier of this Province inflated the financial situation of this Province - Province's finances to his own benefit. That is what he did.

This bill talks about: "Clause 1 of the Bill would amend the Schedule to The Loan and Guarantee Act, 1957."

There are three or four entities there that are looking for loan guarantees. The first one is Health Labrador Corporation. They are looking for a loan guarantee and it is a guarantee not to exceed $9 million.

It is interesting how this one - here in this it says, "When a strategy acceptable to both government and the corporation's bank is in place, the guarantee will be withdrawn." Then down at the bottom of the same paragraph it says, "The corporation's ongoing cash requirements may require an increase in the guarantee, which will be ratified through a future amendment to the Act." It is kind of contradictory when it says the government is requesting that Health Labrador Corporation balance its books on one hand so they can withdraw their guarantee, and then on the other hand they are saying that they may need a larger request for a guarantee in the future.

Torngat Fish Producers Co-operative Society Limited, $2.1 million. Marble Mountain increases from $1.45 million to $1.7 million.

This is an interesting one here in the bottom. It says, "...increasing the loan guarantee of the Newfoundland and Labrador Education Investment Corporation from $75 million to $105 million as authorized by Order in Council 2003-556. This is to facilitate additional financing for the construction of new schools, as well as the repair and renovation of existing facilities." To the best of my knowledge the only one that is going to be constructed this year in this Province, in the way of new schools, is in the Minister of Finances own district of Ferryland. To the best of my knowledge everything else is being put on hold.

Now, what kind of government is this that had only one mission in mind on January 5? The Premier, I think, himself, was the one who brought this to the people's attention. He said that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador pays out $1 billion a year in interest payments to the banks. Now these are the real loans here that we have to pay interest on. These are a group of corporations that we have guaranteed loans for. Also, when you look at the fact that school boards and other entities of government - these are the ones where interest is paid. It is not on unfunded pension liabilities and so on, but the Premier left the impression here in this Province that we are paying out $1 billion a year in interest on the Province's debt to the banks and that is incorrect.

I guess that must have been felt and accepted by the general population. It certainly was by the public sector, workers in this Province, that he convinced we had no money. He convinced them, right at the start, that they need a two-year wage freeze, which they accepted and agreed to. Then he convinced them, right up to the end, of the situation of the Province. As a result, they were left with nothing that they could bring back to their membership. In fact, they lost some of the concessions that they had. So, I guess he got top marks for that.

When I heard his Government House Leader today on a request from our Opposition House Leader - our Opposition House Leader asked a simple question. We wanted to ask the Premier of this Province about the new Department of Business that he is setting up. Do you think he would oblige us - which is his responsibility to do as the Premier of the Province who heads this new Department of Business. He is the minister of that department, and he is also the Premier.

It is normal for any minister who heads a department to be available to answer any and all questions that might come forward during the Estimates Committee process, but, no, all we seen today was total arrogance. We wanted to be accommodating on this side of the House. We wanted to be accommodating and reschedule. We know that the Premier is currently in Europe. We wanted to be accommodating and reschedule that Estimates Committee meeting so we could ask firsthand: What is your intention in creating this new Department of Business? What are your plans for growing the economy? What kind of physical presence will we have?

We know that people will be employed for that particular department. We saw some glossy ads in The Telegram this weekend looking for deputy ministers and information officers. Normally, the Premier of the Province appoints deputy ministers, but in this particular situation he wants to go out and check around the world and see if there is somebody out there with different expertise than he has been accustomed to here. He is looking for someone outside to fill that role. These are the kinds of questions we want to ask this Premier about this new Department of Business. Is he going to be available for our questions? Oh, no. That is not on his agenda. It should be the first thing on his agenda. He has that responsibility.

When questioned today, the Opposition Leader asked the Government House Leader if he would reschedule. Do you know what the Government House Leader said? No, I do not want to check with the Premier. He has no intention of checking with the Premier whether or not he will reschedule this important committee meeting. I would suspect that the Government House Leader has already received his orders from the Premier before he went to Berlin. You make sure that meeting takes place while I am gone. That was his orders. Make sure the meeting takes place and that matter is clued up when I get back. Also, make sure that the Minister of Human Resources and Employment, and the Status of Women gets her bad news out there and that is swallowed up and gone by the time I get back. I am not dealing with that stuff. Make sure the Minister of Government Services, whatever she has to do and if she has to drop the axe and close the deep holes around rural Newfoundland, get that done while I am gone because I am not dealing with that stuff when I get back. I want that to be old news so I do not have to deal with that when I get back. I am the Premier of this Province and I want to grow the economy my way. I do not want to be bothered with that stuff. Get that done so I do not have to deal with that when I get back. I can well imagine if I were a fly on the wall, that is exactly what I would hear. That is what he said.

The Minister of Human Resources and Employment casually talks about the number of people who have lost their jobs, twenty-eight. Then the Minister of Government Services gets up and talks about that casual number. Then another minister gets up and talks about another casual number. The Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board talks about 4,000 people as if it were so casual, losing their jobs. Do they have any interest in the people of this Province?

Then the Minister of Education talks about cuts to the College of the North Atlantic like is was a routine occurrence, when the President of the College of the North Atlantic came out and said, in her own words, that the cuts were attributed only because of the orders that she got through the Budget, that she must find $2 million in operating expense savings.

How can the Minister of Finance, the President of Treasury Board, on one hand say, I am going to give you a tuition freeze this year - both to the College of the North Atlantic and Memorial University - and then, on the other hand, ask for the money back? That is contrary to everything they said in this Blue Book. That is totally contrary to everything you said in this Blue Book. In other words, this Blue Book is rubbish. I thought right from the start it was rubbish. Now everybody else is thinking it as well. You certainly do not believe your own propaganda. How can the people of the Province believe or trust anything that you are saying? The Minister of Education said that any savings from consolidation of school boards originally would go into savings. He said that last year.

The people who stood on this side of the House last year were so insistent that any consolidation or any savings from school reform would remain in education. They were so consistent in their remarks, and now they have turned full circle. That does not matter any more. None of that matters. We see political patronage appointments to the Chairs of the transitional school boards. That was a new approach that this Premier was never going to use. Here he is, the new approach. There is no such thing. It was just words, words, meaningless words, to the people of this Province.

When you look at the things that are happening all around this Province.... Then the Minister of Education was going to cap class sizes at twenty-five students per teacher in primary grades. Today, he says that he does not think he can do that until the end of his mandate, and then he wants to move into the eight-year mandate to get into the elementary school. How foolish does he think the people of this Province are, to believe any word that anybody in this government are saying? It is incredible what is going on here. It is nothing but betrayal from start to finish. It all happened on January 5, when the people of this Province were conned into believing a bogus report by Michael Gourley, who represented PricewaterhouseCoopers, who inflated the figures. He inflated the deficit, he inflated the amount - I do not know if he inflated it, but I guess the message got through to the Premier: Use those words, that we are going to be paying out $1 billion interest to the banks every year.

That was nothing but lies and innuendo, totally false, but it achieved what this government wanted to do, because on the backs of ordinary people they sent public sector workers back to work without any increase in salary except for years three and four. They managed to take concessions off the table, they managed to go and have a two-tiered system, and they saved $60 million in public service salaries during that whole experience. That is what they did.

They used that same line of communication to bring in consolidation of school boards. They had no evidence. They spoke to no one. They ran roughshod over the people with absolutely no evidence, and came in and made their decision. They are doing the same thing with Human Resources and Employment offices, the very same thing. They have no evidence and they are putting that on the backs of the poorest of the poor, as the minister said today. Who, of those who are social service client recipients, have money to invest in a computer or internet hookup and do not need the services of a face-to-face person when they go into a Human Resources and Employment office? Can you tell me if the social service recipients of this Province are into high-tech and they have the capability, and the financial ability, to be on-line so they do not have to actually go in and make a visit, so they do not have to make a visit to a person and let them know what their situation is, and if they have doctors notes or accompanying information, or if they are applying for a drug card or anything of that nature, that they could actually e-mail it, or have to use the post office, when they could actually go in and sit down to a person and say: Here is my situation, here is the information you need, make a decision.

What are we going to see this summer for our young people in the way of summer jobs? I think we are going to see a huge decrease in summer jobs for our students this summer. I do not know what kind of a priority this government places on summer employment for our young people. I am beginning to question it, when I know that you have already reduced your budget for high school employment, Levels I, II and III. Where did the high school students get jobs? They were mostly in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. It is not very difficult to find a job in St. John's - we have all kinds of retail outlets that will hire young people - but where do you find a job in Badger's Quay for a young person? Where do you find a job in Ramea for a young person? Where do you find a job in Buchans Junction, Buchans, Millertown or Badger for a young person? Those communities depend on government supplying student employment grants for our young people. That is what they look forward to every year.

CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that her time has expired.

MS THISTLE: Thank you.

I have been keeping my own record and I agree with you. I will have another opportunity later on.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I stand today to offer my few words to the debate that continues on in this budgetary process. Mr. Chairman, I would like to bring some attention to what is happening in the Province today as we speak. We talked today. Question Period was consumed mostly about the cuts that have taken place just today in two sectors of the Province, and I am sure we will see more as the week progresses and the month progresses, as this Budget unfolds and becomes clear to the people; because this Budget certainly does not represent the government's promise of a new approach and a better way to do things, where there are a lot of people out there who have been caught up in the cuts, who are anticipating being caught up in these cuts, despite the fact that prior to the election of October 21, the newspapers of the Province, the radio stations, were flooded with ads saying that there will be no cuts, that there will be more opportunity for the young people of this Province.

You know, as we look at the Blue Book - and most people call it now the boo book - there is nothing in there at all that you can take one bit of consolation in as being true. Every single promise that has been in the Blue Book has been broken by this Budget. Every single thing that has come forward has been a contradiction to the great Tory plan of a more prosperous Newfoundland and Labrador. Speech after speech by candidate after candidate across this Province for the PC Party promised a brighter and better future. That brighter and better future, I am sad to say, contains a lot of remorse, a lot of sadness, a lot of uncertainty, for not only the people who are laid off today but for their children, and the words used last week - the children and their children's children - when everybody stood over on the other side and supported Bill 18, a bill to send people back to work, who were already working.

The cuts to teachers, 476. What is that going to do for our education system? An education system in my own district, for instance, right now, that is caught up with a great deal of uncertainty as to where their children will be in school in September. What kind of accommodations will they receive when they go there? What kind of classrooms will they be in? What kind of lunchrooms will they be eating their lunch in? What kind of buses will they be traveling on? How many more of these things will the people of this Province endure over the next four years? That is the question people are asking.

The call that I received this morning in my office: How can we get rid of this government? That is what one lady said to me. She said: They have to be stopped. We did not vote for this. I am ashamed to say that I voted PC. I have been a Conservative all my life, and never again. Never again.

I have had numerous calls saying the same thing. When we look at just what we face today, we have to think about the families of the workers who have been displaced today. What becomes of them? What becomes of the homes they worked so hard to build and put around themselves? Their families, the futures of their children, what happens to them? We have so much uncertainty that this Budget brings forward, it is a heart wrenching experience, I know, for me, as a politician, who has always had a great and close relationship with the constituents in his district, to go out there and they will look at me and say: George, is this going to get any worse? It cannot get any worse. The next day, it does get worse. What do people think? The tremendous amount of regret that they are experiencing, and wishing they had their time back to October 21, when they could have cast their vote another way.

Mr. Chairman, our college system, over thirty-five people have been laid off in our college system, to save $2 million at CONA. Programs are dropped. The Business Administration program in the campus in my own community, in Carbonear, is gone, and the word there from the staff, who have all called me today, said to me: Yes, we are going to train out the last of the few students for Business Administration and then we are going to have empty classrooms here.

Mr. Chairman, I went through this in the mid-1980s. As a matter of fact, it is what brought me to politics. It is what got me involved. I was a college instructor, quite happy in what I was doing, and my students were quite happy with me. They were going out there and getting jobs, every single one of them, at a time in the 1980s when the prospects were not that great for work, but we worked at it together and we found work.

At the end of it, lo and behold, a friend of a former politician decided he wanted a course in that school. Anyway, I was displaced because, I guess, of my political stripe, and I was moved on to another school, thanks to my seniority, but the amount of hardship that has caused to this day because people trying to get a trade in electrical cannot get it in Conception Bay North any more. They have to go to Conception Bay South, either that or go to a private college, and we start looking at the expense that is compared there, when you have to endure student loans and look at the system.

The CONA of Newfoundland and Labrador, the College of the North Atlantic, has been world renowned. It is over in Qatar right now and I think the last contract was $500 million that CONA landed.

AN HON. MEMBER: The biggest contract in Canadian history.

MR. SWEENEY: The biggest contract in the history of our country, for a public college to land, or even a private college, and that was the initial contract. That shows the excellence of our system. Here we are now, not having - this government over there not having - the faith and the confidence in our public system to put $2 million in and keep growing our college system. So, what are we doing? We are downsizing our college system. That, to me, smacks the young people, the people who were promised a better future under a PC Government, smacks them right in the face. The graduates from the Province's post-secondary institution right now, today, don't look forward to the 216 jobs or the 311 jobs, whatever number is being spun out to us today, they can't look forward to filling those jobs. They can't look forward to filling the other 4,000 jobs that are going to go over the next little while.

