MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Before we proceed with routine proceedings this afternoon, I would like to observe an old parliamentary tradition. I have the pleasure, and the pleasant task, to formally introduce a member who was elected in the by-election held on February 21. He is Mr. Felix Collins, from the District of Placentia & St. Mary's.

I have been advised by the Clerk of the House of Assembly that Mr. Collins has taken the Oath of Allegiance to the Crown, as required by the Constitution, and has signed the Members' Roll.

Please welcome Mr. Felix Collins.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, I present to this hon. House of Assembly, Mr. Felix Collins, the new Member for Placentia & St. Mary's, who requests the right to claim his seat.

MR. SPEAKER: Welcome, Mr. Collins. It is my privilege to welcome you to the House, and to tell you that you now have the right and privilege to take your seat.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Members' statements for this afternoon are as follows: the hon. the Member for the District of Grand Falls-Buchans; the hon. the Member for the District of Lake Melville; the hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave; the hon. the Member for the District of Exploits; the hon. the Member for the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair; and the hon. the Member for the District of Gander.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for the District of Grand Falls-Buchans.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to congratulate Exploits Valley High Principal Dave Antle, as being selected as one of Canada's Outstanding Principals. The award is an initiative of The Learning Partnership, a not-for-profit organization bringing business, education, government, labour, policy makers and the community to develop partnerships that strengthen public education in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, the awards program received nominations from every province and territory, and the selection was based on representation by population. Each candidate was scored in several categories, including characteristics of outstanding principals, evidence of partnerships with parents and community, with illustrations of successful change and innovation resulting in improved student achievement.

An example of partnerships with students, parents and community, was one I heard on a CBC interview this morning while I was driving out from Grand Falls-Windsor. I heard Dave Antle being interviewed by Randy Larcombe. Exploits Valley High School has taken a very bold step as of today; they are banning smoking on school premises. This could not have been done without partnerships.

As part of winning the award, principals took part in a trip to the University of Toronto for a five-day executive leadership training program and will also be inducted into the National Academy of Principals.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating Exploits Valley High Principal Dave Antle, one of Canada's Outstanding Principals!

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to congratulate each and every athlete, their communities, their community co-ordinators and volunteers, who took part in last week's Labrador Winter Games.

Athletes participated in a wide range of sporting events, from the traditional, such as the dog team race, the Labrathon, to the more contemporary, such as badminton and ball hockey. It was a great week of competition, fun and sportsmanship. Many Games records were broken but, more importantly, many old friendships were renewed and many new friendships were made, which is why the Labrador Winter Games are so often called and referred to as the Friendship Games.

The Labrador Winter Games are extremely important to the people of Labrador, as they unite Labradorians of all cultures and backgrounds by a single bond - sports. I have to say, Labrador produces some of the finest athletes this Province has ever seen, Mr. Speaker. Mark Nichols and Mike Adam are case in point - who, by the way, received a tremendous welcome at the Games Opening Ceremonies on March 12.

The Games were a fantastic success, due to the hard work and dedication of the Games Board of Directors and Volunteer Committee Chairs, their sub-groups of volunteers and, of course, the Games Director, Assistant Director and their staff, under the direction of Mr. Dusty Miller, without whom these Games would not be possible.

Again, I ask all members of the House to join me in extending congratulations to everybody who took part in the 2006 Labrador Winter Games, and we look forward to the 2009 Games.

Mr. Speaker, a special congratulations I want to extend to the Cartwright team who, this year, won first place in the Labrador Winter Games.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Jamie Porter of Bay Roberts, and Lindsay Roberts of Spaniards Bay, who recently won gold medals at the Youth Bowling Provincial Championships which were held in St. John's. Jamie won in the Senior Division and Lindsay won in the Junior Division.

Mr. Speaker, this was quite an accomplishment for these two young bowlers. Fourteen centres from around the Province took part, and Old Mill Lanes of Bay Roberts was one of those. Jamie and Lindsay both bowl at Old Mill Lanes. Mr. Speaker, a first for Old Mill Lanes, two female bowlers, winning their respective divisions in separate competitions in the one year. Jamie and Lindsey will represent our Province at the Nationals which will be held in Sudbury, Ontario in May of this year.

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to have both bowlers and their parents in the gallery today, and I ask that all members of this House to join with me in congratulating our two provincial Gold medalists and to wish them every success at the Nationals.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Exploits.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FORSEY: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure today to stand in this House to recognize the recipient of the Exporter of the Year Award for 2006, Mr. Bill Butler and his company, Hi-Point Industries.

Since its incorporation in 1983, Hi-Point Industries have been developing an environmentally safe, all natural oil absorbent for containment of Hydro Carbon Spills. For twenty-three years they have been very innovative in manufacturing products that can be used globally and took the opportunity to develop markets outside the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, and now export to over two dozen countries including South America, Europe and the Middle East.

Hi-Point Industries have been very successful in expanding its markets and has made a substantial contribution to the provincial economy.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating Mr. Bill Butler and his company, Hi-Point Industries of Bishop's Falls, on receiving this prestigious award.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This past week I had the pleasure to watch athletes from all over Labrador compete in the Olympics of the North in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. Over 400 competitors and community coordinators from twenty-seven communities celebrated the sporting and cultural heritage of the big Land, and they were supported by over 600 volunteers.

I am proud and pleased to congratulate Team Cartwright from the great District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair on winning the 2006 Labrador Winter Games Championship Cup. The community of less than 550 people showed us a line up of athletes that were second to none in performance. Not only did they claim gold, silver and bronze medals in almost every sport they competed in, but they also set a new record in both the Snowshoe Rely and the female snowshoe Biathlon.

Andrea Pardy of Cartwright was also chosen as the top athlete from Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair district, as well as top female athlete overall for the games. Preston Morris of Cartwright was the top male athlete for the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, while Alf Parsons of Labrador City was chosen as the top male athlete for the Labrador Games.

Cartwright athletes, Mr. Speaker, beat all the odds in preparing for these games, their gymnasium was closed for most of the winter and they had nowhere to train but outside, however, they persevered. Christa Williams of Cartwright won bronze medal during the Northern Games and I was amazed as her mother told me she practiced the seal kick in the hallway of their home in Cartwright in preparation for this sport.

Two of my favourite sports at the games have always been the Dog Team race and the Labrathon, and this year the competition was equally as fierce. As participants made their way around the one kilometre Labrathon venue it was exciting to watch them make a fire, boil the kettle, shoot five targets, saw a six inch log and chop a hole through the ice, all within sixteen to eighteen minutes. I want to congratulate Barry Dyson of Cartwright on a gold medal in that event, and Brad Rumbolt of Mary's Harbour whom I am proud to say is my brother, Mr. Speaker, on a silver medal, and Lyle O'Brien of L'Anse au Loup on a bronze medal. I also want to congratulate and acknowledge Sandy Powell of Charlottetown on placing fifth in this competition, but Sandy has been involved in the sport and competed in the Labrador Winter Games since 1983 and it was good to see him back this year.

In closing, I also want to acknowledge the winners of the Dog Team Race, one of the oldest sports in Labrador culture. Aubrey Russell of Mary's Harbour won gold, Bill Russell of Port Hope Simpson won silver, and Hayward Larkham of Williams Harbour won bronze. What is interesting, Mr. Speaker, is that all three of these individuals originated from the tiny community of Williams Harbour.

For the first time ever we also saw a woman race a dog team in the Labrador Winter Games. Sherry Munn of Wabush was the racer, and I am sure my colleague from Labrador West would know her very well, and it was a pleasure to watch her in the sport.

I ask my colleagues to join me today in recognizing and congratulating all the participants and medal winners along with the volunteers in the 2006 Labrador Winter Games. Especially the community of Cartwright who took the Labrador Cup, the Town of Goose Bay for placing second, the Town of Labrador City for a third place finish, and of course my hometown team of Mary's Harbour for a remarkable fourth place finish.

Congratulations to them all.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the hon. Member for the District of Gander.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, I rise in his hon. House today to recognize the accomplishments of several young people from Gander who recently competed in the Newfoundland and Labrador Winter Games. Charlene Morgan, Alex Holden, Allison Radford, and Chelsea Mercer represented Central in the curling competition. Their coach, Jean Blackie, coached them to a perfect two and zero record in their division as they went on to win a silver medal.

Equally successful at the Newfoundland and Labrador Winter Games was Stephanie Nevin of Gander. Stephanie represented Central in the Open Ladies category of figure skating and won a silver medal as well.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to join with me in congratulating Charlene Morgan, Alex Holden, Allison Radford, Chelsea Mercer, and Jean Blackie of the Gander Curling Club; and also Stephanie Nevin on their Silver Medal performances at the Newfoundland and Labrador Winter Games.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I rise today to inform this House of two new investments being made by government to build on the momentum and growth underway in the mineral sector and our continued effort to attract new business and employment prospects to our Province, in particular in rural parts of the Province.

On March 6, I attended the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada annual convention. This industry gathering, one of the largest of its kind in the country, attracts thousands of industry representatives who take the opportunity to network with their colleagues and investigate merging opportunities in exploration and development.

The convention provides an appropriate forum in which to promote the rapidly growing mineral sector in Newfoundland and Labrador.

As the minister responsible, I spoke at the convention and outlined government's intention to commit $3 million in Budget 2006 to enhance the Mineral Incentive Program and make improvements in the provision of geological services in the Province. This is $1.4 million in new funds over current levels.

Of this, $2.5 million is dedicated to the Mineral Incentive Program. This is the largest contribution ever made in this program's history. The Mineral Incentive Program is designed to promote prospecting and exploration activity in Newfoundland and Labrador. It provides an investment by government which benefits junior companies and prospectors in their effort to leverage additional private funds to engage in exploration.

In 2005, for example, Mr. Speaker, fifty individuals and firms received assistance under the program. The additional funding for 2006-2007 will help meet increased demand by the industry. For every dollar invested by government $1.41 of private capital is spend on grass roots exploration.

I am also pleased to announce that government is committing an additional $500,000 to expand regional geological work in Newfoundland and Labrador. The provision of core geo-science information is a benefit for the exploration community, as this is the first step in the identification of suitable prospects for more detailed mineral exploration.

The dividends are clear, when we encourage more exploration activity then we increase the potential for new mine development, all of which leads to new businesses and employment opportunities for the Province and for the people who benefit directly from their resources.

Government, through a targeted investment strategy in these programs, is active in encouraging new business development.

The key indicators for 2005 support the direction government is taking with these Budget 2006 initiatives. The total value of mineral shipments, for example, Mr. Speaker, in the Province, reached the unprecedented level of $1.5 billion in 2005, as compared to $687 million in 2004. Shipments are forecast to rise to a staggering $2.6 billion in the upcoming year.

Exploration expenditure, another key indicator of growth, has increased by 30 per cent since 2004 to reach $45 million in the last year. We anticipate that this will reach $50 million in 2006. Last year, Mr. Speaker, for example, capital expenditure by mining companies operating in our Province was in the range $500 million.

Our people are benefitting from this growth. Particularly, rural areas of the Province are benefitting from associated employment in the mineral sector. In 2005, 3,200 people were employed in the industry.

We are firmly on the agenda for future growth. I am confident, and government is confident, that the people of our Province will benefit from the renewed prosperity being driven by this vital sector of our economy.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you.

I appreciate the minister providing me with a copy in advance of his statement today. Houdini could not have done it any better himself. Smoke and mirrors and the spin doctors are at it again.

We are talking here about a new initiative that was announced in 1999 by the former Liberal Administration, which this Administration cut the guts out of in 2005 by taking $600,000 out of it.

All of the good things the minister said in this statement are absolutely true, and that is why the program and the initiative was implemented back in 1999 between the industry and the players in the industry and government. It is good for prospectors, yes; it is good for junior exploration, and that is why it was recognized by the former Administration. I am just pleased to see that instead of a government trying to take credit here, like they are doing, as if they have just created something, that they are finally putting back into this program the money that was in it in the first place, because it is good, and it is great to see that this Administration will finally admit that some former Administration Liberal initiatives were indeed great and are just seeing the benefits in this economy today.

Hear, hear!

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

MR. R. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We welcome the news from the minister today. We are not going to get into a fight over who did what when, but we are happy to see this happening, Mr. Speaker, because mining is very important to this Province, and the district that I represent was created solely as a result of mining.

When we look in the future, Mr. Speaker, we see LabMag, a company that is going to operate out of Schefferville to build a pellet plant, they are projecting, in a place called Ross Bay, forty miles from Labrador City and Wabush, that will create, according to their projections, 700 well-paying jobs beginning next year.

The junior companies in this Province, and the prospectors, Mr. Speaker, need incentive in order to get out in the bush and discover the minerals that will provide economic benefit and good paying jobs for the rest of us.

Mining is very important. This year it should be worth more than $2.5 billion in total value shipments. I think that would make it, Mr. Speaker, probably the largest industry in this Province. The jobs that are associated with mining are well-paying jobs and good benefits.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

Does the member have leave?

MR. R. COLLINS: To clue up, Mr. Speaker?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MR. R. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, just to clue up and say that the mining industry needs support and, with the support that is offered, they will develop well-paying jobs for residents of our Province.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

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

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Premier.

Mr. Speaker, Fishery Products International was established to provide employment opportunities and benefits to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador from our fishing resources. In 2004, FPI shut their plant in Harbour Breton throwing 350 people out of work. They recently announced hundreds of job cuts on the Burin Peninsula, all of these cuts because the Board of Directors does not feel they are earning enough profits for their foreign shareholders. I ask the Premier: Do you believe that FPI is living up to the spirt and intent of the FPI Act?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, one thing that this government has done is, they have been engaged, and they have been fully engaged, with the problems that FPI have encountered and created around this Province. Since we have taken over office, we have been very much engaged. The former minister, the current minister, the other ministers in Cabinet, and myself, we have been interested enough to ask all of the questions. We have not been just as much in the dark today as we were yesterday, which came from the former Minister of Fisheries, which is the current House Leader, or Leader of the Opposition, whatever his title is now, forgive me.

Having said that, we are concerned about FPI. We are concerned about the way in which they are operating their company. We are concerned about the way they are treating their workers and their former workers, and we are keeping a very close eye on it. As recently as yesterday, I met with two federal ministers; I met with the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, Minister Hearn, together with Minister Dunderdale and also Minister MacKay, Foreign Affairs. Today, ministers went out and met with the residents of the communities, the people who came in here to demonstrate at FPI. They attended, they discussed with them, and we will having meetings in the future. We are very much all over this issue. We are very concerned about it, and we are doing whatever we can.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, when FPI closed its Harbour Breton facility, this government sat idly by and did nothing to prevent this from happening. Instead, it reiterated all of FPI's excuses and called it a business decision. The fish traditionally processed at the plant in Harbour Breton was supposed to go to the Burin Peninsula for processing, but this has not happened. There are strong suggestions that fish was actually processed in China.

I ask the Premier: What commitment can you give the people of the Burin Peninsula that government will not allow a similar situation to take place in Fortune and Marystown as you allowed to happen in Harbour Breton?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, this government did not sit idly by and not try to assist Harbour Breton. The fact of the matter is that we have an operator who is interested in operating Harbour Breton. As we speak today, discussions and negotiations are underway on the transfer of the facility itself to the community and then to the new operator.

Also, Mr. Speaker, in terms of processing fish in the Province, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition knows, particularly as a former minister, that when fish is landed in the Province it then becomes the constitutional responsibility of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.

FPI, without any permission from anybody, shipped unprocessed fish out of this Province this past year. We were made aware of it, we audited them, and we have now given instructions for an investigation to begin. Mr. Speaker, we will make sure FPI is dealt with to the full extent of the law, no favour shown.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, in a January 21, 2002 press release by the Premier, he stated, and I quote: To the people of the Province, I pledge to you today that my party and I will not stand by and allow businesses or any person to circumvent the spirit and intent of our laws. We will ensure safeguards are in place to protect their interests.

Well, Mr. Speaker, it certainly appears that FPI has deliberately circumvented the FPI Act by closing plants, laying off hundreds of workers, for the benefits of foreign investors.

I ask the Premier: When are you going to live up to your commitments that you made to the people of the Province, especially those who work for FPI in communities like Fortune, Harbour Breton and Marystown?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I have made it abundantly clear to the people of this Province, in communities where FPI are operating or were operating up to a few weeks ago, that we will hold FPI to the full extent of the FPI Act. Now, having said that - because there is all kinds of innuendo being spread, particularly by the Leader of the Opposition, as to what the FPI Act contains and what it doesn't - the FPI Act contains two things, Mr. Speaker, a share restriction, and in section 7 it contains a restriction on selling all or substantially all of their business.

The All-Party Committee that this House struck back in 2002 - I believe the Leader of the Opposition was Chair, Mr. Speaker - considered whether there should be anything in the legislation dealing with plant closures and plant layoffs. On page 16 of that report, the All-Party Committee said the following: The Committee concludes that it is not appropriate to legislate in that area.

Mr. Speaker, what we have in front of us in terms of the FPI Act, we will enforce it, we will hold the company's feet to the fire, we will do whatever we can do, but there is nothing in the FPI Act that deals with plant closures and layoffs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister, if he wants to adjourn the House and come back in five minutes we will go along with it, if he wants to revamp the FPI Act or change any clause that is in it to protect the people of that area.

Mr. Speaker, while responding to the Speech from the Throne in 2003, the current Premier stated that our resources are being used to benefit people outside of Newfoundland and Labrador, and this has to stop. Last year, FPI closed Harbour Breton and is now going to close Fortune, gut Marystown and ship our fish to China for processing. All this is happening to increase the values for the company's foreign investors.

I ask the Premier: When are you going to live up to your commitment and stop these resource giveaways?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I don't know what part of the answer the hon. gentleman doesn't understand, but let me repeat it just in case. I have said consistently, and I say again today to all who want to listen, that once the fish is landed in this Province FPI or nobody else, this moment, this day, has any approval to ship it out.

Mr. Speaker, while we are in the situation with FPI that we are in today, FPI will not be permitted to ship two-thirds of its quota out of this Province unprocessed if it lands it here. Now, if it doesn't land it here, we have to go somewhere else and look for a solution and that would be to the Federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. I have no control or say over fish in the water, but when it is landed here this government does have control and we are not going to back away from that, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister, I am glad to hear him say that but it is too bad his predecessor did not say that because FPI has been shipping fish to China for processing for well over a year.

Mr. Speaker, FPI has indicated it wants to ship approximately 60 per cent of its quotas, our fish, to China for processing. This will lead to hundreds of layoffs and a drastic impact on communities in this Province.

I ask the Premier: What plans do you have to use the FPI Act to prevent FPI from shipping our fish to China, closing plants and laying off workers in this Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, let me correct the record. For the record, in 2004 FPI had approval from the former minister to ship 1.25 million pounds of less than 400 gram yellowtail out of this Province, which previous to that, Mr. Speaker, was dumped in the New Harbour dump because it wasn't economic to process it. It had no permission from the former minister, or any other minister, this year to ship a pound out of this Province and, Mr. Speaker, they are not getting it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Where was your predecessor? Was he asleep at the switch when they were doing it all last year, I ask the minister?

Mr. Speaker, FPI's quotas were given to the company for the benefit of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. It now appears that the company is no longer interested in using these resources to benefit the people of this Province.

I ask the Premier: What discussions have you had with the federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans regarding these quotas, and have you requested that FPI's quotas be taken from it if it tries to ship them to China or elsewhere for processing?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: The federal minister, Mr. Speaker, has been very clear. He is very clearly on the record as to what his position and what his government's position is on shipping product outside the Province. He has been very, very clear on it. I have had conversations with him, the minister has had conversations with him and others have had conversations with him.