I think the Minister of Finance said today, that they are targeting 4,000 fewer positions throughout the public service. What a sad testimony for government to make, to say to the young people who are students in our schools, that: Yes, we are giving away 4,000 positions, you won't be filling them. We won't be filling them. What a sad testimony. The more I think about it, what reason would a young person right now, living in this Province, have to stay here? They are being essentially told: Move off, move away, there is no opportunity here for you.

I read in the Western Star, the President of CONA, who said, the first thing that would happen for displaced workers is they would be given an opportunity of looking at positions in Qatar. Well, how many people are in a position to go to Qatar? How many people are in that position? If you sign on with these college systems - granted, when you get a job with a community college you know you are taking a cut in pay. If you are a trades person or a professional, the salaries in those places are not as high as in the private sector, out there in industry or business. When you stop and think about that, that means somebody has made a commitment to our public education system, that they are willing to go there for a reduced rate of pay. I know I did. When I went to work with the college system, I know what my cheque was when I left the industry and moved into the teaching profession at the college. I saw what a dramatic impact that had on my bank account, I can tell you that. I brought to that position a commitment to stay there as long as I could, as well as everybody else.

I had a call today from a Terry Young with twenty-seven years in the college system: Gone! Given his notice! Now, he is faced, depending on his circumstances, with where he can bump in this Province, where he can find another position. That is not what this is all about. The new approach, to me, is certainly hurting the people we represent in this Province.

The minister today, when questioned about the weigh scale operators: Oh, no. Everything is going to be fine. We are going to have stations in Pynn's Brook, Grand Falls and Goobies. Well, I can remember a little while ago when a tractor-trailer broke off just outside of Goobies, disintegrated on the highway in the ruts, whether it was because of the weight or whatever it was. A tractor-trailer disintegrated, and the highway out there was closed for a number of hours until it was cleaned up. Those are not the things that make for good government. Public safety has to be tantamount in governing. The people out there with tractor-trailers now leaving some point in Nova Scotia and coming into -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SWEENEY: From Nova Scotia into Port aux Basques before it is weighed. Now it has to continue on to Pynns Brook.

CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the member that his time has expired.

MR. SWEENEY: Leave, just to clue up, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

CHAIR: By leave.

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In conclusion, I have to say that these are only some of the things. I have to think about the news story today on VOCM news about the Carbonear General Hospital. The hospital is losing twenty beds. A lot of people out there are very, very concerned. The phone in my office has not stopped up there this morning.

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Chair, I conclude.

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am glad they filtered back in again. Maybe they took responsibility finally or felt guilty on their own business that they never took care of since December, 2001, and they wanted to come back in again and have a comment. I am glad to see them come back in again. Even if they are guilty, we will certainly hear from them when they get up whether that is the reason they came back.

There are aspects of this bill that this government would not bring forward. They have increased guarantees, which are referenced here. They increased them and did not bring it to Legislature in 2002; increased them in 2003. Of course, did not bring them to Legislature in 2003. They had opportunities. Why didn't they bring it to the Legislature? Are they trying to hide it on the people of Newfoundland and Labrador? Is that their reason for doing it? Well, I can tell you, we will bring - we changed guarantees - it to the Legislature in a timely fashion and be accountable. We will not leave it for two years, waiting until an election passes and then let it come to the House and let somebody else do it.

They have to own up to their responsibilities, Mr. Chairman. They have to do what they were elected to do. Put every tough decision off. We had to face a significant deficit in this year's Budget due to an irresponsible government that pushed everything off to the future. They took one-time money and pushed that off to the future. The children and the grandchildren and the great-grandchildren for years to come are going to be paying for this government's mistakes in the past.

It is never pleasant when layoffs are announced. We have 195 layoffs generally, and there is a redevelopment centre set up under the Public Service Commission to identify and match people who can get back into the workforce. For instance, since our budgetary time we have looked at - there were 331 positions. We have reduced that by 114 due to attrition. So more than one-third of the people who were identified back at Budget time now are working and will not need to be laid off technically because attrition has occurred and other means in the system to accommodate and enable that to happen, Mr. Chairman.

This process is ongoing and over the next while we hope that all - we would hope. We cannot guarantee, no one guarantees. If you can guarantee me attrition rates and what position they are going to occur in, then we can look at guarantees, but nobody knows that. Somebody might want to retire. They might want to leave the workforce. They might want to take a job elsewhere and so on. These are the types of things we are going to work with unions to accommodate and try to identify. There is a redeployment centre to be established. These people have access to that. Nobody else will get priority over them in accessing jobs they are qualified to obtain which occur through vacancies within government. We want to manage that, we want to organize it, and we want to cushion that blow.

The number we announced back at Budget time - we said there could be 700 people throughout hospital boards, through school boards, the College of the North Atlantic, through all these areas. That number is now revised, Mr. Chairman. The total now is down in the 550 range, not at the 700 range now. Hopefully, it will go down significantly more over the course of the next month and two months as this process works itself through, with the assistance and work of the Public Service Commission, with the unions and with my Department of Treasury Board in working with that to be able to identify people and do a matching with those positions. So, it is important. We have to do responsible things. If we do not protect our future we will not have an education system, we will not have a health care system, we will not have anything in the future. We will not have any of these.

I heard the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace talking about maybe the truck was overloaded when it hit and broke off. I am not sure if that was the case at all. I thought it was that the road was in such terrible condition. My understanding at the time, and I am not intimately familiar with the details, but I think that probably had something to do with it. It was in terrible shape on that part of the Trans-Canada Highway I understand. I think that was probably one of the reasons. If is was, their government was in power at the time. So trying to transfer that over to this government today when it happened when they were in government. How silly to be getting on with that nonsense and trying to indicate that something this government - or even imply or insinuate that might happen. That is utter nonsense!

We have a bill here today - they should get up. They should be ashamed. They should get up quickly and pass it and get it off the Order Paper as fast as they possibly can because they are the ones who should have dealt with most of this in the past. We would not have to be dealing with it now. If they have any honour, get up, get it out of there, and say we should have done it in 2002. We should have done it in 2003. Get it over and done with. Admit responsibility, that they hid it on the people of the Province for a year and two years. Now we are finding out the truth of their inaction and their failure to live up to their responsibilities. All they were focused on was the next election. Pushing everything off into the future; get them by the next election and trying to get as many seats as they can. Shirk their responsibilities, and now we find out all the mess they created.

A billion dollar deficit we are facing over the next four years; over a billion a year. We managed to get it down to $840 million this year. We are going to work on it over the next three years, over the next three Budgets, to address these problems that they created here. We are going to do it because if we do not do it the future of this Province will be a lot less bright, I must say, than it would be if we accept the responsibility to do it. Nobody likes to layoff. Nobody likes to have big deficits. We have to get rid of it. We have to stop paying on debt. How many people like to be writing cheques for hundreds and hundreds of millions a year to pay interest on a debt? We did not have to do that, Mr. Chairman. If we did not have any new borrowings, we could get it down where we eliminated new borrowings. At least we would have accomplished something significant. We would not be adding more debt on to what we have. At least we will be servicing the debt we have, and it is at lower interest rates than it was ten and fifteen years ago. So, we will find that we will get ahead, we will turn the corner, and we will turn the corner. It will take a term to turn the corner, but we will do it and we will put this Province back on a path of prosperity, but we have to get the brakes on. We have to stop that billion dollar annual slide that they have put us in. When we stop that, we are going to turn it around and we are going to get it back moving again, and that will be in the best interest of the people of this Province.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I rise today to speak on Bill 14, that is before the House, and I certainly cannot go on without making some comments on what the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board has just said. I say to him that there is a difference between balancing the books and maintaining a good service for the people of the Province, and what we are seeing here is a very heavy-handed approach by him and his government to do only a balanced Budget regardless of how it impacts the people of the Province, regardless of how our education system may suffer, regardless of how the access to services are prohibited to people where they live in the Province. That is certainly a philosophy that I do not support and that I do not agree with.

Mr. Chairman, when you talk about providing services to people, I think that what happened in this House today, the details that we knew would come, is the kind of a platform and principles upon which this government would stand. I am going to say to the hon. Member for Mount Pearl, that perhaps if he would be quiet for a few minutes he might learn a little bit about what I am going to say here today, because it is no laughing matter, I will tell you that. It is no laughing matter when the minister will not even walk into this House of Assembly and stand on her feet in a Ministerial Statement to talk about the twenty offices in Human Resources and Employment that she is going to close, but rather sends out a press release on a wire from her office four minutes before this Legislature is called to session. I have never seen the like in my life! If she believes firmly enough in what she is doing, she would stand in this House today and present her statement to the House of Assembly, which is the purpose of this House, to inform the people of the Province, to bring issues forward for debate - regardless of what side of the issue you stand on, regardless of whether you have unanimous support or if there is opposition to the issue. That is the purpose of the House of Assembly, not to hide away in one's office and send out a fax before they show up in the House.

Well, Mr. Chairman, I am not happy with the twenty HRE offices that are closing in this Province today. I am not happy at all, because when you look at where these offices are based throughout the Province, it is the most rural areas, the most remote areas, that will lose the HRE offices: places like Fogo Island, that will see their offices closed; two offices that will close in my own district, one in Cartwright and one in the Labrador Straits; places like Harbour Breton that will have their offices close; places like Bonne Bay and Englee. No, I do not support the decision that the minister has made, and I can guarantee you that there are a lot of other people out there who do not support it.

There is one thing I have to say, because I have lived in a rural community all of my life and I know how hard it is to access the services provided to the public. Whether it be through financial assistance programs or career exploration programs, through Human Resources and Employment, or education programs, or health services, it has never been easy for rural areas in this Province.

Mr. Chairman, with the closing of these twenty offices, what you are seeing is not just the closing of a Human Resources and Employment office, but you are, in fact, losing some of the keenest resource people that those communities have had to rely upon. These individuals, in many cases, Mr. Chairman, were the people who kept together all of the programs in these small communities. They extended themselves beyond what was required within their immediate job. I would think that the minister would know that. The implications are much more far-reaching than certainly she indicates they are today.

I know a lot of these people personally, Mr. Chairman. I have lived around them. I went to school with them. I have grown up with them, and I still have contact with them on a regular basis, all throughout the Province, who work in this profession. They know, Mr. Chairman - and I rely upon their opinions - and what they tell me is that they are in a very stressful job as it is, that they are required to be available to their clients on a full-time basis, and that they quite often go beyond what is required from them as financial assistance officers. They are always there to serve the people within whatever regions they are.

Mr. Chairman, this is a group of people who are already experiencing backlogs in servicing the clientele that they are hired to service. Now, we are going to see even more backlogs with the elimination of almost thirty positions today with this announcement, another almost thirty people in this Province who will foreseeably be out of a job or asked to relocate from the area in which they live. Do I support it? Indeed, I do not.

The minister rationalizes her decision in her press release, because she did not rationalize it in the House of Assembly, I can tell you that, but in her press release, Mr. Chairman, she says that clients could access the income support system through telephone application in the privacy of their own home.

I have a newsflash for you, Minister, there are a lot of your clients who live in my district who do not have access to a telephone, a good many of them. There are a lot of them in a lot of other areas in this Province. I am sure in the Minister of Finance's own district, in Ferryland, and in the area of Placentia, and in the Fogo area and in the Harbour Breton area, in the Piccadilly area, out close to home, I can tell you now that a lot of your clients, Madam, do not have a telephone to be able to access the services of your office. I know this because I know these people personally and I know the trials and tribulations that they go through on a daily basis. Now, the only income they have, the only access to service they have, because of unfortunate circumstances, happens to be through the Human Resources and Employment office, and now that office is again being taken away from them.

The minister talks about creating greater access to employment and career services, but I certainly did not see a plan here to hire twenty new workers to focus on career and employment services within her department. If you want to talk about bridging the gap between social assistance recipents or dependents to an employable occupation, then you have to put some serious effort into it. It just cannot be words to paper. It has to be a serious commitment of financial resources and proper career training for these individuals. That includes making accessible to them child care expenses, because many of them have dependents and they just cannot drop everything and go back to school and retrain. They need to have those support mechanisms available to them. They also need to ensure that they have financial contributions to further education and study. Those guarantees, I do not see anywhere in the minister's release that she put out over the wire at 1:26 p.m. today. None of those things are included. It is just words, Mr. Chairman, words that say that we are going to focus more on employment and career services, but absolutely no indication here that she intends to hire any new resources within those offices to be able to do that.

Mr. Chairman, that is just one issue today. The other thing that I am finding out today, as it affects my district, is that we are not going to have any more driver examinations being offered in the Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair District. Do you know what they are being told by the Minister of Government Services today, Mr. Chairman? That they are going to have to go to Flower's Cove on the Northern Peninsula of the Island if they want to do a driver's examination. Now, I thought that was the most ridiculous thing that I have ever heard. You are taking about one of the most remote areas, one of the areas where the Minister of Transportation already is throwing up his hands in the air because he does not know how to get the snow off the road up there, and now they are actually telling them that we will have no more driver examination services in your area. You will have to go to Flower's Cove on the Northern Peninsula. Mr. Chairman, that is absolutely ridiculous to expect people to do such a thing. I have to question where this government is getting their ideas to, where they are laying out their plans to, because I can guarantee you that they are not talking to anyone in my district, or anyone in that region because if they were they would certainly not have been told that we do not want any more driver examinations and that we are prepared to drive to the Northern Peninsula to do a drivers test.