So, you know, really you cannot take that any further than where you have taken it. The federal government, who has jurisdiction over this particular issue, have said that they will not stand for allowing this to go outside the Province. He stands by it and we stand behind him on that statement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, FPI's decision to close Harbour Breton in 2004 and the current situation on the Burin Peninsula, I ask the Premier: Are you willing to have an emergency debate in the House of Assembly concerning the future of FPI's operations in this Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: There is certainly adequate opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to debate anything that the hon. members opposite want to debate about FPI, or any other piece of business relating to the fishery in this Province. We are doing it now through Question Period. This afternoon we are on Interim Supply, which is a money bill. You can talk about anything under the sun. So there is no impediment, Mr. Speaker, to an emergency debate to bringing the matters of FPI to the floor of the House for debate; no impediment whatsoever.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, we know that the minister by his own admission in front of a group of plant workers from the Burin Peninsula on O'Leary Avenue an hour ago, and by his own admission here in the House of Assembly a few minutes ago, that FPI has broken the laws of this Province by shipping fish out of the Province for processing without the permission of government. We also know that the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture has also conducted an internal review of FPI and says that the company is not in as bad a financial shape as they would lead the people of this Province to believe.

I ask the Premier, knowing that they have broken the law and knowing that they are saying things that run contrary to what the minister is saying, will you hold a public inquiry into the operations of FPI and its Board of Directors?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, when FPI had permission to ship unprocessed fish out of the Province back in 2004, it was given with the approval of the government and the minister and with the approval of other stakeholders in the industry, including the union at the time. We are not going to go about dealing with FPI on their own when it comes to shipping unprocessed fish out of the Province. There was a committee struck that represent the union, the company and the Province. We are trying to reactive that committee again because if it is necessary to deal with a request again, we will obviously have to deal with it but we are going to proceed to deal with FPI to the full extent of the law, Mr. Speaker. What an inquiry would do into this company, I have no - I cannot see what an inquiry would do that we are not doing here in the House today, that we are not doing publicly with the participation of the FFAW everyday. We will do whatever we have to do to hold FPI to the spirit and intent of the FPI Act. That has been our commitment from day one and that will be our commitment as we go forward, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: Obviously, Mr. Speaker, there will be no inquiry, any more than they agreed to look into the operations of FPI last fall when the time was appropriate to do it.

Mr. Speaker, the Burin Peninsula is in a crisis. Families are leaving daily for Alberta in search of work. I ask the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development, where is the rural strategy you boasted about two and half years ago? Now, minister, would be a good time to roll it out while there are still people left who can benefit from it.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, this government has stood shoulder to shoulder with people of communities all over this Province who find themselves in distress. We are undergoing a huge economic and industrial adjustment in this Province in the fishery. The fishery is a key economic anchor on the Burin Peninsula and we will work with the Burin Peninsula, not only to diversify the economy, but to solidify what is their heritage and their right.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, this government is famous for referring to plan B rather than hold companies in this Province accountable. FPI is a case in point, where this government is allowing a company off the hook instead of enforcing legislation that exists to protect the people of the Province. All you have to do is look to Harbour Breton and see where you have dropped the ball.

Minister, your plan B for Harbour Breton has not worked and people are leery of your plan B for Fortune. Isn't it time you admitted that the rural development approach has been a disaster as more and more people leave this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, what this government has done, first of all, is to take the interest of the plant workers in Harbour Breton as their first priority. What we have been able to do in terms of agreements with ACOA, with the money we put on the table and with the money this government negotiated from FPI, was to ensure that the plant workers in Harbour Breton now have an income for the next year that reflects what they would have received had that plant been operational; number one priority.

Number two, Mr. Speaker, we have secured an operator for the plant of Harbour Breton and one that will take advantage of the wild fishery and the farm fishery and secure a proper place in both of those fisheries for the people of the Connaigre Peninsula, which will see them prosper in years to come.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I do not know if this minister thinks that the people who work on the Connaigre Peninsula or on the Burin Peninsula have years ahead of them to wait. People's EI is running out; they do not have work, they do not have employment opportunities. It is all too obvious if the only rural strategy this government has is one that will result in wiping out rural Newfoundland and Labrador. All you have to do is speak to someone from Harbour Breton. Now the communities that work at the fish plant in Fortune are in shock of the news that, that plant will not reopen and now the Marystown workforce will be cut in half. Minister, what do you say to these people who are looking to you for direction?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, I am going to stand shoulder to shoulder with the people of Harbour Breton and Fortune. I will not be looking for a seat in the federal government, I will be right here fighting the battles with them and securing the future for the people of all of those communities.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The members know that the clock is still running and there are questions to be asked.

The Chair recognizes, I do believe, the hon. Member for Grand Bank on a supplementary.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

AN HON. MEMBER: That is a good comment that is, a good comment.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier's personal jibes at me don't mean a thing, so he can keep it up all he wants. The point here is that: Minister, if you are going to stand shoulder to shoulder with the people on the Burin Peninsula I hope it is there and not in Alberta where they are all going.

Mr. Speaker, the people on the Burin Peninsula try to understand what is happening to them and they run into a brick wall in trying to meet with the Minister of Fisheries to try and get answers. After months of requesting a meeting with the minister, the Concerned Citizens Committee of Fortune finally have a meeting scheduled. The union from Clearwater Seafoods in Grand Bank have also been requesting a meeting but with no success.

Minister, will you confirm a time to meet with the union now that Clearwater has stated publicly they will not be landing their catch at the plant in Grand Bank and has moved it prime cuts line to China?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, for the information of the hon. member, I have dealt with requests to meet with various groups on the Burin Peninsula. As a matter of fact, I went to the Burin Peninsula. I spoke at the Chamber in Marystown and I sat down, for I think it might have been an hour, with people from Fortune, with people from Burin, with people from Marystown, and it was the Member of Parliament for that district who asked me to meet with the Concerned Citizens Committee of Fortune which I am doing tomorrow morning.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Justice.

Minister, has your department commenced any work in light of the current circumstances on the FPI Act, to ensure that it has the proper teeth required to protect the interests of our people?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon. member that lawyers in the Department of Justice have been engaged full time with officials in the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture to deal with the whole FPI file. We also have engaged outside solicitors to assist us in that regard as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Minister, I guess we all, at times, don't draft legislation that would be perfect. I guess the current Minister of Fisheries was the minister back in the 1980s when the FPI Act came about, so if there were any deficiencies in it I guess there were oversights at that time. It is good to see that you are involved.

I ask you, Minister: Isn't it about time that you or your government told the people of this Province - the unions, the communities, the people involved, the fisherpersons themselves, the plant workers - what it is you have found so far?

We hear your ministers saying: We don't think the act has much teeth. Well, how long have you been working on this plan to put some teeth in the FPI Act? When can we expect to have something from you rather than, again, sitting on your duffs?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, lawyers in the Department of Justice are engaged on a daily basis with other departments, with ministers in other departments, to provide legal advice and to deal with their concerns, and the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture will be the minister who will stand in this House and indicate government's policy with respect to the fisheries industry in this Province.

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With all due respect to the minister, the people in this Province, particularly the people impacted by FPI, need more than just smoke and mirrors and non answers.

Minister, your government was pretty quick to come to its feet and have a free vote in this House and call everybody back here when you wanted to amend the FPI Act to allow them to sell off their profitable arm down in the States. How come you are not so quick now?

When can we look forward to something from this government to put the necessary teeth in the FPI Act? Can you give us some idea, rather than saying we are looking at it? How long have you been looking at it, and when do you anticipate we might have some suggestions from you that are helpful rather than just being harmful?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member well knows that the role of the Department of Justice is to engage with the various government departments and to provide legal advice when called upon to do so, and it is the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador who will stand in this House and indicate what the government's policy is with respect to fisheries matters in this Province and with respect to FPI or any other company that is engaged in the fisheries industry, and not the Department of Justice.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Premier.

Mr. Premier, we all know that FPI is a private corporation but it has a public purpose as set forth in the FPI Act. That includes a commitment to the growth and strengthening of the fishery in the Province and not to disrupt the historical patterns of harvesting and processing of fish, which is what we have seen happen.

Mr. Speaker, hardly anybody - if there is one, I would like to know his name - has any confidence that the current leadership of FPI believes in the act and believes in the purposes that are set forth therein.

Will the Premier confirm that this government will not, under any circumstances, weaken the act, and specifically keep the 15 per cent share restriction, and will it now insist that FPI put into place leadership that is committed to operating the company in accordance with the principles and the purposes set forth in the act?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is not our intention to weaken the act under any circumstances. That certainly is not our intention. If, in fact, there were stakeholders - if, in fact, the communities and the union and the company and government felt that there was a solution that could be resolved by working through the act, we would certainly look at that, but that would have to be an agreed solution that everybody was comfortable with.

We do not intend to weaken that act. That is not our intention. The company now would like to basically see us just take that act and just remove it.

The other thing is, too, I think we need to point out something and make something very clear here for the people who are in attendance, and for the people of this Province. There was an all-party committee that was headed up by the Leader of the Opposition - and, of course, the hon. member actually, I believe, was a member of that committee. At that particular point in time there was a very clear recommendation not to interfere with that act.

The Leader of the Opposition stands up here and speaks out of both sides of his mouth, and now demands that this be changed, when he headed up and he was chair of a committee that said it should not be changed.

Now, despite what you say and despite the fact that you talk out of both sides of your mouth, we are going to find solutions for those people on the Burin Peninsula because, as the minister said, we will stand shoulder to shoulder with those people and we will find solutions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It was that committee and this Legislature that, in fact, put in place the purposes in the act and, in fact, are forcing the company to operate in accordance with those principles despite the fact that they have no belief in them.

Mr. Speaker, what I want to know is: How far is this government prepared to go to ensure that this company, FPI, operates in the best interests of the fishing industry and the communities of this Province? Are they prepared to look back at history and see what was done between 1984 and 2001, and have a company in place with government participation and ensuring that the best interests of the communities and the best interests of the Province are, in fact, in place? Is the government prepared to consider that as an option if it is necessary to do so?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. gentleman for his question. Let me answer it this way: The government is prepared to consider any option that will help improve the situation in communities where FPI operate. Any option we will consider. If that means we have to maybe do something to strengthen the act, well, that means we have to look at it. If it means that all parties are going to come together and, if they reach a solution, they say to government, maybe you should undo things in the act now to let the company breathe better or easier or raise money or whatever, if that comes out of a consensus, that kind of a solution comes out of a consensus, as the Premier indicated, we will look at it. But the bottom line is, we are prepared to look at any and everything, any and every possibility, to improve the lot of those people who depend on FPI, and the communities where they operate.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, this morning gas prices skyrocketed once again, where it now costs $1.10 or more per litre. We have continuously asked this government to provide some relief to consumers who, through their taxes, are contributing to the surplus this government is experiencing. As the price of gas increases, government collects more HST for their coffers.

I ask the Premier: Will you give a break to ordinary Newfoundlanders and Labradorians in the upcoming Budget and reduce taxes on gasoline by either removing government's portion of the HST or lowering the provincial gas tax?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I answered the question three times already in this Session; I will answer it again. When gasoline prices go up at the gas pump, we take in less revenue on gasoline tax because consumption has gone down and ours is a per litre tax. In fact, in this fiscal year we are in right now, I would say to the member, we are down $4 million in gasoline tax this year, because as price goes up consumption goes down and we get less revenue.

What we did do, Mr. Speaker -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: What we did do was something that government never before did; we allowed people, from home heating fuels, to get a rebate up to $400 when they gave a measly $100 when the price of oil was so high.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the same old rhetoric from this minister every time. He called for gas taxes to be reduced when he was in Opposition but, because he is making a windfall profit off the backs of the people of this Province, he is no longer willing to provide consumers with a break.

I ask the minister: With over 40 per cent of the price of gas being direct or indirect tax, why is our provincial government still focused on taking every single cent possible from the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This government has looked at people who may have hardships because of low incomes, and people affected by this. This government initiated and eliminated income tax for individuals under $12,000 -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: - under $19,000 for a family of two, with no provincial income tax. We have taken initiatives on low income people to refund money through rebates on home heating. We will look at, in this Budget - I have said in this House before - a poverty strategy to assist people not just because you have $15,000 income, or $18,000, but much higher levels, to assist everybody in Newfoundland and Labrador who have low income and hardships, whether you drive an automobile or whether you do not.

We want equity. We have taken this Province out of a billion dollar debt they left us with on an annual basis; deficit. We are trying to turn this around and enhance the plight of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. We are going to do it and we are going to continue to do it, as much as she hates to see it happen.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, I guess the jury is still out. Was that a yes or a no with that answer?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: I guess this is the same minister who pulled the wool over all our eyes when he said we were in debt a billion dollars when he took over, and eighteen months later we are in the black and they have not created a single job.

Mr. Speaker, the minister could very easily make the decision to reduce the provincial gas tax without having to worry about consulting with other provinces -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS THISTLE: I ask the minister: Why not reduce -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the member and we note that there is very limited time left.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I ask the minister: Why not reduce this 16.5 cent per litre gas charge to consumers in this Province? You have money to burn, start here.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board, time for a very brief reply.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We are not going to burn it, we are going to use it for the good purpose of people in Newfoundland and Labrador. That is what we are going to do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, this year coming up we will have - in the following two and three years we will be increasing with the highest number of people employed in the history of our Province. We did not fabricate that. The Auditor General confirmed on public accounts -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair has permitted a question to be asked and it is the Chair's responsibility to make sure that there is adequate time for a reply. I ask the minister if he would finish his comment very quickly.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

They do not like success. The Auditor General has confirmed a $913.6 million deficit in the year we took over. Now we have a balanced budget, I say, a balanced budget on this year. In fact, a surplus on this year, I say to the member, and we are going to use that for the benefit of people in our Province to provide services to everybody around our Province. We are seeing new construction in our Province, in schools. We are seeing it in long-term care facilities, road construction, ferries, you name it - everything we are going to be looking at to enhance the Province, not leave us in the state that they left us in.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time allocated for Question Period has expired.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

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

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

I give notice and by leave move, with the agreement of all parliamentary groups in the House that we have already had this discussion, the following resolution and bill, standing in the name of the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on Supply to consider certain resolutions for the granting of Interim Supply to Her Majesty, Bill 74, and that following the receipt of the message from His Honour, the Lieutenant Governor, the resolution and bill will be referred to Committee of Supply when Orders of the Day are called by you, Mr. Speaker.

I further move that upon adjournment of the Committee of Supply this afternoon that Bill 47 be reintroduced during the third session of the Forty-fifth General Assembly and that the resolution and bill appear on the Order Paper at the same stage that is in Committee of the Whole on Supply.

MR. SPEAKER: Is there agreement that this will be the method by which we would operate the House this afternoon?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Agreement has been reached. At the appropriate time in the proceedings the Chair will therefore call these respective motions.

Further Notices of Motions.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Orders of the Day.

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

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

Upon giving notice, I now move Bill 74.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wish to inform the House that I have received a message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor.

MR. SPEAKER: All rise.

The message reads as follows, dated 15 March 2006, "As Lieutenant-Governor of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, I transmit a request to appropriate sums required for the Public Service of the Province for the year ending 31 March 2007, by way of Interim Supply, and in accordance with the provisions of sections 54 and 90 of the Constitution Act, 1867, I recommend this request to the House of Assembly." Signed by Edward Roberts, the Lieutenant Governor of Newfoundland and Labrador.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move that the message, together with a bill, be referred to the Committee of Supply.

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

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

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

CHAIR (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

Bill 74, An Act For Granting To Her Majesty Certain Sums Of Money For Defraying Certain Expenses Of The Public Service For The Financial Year Ending March 31, 2007 And For Other Purposes Relating To The Public Service.

The Committee is now ready to debate the resolution that accompanies Bill 74.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This bill is to allow us to have some interim monies available to be able to carry on the business of government from the period April 1 until approximately June 30, and we have asked the House for $1,509,510,800 to be able to carry on the business of government.

On the Schedule attached to that, you can see the expenditures that are being put forth from Interim Supply in each of the particular departments there. There are no significant differences from the 2005 Interim Supply Bill, just to allow for other areas like salary increases, 3 per cent in the public service in certain instances, April 1 to allow for extra expenditure in normal ongoing programs. In some of these areas, if you compare them to last year, for example, the Department of Health, you will probably see around $34 million more. That is to carry on the operations of our regional integrated health authorities, the functions of the department, and carry on all of these responses that are out there.

Interim Supply basically allows us to be able to appropriate money to carry on current programs that are out there, and to be able to fund them to the level that would be required until the Budget gets approved, and hopefully it will be sooner rather than later. What it does is important, of course. March 28 is the ultimate deadline, of course, that it would need to pass to allow the processing of cheques so they can be sent to Labrador, to reach there in time to be able to meet our government commitments there and be able to have the money approved by this Legislature.

Overall, I am sure ministers, along the way, might want to have a comment - or other members - on their particular departments and so on. Certainly, under the Finance area that I am responsible for, and a part of Executive Council also, expenditures are normal, government expenditures. There are no significant variations, in fact, in some of these from last year, but obviously in some areas like Health, which is a big department, we are looking at up in the $1.9 billion range of expenditures. Obviously, we need a fair amount of money to be able to pay the bills for the first three months of the year.

Other departments out there, if you look at Interim Supply last year, like Transportation and Works, there is probably roughly $23.5 million extra; Municipal Affairs about another $10 million; Executive Council about $13 million; Natural Resources about $7.7 million; Education about $20.7 million and so on, so there are various areas of expenditure to meet our programs there. It is a normal, standard procedure here; it is needed. Really, it is an advance approval to start spending money on the 2006-2007 Budget until the Budget is approved.

That is basically what it does. Along the way, if there are any particular questions and things that people have, I will certainly try to answer them.

With that, Mr. Chair, we put forward probably the largest Interim Supply Bill, I would think, in the history of our Province, which means that we have an increased revenue base, we have an increased expenditure base, and we are going to be able to provide a fair amount of service. The Budget will address that, of course. These ones here allow - there is increased cost to running current programs that are there right now. We need to have the money to flow to be able to do that. I am sure, with the co-operation of the House - we have always had co-operation of the House on both sides, in the twelve years I have served in Opposition, too - with facilitating this process to allow government to operate and people to be able to get paid.

With that, I will conclude my comments at this time, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am pleased today to rise and speak to this Interim Supply Bill. As the Government House Leader indicated earlier, with an Interim Supply Bill, this is a money bill. Of course, we can talk about pretty much any subject we wish under the heading of a money bill.

As the minister indicated, this is $1.5 billion that needs to be approved by this House of Assembly before 28 March so people who are expecting this money can get their money before the end of the month.

There is no reason why we would hang up this bill, but it still gives us an opportunity to review what government has been doing with the taxpayers' money and give an account of the direction they are taking, and whether or not we agree, as the Official Opposition, with what has been happening.

There was a lot of activity in the media about ten days ago concerning health care in this Province. In fact, on the heels of that, the Premier did a mini shuffle of his Cabinet. He changed over the Health and Community Services Minister. I was surprised, myself, to learn that, here in this Province today, we are actually going to send out patients for cancer treatment. When I heard that, I really could not believe it or understand it because a year ago there was a health care accord that was signed by all premiers of all provinces with the federal government. In this Province we have gotten, from that health care accord, an extra $46 million per year. When I learned, as did the public of our Province, that patients are now having to be sent out for cancer treatment, I was startled by that, because going through cancer treatment is traumatic enough without having to leave your support system, which is your family. Even sending someone out, they cannot take their entire family. They can just probably take a caregiver, the nearest of kin, who wants to travel with them.