Mr. Chairman, I do not know where they take their direction but I can guarantee you it is not in consultation with people. We have seen that time and time again in this House. Not only when they close down HRE offices, as they did today in my district and many other districts in the Province, but also with the driver examination services. The closure of school boards, Mr. Chairman, that was done with no consultation with anyone; without consultation with parent committees, without consultation with teachers, without consultation with principals or even the boards themselves, the elected school boards that are out there.

CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the member that her time has expired.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I will just clue up for a minute, if it is okay.

Mr. Chairman, there was very little consultation on that issue. My time has now expired so I will have to take my seat and hopefully have an opportunity to debate further in the day.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have to say with the announcement today by the Minister of Human Resources and Employment, and the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women, it is indeed a sad day throughout the rural parts of Newfoundland and Labrador. I know it is certainly a sad day in Grand Bank, which happens to be my hometown, and in the District of Grand Bank, where today we have seen the closure of our Human Resources office. I can tell you that there are employees there who are very disappointed and saddened today. There was some indication, of course, that this was coming, but they all, I guess, hoped for the best. They hoped that at the end of the day that office would not be cut, any more than any other office across the Province should not be cut.

Having said that, Mr. Chairman, today we found out that, indeed, the office is closed. It is going to have a devastating impact on the people in the District of Grand Bank who use that office on a regular basis. I know only too well a lot of these people. They are my constituents. A lot of them do not have access to a car. A lot of them do not have access to the new technology, as the minister puts it, as her rationale for doing what was done today. These people need that face-to-face interaction. These are people who need the supports that a government should be able to provide to them. They did not expect, when they voted and elected a PC government, to find that the very services they have become used to, expect and deserve, will be taken away from them. They did not expect that vote, that they cast in the election in October, would take away services that are so vitally important to our most vulnerable in society.

That is exactly what has happened here today. The closure of twenty Human Resources offices throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. I know they are now wondering how they are going to deal with this situation. First and foremost, of course, we have employees in those twenty offices who were hard-working, dedicated employees. I know in my circumstance, in Grand Bank, these employees worked above and beyond the call of duty. In fact, many of them were overworked to the point where I know some of them have been off on extended sick leave. My heart goes out to them because I know that in addition to having worked so hard on behalf of the people of the Province, and on behalf of a government that is their employer, that the only thanks they got was a lay off, fired, gone. Some of them, obviously, will be able to bump into other positions but all that means is that other people will have to be displaced. So, they will just spread the pain. No one likes to have to bump because what you do when you do that is you displace another worker. It means someone else has to go without a job. Someone else has to go without an income so that another individual can be gainfully employed.

So, it is a sad day. It is another black mark against this PC government. Certainly, it is a black mark for the people of the Province, but especially in Grand Bank today. Not just in Grand Bank, because while the office is in Grand Bank it serves the entire District of Grand Bank. Of course, this coupled with the cancellation of a new health care facility - which, again, served many more people than just those in the District of Grand Bank - is sending a very strong message, and that is this government is not concerned about, has no compassion for, the people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

A $17.5 million facility that was analyzed over and over by all of the stakeholders involved - I did not do the analysis. It was not a project of the MHA. It was a decision taken after extensive consultation with all of the stakeholders. Today I am told that tenders have gone out to take down the steel, and not only to take down the steel, but to bury the foundation work that has been done. Three million dollars has been spent, and the message that this government is sending is that no one will ever be able to utilize that site in the future to build a health care facility. We are going to make sure of that. Not only are they doing this for whatever reason, and nobody in the world would believe the reasons that are being given, but they are making sure that no one else will be able to do it. So, it is a sad day, two initiatives by this government that are really having a devastating impact on the people in the District of Grand Bank.

Then, of course, we have the closure of the school board. We have the teacher cuts, and it is clear, from the decisions that have been taken by this government, by the PC government, that education is not a priority. My colleague from Grand Falls-Buchans has stood, on several occasions, and made that very point. Interestingly enough today, when I read the editorial in The Telegram, the point was also made there. I do not know how anyone would think that you can have a sound economy without having a sound education system. Everything this government has been doing detracts from our education system. Fewer teachers mean fewer courses mean multigrading. It just isn't possible for this government to convince any of us, and I expect the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, that they understand the value of a sound education system.

The irony in all of it, of course, is that the Premier has touted the Ireland experience as something he would like to model his initiatives after. Well, if you want to do that, do it by looking at what Ireland has done from an education perspective. They have done everything they can to make sure that students have a sound education experience, that post-secondary students have access to affordable quality education. Do not do what you have set out to do in this Budget. Of course, we are really not sure, with the Budget, what it is you are doing, because on the one hand you bring down a set of numbers and say this is the way it is going to be, and then, within a matter of a week, two weeks, three weeks, we get a different story. So, we really do not know, when we talk about the Budget that we have been presented with, how much of it is valid, whether or not when we are debating the Budget we are actually debating the numbers that we are presented with, or if, in fact, we should be looking, expecting amendments because of decisions that have come after the Budget. Whatever, I know that it is confusing, it is puzzling, it is disappointing, it is everything that is bad, because we see so little of any positive announcements or initiatives coming out of the government.

Education is so important. I have yet to hear from this government any initiative with respect to literacy. Of all the initiatives that we did as a government, the one that I was really proud of was everything we did with respect to literacy in the Province, recognizing that we have a high illiteracy rate and that the people who need that support are, again, the most vulnerable. They are the last to ask for help but they need it.

What we were able to do by focusing on the need for literacy initiatives was to bring people out of their shells, to encourage them to come forward, to acknowledge that they had a problem, and not a problem of their own making. It was not their fault that they had difficulties, but for whatever reason, a fault of the system, being in the wrong place at the wrong time, whatever the reason for people finding themselves in circumstances where they wish they were not, many of them were brave enough to acknowledge that they needed help.

I have yet to hear from this government any acknowledgment of the need to continue with literacy programs and initiatives, I have yet to hear from them the kind of funding they are putting in for these programs, and I am worried about it. I am sincerely worried about it.

At the end of the day, I think we all know that the people who rely on these programs are not the ones who stand up and protest, and shout and scream. They are the ones who take it in stride, but hope beyond hope that the government will indeed acknowledge that there is an issue there.

MADAM CHAIR (Osborne): Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that her time is up.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Madam Chair, and I appreciate the time.

MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment, and Minister Responsible for the Status of Women.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Thank you, Madam Chair.

I rise today to address some issues and some concerns regarding the closure of the twenty HRLE offices in Newfoundland and Labrador, that were announced today.

Madam Chair, I would like to draw to the people's attention, that in 1997 the Department of Human Resources was split into two departments. Health and Community Services took on the responsibility for youth corrections, family and rehab services and child protection, as well as other social services.

At that time, the Department of Human Resources and Employment was formed and took on two roles. The roles that were assumed at that time included income support as well as employment and career services. As this department continues to grow, of course, we have taken on new responsibilities. This department is now responsible for income support, employment and career services, youth services, as well as immigration. We have also taken responsibility for the new Labour Relations Agency which has labour standards and labour relations.

Madam Chair, I would like to talk about the necessity for the changes that we have implemented, and we will be implementing in September, which is the closure of our twenty offices. The system that we have been operating under, Madam Chair, has been outdated. The system of income support applications, at times, is dated back to the 1960s. I can remember working in the department during the summer of 1985, as a summer student, when I worked with income support, that at that time, anyone who applied for income support had to have a home visit done. These home visits were actually quite intrusive. If you refer back to the policy, Madam Chair, at that time it was incumbent - and it is almost embarrassing to say this - upon the worker to even check the fridges of the people who applied for income support, to make sure that they didn't have sufficient food. It was a very belittling experience.

The department certainly have moved in those areas. In recent years, the requirement has been that people can apply for income assistance without the necessity of a home visit. Home visits have not been made for a number of years. The income support, and a person's application for income support, and whether or not they receive income support, is an objective decision. The decision is not based on what food they have in their house, it is based on their level of income. If a person doesn't reach a certain basic level of income, they are entitled to income support. Our workers today determine if the people who apply for income support meet these financial requirements. If a person meets the financial requirements, they are entitled to receive income support.

Madam Chair, in recent years, and under the previous administration, there was a model for new service delivery. As part of that new service delivery model, $3 million was spent on operating a new computer pay system. That computer pay system, under the former administration, was piloted on the West Coast of Newfoundland and Labrador. Madam Chair, we are nearing the completion of that pilot on the West Coast of Newfoundland and Labrador, and, as of June 15, the telephone application process will be initiated. The computer pay system then, Madam Chair, will be rolled out into other part of the Province with the next region accessing this service being the Avalon Peninsula.

Madam Chair, I want to make it clear today that the new delivery system that we are introducing was started by the previous Administration, and for good reason. The department had changed its role in recent years and we are responding to that role change.

I also want to talk about some of the shifting demographics in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We have an aging population. In many areas we do not have the same number of young people as we had before. It is a fact that since 1997 the caseload for the Department of Human Resources, Labour and Employment decreased by approximately 8,500 cases. I would like to note that in 1997 the caseload peaked at 37,000 cases and has been decreased as of last year - our statistics showed - by 28,500 cases. We have to respond to the shifting caseload. We have to respond to the changing demographics in Newfoundland and Labrador.

We had forty-six offices located across the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, which were a response to our policies and the fact that we had to do home visits for every application. Home visits are no longer required. The caseload has been reduced by over 8,000 cases. It is also noted that last year 50 per cent of new applicants were twenty-nine years of age or younger. What that means is that we have an abundance of young people coming on the caseload, despite our changing demographics. These young people are not necessarily in the more remote areas of Newfoundland and Labrador. What we have to do is address the needs of this department.

Yesterday in the House of Assembly it was well noted that there is a skills deficit, and a looming skills deficit, in Newfoundland and Labrador. When we have approximately 1,800 new cases coming on income support, which represents people twenty-nine years of age or younger, we need the flexibility to work with these people to move them from income support into the labour force. I say that most people who receive income support in this Province do so because they are in a crisis and not because it provides such a comfortable living for people. If people are given the opportunity, they would prefer to be working in gainful employment and supporting themselves and their families.

By making these moves that we have made by closing these twenty offices, we have given ourselves the flexibility that we can make the most of the new technology which is being introduced and, as well, using the staff in a more flexible way that they will be able to engage in employment and career services in all centres of this Province.

Madam Chair, it is also worthy to note that the people who provide employment and career services will continue to go into the rural communities and do this individually one on one. However, it is not necessary to have people in these communities forty hours a week because the need may not necessarily be there for employment and career services.

Madam Chair, I would like to, at least, address the issues that were brought up regarding Labrador. A combined caseload for employment and career services, which encompasses Mary's Harbour, Cartwright and Forteau, totals fifty-nine people. In essence, when we look at our caseloads there are two types of cases. We have long-term assistance and short-term assistance. The short-term assistance cases are the ones that require the most intervention.

Between Cartwright and Forteau together, there are fifteen cases requiring short-term assistance. In Cartwright alone, Madam Chair, we only have one employee and that is a clerical staff. We do not have the files. We do not have community service workers involved in income support in Labrador.

MR. JOYCE: (Inaudible).

MS BURKE: This is not a speech.

I would also like to comment that right now we have often had to deal with communities that did not necessarily have offices in their local communities. I may be corrected, but I understand there are approximately 450 communities in Newfoundland and Labrador and we operated forty-six offices. We have had people accessing income support and employment and career services who did not necessarily live close to an office. We will continue to access rural and remote areas. People will be able to continue to access services.

We will be bringing in the new telephone application system, which is a less intrusive way of doing income support. One point I would like to make with telephone application, is the fact that if a person has a telephone it will be no cost to contact the office. We may have cases in Newfoundland and Labrador where the person does not have a telephone, but what I would like to point out is if they are able to access a telephone it is actually cheaper and more cost-effective to use somebody's telephone as it is to actually mail a letter or travel to an office.

We have been able to deal with emergencies over the years. A lot of times when people need services on an emergency basis, these emergencies do not necessarily happen between nine and five. We have been able to have clients access services after hours or on weekends. We are very well aware of emergencies and we will continue to address these emergencies. The one point that I would like to make to all the recipents of income support in Newfoundland and Labrador is that these changes will in no way see any reduction in services.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Madam Chair.

It was definitely a great speech from the minister, and too bad it did not come from the heart. It had to come from a written text, I say, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, she was probably correct when she said the former Liberal government started the program but once we realized the impact on rural Newfoundland and Labrador we did not implement the program because we knew the impact on rural Newfoundland and Labrador. I am sure the minister forgot to add that minor note there.

Madam Chair, we are here today to speak on a few finance bills. Some of these bills that we are going to speak on were presented to us probably some month-and-a-half ago, six weeks ago. Here we are, presented with a bunch of documents that we are asked to vote on, to bring back to our constituents, and say: Do you agree with this or don't you agree? What are the implications?

Madam Chair, over the last six weeks all of the information that is coming out is not what is in the Budget. I will give you a good example. The class 4 roads in the Budget - and, Madam Chair, you yourself have seen it, you are part of the government that presented it - class 4 roads are eliminated. No more grading of class 4 roads. The Member for Humber Valley is out in her district saying: No, no, we may have something done up here. We may have the problem solved, going through Tourism.

After Tourism could not do it, the Minister of Transportation and Works goes out and here is what he said in Corner Brook, and I am sure the people all across Newfoundland and Labrador would love to know.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. JOYCE: Cormack?

AN HON. MEMBER: No, it wasn't in Cormack either.

MR. JOYCE: Well, it was just where it was printed or something.