Having to learn that people in this Province, after all the money that is after coming from oil exploration, oil development offshore, and $2 billion from the Atlantic Accord and $46 million more ever year from health, just designed for health alone, that we are now in a position of having to send our people out for cancer treatment, Mr. Chairman, I would say: Who is minding the shop? Who is looking after health care in our Province? The money is there, supposedly. Is it being used for something else? There is no reason that we do not have up-to-date equipment in our cancer treatment facilities because the money was designed for that purpose, so that there would be no waiting and no need to send our people out of the Province for cancer treatment.

In fact, there should be no reason that we would see patients on a stretcher in a hallway in a hospital, waiting for a bed. There should be no reason why people would be in that situation. There should be no reason why senior patients would be held up in long-term care in a hospital, when they should be in a long-term care facility for seniors. Keeping seniors in a hospital is not conducive to their well-being, when they should be in a long-term care facility. The minister has said that there are long-term care facilities under construction. They are not under construction right now; they might be in the planning stages.

The other night, I received an e-mail from a person in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, and it was one of these heartbreaking e-mails concerning a young woman who has her mother requiring Alzheimer's care at a facility but there is neither one in Labrador. Now, this mother is only in her sixties and she has come down with Alzheimer's. She can no longer stay in the facility in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. That is a hard proposition for any family to have to do, to have to send their aging parents - in this case, this woman is very young, only in her sixties. For her to have to go to the Hoyles-Escasoni house here in St. John's while her family are in Goose Bay, Labrador, just look at the trauma for someone who has very little memory and only associates it with the people they have known all their life, their immediate family. When that link is gone, can you imagine the trauma that is going to be for this Alzheimer patient and her family who are still in Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

Government are now in a position where they are pretty much in the black on their current account deficit, and they need to look at long-term care facilities, particularly for the people in Labrador. That is a great issue that should be done. You have to look at specialized facilities such as Alzheimer treatment and so on.

Even on the Island portion of our Province, there are still not enough facilities for Alzheimer patients. In fact, in Central the only one we have is at the Hugh Twomey Centre in Botwood. There is a waiting list there as long as your arm. People just cannot cope with having to look after their parents in regular facilities or even at home. Government needs to turn their mind around that prospect. They have said, government did, in their own literature that in ten years time more than half of the people in our Province will be fifty years old or older, so you need to start planning right now. This is the third year of your mandate and you have to look towards what is happening with our health care and our seniors.

I have also heard that someone receiving surgery, they can't get those dressings. If someone requires dressing from a surgery, they cannot get those dressings in their home today unless they actually go out and buy the dressings and have somebody come in and administer those dressings. Ordinarily, what people are expected to do is, if they have a centre like we have in Grand Falls-Windsor, the provincial building Health and Community Services, no matter how bad you are feeling after an operation you actually have to go up to that centre and sit down or lie down on an examining table and get your dressings done. We always were accustomed to having the public health nurse go right into a home after surgery and administer dressings.

These are types of things that are happening that probably people are not aware of. With money to spend in all directions, as this government is about to announce a good news Budget, it is time for government to put their money towards health care and looking after our seniors and the people who really need it.

It was interesting this afternoon to hear the Minister of Natural Resources when he got on his feet and made a ministerial statement. He talked about new investment being made in the Mineral Incentive Program and regional geology services. He says his government is putting $2.5 million into that particular incentive program. Well, I would say to the Minister of Natural Resources and his government, look closely on what is happening in the Buchans-Millertown area. We have a deteriorating road, I was up over it about a week ago, and the sides of the roads are completely eaten out. Since this government, the new government, got into power they have not put any money into rural Newfoundland roads. I am concerned, because Millertown and Buchans, these are bright spots. There is a mine all ready to go into full operation this summer. Right now they are employing 150 people at Duck Pond. Messina Minerals Inc. are there, and there are all kinds of other companies that are there in the exploration stages. Can you imagine the income tax and the taxes that are going to be paid on services purchased that are going into the coffers of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador? Yet, they are satisfied for pieces of equipment, all kinds of trucks, heavy equipment, men and women, employees going over that road day after day but they are not going to upgrade it and improve it.

This is something that you cannot phantom, because the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Newfoundland is trying to, she says, rejuvenate rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Well, that would be the first thing to do. If there is actually something happening in rural Newfoundland and Labrador - which there is, in Millertown, and also there is a barite mine in Buchans that is now in operation as well. If you have two entities in a close proximity and they are turning in money for government, wouldn't you do your utmost to make sure that the road is in proper condition so that heavy equipment and supplies going in and out, and ore that is being mined there, that people will have a good road to go over? Sure, that is only a solid investment.

Why do I have to get up day after day and say to the Minister of Transportation and Works, we need this done? This is a money-maker for government. Last year I had pictures of the holes in the roads and the sides were eaten off the shoulders of the roads. I had pictures blown up to show him. After all of that we got $300,000 to do up 100 kilometres of road. That was like a fly spit into the air, that is all it was. So, it is time for government to realize what potential is in rural Newfoundland and Labrador and if you have a bright spot that is creating investment, creating revenue, do something. Do the right thing, do up the roads so you can have people being able to get to their jobs.

It was interesting too, when I heard the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development get up today. In her questions from the Member for Grand Bank - the Member for Grand Bank asked the minister what was she going to do for the people of the Burin Peninsula. She got up and said she was going to stand shoulder to shoulder and she was going to do for the people on the Burin Peninsula what she did for the people on the Connaigre Peninsula. Well, good Lord! After watching that CBC special they had on there last week about the men who had left Harbour Breton and they were heading to - I think it was Calgary. They showed them when they left their homes, it was still darkness in the morning, and they showed them when they arrived in Calgary and they showed them too when they started their work up there on the job.

Well, you know, I looked the other day at this Rural Secretariat Executive Council Annual Report, it went right up from April 2004 to March 2005. One of the key things it says: The Rural Secretariat is still in a developmental stage. Well, good Lord! The Rural Secretariat is still in a development stage - their own literature. Three years on the job. All I can find, from looking in this book, is that the Rural Secretariat - there are going to be nine regional councils comprising men and women. Oh, I am glad to see that women are going to be in it. Comprising men and women - gee, that is something new. There will be nine regional councils comprising men and women from larger and smaller communities and the provincial council will consist of representatives from each of the regional councils. This is Doug House's book right here.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS THISTLE: Yes, he is now reviewing his plan B.

Doug House had a plan that everybody on the Trans-Canada from St. John's to Port aux Basques would survive, and everyone else off the Trans-Canada, unless they could get into one of these big places to get a job, we should cut them off. That is your plan. That is the plan. Everyone on the Trans-Canada had a chance to survive but everyone outside the Trans-Canada, if they could not get into a regional centre to do an IT job or a service industry job or a job in the mall, or somewhere else, too bad. They had to get their U-Haul and go to Calgary or Yellowknife or Fort McMurray, but I cannot understand it. I really cannot understand it. Three years on the job by the new government. They are rated in the polls, the highest that it could ever be recorded, and how lucky can you get? This is a government that hasn't brought in one new initiative to save rural Newfoundland and Labrador. They have been able to sit on their duffs and look at the balance sheet pile up in the black because it was all Liberal initiatives that made it that way.

CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the hon. Member for Grands Falls-Buchans that her time has expired.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I will take my leave and maybe I will come back again this afternoon.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

It is indeed a pleasure to stand in this hon. House today and talk about some of the good things that are happening in Newfoundland and Labrador, and in particular, Labrador, I say, Mr. Chairman.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: I say to my hon. colleague from Grand Falls-Buchans, that we have addressed the issue of a long-term health care facility and we did it last week, something that you and your government never, ever addressed while you were there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: Never, ever addressed while you were there, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I want to talk about some of the announcements that happened and we talk about rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Well, I can tell you, in the rural parts of Labrador this Budget, and this Budget that you will see over the course of the next number of days, will reveal that there is a commitment to rural parts of this Province and, in particular, Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: So, I can tell you, we have done it! Something your government, I say to the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans, never had; never had it in you to do it for the people of Labrador.

Anyway, Mr. Chairman, I want to go over some of the good news stories coming out of Labrador. Last week the Premier was there, the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation was there, the Minister of Labrador Affairs was there, and the Deputy Premier was there. We have had more ministers in Labrador than we saw over the previous fourteen years, I say to the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

Mr. Chairman, last week was indeed a great week for the people of Labrador, and I would not able be able to stand in this hon. House today and not stand here and say to our Premier and to our government that we have addressed and made commitments to the people of Labrador on long-standing issues, I say, Mr. Chairman, long-standing issues, particularly when it comes to infrastructure. I want to go over some of these, Mr. Chairman, because they are important, indeed important to my constituents and indeed to the people of Labrador.

As we go on over the course of the next number of years, Mr. Chairman, we will see great opportunities in Labrador, particularly in the resource sector, particularly in mining, hydro development, tourism, transportation, justice issues, all very, very important, all issues that have been outstanding for many, many years, Mr. Chairman. I can tell you, as a former mayor, as a former councillor, as a resident of the community, having lived there, I can say to my good friend from Grand Falls-Buchans, we finally have a government and a Premier and the leadership to do the things that should have been done many, many years ago. I will say to you, Mr. Chairman, that as we go forward, the announcements, some $175 million, close on $200 million, will be invested in Labrador over the course of the next four years.

I want to take a couple of minutes today to talk about some of those investments. We are talking somewhere in the vicinity of $1.9 million which will go into a performance base or auditorium, something that the young people of Labrador have long wanted.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HICKEY: I say to my fellow colleague over there, you were one of the members who were against it, if I remember. You were the ones who voted against it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. HICKEY: Anyway, Mr. Chairman, the performance complex is something that we will build. It will be started this year in Lake Melville. It will be a performance base for the people of Labrador, for the arts community of Labrador, and I am so glad that we can move forward on this particular project.

Mr. Chair, there will be a further investment of some $1.5 million into the health centre in Labrador West. I can tell you, having lived in Churchill Falls and growing up there, the facility in Labrador West is long overdue - long overdue. I can tell you, the comments that we have heard from the mayors and from community leaders in Labrador West have been very, very supportive, very supportive of this government and the commitments that we have made.

I also want to talk, Mr. Chairman, about the commitments that we have made when it comes to post-secondary education in Labrador, and the extension to the College of the North Atlantic in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, and indeed the new facility for Labrador West.

Mr. Chairman, when it comes to post-secondary education, it is so important that we prepare our youth and our young people for the jobs and the economic development that is going to take place in Labrador. I am so pleased to say that this government and this Premier have given the commitments that we need to ensure that we have facilities that will allow our young people the opportunity to train and prepare themselves for those jobs that will be coming up in the different resource sectors in Labrador.

I also want to talk about the long-term health care facility. As I said earlier, the long-term health care facility has been long, long overdue. I want to commend some of the people back home in my district, like Mayor Abbass, Councillor Stanley Oliver, and many of the community groups and organizations that for so long have lobbied for a long-term health care facility so that we can keep our seniors at home, we can provide them with the care and the service of their friends and their families. I will tell you, this was a great announcement for the people of my district and the people of Labrador. It is indeed gratifying that now, once this facility is built, we will not have to send our loved ones off somewhere else to live, basically in solitude.

Mr. Chairman, there was also a major commitment to the Trans-Labrador Highway made last week. I will read here from the local Labradorian newspaper. It says: Pre-budget Bonanza, Funding Flows for Labrador. Great news for Labrador!

I want to talk about the transportation initiatives, some $41.7 million for the continuation of the Trans-Labrador Highway. The difference between this government, Mr. Chairman, is that we are spending our money on the Trans-Labrador Highway. We are not trying to put it into general revenue, like my good friends and colleagues across the way did while they were in government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: I must make that point, because it did happen.

Mr. Chairman, we are also going to commit some $15 million, which will be cost-shared with the federal government to add up to $30 million, to start the hard surfacing of the road from Happy Valley-Goose Bay to Labrador City. Mr. Chairman, I can tell you, that is something that everybody in Labrador has been wanting for many, many years. Again, it is this government that is making the commitment, and we are putting our money where our mouths are.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: We are not talking about it like the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair used to talk about it. We are not talking about it like the Member for Torngat Mountains used to talk about it. It was all talk, talk, talk, but there was never any action. I can tell you, this government is putting our mouth where it is and we are supporting those projects in Labrador, Mr. Chairman.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: Mr. Chairman, I am going to go on as long as I can here today, because there are a lot of good things that have been done here in Labrador since the course of this government has taken office. I will say to you that, since the fall of 2003, government has made steady progress in establishing solid economic and infrastructure help for Labradorians to capture the opportunities presented to its regions, strong resources base-skilled in innovative communities.

We have been listening to the people of Labrador, something that has not been done before. I want to just show you and to demonstrate to you, to the Province and to the people of Labrador today, that our Premier and this government have been listening to the people of Labrador and they have been listening to our issues.

When the Premier, in part of our Blue Book, was to establish a Premier's Office in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, I am pleased to say, Mr. Chairman, that project has been there. It is set up. We have a great, capable person in the name of Ms Win Barnes who is running the office there, and that facility and that office certainly will be a connection to the people of Labrador to ensure that the priorities of Labradorians get straight into the Premier's Office.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HICKEY: I was coming to that one.

We have strengthened the Department of Labrador Affairs, Mr. Chairman, through the hiring of a new Assistant Deputy Minister of Labrador Affairs. That position is established in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, and I am proud to say that this government promoted from within one of our own senior civil servants, from one of our own senior civil servants, and gave them the opportunity to take on the task of that position.

Premier Williams, our Premier, along with ministers and myself, we also went to the North Coast of Labrador. We were in all of the communities in the summer of 2004, and we listened to some of the issues that were raised by the folks on the Coast of Labrador. It was a great opportunity to engage with people, to listen to their concerns and to get ideas from them as to how we can improve the lot of those communities on the North Coast of Labrador.

Mr. Chairman, the Premier has led consultations in November, 2005, with Aboriginal leaders, and in particular Aboriginal women, to advance the issues at the First Ministers' Conference of National Aboriginal leaders in Kelowna, B.C.

The Premier has hosted public meetings with Labradorians in November 2005 on the proposed Lower Churchill. The Premier advanced Labrador issues during the recent federal election, including the Lower Churchill, development of 5 Wing Goose Bay, the Trans-Labrador Highway, and certainly a very important issue is the creation of a reserve in the community of Sheshatshiu.

We are committed, Mr. Chairman, to strategic investments to strengthen Labrador's positioning for long-term economic growth. I can tell you, we have done this through the hiring of a new senior government position that supports in Labrador West -

CHAIR: Order, please!

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

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

CHAIR: By leave? Does the hon. member have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

CHAIR: By leave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The new senior government position supports in Labrador West was created within the Department of Natural Resources to serve Labrador's mining, agricultural and energy sectors. I can tell you, Mr. Chairman, that is a very, very important position. It is working well, and I can tell you we are going to see great benefits from that initiative.

5 Wing Goose Bay, this is probably one of the biggest issues that is facing the community of Happy Valley-Goose Bay. It is an issue that I have been involved with for many, many years. I can tell you that our government, and particularly our Premier, has championed 5 Wing Goose Bay more than ever we have seen on any previous government.

I am also pleased to say, and report back to the people of my district, that the very first meeting that our Premier had with the new federal government was with the Minister of National Defence, Gordon O'Connor, to talk about the commitments that were made to our government in writing by now Prime Minister Harper on 5 Wing Goose Bay. Mr. Chairman, we are going to be, with great interest, looking forward to the 650 ground troops that will be established in Happy Valley-Goose Bay at 5 Wing over the course of the next number of years.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: We are also going to be very pleased to see the additional 100 support troops who are going to be there to support the UAV squadron that will be stationed there, but most of all, Mr. Chair, we are happy that the new Conservative government in Ottawa is going to make a long term commitment to Five Wing Goose Bay and ensure that it has an operational requirement into the future. That is so important for the longevity and for the jobs of the people of Five-Wing Goose Bay and indeed the people of my district.

Mr. Chair, the Lower Churchill Development is coming forward. We have committed to look at this project. I can tell you that this project is now being looked at certainly through the departments. An energy plan is in place, and I can tell you we look forward to the day when we can announce the Lower Churchill. We look forward to the day we will do this ourselves in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: That is what the people of this Province want, this is what our government wants, and that is the commitment.

When it comes to agriculture, Mr. Chair, no previous government has given the commitment to agriculture Labrador that this government has created.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: I can tell you for certain, talk to some of my friends who are in the farming community and agricultural community in Happy Valley-Goose Bay and they will tell you that we have never seen the support of any previous government on issues of agriculture as we have seen, certainly, from the Minister of Natural Resources and this government. The proof is in the pudding. We never talked about it, we did it, we put the money where it was to go. I can tell you, it was a proud day for the farmers when they took the keys of a new tractor, a $165,000 tractor, so now we can clear land and now we can do many of the things that agriculture can do in the District of Lake Melville and indeed in Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: Mr. Chair, I would be remiss if I never talked about safety and justice. Safety and justice are certainly two issues that we have been crying for in Labrador for many years. More police officers was something that was needed, and more social workers. I am happy to report here today, Mr. Chair, that five additional social positions were announced in 2004 to the tune of some $500,000 of new money put into the department; three additional positions in 2005 for Northern and Central Labrador; eleven additional RCMP positions established for coastal communities, which amounted to $1.2 million; additional funding provided to the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary in Labrador West under a 70-30 federal-provincial funding arrangement; a new RCMP detachment established in Sheshatshiu; a new Supreme Court building constructed and officially opened in Happy Valley-Goose Bay at $2.1 million; Labrador Correctional Centre, upgrading a building, $193,000; and a new video conferencing unit established in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. Mr. Chair, when I sing those figures out, I can tell you, I will challenge anyone across the way to put their track record against what we have done for Labrador in the last two years, I can tell you, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: One of the things, Mr. Chair, that we did in our government is we made a commitment to working with Aboriginal people and Aboriginal communities toward greater self-reliance. The Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement has been passed by both the federal and provincial levels of government. Our Minister of Aboriginal Affairs has appeared before the House of Commons and the Senate Standing Committees on Aboriginal Affairs in June of this year to encourage the expeditious passing of the legislation.

The Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement, signed by the Labrador Inuit Association and the Government of Canada in Nain of January 22, 2005, provided the foundation for a sustainable development in Northern Labrador, Mr. Chair. The Torngat's National Park Reserve land transfer agreement, signed with the Government of Canada on January 22, 2005, which included funding Parks Canada for up to the tune of $14 million over the next ten years, Mr. Chair. Parks and benefits agreement signed with the Labrador Inuit Association and the Government of Canada to provide employment and economic benefits for the Inuit people of Labrador. Progress in the negotiation of the Innu land claims and the impacts and benefits issues related to the Lower Churchill are ongoing and making progress, Mr. Chair. This government, this Premier, is committed to ensuring that Labrador gets its fair share and that justice for all is something that we will ensure happens in the big land.

When it comes to health and wellness - another very, very important issue, Mr. Chair. Our government has worked with the Innu and the Government of Canada to further the Innu healing strategy and to address the many social problems that have plagued the Innu for many years. Eight additional permanent social workers to serve Natuashish and nearby Aboriginal communities at a cost of some $750,000 a year. We supported the reopening of the group home in Sheshatshiu, family resource projects and other projects to help protect and empower Aboriginal women and their families, $400,000, including $100,000 for violence prevention.

Our Premier participated, in 2004, in the first meetings with Aboriginal leaders on Aboriginal health, helping to achieve an agreement for some $700 million dollars in new federal funding to help address some of the social challenges confronting Aboriginal communities across Canada.

Mr. Chair, planning is underway for our Premier to participate in the First Ministers' Meeting of Aboriginal Affairs, including consultation with other Aboriginal groups.