I say to the minister: You can say you did the interview, but if the information you gave them was correct, it is not what is in the Budget. You can say what you like, or whatever you want, but it is not what you put in this Budget. All of the people in Newfoundland and Labrador would like to know what you are saying out in a PC district, because there are some other people who would like to know the information, I say to the hon. member.

Here is what the minister said: Some stakeholders to the region fear that the move would spell certain doom for the Sir Richard Squires Park because its access road is designated a class 4 road; however, Rideout said, this road will be exempt from the budgetary decision. Exempt.

We have class 4 roads, which we were told six weeks ago - are exempt, and here they are now, the minister, because he may have done an interview over the phone to a reporter in a PC district, the class 4 roads now are going to be exempt.

He goes on to say: Rideout said the decisions will be placed - rather, this spring, those people in class 4 roads, access roads, will be phased in.

So, what we have in this Budget is not what is being said by the minister out in public, when he is out in certain PC districts.

When you look at the highway enforcement officers today, in the Budget they allocated for highway enforcement officers. Today, we learn from the minister that they are gone. They are gone, they are eliminated. In the Budget, in the estimates for the salaries, they were included.

How can we vote on a Budget when we just do not know what is in the Budget? We are hearing one thing from the Minister of Finance when he presents it, and when we get out around, when the ministers get out and they want to make their press releases, and want to do their cut, slash and burn, it is completely opposite. So, what are we asked to vote on, Madam Chair? I ask, what are we asked to vote on?

I will go through some of the Budget Highlights. Funding provided for planning for the Corner Brook long-term care facility in Corner Brook. The Premier was well aware of this, and the Member for Humber East, the Minister of Justice. All during the election, before the election, the Premier had five different positions on the long-term care facility, five different positions, Madam Chair. The final position was that the facility would be built in his mandate, which meant - and he heard this and he always says, yes, it will be built in my mandate - that the facility will be built in his mandate and everybody was assumed to believe that the facility was going to start this year, to start as we speak, the money will be there.

I wrote Allan Kendall, the Chief Executive Officer of the long-term care facility in Corner Brook. "In response to your letters of April 30 and May 4, 2004, I write to advise that to this point the Western Health Care Corporation has not received a letter of official notification from Government outlining the amount and purpose of the funding for the new long-term care facility in Corner Brook." That is coming from Allan Kendall, Chief Executive Officer of the Western Health Care Corporation.

We are asked to vote on a Budget, $300,000 that the Premier committed will start this year, that will be built in his mandate. The Member for Humber East, the Minister of Justice, had it in his brochure, Madam Chair, had it in his brochure. So, here we are now asking to vote on $300,000 and no one can get an answer.

I just spoke to Israel Hann. I just got off the phone with Israel Hann, before I came in, Madam Chair, and I asked Israel: Do you know anything about the $300,000 for the long-term care facility? Israel Hann informed me that all he is hearing is rumours, that they are purchasing land. The Member for Humber East, the Minister of Justice, told him that they have some land picked out. The City of Corner Brook is saying that there is some other land picked out. The Premier committed, the Minister of Justice committed, the Member for Humber East committed, to go back to the long-term care facility committee to help and consult them on where this long-term care facility will be built. They have received no consultation. They cannot get any answers. They have not received one notification of any work that is going to be done with a long-term care facility.

Madam Chair, this is a major, major concern for the people of Corner Brook and Western Newfoundland, when Mr. Hann, a long-time advocate of the long-term care facility, says to me: Ed, I have no idea what is going on with this $300,000, I have not heard one word from the government since all of those rumours. The Member for Humber East, the Minister of Justice, is telling us that he has land picked out somewhere, which no one knows. I get a letter today from the Chief Executive Officer, stating that the Western Health Care Corporation - to all of the people in Western Newfoundland - have not received notification of the $300,000, what it is going to be used for, when it is going to be used, how they can use it, or when they can use it.

Madam Chair, I have to ask questions and I cannot get any answers from this government on this long-term care facility, but I can assure you that we had a meeting just after the election and the Premier, of course, and the Minister of Justice, the Member for Humber East, did not find it upon themselves to show up to the meeting. The Premier sent his non-elected executive assistant and they said: No, trust him. Trust him. We will get it. Trust him. That is all I can say to you. You have to trust him.

I say to the people of Corner Brook and Western Newfoundland, so did NAPE and CUPE. They trusted him. I say it is time for us right now to starting lighting the fire because now I will say that I doubt very much if this long-term care facility will be built in the four years that the Premier has made a commitment - before, during and after the election. I doubt it very much.

We look at the next major priority in Corner Brook that was in their brochures - the Member for Humber East, the Minister of Justice and the Premier - Herdman Collegiate. The elected school board, District # 3 at the time, did a lot of work, and I praise up the elected committee for District # 3 School Board. They put a lot of hours into it, Madam Chair. Here is what was in for the Bay of Islands, the Budget Highlights: Extension and renovations of Herdman Collegiate in Corner Brook has been deferred - deferred, Madam Chair - pending further review of the proposed design and consultation with the school board to such an affiliate compromise, affordable compromise.

Madam Chair, I am sure the ministers are well aware of it, before the election, this District School Board # 3, the elected officials, did sign off with the Department of Education on an affordable compromise for Herdman Collegiate. The Member for Humber East, the Minister of Justice, had it in his brochure, his election brochure, Herdman Collegiate. Now, here we see some statements put in here - which I know that the design, the cost, was agreed to by the department, was agreed to by the elected school board, and here we are now seeing Herdman Collegiate deferred. Then again, we hear the members opposite say: Trust us. Trust the Premier. Here he was, out during the whole election, and the Member for Humber East, saying: Trust me on the long-term care facility.

MADAM CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that his time has expired.

MR. JOYCE: By leave?

MADAM CHAIR: Does the hon. member have leave?

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MADAM CHAIR: For a moment, okay.

MR. JOYCE: I thank you, Madam Chair, for leave, and the Government House Leader.

Madam Chair, I just want to pass on those comments and those concerns. I pass them on to government, on behalf of the people of the Bay of Islands and the Corner Brook area. These concerns are real. These concerns are not going to go away and these concerns must be addressed. If I have to stand here everyday, day after day, to ask the government for answers to these major, major concerns, I will.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Madam Chair.

I appreciate an opportunity to speak for a few moments concerning this issue here today, not particularly this issue, but dealing with budgetary issues, I guess, in particular. There are two issues that I would like to address in my allotted time of ten minutes, one being the weigh scales issues and secondly, the issue of the Department of Business.

First of all, on the weigh scales issue it was announced today - or my office, at least, in Port aux Basques, was advised today by the four workers who work at the weigh scales - which are situated about five kilometres outside of Port aux Basques - that they were terminated. They are laid off. They are gone. They are finished and that the facility would be closing.

We are in the budgetary process here where, I think, everyone in this Province understands that because of the financial circumstances some tough lines had to be taken and the government was certainly prepared to draw those tough lines and make those tough decisions. They have proven that with this Budget document that we are dealing with and also with their overall financial and policy agenda, economic agenda. But, one must question the merit sometimes of some things that they do. Everyone knows geographically that the bulk of the freight that comes into this Province comes through the entry port of Port aux Basques. Marine Atlantic is the major employer in that community. We have four personnel working the weigh scales there and a minimum of 40,000 tractor-trailers per year come off the ferry in Port aux Basques. The whole purpose, of course, of the weigh scales over the years has been twofold. Number one, it is generally the location where you do the inspections on vehicles to ensure that if they are not up to scratch, if there is something wrong with the way the load is on the truck, if there is something wrong with the safe aspects of the vehicle, they can be stopped and corrected before they move across the Trans-Canada Highway, which is certainly a safety issue. You want vehicles to be safe.

The other aspect, of course, is to ensure that the weight that the trucks carry are within the mandated and regulated load limits. Again, the reason is obvious. Besides being a safety factor, that you do not want vehicles carrying more than the regulations say, there is also the issue of - it makes commonsense, you are only supposed to carry so much. There were, in fact, penalties that were enforced if you carry more.

There are two issues here that are being forgotten about by this government, because right now the nearest weigh scale in this Province, after today - or after June 11, I should say, which was the notice date - will be in Pynns Brook, which happens to be 268 kilometres from the entry point of these 40,000-plus tractor-trailers into the Province. It does not take a whole pile of commonsense to try to figure out. Why are we putting into Pynns Brook - because I understand there might even be an increase in Pynns Brook. Why are we - in a facility that was only built within the last five years, at exorbitant capital cost. They have a whole water system there. They have their own electrical system there. They have the new building there, the new weigh scales.

Hundreds and thousands of dollars was spent in providing a weigh scales in that location within the last five years. All of a sudden they were saying: We are going to shut that down. Forget about the capital cost investment that we made into that five years ago, which in the tune of hundreds of thousands. Just putting the electrical alone in there, which is outside the municipal grid system, was a major cost. We are going to scrape that and close it up. We are going to move whatever services were there to the nearest place, which is Pynns Brook, and 40,000-plus tractor-trailers are going to come into this Province and travel 268 kilometres before there are any inspections done on them, because that is where it was always done. Anybody can check. The record is that they were checked at the weigh scales. Again, as a courtesy to the drivers quite often because they had to stop anyway to get weighed. You would not stop them one place and then stop them up the road again unless you had some reason to. So you generally tried to coordinate both their stop for their weigh in and their stop for the inspection at the same time, in the same place. Now, that is not going to happen anymore.

There is an issue here of balancing the scales. It is one thing to save dollars in terms of a Province. I have no problem with that whatsoever, if you have to save dollars. But I seriously question the issue of the safety factors here. It is one thing to cut off your nose to spite your face, and I think that is what has happened here. Yes, there are the issues of the dollars that these four employees put into the economy of Port aux Basques. That is one issue. No doubt, these four people are local people and lived there all their lives and do not want to move. If they want to have a job, no doubt they are going to have to move. That is an unfortunate factor, but besides the impact that is going to have on these four local people, it is the nonsensical thought of closing down hundreds of thousands of dollars of capital cost and creating a safety factor 268 kilometres up the road. You are virtually halfway across the Province. In fact, it is possible now with the moving of the weigh scales from Port aux Basques to Pynns Brook, you can travel right to Grand Falls without being inspected.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. PARSONS: About 40,000-plus tractor-trailers every year.

You can actually travel now, because what happens - and it is been known in the past, what used to happen sometimes when the weigh scales were closed in Port aux Basques, a scattered truck, of course, that might have been overweight, would sneak up the Trans-Canada Highway to the Burgeo turnoff, shoot down the Burgeo road and pass on up through the Buchans road and be in Central before you knew it. In fact, you could service Central because the way the weigh scales worked out, you could be virtually anywhere in this Province and not be caught if you got past the Port aux Basques one. They, in fact, had it designed from a service perspective that if you are going to get them, get them when they come in. That is gone now.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. PARSONS: Right now, I say to the government, I think this is a very narrow decision that has gone beyond saving money. It has gone beyond utilization of the service that you provide and we have caused ourselves a great safety hazard. God forbid - we talk about what we have on our conscience - if in the next three or four years, or at any time in the future, we have an issue of safety that develops anywhere between Port aux Basques and Pynns Brook because somebody decided to save a dollar and this safety factor has been removed. I certainly do not want it on my head and on my shoulders that something happens because of a dollar saving exercise we created this safety factor.

The other issue I would like to address in my ten minutes deals with the issue of Estimates Committees. We had a question here today from the Leader of the Opposition about the Premier appearing at the Estimates Committee for the Department of Business. I am at a loss to figure out why the Premier of this Province does not want to, or will not, appear before the Estimates Committee. This is something that has happened in this Province, according to my information, for years, about twenty-five years, these Estimates Committees.

According to the Table Officers that I have checked with there has never, in the history of Estimates Committees in this Province, been a case where the minister did not attend the Estimates. Never! To anybody's knowledge of Table Officers in this House. It is for obvious reasons because the very way that governments function, as part of the budgetary process and the Estimate Committees, is to allow the ministers to explain what their budgets are all about. What are the dollars being used for? What are they going to? What is the agenda of your department? How many employees do you have? What are your programs and your policies? It gives the minister an opportunity to explain. Here we are in this case, in this Province, where this Premier made himself the minister of a department, the Department of Business, put it into a Blue Book, put it into a Throne Speech and touted it as one of the most important departments this Province is going to have, was not important enough to leave it under ITRD, carved it out from Minister Dunderdale's department and said: I am going to do this as the Premier. This is how important this department is to this Province.

In the Budget he sets down an amount that is going to be used for that budget. He was out last Friday advertising for deputy ministers and information officers. Yet, when the Leader of the Opposition asked today: Can we reschedule the Estimates meeting at any time in the next three weeks that the House is open, or within the fifteen days that we are permitted under the rules, so that the Premier can appear and tell the people of this Province and tell the committee members if they have questions what the answers are? What do we get? An answer, no! I am at a loss as to why the Premier of this Province - according to the Government House Leader - would not even consider such a reasonable request as part of his job. If he creates a department it is part of his obligation and responsibility as a minister to do the Estimates Committee, to appear before the Committee. I am at a great loss here, and I am sure the people of this Province, once they get it explained to them, will be saying: Where is our Premier, our Minister of Business? - when it comes to explaining his agenda for this department to the committee and to the people of this Province. These are not ad hoc, don't care committees. Everything you say in these committees is recorded, very important, and yet we have a lackadaisical: Well, I am in Germany this week and I cannot do it. We cannot even figure out over here -

MADAM CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that his time has expired.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Madam Chair.