Mr. Chair, we are committed to ensuring that Labrador and its communities get its fair share. I can tell you, last week the commitments that were made by this government, the funding that was made by this government, has never been seen in the history of Labrador. I have lived there all of my life and I can tell you, no other government has made the commitments to Labrador and to Labrador communities that this Premier and this government has made over the past week.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: Mr. Speaker, as we move on over the course of the next weeks and months we will see the turning of the sod for a new long-term health care facility; a new extension to the College of the North Atlantic in Happy Valley-Goose Bay; a new college building for Labrador West; a new health centre for Labrador West; a new long-term health care facility for Happy Valley-Goose Bay and indeed Labrador; and indeed the auditorium for the arts community of Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

I am very pleased, Mr. Chair, to say I have been on a lot of those files. I have been all over some of those files for many years, but I will say that it is very gratifying for me as the MHA, the only MHA on this side of the House from Labrador, to ensure that our government has made these commitments to the people and to the communities. I can tell you, as we move forward Labrador is going to play a huge role in the future economic development of our Province. As I said many times in the past, and I continue to say, the future of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador lies in the development of the resources of Labrador. I can tell you that as we move forward with the Lower Churchill, and forestry and mining activities, I can tell you that the future for young Labradorians is going to be great. The future of our Province is great and our commitments are firm and strong.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, for this opportunity.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I stand today to speak to Bill 74, recognizing of course that under this particular bill you can speak to about anything your heart desires but, particularly I guess, anything to do with issues that are of vital importance to this Province.

I listened intently to the member from Labrador speak about what has happened in that part of our Province, and I think it is absolutely wonderful that is, in fact, the case. I would like to think that it will not be too long before the Member for Burin-Placentia West, who is now in Cabinet, will be able to stand up and rhyme off a litany of things that is going to happen for the Burin Peninsula. I think we all know what is happening on the Burin Peninsula and its devastation, there is no other word for it because, obviously, we have hundreds of people who really do not know what their future holds. So, while we can talk in glowing terms about a bright future for people in one part or another part of our Province, the reality of what is happening on the Burin Peninsula is sad.

I think we heard today from members of the FFAW who travelled to St. John's, who protested over at Fishery Products International. We heard from them exactly the trials that they are going through, the anguish that they are living through, and when we talk about the importance of revitalizing a part of our Province that has given so much in the time that it has existed, has been such a major player in Newfoundland and Labrador, and today they are wondering what their future holds. I speak for them when I stand here and say that they really do not want to move away. They really do not want to leave Newfoundland and Labrador but they will tell you, if you speak to them, that the question that is being asked all the time is: When are you moving? Where are you going? Do you have any idea how long you are going to be away? Isn't that sad? Isn't that sad, not that it is unusual for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to go away and work and come back, but what is happening now is that we have entire families that are moving. To have a spouse go away and come back, you know that family unit is still here in Newfoundland and Labrador, it is still intact. But what is happening now is that they cannot see a future anymore. They cannot see down the road where, in fact, they will be able to come back and spend time in Newfoundland and Labrador; and, in the best interest of the family unit, the decision they are making now is to uproot the family and move, because they are looking at the actions of FPI, they are looking at the actions of a government and its failure to hold FPI accountable, and saying: Where do we turn? Who do we look to? We can't look to our government.

We have asked the government today, again in the House of Assembly, to conduct a public, independent inquiry into the operation and management of FPI and they have said no. A golden opportunity to take a company that is a profitable company, that has just rode roughshod over to the people in Newfoundland and Labrador, particularly in those places where they have told them they are no longer important.

Look at Harbour Breton. What does the future hold for Harbour Breton? We talk about Plan B. Well, Plan B, if you talk to the people from Harbour Breton, the B could stand for bull because they are not seeing anything coming out of this government with respect to Plan B. I know there is a discussion about the Barry Group, and if that materializes it will be good news, obviously. The same way with the Plan B for Fortune, where they are talking about Cooke Aquaculture. If that materializes, that will be good news, but the reality of it is that if either of those materialize you are not going to see employment in the numbers that have been there with FPI. So, what do all of these people do?

Marystown, we talk about 300 people going to work. The reality is that we are talking about 115 positions, not 300 positions. They are talking about taking 300 and some-odd people and working them over three shifts. What does that tell you in terms of the future for these people in Marystown?

We have Harbour Breton, who has gone by the wayside, hanging their hats on a Plan B. We have Fortune, where the plant will not reopen, hanging their hats on a Plan B. We have Marystown, who does not know where to turn, thinking that the workforce there is going to be cut in half. There are people, of course, from my constituency who work in Marystown, so they really do not know where they will fit in the whole scheme of things. Then, there is Bonavista.

I bring up Bonavista because we all know what happened with Trepassey, all of these other communities. We were thinking in Harbour Breton, Fortune and Marystown, it will not happen to us. Well, guess what? It happened to Harbour Breton. Fortune was saying: No, we are going to get a secondary processing plant. The powers that be at FPI promised us that would materialize. Well, guess what? There is no secondary processing plant going in Fortune, so now it has happened to Fortune. Marystown - whoever thought that they would take the plant in Marystown and cut the workforce in half? I am sure the people in Marystown didn't think that. Well, that is exactly what is happening in Marystown. The people in Bonavista must be holding their breath and wondering: Are we next? The track record of FPI has been such that I make no wonder they are wondering if they are going to be next.

There does not seem to be an ounce of social conscience left in this company. If you can watch what is transpiring, how people are hurting, how families are being torn apart, and the only thing that you are concerned about is the bottom line, then this company has indeed lost any sense of a social conscience that it had.

This from a company, by the way, and this is their - FPI reports fourth quarter and full year 2005 unaudited results. For the year December 31, 2005, revenue was $833.7 million, an increase of $33.3 million or 4.2 per cent over 2004 revenue of $800.4 million. It is a company that is not hurting. Are they making enough wealth to satisfy their shareholders? Maybe not, obviously not, because I cannot believe that anybody in their right mind would do what this company is doing if it was not trying to just please their shareholders.

I look at the Board of Directors. I look at the Chairman of the Board of FPI, a Newfoundlander. Where is his social conscience? Why can't he make any inroads? Has he tried? Does he understand what is going on here? Because we have to look to people like this to influence people like John Risley.

We know that Mr. Rowe is on the record as saying FPI is going to become a shellfish company; they are getting out of the groundfish business. Well, why didn't Mr. Anthony, the Chair of the Board, speak up? If he did, we did not hear him. There must be someone inside that operation who thinks enough about this Province and rural Newfoundland and Labrador to stand up and be counted, but to date we have not seen it. That is precisely why we are calling on the government to initiate a public, independent inquiry into the operation and management of FPI. Anybody looking at what has transpired here would have to agree that the time has long come. The opportunity that we had back in the fall when I introduced a private member's motion to do just that, which every person on the government side voted against, a golden opportunity missed, and all of us, of course, in the Opposition, including the NDP, voted for, we have missed that opportunity. Well, now we have another one. Now that we know that FPI has been breaking the law, doesn't that beg the question: What else have they been doing?

You must wonder what FPI is up to. As a government, you have a piece of legislation that makes it possible for you to move and hold this company accountable; but, for whatever reason, you are choosing not to do it. It boggles the mind why you would do that, as a government that is representing the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. You are not there to represent the interests of FPI. You are there to represent the interests of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I know in my own district, the fish plant is in Fortune but actually the people who work there - or worked there, I should say - came from about six or seven different communities.

CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the hon. Member for Grand Bank that her time has expired.

MS FOOTE: By leave, Mr. Chairman?

CHAIR: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

CHAIR: The hon. member, by leave.

MS FOOTE: Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to continue.

The fact of the matter is, this is all about rural Newfoundland and Labrador and it appears, from everything we have seen, that not only has the company turned its back on our rural communities but so has the government. When the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development says rural Newfoundland is going through an economic restructuring, all I can do is look at the people who are sitting in the gallery today and say, that really gives them a level of comfort, people whose EI is running out, people who worked years at the fishery, people who really do not have any other skill set that they can take and apply to a position whether it is here or in Alberta or in Ontario or some other part of our country. I wonder what they think about the fact that the minister who is responsible for helping to revitalize rural Newfoundland and Labrador says rural Newfoundland is going through an economic restructuring. I am telling you, they will be able to put that on their table tonight for dinner, they will be able to go and buy their gas, they will be able to go and pay their bills, because of this economic restructuring that rural Newfoundland and Labrador is going through!

The reality is people are hurting. Rural Newfoundland and Labrador is disappearing. It is disappearing because people are leaving this Province and moving because of actions by companies like FPI. While other companies may make similar decisions that will impact on our people, this government has the authority, under the law - it has a piece of legislation that it can come to this House with and say to FPI: You are not going to treat the people of this Province in the manner that you have been treating them, and if you do not care about rural Newfoundland and Labrador then move elsewhere, take your name, FPI, and go, but leave your quotas, leave your fish plants, leave your boats, because we know there are people who will be only too willing to take those assets and those resources and make it work for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. The fish that are in our waters should be harvested and processed in our Province.

The problem we are having today is that the company has gotten away with sending this resource, this most valuable resource, to China. Who knows what other companies might be doing the same. The fact of the matter is that the government did not know it was happening, so they say. The question is, are there other companies doing the same thing. It begs the question. If so, what does that mean in terms of employment lost for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador?

The reality is that there is no one keeping watch and that is the sad part of this. There is no one keeping watch on what is happening, and that was admitted today by the Minister of Fisheries. Isn't that a sad admission, that a company can ship all of this resource to China, away from our Province, creating employment in a foreign country, while the people of Newfoundland and Labrador who work so hard in the fishery are without jobs? They are not in a position to be able to provide for their families. They have to look at uprooting their families, if in fact they are going to provide for them, and move to whatever corner of the world where they will be able to find work, because we all know that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are among the best workers in the world.