I will conclude at that point and return to the issue subsequently.

Thank you.

MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Government House Leader

.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Madam Chair.

I believe on this motion, Bill 14, that we have concluded and it is my understanding that I must rise the Committee. Or, can we leave the Committee, I ask the Chair, and move on to Motion 15? My understanding is that I must rise the Committee, report progress, and ask leave to sit again, and then move the next motion on the Order Paper to get back into Committee. I think that is the parliamentary wrangling or hoops and loops that we must jump through.

I say to the Chair - I ask the Opposition House Leader - we can do anything by leave. If it is okay, what we probably can do, as opposed to rising, reporting progress, sitting, that we move directly into Bill 15, and allow the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to introduce that bill, and we can continue the same discussion that we are having right now, with some responses back and forth to some of the issues that you have just raised.

MR. PARSONS: Madam Chair, the Opposition concurs with the suggestions of the Government House Leader in that regard.

Thank you.

MADAM CHAIR: It has been moved that the Committee rise, report progress -

MR. E. BYRNE: Just to be clear, by agreement and by leave, Madam Chair, we are going to move right into Bill 15.

MADAM CHAIR: Okay.

MR. E. BYRNE: The Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board will introduce that bill. When we have concluded debate - my understanding is, it will be somewhere around 5 o'clock - then we will vote on both Bill 14, the clauses of it, or would you prefer that we vote on Bill 14 now?

MADAM CHAIR: Okay.

MR. E. BYRNE: Let's do that now, then.

Resolution

"That it is expedient to bring in a measure further to amend The Loan and Guarantee Act, 1957, to provide for the advance of loans to and the guarantee of the repayment of bonds or debentures issued by or loans advanced to certain corporations."

MADAM CHAIR: Shall the resolution carry?

All in favour, aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MADAM CHAIR: Contra-minded, nay.

Carried.

On motion, resolution carried.

CLERK: Clause 1

MADAM CHAIR: Shall clause 1 carry?

All in favour, aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MADAM CHAIR: All those against, nay.

Carried.

On motion, clause 1 carried.

CLERK: Clause 2.

MADAM CHAIR: Shall clause 2 carry?

All in favour, aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MADAM CHAIR: All those against, nay.

Carried.

On motion, clause 2 carried.

CLERK: Clause 3.

MADAM CHAIR: Shall clause 3 carry?

All in favour, aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MADAM CHAIR: All those against, nay.

Carried.

On motion, clause 3 carried.

CLERK: Clause 4.

MADAM CHAIR: Shall clause 4 carry?

All in favour, aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MADAM CHAIR: Contra-minded, nay.

Carried.

On motion, clause 4 carried.

CLERK: Clause 5.

MADAM CHAIR: Shall clause 5 carry?

All in favour, aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MADAM CHAIR: All those against, nay.

Carried.

On motion, clause 5 carried.

CLERK: Be it enacted by the Lieutenant-Governor and House of Assembly in Legislative Session convened, as follows:

MADAM CHAIR: Shall the enacting clause carry?

All in favour, aye

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MADAM CHAIR: Contra-minded, nay.

Carried.

On motion, enacting clause carried.

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957.

MADAM CHAIR: Shall the title carry?

All in favour, aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MADAM CHAIR: Contra-minded, nay.

Carried.

On motion, title carried.

MADAM CHAIR: Shall I report the bill carried without amendment?

All in favour, aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MADAM CHAIR: All those against, nay.

Carried.

Motion, that the Committee report having passed a resolution and a bill consequent thereto, carried.

MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, Motion 1, that the hon. Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board deal with Bill 15, An Act To Amend The Local Authority Guarantee Act, 1957.

MADAM CHAIR: An Act To Amend The Local Authority Guarantee Act, 1957.

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Madam Chairperson.

I am pleased to introduce this amendment to The Local Authority Guarantee Act, 1957; an amendment to this act, Madam Chairperson, ratifies government loan guarantees that have enabled municipalities to be able to get financing for capital works projects on a short-term basis.

Now, this is essentially a housekeeping item, and the last one brought to this House was in the fall of 2001. The reason it is so thick, Madam Chairperson, is that the previous government did not bring any to the House in 2002 and 2003, so obviously we have to do it. It is important that we do give approval for this because there are exercises for short-term borrowing.

These are interim loans, Madam Chairperson, that are drawn down by the municipalities to enable them to carry on ongoing projects. Now, this approval allows for those guarantees to go on, interim funding for the projects, normally for a two-year period, and then after that two-year period they can be extended for a three-year period. That is when water and sewer, or paving, or recreation, or other capital grants, capital structure projects, are ongoing.

Now, when that period is up, obviously the municipality then would have to go and get permanent or longer-term financing. Longer-term financing then would have to be arranged through the Newfoundland and Labrador Municipal Financing Corporation, or they could go out to private financial institutions, the banks or credit unions, and get that funding on a long-term basis. So, we are giving the guarantee for that. That guarantee ensures that, if they defaulted on that, we would have to honour that guarantee and pay that out on behalf of the taxpayers of this Province. I think it gives us some comfort, Madam Chair, to know that no defaults have ever occurred under this particular program, which means that the municipalities out there accept the responsibilities that they are given, this funding, and their basic commitments to that.

This amount, now, Madam Chair, is up to $103 million. This an add-on from what the amount was prior to that, because, over the past two years, of course, the number has increased significantly from what it was. There are projects that keep adding on, and, of course, over a period of time, hopefully sometime in the future, we will be able to see an elimination of debt, just like any debt in our Province. I do not think we are going to see it in my lifetime, a total reduction of our Province's debt, because we are in such a huge pile of debt now. It is so deep now we cannot get out of that in the short term. We can, at least - and I said it when I spoke to the previous bill, Bill 14 - get us back on the road to recovery, that, after a four-year period, we will stop the slide. We will not have to, hopefully, go to the markets for increasing debt, but at least to rollover debt that we have. If we can get to that point, we can stop that slide of money we are putting in for our debt servicing cost.

Right now, this Province contributes $1 billion to debt servicing costs. That is 25 per cent, approximately, of every dollar of revenue that we take in, in our Province. That is an area of grave concern. The Auditor General, in his report last year, said we were at 23.9 per cent. We were slated, on the path the former government had us, to go to $1.2 billion just on debt servicing costs. It is an enormous amount.

The Leader of the Opposition, on times, has stood and said: Oh, we are only paying 13 and 14 per cent. Well, we moved into an accrual budgeting, an accrual system of accounting, and under that system we will report all debts, ones that are hidden, interest payments that are hidden, the ones that they did not own up to before. We include debts that government incurs here in our regular day-to-day actions, in our short-term borrowing, in our long-term borrowing. We include debts incurred by hospital boards on behalf of government, education boards on behalf of government. We include the interest on that. Former governments shifted it off into a different fund and did not count the debt, did not count those direct costs in the Education Investment Corporation, $100 million. In health boards out there, they did not count the interest on debt that they are paying. There is over $60 million of that, Madam Chairperson, over $60 million of interest going on a debt that they are not counting, in hospital boards, education and so on, all over, for schooling in our Province.

They conveniently manipulate to move figures around, on a cash basis, when we have an accrual based budget. They had three sets of figures. They had a cash figure, they had a consolidated cash figure, and then we had the accrual basis. The cash was the basic ongoing transactions and the Consolidated Revenue Fund that were ongoing. Then they shifted those groups off, the schools and other areas, off into another group, rooms and all these types of funding, shipped them off somewhere else.

The Municipal Financing Corporation is separate. It was under consolidated cash and we were not getting true figures. Mr. Chair, what we are paying out is about $612 million, $615 million, for the last two years per year in direct interest payments, plus about $400 million more that we have to accrue for debt primarily on unfunded pension liability. Had it been funded, had the money been in there, it would have been earning money, it would have been making money. We have to allow for the shortfall that is unfunded, because people who work for this Province, people who are going to get pensions in the future, in ten, fifteen and twenty years time and longer, want to make sure that there is an allocation there to deal with them in the future. We cannot ignore the people in the future. We have to depend on getting that money. That is what is accrual accounting is all about. We cannot say live for the day and forget the future, forget the people who want to draw pension on this Province, forget the children and forget the grandchildren who are going to pay the bills in the future, who are going to inherit debt. That has been going on for too long in this Province. That is why there are responsibilities we have own up to. We have to start, make today, pay for today, and start accepting our responsibilities.

We would have over $1 billion deficit this year only for we had to take very strong action, a lot of it not very popular. The last few months, since Budget time, has shown that. Some are not popular, but they are the right decisions. If you are going to get in it for popularity, we will be mired in debt we will never come out of, and there would be no future for people in this Province. We would see a strong outward path of migration occur in this Province. We would be spending more and more on interest, less money for the road network in our Province, less money for health care, there would be less for education and there would be less for every single government service.

That is the part of the responsibility of governing, Mr. Chair. That is a part of the responsibility. It is a responsibility that was ignored by the former government. They governed to get them by an election. They governed to get seats in the Legislature. Well, they only got a dozen. It cost them. People did not buy into it. They knew we were going head over heels in debt. They wanted somebody to come in, a government and a Premier and a PC government, to come in and do something about that. That is the task that we have been assigned to do and it is a task that we are going to do. Everyday, it is not the most pleasurable thing to do, but it is the responsible thing to do and it is one that is important to help secure our future. We will not wait two years to get us by an election to bring a bill in here. Own up to it.

There is nothing wrong, nothing should be embarrassing, with giving communities money that they are living up to their responsibility to pay, and we are giving a guarantee. They have not gone out and defaulted. There has not been a default under this local authority guarantee, under this basic program. It is something that is important. It helps build infrastructure in our Province, it helps build water and sewer, it helps roads and provides recreational facilities, things that we all need in our Province to be able to encourage people to live, participate and occupy parts of rural Newfoundland and Labrador. People live in communities because they have access to water and sewer, they have access to recreational facilities. Hopefully, the transportation network is sufficient to allow at least an ease in movement of transportation, whether it is for business or for personal reasons. They are all parts of developing and growing a Province.

I heard the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair talking about how they shut down an office in her district. Well, the office closed in my district, the only one that was there. Two motor registration offices, the only two, closed down. They drive in from Trepassey now to get a driver examination test. There are none left. There is hardly anything. There are very few public employees in my entire district, I might add. Eleven of those twenty are in PC districts, and there are only a dozen on that side of the House. A disproportionate amount occurred in districts because a decision is based on fact, it is based on research, it is based on the best mode to deliver these services.

That government started the process. That government didn't have the backbone to finish the process. They put it in place and they moved on then, they got kicked out of office. They would have done the same thing. Now they are standing up and saying: Oh, we realized how important it was to rural Newfoundland and Labrador. That, to me, Chairperson is hypocrisy. That is what that is. That very government initiated some of the actions we are initiating now. They were started by that government and they would have done it. All of the sudden, the electorate threw them out and they are not going to confess to what they did and what they started. That is not the honourable thing to do and it is not the proper thing. It is about time now they tried to accept responsibility. It is very easy to complain, but to do something about it takes an entirely different commitment.

Chairperson, I am not going to go through all of the details. Every single community is here and the particular amounts that have been guaranteed under this particular piece of legislation. I am sure some members might want to make a few comments on this.

I will say again, since the fall of 2001, the former government never brought those amendments forward to add on. We will do it as they occur. We hope to be able to do it on an annual basis, add these to the list and so on. We won't shirk our responsibility in dealing with any of the problems confronting our Province.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR (Fitzgerald): The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am pleased to respond to the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board today on Bill 15. This is a bill that is necessary. As the Minister of Finance said, short-term borrowings of communities around this Province most times take upwards to three years before that is converted to long-term debt and financing through banks or the municipal financing corporations.

When I look through this, and there are 880 loans here and guarantees, there are four communities that I represent in this bill. I am proud to say that I was part of the former administration that provided funding to municipalities throughout our Province to actually write off their municipal debts. One of those communities was Badger. It put them in a position where they can now go to a chartered bank and apply for funding to do municipal work and qualify, because they were saddled with a lot of municipal debt over the years that they did not have the ability to repay. It put them in an awkward position because they could not borrow from any chartered bank and they could not go and get funding to repair their streets or improve their infrastructure. They were in an awkward position, as were many small communities in our Province. We took initiative, the former Administration, to provide funding. I think it was probably upwards to $20 million over a few years to look at various communities, work with them, work with the councillors in these communities, and help them to look after their finances so they could get their books in order. A lot of them, in many cases, were not increasing their taxes over the years and they did not have the ability to make any type of payments on loans.

A year ago, February 15, there was a flood in Badger and this previous Administration, which I was a part of, took the initiative to pay off any existing debt that the Town of Badger had. Maybe this government would not do this, I do not know, but I was glad to be part of a government that had a heart and realized the situation that the community of Badger were in, and decided to wipe the slate clean, pay off any existing debt that the community of Badger had. It gave them a fresh, new start.

Also, the former Administration, that I was a part of, decided to put a new subdivision in Badger and look after improving and rebuilding most of the infrastructure there. That was a good decision that was made, I believe. I would hope that, even though there is a new government today, they would feel the very same way in a disastrous situation like that. I know that we have the community of Buchans and Buchans Junction. They are included in here. They have small populations and a very limited means of repaying debt. Yet, for all that, they are doing that.

Many communities in our Province are operating under a local service district arrangement. I know anybody who represents rural Newfoundland would understand that. Many times government pays 100 per cent of their municipal needs for water and sewer and emergencies that take place and helps them with their fire department in purchasing equipment and sometimes buys equipment for them, because they do not have the means to raise money in rural Newfoundland like they would in a bigger community. Lots of times whatever they need is 100 per cent looked after.

There is very little in there for the Town of Grand Falls-Windsor in short-term financing. They are in a good position. They have always been able to have a balanced budget and that is reflected in their taxes to the people. When you compare taxes in Grand Falls-Windsor for the amount of services that we get in relation to the City of St. John's, we are paying a lot less, I can tell you that. The services are terrific. We can walk almost on any sidewalk in our community, in our Town of Grand Falls-Windsor, during the winter months with our sneakers on. That is big concern for people in the City of St. John's, that they do not have access to their sidewalks. I can tell you, you can walk around town in Grand Falls-Windsor in the winter. I think there is forty-one kilometres of sidewalk that is plowed all the time. It is a joy to walk around the town because we know that all of the streets are looked after.

This is only one aspect of this bill today. As the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board said, it is basically housekeeping. He did say, also, that no defaults have ever occurred under this arrangement. That speaks well for every community here on the list.

The Minister of Finance also said - he talked about we were tardy in not dealing with the fact that our total debt is going to now be an accrual method. I would like to say to the Minister of Finance, the President of Treasury Board, that every budget that was brought down in this House of Assembly, while we were the government, was perfectly okay. Your own Auditor General, who sits to your right, confirmed for ten years running that our books were in order and they were the accounting method that almost every province in Canada used up until this year. We have now, this year, moved to accrual accounting and you have used this method to frighten the population of our Province. You have used this method of accrual accounting to frighten the population of our Province. You have done that and most people do not understand the complexities of accounting and now you will only talk about cash deficits.

Your mandate says that you are going to get rid of the cash deficit in four years. That should be a breeze because let me tell you something, Mr. Finance Minister, you are running two sets of books here in this Province. You are running two budgets. What is stated in this Budget is not real. You have put salaries in every department that you have no intention of paying. In your Estimates, and it will come to light - and you cannot even look up from your desk because you know full well that the Budget that you delivered - I think it was March 26.

MR. SULLIVAN: No, you are wrong again. March 30.

MS THISTLE: March 30 you delivered that Budget and you know full well that you have two budgets. One here is within those two covers here. You have two budgets. What you did not say to the people of the Province when you included the salaries for the Human Resources and Employment people, when you included the salaries for Transportation and Works, when you included the salaries for Government Services and also, many of the people in the College of the North Atlantic, you made it look like you were going to pay salaries out to all of these people when, in fact, you had no intention of doing it.

In fact, ever since you delivered your Budget on March 30 there have been pink slips continuously flowing from this building. You have sent your officials out to every area of this Province to deliver the bad news. They are going as I speak, and they were going yesterday. We predicted that there would be an announcement today on Human Resources, Labour and Employment. By golly, there wasn't a Ministerial Statement. No, sir. The bad news went out through a news release. I have a question: Whoever is writing the communications for Human Resources -

MR. SULLIVAN: It is not Question Period.

MS THISTLE: It is always Question Period in this House, let me tell you. While I am on my feet I will ask you any question I feel like. It is up to you whether or not you want to answer it.

The Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment, and for the Status of Women, she did not put that on her title when she sent out the news release today. So the Status of Women was not important. She did not put that in there. Anyway, she says, "The actions taken today reflect the department's goal to offer clients the best possible level of service and to use available resources most effectively." Now, this is the telling point. This is the telling part, "We must also recognize that the province's population has shifted and our service delivery network should reflect where people currently live." So, is she saying that nobody lives in Bay Roberts, nobody lives in Ferryland -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS THISTLE: No, you have moved to St. John's your own self.

- nobody lives in Whitbourne, nobody lives in Bay L'Argent, nobody lives in Wesleyville, nobody lives in Piccadilly, nobody lives in Cartwright to Forteau? She is saying the service delivery network should reflect where people currently live. Then she goes on to say that staff will have more time. They are going to have more time to help "...clients on employment and career opportunities, helping them prepare for meaningful employment." Well, now isn't that a lark? What a joke that is when her own colleague came out and said that there is going to be 4,000 job cuts and her own colleague, the Minister of Finance, instructed the College of the North Atlantic to go out and lay off people - her own colleague - but, then again, what more do you expect? What more do you expect from an urban decision-making Cabinet? I do not know if she knows where half of these places are.

What effect will it have on people? It is interesting. One of the things that I saw in your Budget was how you were going to structurally change the health care system. There was nothing said about the people you are going to affect. That does not matter.

The Minister of Finance just got up on his feet and said, we did not get elected in a popularity contest. Well, I will tell you how you got elected. You got elected in a Blue Book that was supposed to be truthful, and you got elected because you were expected to be trustworthy, but what have we seen so far? We have seen nothing but broken promises, betrayed trust, and how you have misled the people. We saw that today. We saw it with the College of the North Atlantic, when you said in your Blue Book what you were going to do. You were never going to ask them to change their budget. You were going to maintain the tuition freeze. You were going to give them money to offset that. What did you do? The complete opposite. That is what you did. That is exactly what you did.

Even today, when we wanted to question the Premier on his new Department of Business, the Government House Leader stood up and our leader asked: Would you reschedule it at your convenience? What did the Government House Leader say? He said: No, I don't want to check with the Premier. That is what he said. What kind of an arrogant attitude is that for a brand new government only seven months old? What can you expect to find over the next four years?

Then, the Minister of Government Services stood up and said that the weigh scales across the Province are well looked after and the travelling public does not have a thing to worry about. You have three weigh scales from Port aux Basques to St. John's. Three weigh scales and no inspectors, only in those three spots.

It does not make any difference - as the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile just said - that 40,000 tractor trailers a year gets off the ferry in Port aux Basques and get on the highway. Forget that. We are going to efficiently run our Department of Government Services. We think, and we believe, that you only need three weigh scales across the Province. That is all you need. You can get off in Port aux Basques with an overweight load, you can have bald tires, anything like that, which is a threat to safety on the highway.

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible) check your tires.

MS THISTLE: It does not matter, because this government are having three weigh scales. Come hell or high water, that is all they are having. That is all they need.

Now, a question was asked today from the Member for Labrador West. There is not going to be any driver examination place in his district. Can you imagine? The Minister of Government Services got up on her feet and said: Well, people are going to have to drive a bit further.

Does she realize that they are going to have to drive 600 kilometers each way to get their driver's licence? She expects people to do that, all in the interest of saving money.

CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that her time has expired.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I will have another opportunity later on.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

When I look at Bill 15, and all the guarantees that are there for the municipalities across the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, I see that there are quite a number from Anchor Point to Appleton and everywhere in between.

Millions of dollars that were spent in infrastructure over the last number of years, the two years that I had the opportunity to be Minister of Municipal Affairs, there were three programs, and I just want to talk about the three programs that were there that we administered.

For the larger centers we had the Multi-Year Capital Works Program. That was 50-50 cost-shared between the municipality and government. Many of the major municipalities took advantage of that, like the Cities of St. John's, Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Grand Falls-Windsor and so on.

Then there was the other one, the Water Quality Improvement, because a couple of years we did have a major problem with THMs, and we recognized that we had to improve the quality of drinking water for many of the smaller communities in the Province. I remember that. I remember the letter.

What we devised was a program up to $100,000 for small municipalities where we paid 100 per cent of the cost. That was significant for many of the smaller communities where they had to put in a new system, many of the systems were not operating, and so we decided that we would put in $100,000 - up to $100,000 - for these communities to install the new chlorination plant. Some of them went over $100,000 and that was a cost to government that government had to bear, and it shows up in Bill 15. Obviously, I do not feel any regrets about doing that. I do not feel any embarrassment about these types of costs that are associated to the Province. I am glad that we had a part to play in it.

Then, of course, the other part, the third part, was the Canada-Newfoundland Infrastructure Program. That program, in itself, is a good program, but it is not enough. When you have a population division from the programs that are there - Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia get most of the funds and we, in Newfoundland, get about 2 per cent of it. If there is a $2 billion program, we get 2 per cent of that. It is practically peanuts and not enough to be able to do one project in the City of Corner Brook. I am sure that we would like to be able to change that ratio, if not we are going to be forever and a day looking for more money to provide infrastructure to many of the smaller communities.

The Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board made a statement that was very important, I think, to all of us, because these are large sums of money in Bill 15. Not one of the municipalities in the Province has ever defaulted on a loan. That is significant. Obviously, they cannot pay for all of that infrastructure up-front, they need some breaks like you have in the water quality program, they need extra breaks when you talk about the amount that the municipality would have to pay, but when it comes to their share, they never defaulted.

I had the opportunity, over the last couple of years, to provide close to 200 communities with debt restructuring, because they could not afford to do that themselves. As a result of that, many of these smaller communities are now able to pay their debt, with the new ratio that they have been given. In addition to that, charging at least a $1 a day for water and sewer, plus, in some instances, 10, 11, 12 or 13 per cent property tax, and their bills are in line with what you would find in many of the larger communities. In fact, the water and sewer rates are much higher in many of the smaller communities than you would find in many of the urban centres.

Also, not so much associated, I guess, with Bill 15, but certainly on the finance side, I think, today, when the minister announced the closing of the HRE offices, I think about one, in particular, I think about the one in Burgeo. Burgeo is not in my district, it is in the Member for Burgeo& LaPoile's district, but it does serve the people that I represent from the Francois-Grey River-Ramea area. Just think about it now. If you know the geography of the South Coast, these people from Francois would have about two hours-plus, probably two hours and a half, to go by boat from Francois, and a little less than that from Grey River to go into Burgeo, where they go into the HRE office. Now, then, no office in Burgeo anymore. They have to go two and a half hours drive up to Stephenville. It just does not add up.

The thing is, there should be a satellite office or something there that would look after these people, because some of them, a lot of them, in those smaller communities do not have vehicles and the Department of Human Resources and Employment would have to provide a taxi for them for services, to go into the larger centres. Just think of the cost that would be. I think that this particular situation is penny-wise and pound foolish.

Another area that was closed in my district today was in Harbour Breton, but they do have a road connection and it will inconvenience a lot of people there. It is so inconvenient as you find the people in the isolated communities along the South Coast. It just does not add up to me at all. To ask the people from these isolated communities to bypass Burgeo, take the office out of Burgeo and then ask them to go to Stephenville, two-and-one-half or three hours away, for services, just does not add up. I would like to know how much that would cost to be able to close that office, or to remain open, I should say, to provide the services to the people along the Southwest Coast.

The Finance Minister was talking about the amount of debt we owe, and we talked about the pension non-funded liability. I remember, when I came into the House first, back in 1989. hearing the Member for Mount Pearl at the time, a former Finance Minister, Neil Winsor, talk about when he was Finance Minister, and he boasted about the fact that when he was minister he did take the money out of the pension plans to finance roads and to finance water and sewer. I am sure you can go back into Hansard where he said: If I was a minister today, I would do the same thing. It was the best deal that government could find. Obviously, that process has stopped. You are not allowed to do that anymore. The pensioners are right when they say that governments did take their money to do water and sewer, to build roads and do many other things. Today, they are asked to pay even more into the pension plans to make it viable. Government did use the money and has a responsibility to pay it back. That, to me, speaks volumes about the things we hear from time to time.

The other thing that we talked about, or heard today, was the weigh scales and inspections into Port aux Basques. Again, it is another example, I guess, of people who work for government and the people who work in the departments, the civil service employees, bureaucrats, or whoever, making decisions. Just think about it. As the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile said earlier today, 40,000 tracker-trailer trucks come through Port aux Basques and find their way across the Province yearly.

That particular station that is here, the weigh scales, did more than weighing the trucks. There were people there who went out and did the inspections. As the member noted - and I have done it many time, driven the road from the Burgeo highway. It is a gravel road. You can go on a gravel road from the Burgeo highway and you come out in Badger. You can bypass the weigh scales at Pynns Brook if you want to. These particular trucks could find themselves in Eastern Newfoundland and could deliver all of their goods in Central, in Grand Falls- Gander, without having to go through any inspection. That, to me, does not make sense, and I think that should be one of the things that should be looked at again and re-evaluated. We are talking about safety.

Only recently, I was listening to the news, and then went to the CBC news, locally, in Nova Scotia that talked about where a person from this Province had been involved in an accident, a fatal accident. The reason why the accident had occurred was that the rear wheels of the machine came unhooked and caused a crash. There was another person who was killed from the Atlantic Provinces - I am not sure which province, I think it might have been New Brunswick - and there were other people who were injured. It is these types of things that we can never be too sure about, about safety. Obviously, then, by doing these types of things, and cutting, it just doesn't add to making what governments are all about, making the roads safe for people who use them.

One of the other things that we have talked about, also as a part of the budgetary process, is fees that people have been asked to pay, and we will deal more with that tomorrow when we talk about the ferry rates for people across the Province.

CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the member that his time has lapsed.

MR. LANGDON: Just a minute to conclude, Mr. Chair?

CHAIR: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

CHAIR: By leave.

MR. LANGDON: We have just seen the public service unions accept a two-year wage freeze, zero and zero, and yet everywhere you turn - the ferry rates are supposed to go up 10 per cent this year. We have found out that, by way of their rounding and so on, there is an 18 per cent increase. That is not fair to the people who are using these particular services, after they had been told that another approach would be used to bring these particular ferry rates in line with highway traffic.

With that, I will conclude. I will have another opportunity, I am sure, to speak about that.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I, too, want to take a few moments in relation to Bill 15, guaranteeing certain loans under the Local Authority Guarantee Act of 1957.

I have to say, Mr. Chair, when I look through the bill I notice that quite a few of the towns in my area have, I guess, experienced the benefits of this particular bill, and hopefully it will continue in the future.

Mr. Chairman, I have to go back and spend some time on, I guess, what happened here in the House today. I believe it is all related to the Budget and so on. When the questions were asked to the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment, and the Status of Women today, I have to say I was somewhat surprised, I suppose, when I saw hon. members opposite being able to clap and applaud when we knew that twenty offices, twenty HRE offices, were going to close around this Province. Personally, Mr. Chairman, I was unable to applaud knowing that the office would close in Bay Roberts. I will go into some of the other ones a little later on.

I have to say that it is very discouraging to know that people are able to do that. I have to look back at the statement that was released by the minister. She said, "The actions taken today reflect the department's goal to offer clients the best possible level of service..." Some hon. members opposite are saying, yes, that is right.

I have to say, when the hon. Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune just explained how people have to go from Grey River to Burgeo, that was bad enough, now once they get in Burgeo they have to drive all the way to Stephenville. I have to say to the hon. members opposite, if that is an upgrade in service being provided to the people of this Province, there is something just not right.

The other thing, Mr. Chair, I have to say it was noted today that twenty-eight people would be laid off through this announcement, but I also wonder how many are there that are going to retire over the next two or three months. We do not know that figure. How many of them will fall from the system through attrition over the next few months? When you take all of that into consideration, Mr. Chair, I wonder how that is going to affect the service that is being offered.

We are always hearing that each issue that is discussed in this House seems to always come back that, oh, this was something that the former Administration did, or this is why we are in such a mess.

MR. WISEMAN: (Inaudible).

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Chairman, I say to the hon. Member for Trinity North, today the announcement that was made, the former Administration had very little to do with it. The minister on your side of the government, Mr. Chair -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. BUTLER: Oh, no. Lots of times issues are put forward and when you buckle under pressure like you people, I think you people buckled under the pressure of the Treasury Board, because if that came up before, the former Administration took the concerns of the people at heart more than what you people did at this particular time.

MR. DENINE: (Inaudible).

MR. BUTLER: I say to my hon. colleague from Mount Pearl, he should speak to the member himself, if he wants to know if I apologized for something that I did not do.

I have to say, Mr. Chair, a plan is one thing but actually doing it is another, and that is what we have seen here today. I listened very carefully -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. BUTLER: - to the comments that were made by the minister, with all due respect, when she went on to say why those changes took place today. One of the changes is in the Province's population and the other one is in the improvements in our transportation system. Well, I have to say the people in my district who are serviced by the Bay Roberts office, I think they have the same roads that they have had there for many, many years. The population is continuing to grow, so I do not think that is the only reason why those offices are closing, Mr. Chair. They say it is to provide a better service to the people of this Province. I even question that, after what we have heard here today.

Mr Chair, she went on to say that home visits are not needed any more, and that may be true and that has happened over quite some period of time, but I can assure you, if you speak to the people in the various offices around this Province, they are having a more difficult time now knowing what is happening, and all too often there are monies that had to be paid back because things are happening and the office staff really do not know what is going on.

I say to the minister and to the government opposite, this is going to increase more now when you have the offices closed in forty different communities covering a large area. The issues, they will have less to know about them and I can guarantee you there will be monies sent out now because it is all going to be done by the telephone system and there will be no personal contact with the clients around this Province and they will not know what is happening.

They go on to talk about the computer system, the computer payout. That is all fine, but I can assure you, Mr. Chair, and the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's, the people right up as far as one of the communities up in St. Vincent's area, they are now covered off by an office in Bay Roberts and Carbonear, so do not tell me that there are people up there not going to have major concerns. Everything cannot be done by technology. Everything cannot be done over the telephone. I have to say that those people, from time to time, are going to have to travel to the offices, and I wonder who is going to cover off the costs for those people. It is fine to say it can all be done by technology, and maybe that is true, but the cost of the travel is one thing. I believe that the service that is provided to the people will also be downgraded.

Mr. Chair, when you look at the offices that are going to be closed - Conception Bay South - those people are going to have to come into St. John's. That is not all too bad, and I have to say Bay Roberts, travelling as far as Carbonear, that is not all that far away, but it is an inconvenience for people if they do not have a vehicle, do not have the means to get there, but when I look at St. Mary's, the office in St. Mary's, my understanding is that those people are going to be serviced now by the office in Carbonear. That is quite a distance for those people to go.

It is not only the service provided to the individuals in each community. It is also, Mr. Chair, the upheaval of the people who work there. I know, and I spoke to the people today in the Bay Roberts area, those twelve people, they are fairly fortunate. They are going to only have to move to Carbonear, which is only about maybe twenty minutes to a half an hour's drive. The workers in Whitbourne are going to have to go to St. John's, and that is not all too bad - I drive to St. John's - but then I hear the people who worked in St. Mary's, they received a pink slip.

Mr. Chair, when you look at those rural communities around the Province that are being affected today, I think it is totally unacceptable that the most rural communities in this Province are the ones that are being affected. I cannot help but think about even on the Burin Peninsula, Grand Bank and Bay L'Argent, those people have to travel up over the highway to Marystown.

Mr. Chair, I mentioned earlier the one from Burgeo. That office in Burgeo, not only does it affect immensely on the people who live in Burgeo but the other people along that coast who have to go by boat, who were serviced at the office in Burgeo, and now they, as well, have to go all the way to Stephenville.

Mr. Chair, all of this, to me, is a lack of respect, a lack of concern, for the people of this Province. I am wondering, I do not know how many dollars will be saved through this venture - I know over the coming days, I guess, we will find out - but I doubt very much if there will be really much savings into it once you calculate the transportation costs and the people having to move from one area to the other.

Mr. Chair, in conclusion, I want to say that I believe, I think it was the Minister of Finance who looked over at me a little while ago when someone was talking about the scale houses around this Province, and he said what it is scaling down. I say, Mr. Chair, it is more than scaling down when we close twenty offices around this Province, because our highways, if we listened to the hon. members when they were in Opposition, they were telling us how bad the highways were in this Province because of neglect by the former Administration. Now, what we are hearing is that our highways are so good, our technology system is so good, that we do not have feelings and respect for people any more. It is all going to be taken care of by the telephone system.

Mr. Chair, in the Budget they referenced the fiscal tiger. I believe that today, and what we are going to see over the coming days and weeks, I believe that even our economic tiger will probably be put to sleep once and for all because there is going to be such a drastic effect on the economy.

In conclusion, Mr. Chair, I want to say that last week, after Bill 18 passed in this hon. House, there was a symbolic - I guess you could call it a death to collective bargaining, that was carried out by the members of the various unions. All I can say, Mr. Chair, as we look at what has happened here today and what we are going to hear coming down the tubes over the next short period of time, I believe that over the next three-and-a-half years this Province will be in mourning for the full duration.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Bellevue.

MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I rise today to say a few words about the bill. I think what has happened in this House today, and what has happened outside the House - and indeed last Tuesday was a very dark day in Newfoundland and Labrador. It seems like Tuesdays is the day in this Province that we receive such bad news.

When we hear the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment, and the Status of Women, and the Minister of Government Services, and the kind of announcements that they have made today, it is indeed a dark day for Newfoundland and Labrador.

The District of Bellevue is one of the areas of this Province, in terms of the generation of wealth in this Province, that generates a lot of wealth in this Province in terms of the number of jobs and the amount of people working. Today, we lost a government office in the Community of Bay L'Argent. Bay L'Argent has an HRE office there, and we lost the services for the people of the smaller communities in Fortune Bay, and now they are all going to have to go to Marystown to receive services.

One of the advantages of having a government office, of course, is that people come from other communities. In a lot of these communities you have very small businesses, and bringing people into the community brings money into the community, in that when they come in to go to the government office they probably will drop into the store to buy their groceries and buy other things.

I recently did an interview with The Telegram, and I see that this government is in a program of resettlement of rural Newfoundland and Labrador. In other words, the only place that will exist on the Burin Peninsula is Marystown. Then, all of the other communities, they are looking at phasing them out. I think it is a very sad day.

One of the other advantages of government offices in a lot of those communities - I know when I was the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, a lot of these offices that are government offices, the town council and other community groups rent space to the offices. The town council in Bay L'Argent is already in bad financial difficulty and moving that office out of Bay L'Argent will mean that town council will now lose rent for the leasing of that particular space. It is a very, very sad day for the people of Bay L'Argent; I can assure you that.

I think it is a very sad day for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. In this Province, where we have such a wide geography, they are closing down the weigh scales in Port aux Basques and the weigh scales in Foxtrap. I don't know if people realize it or not, but in the District of Bellevue we have major, major industries: the Bull Arm site; the Whiffen Head Transhipment Terminal; the Refinery. There are trucks that leave St. John's with very, very heavy loads, very, very heavy equipment. Right now, they will leave downtown, St. John's, or wherever they leave in St. John's, they will travel on the Trans-Canada Highway, and the next weigh scales are in Goobies. There will be no weighing of those vehicles, or inspection of those vehicles, at all.

AN HON. MEMBER: There is a portable team there on hand.

MR. BARRETT: A portable team which is there once in a while. I can assure you right now that one of the areas of our Province where the Trans-Canada deteriorated really, really fast was between Whitbourne and Goobies. It was a result of all the heavy equipment that was transported over that highway over the last ten years in terms of Bull Arm.

I say to the hon. minister, you are having trucks coming in from Port aux Basques. They will not be inspected until they get to Deer Lake. The Member for Humber East is well aware, that hill in Corner Brook and coming down over that hill in Corner Brook can be a very treacherous place. If you get a truck coming down over that hill with bad brakes, overweight, I can tell you one thing - hon. members should realize on that side, you are in government now. You are in a very highly responsible position. I can tell you, if one of these trucks comes down over that hill and wipes out two or three cars carrying - you talked about your children and your grandchildren, I can tell you, what you did here today - we are talking about the future of our children and our grandchildren, by eliminating that weigh scales in Port aux Basques you are putting those children and those grandchildren at great risk. I do not know if you realize it or not, but a lot of these trucks, if they are not inspected for overweight and they are not inspected - we saw what happened down on Duckworth Street. We saw a person killed down on Duckworth Street because the brakes gave out on a particular truck and landed on top of one of those vehicles. A family out doing their shopping and all of a sudden the family was wiped out.

Today I saw the hon. members on the other side, which really shocked me, when the minister was making these kinds of announcements, for them to be clapping and patting on their desks and cheering. I mean what we are going through here in Newfoundland and Labrador and what is happening here today is a very serious matter.

We have three weigh scales in this Province, and we all know the problem of hydroplaning on the Trans-Canada. The divided highway now between St. John's and some of the areas going out over the road is getting in very rough shape because of the heavy trucks and the heavy equipment on our roads and the hydroplaning that takes place.

I say to the hon. minister, I think you should rethink some of the things that are happening in your department in terms of the safety of the general public. I mean you were elected for the health, safety and education of people. Right now you are forgetting about the safety of people in terms of what you are doing here right now. I ask you to rethink what is happening here in terms of the eliminating of the weigh scales. I think it is utterly ridiculous in terms of what is happening. The number of vehicles on our highways are increasing, and I can assure you that I hope nothing happens which seriously injures the travelling public on our highway system.

The members on the other side, the member for St. Mary's-The Capes, there are people in his district whom I receive faxes from. Recently I received a fax addressed to the hon. member for St. Mary's-The Capes and it is to the hon. member for St. Mary's-The Capes. It says: We, the workers at Local 5305, Transportation and Works, unit 143, St. Bride's, would like to express our displeasure with you, our MHA, for standing in support for Bill 18. We all know what Bill 18 was, the bill that put everybody back to work who were working. During yesterday's sitting of the House: it is, indeed, a very dark day for the collective bargaining process in this Province. During your campaign you promised that if you were elected, the Danny Williams' team, our depot would most definitely not be closed this summer and we would not be travelling to Placentia. Well, we were sent to Placentia a week earlier this year. Not only were they not going to be sent to Placentia, but what they are saying in this particular fax is that they were sent to Placentia a week earlier this year: and we feel we will be lucky to save our depot with this PC government.

That is a fax which was sent to the hon. member for St. Mary's-The Capes, that when he was campaigning he had committed that they would never have to travel to Placentia again. It is signed by the people in the area. They signed their signatures. This is the kind of stress and agony that is happening within the public service in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and they cannot get any response from the members on the opposite side.

AN HON. MEMBER: Where are the people from?

MR. BARRETT St. Bride's.

AN HON. MEMBER: St. Bride's?

MR. BARRETT: In St. Bride's, yes.

AN HON. MEMBER: That is the hon. Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

MR. BARRETT: Yes, the hon. Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

They sent me a copy of this particular fax, because they said that their member would not bring up the issue in the House of Assembly. So, what is happening here today in terms of the weigh scales, and the work that is happening here, I think it is atrocious. I never saw a government so excited about people losing their jobs.

CHAIR: Order please!

I remind the Member for Bellevue that his time has expired.

MR. BARRETT: Okay, there is plenty of opportunity in this bill, Mr. Chairman, to speak.

CHAIR: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I appreciate the opportunity just to spend a few brief moments with respect to Bill 15, An Act To Amend The Local Authority Guarantee Act, 1957, and having missed an opportunity to speak to Bill 14, An Act To Amend The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957, which was dealt with in Committee earlier today, I just want to make a few brief comments in terms of this particular legislation which is important legislation, as the last piece was, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to see the amount of co-operation occurring here today between the House leaders, the government and the Opposition parties, in terms of getting some important business done.

Mr. Chairman, the few comments I make are along these lines: The unfortunate part is that you have the mixed messages. The two bills that we are doing here today, the one that is already gone through Committee, Bill14, and this Bill 15, the unfortunate part, as I see it, is that there are considerable number of members in the government caucus that I am pretty sure do not really, 100 per cent, understand the significance of it, because they have been described to them in a couple of different ways at different times.

This one, for example, The Local Authority Guarantee Act, if you look at what it is, it is loans for largely rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Just a few of the communities that are involved: Anchor Point, not one of the largest communities in Newfoundland and Labrador by any stretch of the imagination, but viable in its own right because of shrimp operations and the plant and so on; Appleton, close to Gander, I believe, part of the district for the Member for Gander, a viable community in its own right, doing very well, but not a large community by Newfoundland and Labrador standards; Arnold's Cove, Avondale, Badger, which just went through the flood crisis a year or so ago; Baie Verte, which has not seen the best days in the history of Baie Verte, but still a viable community in its own right, and the people who are there are quite determined that there is a good future still for Baie Verte; Bay L'Argent; the future was a bit brighter before today, when they found out the office was closing; Bay St. George South; Bay de Verde, again, a prosperous community in its own right, but certainly rural Newfoundland in its very essence, not urban or cosmopolitan or metropolitan by any stretch of the imagination; Bird Cove, on the Northern Peninsula; Belleoram, and communities of that nature. It goes from A to Z, except there are no communities in Newfoundland, I do not think, that begin with Z. The last one is Woody Point, which begins with a W. Then you have Cavendish, Centreville, Wareham, Trinity, Campbellton, Burnt Islands and so on, so you have communities like this that are paying their own way and at points in time they borrowed money. They have borrowed money because, just like ourselves, just like people like myself, in having a house, I did not have the cash to pay for the house so I went and arranged a mortgage. As long as I pay the mortgage and do not default, at some point I will own the house. From my own sources, I hope that I am fortunate enough to be able to continue to do that and be mortgage free within another twenty or thirty years, before I die or something.

These communities borrow for specific purposes, whether it be water and sewer, local roads, a community centre. In Grand Falls-Windsor, for example, my hometown now, they are just completing a major refurbishment and renovation of the Joe Byrne Arena. That is what it is called now. It was the Grand Falls Stadium when I grew up and played hockey there. It was quite a facility. As a matter of fact, it was provided to the community by the mill a long time ago. Now that the new community, which has only been incorporated since 1962, wanted to refurbish it, they did not have the cash either. Grand Falls-Windsor is a fairly viable town by Newfoundland standards, but they did not have the cash. They did not have a couple of million dollars hanging around to just go out and pay cash, so they borrowed it. It gets rolled into a bill like this because the other thing that the law suggests in Newfoundland and Labrador, the law of the land says that communities - even a city like St. John's, by the way - cannot go out and borrow money like that without the permission of the provincial government.

The former councillor for St. John's, now the Member for St. John's Centre, would know that. The former Mayor for Mount Pearl would know that, now the Member for Mount Pearl. By the way, banks probably would have given them the money on their own, but the law suggested that the Province had to agree to it and had to guarantee it.

The Finance Minister, as I understood today - I did not hear him, because I do not listen to him, but somebody reported to me - he suggested that there have not been any defaults, that these are pretty secured loans. There is no history of default.

He says that because today he says: Well, there is no problem, pass this bill. You do not have to debate it a lot because there is no risk here for anybody. There is no history of defaults. These are good, secured loans. There are assets already in the communities for these. The towns, themselves, through their Municipal Operating Grants and their own tax bases, are paying the bills as they go, so there is no real risk.

That is what he is saying today because he wants us to vote for it, but guess what he has told this caucus and the people of the Province on another time? He has told them that the millions of dollars that are here, guaranteed by the Province, when he describes it another time, because he wants to scare people, he says: That is part of the total debt for the Province. That is the debt that the Premier says we are drowning in. Now, notice that. That is part of that. Sometimes they have it up as far as $15 billion, they say. The direct debt of the Province is less than $8 billion, but when they want to make a big number to scare people they say: Oh, you have to count the debt at Hydro. You have to count debt for the municipalities, because it is guaranteed by the Province. It is guaranteed by the Province only because the law says it has to be, because as legal entities they are not allowed to borrow on their own.

He says there is no risk, but in the speech that is used to say we have to have wage freezes, we have to have layoffs, how many today, 335 today? If 331 - and the Finance Minister is outside the doors here telling the media that, by the way, that is today. There is another 300, at least, coming before September, and maybe the members opposite are hearing that for the first time. You might be hearing it for the first time now, at about twelve minutes after five. It will be on the evening news at 6 o'clock, with your Finance Minister telling the whole world that the 331 layoffs, we had no choice in today because we are drowning in debt.

When he wants us to believe that we are drowning in debt, the millions of dollars that are in this bill, he adds to the list and says: We cannot sustain it, we cannot pay it; but, because he wants the bill passed this afternoon, he says: There is no risk to this. Even though it is guaranteed by the Province, it is routine. You should vote for it because the towns are paying for it and the cities are paying for it anyway, and nobody need worry about it.

That is the speech for today, but unfortunately the same numbers are rolled in when the Finance Minister and the Premier want to suggest to somebody that the total debt of the Province is now up around $15 billion and we cannot pass it along. Remember this speech that you all made last week: I can't be part of passing that along to my children and grandchildren.

Well, the millions of dollars that are in here, you are not passing that along to anybody. Your own Finance Minister just told you in the introduction that it is all secured. It is all guaranteed. There is no history or record of default. The people pay for it themselves. It is water and sewer and municipal infrastructure, local roads, community centres, recreational facilities. They are paying for it themselves. You are not paying for it from the provincial Treasury. They are paying for it themselves through their own revenue sources and their own tax bases. So it is a bit disingenuous to say that the millions and billions of dollars, by the way, that are in bills like this over the years are counted for their provincial debt and they are a risk, and then stand up today and say: Oh, you do not need to debate it a lot today because there is no risk. Go ahead. I recommend that you vote for it because it is a routine matter.

Mr. Chairman, the Government House Leader, for example, talks about why he changed his mind, because the debt increased by $2.5 billion, I think he said, in the last - five years?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. GRIMES: The last five years. And guess what? Here is a bunch of it right in here which his own Finance Minister is saying today - these loans have been granted in the last couple of years, millions of dollars worth. The Finance Minister is saying: Vote for it today. All of you now, who voted to send workers back to work last week - who were already working, because you were told not to pass along something to your children, grandchildren, and great-grand children. You are being told today that these millions of dollars: Don't worry about it. It is all secure.

By the way, that is the same thing the bond rating agency said about the hydro debt. The hydro debt, which is between $2 billion and $3 billion - it might be a little more than $3 billion - but all the financial agencies said: Don't worry about the hydro debt because it is 100 per cent totally secure. It is risk free. It is the same as me going to the bank and saying: I want $150,000 for my new house in Grand Falls-Windsor.

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MR. GRIMES: Never mind that part, I will not be distracted by the Minister of Natural Resources today.

I want $150,000 for a new house. I want a mortgage, but I am telling you that I have $150,000 in the bank, except that I do not want to spend it on a house.

CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the Leader of the Opposition that his time has expired.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

There will be lots of time to come back to these issues. Again, I know that the bill will pass because I do agree with the Finance Minister, that it is a routine matter and it is not a big problem.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Chair, I am going to deal in more substance, maybe on Thursday, with some of the comments made by the Leader of the Opposition, but I cannot let this one pass.

MR. REID: Hold on now, we are not finished yet, are we?

MR. E. BYRNE: No, but I have ten minutes now, I say to the Member for Twillingate, and I plan to use some of them, thank you very much.

The Leader of the Opposition has made the contention that since 1989 hydro's debt to equity ratio was 80 per cent debt, 20 per cent equity. Now, he says, just because the bond rating agency said - since that time they have increased the debt to 87 per cent debt, 13 per cent equity. Now, what does that mean? It means that we are further exposed. It means that our equity in the company has diminished. It means, if you take his argument and move it forward, then why don't we just go borrow the remainder of 13 per cent because if it is self-financing, so what?

Now, what a philosophy to have. Is it any wonder that we are in the position financially that we are in today with that type of thinking? I mean if that is the case, if you take by the sheer logic of his argument, then what we should do right now is whatever equity we have left in that company, we should go mortgage it to the hilt because it is self-financing anyway. And guess what? Then there is no equity left, we will spend it this year and maybe next year to keep services going. But happens the year after that? What happens the year after that? The year after that, is that we have no equity left to borrow against because we just borrowed it all. That is the point which we are at right now. For the last five years, that is exactly what they did. They went into every cupboard where there was a substantial amount of cash and even insubstantial amounts of cash that were available and pooled for the Province, took it, used it for the day without any care for what was going to happen six or seven or eight years down the road, and they had fun doing it. But now the jig is up.

If you take that logic - and I am glad he stood up and said it. I am glad he stood up and talked about what his view was on how you could do it because it shows, crystal clear, not only to members in this House but to the people of the Province, that the philosophy the Leader of the Opposition had when he was here is that: I got lots of money left. I got some money left on the credit. I got a little bit of equity left. Let's go mortgage that, too, to pay for the day and forget about the year after that. That is not the philosophy that we take. That is not the philosophy that stands our children and grandchildren in good stead, and that is not the philosophy that we should pass on to our children and our grandchildren as their inheritance, and I will be darned if we are going to do it. That is why we are taking the decisions we are doing today, so we do not have to do exactly that.

Mr. Chair, with that in mind, I would like to move that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

The motion is that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

All those in favour?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Against?

Motion carried.

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

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole have considered the matters to them referred and have directed me to report that they have adopted a certain resolution and recommend that a bill be introduced to give effect to the same.

Also, Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole have directed me to report progress on another bill and ask leave to sit again.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chairperson of the Committee of the Whole reports that the Committee have considered the matters to them referred and have directed him to report that the Committee has adopted a certain resolution and recommends that a bill be introduced to give effect to the same.

It is moved and seconded that this resolution be now read a first time.

All those in favour?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against?

Carried.

CLERK: That it is expedient to bring in a measure further to amend The Loan and Guarantee Act, 1957, to provide for the advance of loans to and the guarantee of the repayment of bonds or debentures issued by or loans advanced to certain corporations.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that this resolution be now read a second time.

All those in favour?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against?

Carried.

CLERK: The second reading of the resolution.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, we have made some progress today.

AN HON. MEMBER: The second reading of the resolution.

MR. E. BYRNE: I am sorry, Mr. Speaker.

I will ask the Clerk to read the bill a first and second time, please.

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

We are dealing with Bill 14.

It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of Finance shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Finance shall have leave to introduce said bill?

All those in favour, aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: Carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957," carried. ( Bill 14)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a first time?

All those in favour, aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: Carried.

CLERK: A Bill, "An Act To Amend The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957." (Bill 14)

On motion, Bill 14 read a first time, ordered read a second time, presently, by leave.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said Bill 14 be now read a second time.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a second time?

All those in favour, aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: Carried.

CLERK: A bill, "An Act To Amend The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957." (Bill 14)

On motion, Bill 14, read a second time, presently, by leave.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill, Bill 14, be now read a third time.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a third time?

All those in favour, aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: Carried.

CLERK: A bill, "An Act To Amend The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957." (Bill 14)

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

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

Before rising, I want to just give notice that tomorrow morning the Resource Committee will meet at 9:00 a.m., in the Chamber to review the Estimates of the Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development; and, the Resource Committee will also meet tomorrow at 7:00 p.m. in the Chamber to review the Estimates of the Department of Environment and Conservation.

Just a reminder for all members of that Committee, as well, the Estimates of the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture will be reviewed at 7:00 p.m. tonight.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. E. BYRNE: If members would give me a moment, I could explain everything to all members, including my colleagues to my left and members opposite.

What is on the schedule tonight, I think the Minister of Fisheries has talked to the Member for Torngat Mountains, so that is in place.

Mr. Speaker, with that, I do move that the House now adjourn and reconvene tomorrow at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER: Prior to adjourning, I do believe that -

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A point of order has been raised by the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. ANDERSEN: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture and Labrador Affairs, I met with him on a separate issue today, outside the door, and he mentioned to me that the Estimates for Labrador Affairs was cancelled tonight and would be carried through on Wednesday. I said: Well, if it is cancelled, I am sorry, I do not make that decision. It goes through my colleagues over here, so I guess he should have talked to my colleagues over here if he was going to cancel it.

MR. SPEAKER: I might suggest to the hon. members that they might consult with each other prior to adjourning so that we have all of the procedures proper.

When we were calling the bill at the end of the process, the Speaker was supposed to say: This Bill 14 is now read a third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and its title be as on the Order Paper.

So that we can make sure that all the appropriate processes are followed, the Chair wishes to read that into the official record of the House.

The motion is to adjourn. It is moved that we adjourn until tomorrow, Wednesday, at 2 o'clock in the afternoon, when I think we are debating a motion by the hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

This House now stands adjourn until tomorrow at 2 o'clock in the afternoon.

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