When I have to sit in this House of Assembly and look at the people in the gallery who are asking for our help, and when I go to my district and I meet with people who do not know how they are going to pay their bills, grown men and women who are crying, that is hard to take, knowing that there is so little I can do about it other than bring the issue up time and time and time again, and hopefully get the government to acknowledge that this is a serious issue and that plan Bs do not cut it. Plan Bs that fail to materialize in a certain amount of time do not cut it. You cannot talk about a plan B that is going to materialize maybe two, three, four or five years down the road and expect that people are going to hang around and wait for that. Would they, if they could? Probably, but the fact of the matter is that they cannot afford to wait around. This government should not afford this company, FPI, the time it is giving it to make final decisions.

The FFAW was the body that actually told all of us what the company was going to do. I am sure the government must have known, they have been in discussions with FPI and FFAW, but it had to be left to the FFAW to tell the people of the Province what was coming down. That is sad, when our own government and the company were not upfront with the people who work for the company and who the government represents.

Mr. Chair, I will conclude by saying, I would like for the government to reconsider the request that was made today in Question Period, that, in fact, the government agree to a public independent inquiry into the operations and management of FPI, because it is in the best interests of all of us to find out exactly what FPI is doing.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the New Democratic Party.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am pleased to have an opportunity to say a few words today on Interim Supply. It is an opportunity to comment on the general state of the finances of the Province, and because we have $1.1 billion being authorized to be spent by the government, it is pretty clear this is a significant debate. It is traditional to allow the government to, at some point after debate, obtain sufficient authority to spend, usually up until the end of June, sufficient monies to carry out government programs. I do not know if that is the strict accounting there. Maybe the Minister of Finance can straighten that out a little later, but if we are going to spend $1.5 billion between now and the end of June, I hope that is not one-quarter of the expenditures for the year, because that would mean we are going to have $6 billion to spend.

If the minister was right the other day, saying we are going to have a balance budget, then he must have $6 billion of revenues somewhere too. I hope he does, Mr. Chairman. I am sure the minister watched very avidly the other night, on Sunday and Monday, when the Tommy Douglas story was put out on CBC, telling the story of the Douglas Government back in the 1930s and 1940s, going down to the bankers in Boston who thought they were going to call their bonds, saying: Mr. Banker, not only do we want you to keep the bonds, we are going to start paying them off. The Minister of Finance must have been watching that or he must have known about it when he decided to have a go at the Teachers' Pensions Plan deficit, Mr. Chair, because, of course, one of the things that Tommy Douglas did was said that governments should not be beholding to the bankers for their agenda. The agenda should be set by the government based on the needs of the people.

Getting to that, Mr. Chair, we had a debate today earlier in Question Period about FPI. What I want to know is: What is the agenda of the people who are running FPI? I have a pretty good idea, Mr. Chair, and I have a pretty good idea that it doesn't have anything to do with the purposes that are spelled out in section 2 of the Act, the section that was put in there in 2002 after an All-Party Committee went around this Province and considered what the future of FPI might be under the new Board of Directors, under the new attempt at control of the company by those interests outside the Province.

You, Mr. Chairman, were on that committee, the Leader of the Opposition chaired the committee, the former Minister of Fisheries was on the committee, and we went around the Province and heard how important FPI was to the communities of the Burin Peninsula, of the Bonavista Peninsula, the Triton area, the Great Northern Peninsula, and all of the communities that were dependent on a flag ship company such as FPI continuing to work for the growth and the prosperity and the expansion of the Newfoundland fishery and the protection of that, to strengthen that not to weaken it, and not disrupt the historical pattern of harvesting and the processing of fish.

We put that in the Act, Mr. Chairman, because it needed to be put in that Act. They needed to be told that was the purpose and that was the historical purpose of FPI going back to 1984 when the restructuring took place and public money was put in to make FPI happen.

What do we have now, Mr. Chairman? We have resources being shipped to China and processed in China. We have shrimp being processed offshore. We have the closedown of Harbour Breton. We have the closedown of Fortune. We don't know what the fate of Bonavista is because all of the commitments that were made last summer when they wanted changes in the Act none of them seem to have panned out. What we have now, Mr. Chairman, is a total lack of confidence in the leadership of this company.

I will ask you this, Mr. Chairman. There was a lot of talk today about the shipping of yellowtail to China for processing. The question has got to be asked: What yellowtail is being shipped to China? The answer given today was: It was yellowtail that was less than 400 grams. Now, Mr. Chairman, what are we doing, and what are they doing, catching yellowtail less than 400 grams? The insanity of that knows no bounds, Mr. Chairman. If you had a company that was interested in the long-term health of the fishery of Newfoundland and Labrador they wouldn't be catching 400-gram yellowtail in the first place. They would leave it in the water and wait until it grows so they could catch it. So what interest does that company have in the long-term sustainability of the yellowtail fishery that they are catching? What is the insanity of that? What is the value in that?

I remember a few years ago big pictures on the TV screen, the former Premier Brian Tobin down in New York with a big net hanging from a crane and he had a little baby fish. He called it a little baby turbot, the last lonely turbot, less than the size of your hand clinging on by his fingernails on the Grand Banks. That is what we had. Now we have 400 gram yellowtail being shipped to China to process because we cannot afford to process it here. Of course, we cannot afford to process it here. It should never be caught in the first place.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARRIS: It should never be caught in the first place. Is this a company, I ask you, that is interested in long-term prosperity and strengthening of the fishery of Newfoundland and Labrador? No, Mr. Chair. Not if they are catching 400 gram yellowtail fish. What is wrong with them, Mr. Chair? What is wrong with them? Obviously, they do not care about the future of the fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador or they would not be destroyed. If they left that yellowtail in the water this year and next year and the year after, they might have an increased quota. There might be more to catch. So, what are they doing, Mr. Chair? What are they doing? Catching that level of fish that should not be caught in the first place.

So, we have a problem, Mr. Chair. We have a problem. We have a bunch of people running the leadership. I call it the leadership today but we have to call it a hide-and-seek leadership. Now, we kind of know their names. John Risley is one of them. He is in Nova Scotia mostly, when he is not flying around in his corporate jet. We have Mr. (inaudible) who seems to be a bit of a corporate raider type, and we have a few others, people who are calling the shots.

The Icelanders still have a big interest in what is going on. They are very interested in the marketing arm. They are very interested in marketing. I have nothing against marketing. Marketing is a good thing. We need to have a good strong marketing arm for the fish that is caught and processed in Newfoundland and Labrador. I do not even think I am opposed to having a marketing arm in the U.K. if that is what it is, because, yes, we do need to be able to penetrate the European market if we can for our crab and our shrimp without a tariff if we can do it; if we can do it, Mr. Chair. But we need to know that that marketing asset is just as important to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador as the fish plants, as the quotas and that we still need to have a flagship company.

What kind of a flagship company is this, one that is satisfied to see the operations in Newfoundland and Labrador deteriorate and, at the same, foster plans to get rid of the obligation to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador? They will say the restrictions. They said as late as March 10, the restrictions placed on the act, the burden of the act. Well, the burden of the act, Mr. Chairman, are the obligations to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador who made that company possible. What is a burden to them is a plus for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. This government has an obligation that they have inherited as part of their responsibility to the govern to ensure that FPI is operated in accordance with the needs and the best interests of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. I hope they are going to do that, Mr. Chairman. I hope they are going to do that. We need to insist that the directors of FPI come up with some leadership that people can have faith in, that they are prepared to sit down and trust that when they say something they can do it and they will do it. If we cannot have that, Mr. Chairman, yes, we have to look at what we had in the past; yes, we have to look at the restructuring that took place in 1984 where the public participated and the public was entitled to dictate, not just the structure and the restrictions but also in the case initially of FPI which plants would stay open.

I agree with the Minister of Fisheries in what he said today, that yes, in 2002, the all-party committee did not recommend the list of plants that should stay open; did not recommend that there be a restriction on the closure of plants. The government recognized that they did not own the company and they were not going to tell the company what they should do or should not do in any particular circumstance. The purposes were put in there that they should not unduly disrupt the traditional historic patterns of harvesting and processing. That is what they are doing, Mr. Chairman, to the extent that they are in the Burin Peninsula and have last year in the Harbour Breton area. The whole South Coast, Mr. Chairman, that was once a very important part of the harvesting and processing sector in the Province has now been devastated by the actions of FPI.

So, we do not have faith in the leadership, Mr. Chairman. We do not have faith in the leadership that, in the last five years, started turning their attention to the operations of a particular plant and saying: Are we making money here or are we making money there? That sounds like CN, Mr. Chairman. We are not making money on this particular piece of rail line because we divide the number of rails we have by the amount of money we spend in Moncton, or in Winnipeg, or someplace and say: Well, this particular piece of rail here in Newfoundland and Labrador is not making any money so we should close it down.

CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the hon. Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi that his time for speaking has expired.

MR. HARRIS: By leave, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

CHAIR: The hon. member, by leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank all hon. members for their leave.

We do have a situation here that is fundamentally important to the future of rural Newfoundland and Labrador but fundamental to how we see ourselves as a people. FPI did have a corporate culture, if you want to call it that, going back to 1984. It was a culture that responded to the realities of Newfoundland and Labrador but also worked with the people and the communities to work through some of the most difficult times that we have experienced in our history in terms of the cod moratorium. That company survived, Mr. Chair, and people seemed to have faith in it. The only people who did not have faith in them, Mr. Chair, were people like the Ontario Teachers' Pension Fund who thought they could make more money by putting somebody else in charge and maybe squeezing a few more dollars out of it. I do not think there is any evidence for that in the share price of FPI today, and those who so eagerly supported that move a few years ago are obviously sadly disappointed with the return on their investment that they made at that time in the expectation that there was going to be a massive profit. What we have now, Mr. Chair, is a company that is not doing very well at all and people have lost confidence in the leadership that is there. So, we would like to see that change, Mr. Chair.

I will just change the topic slightly, we are on a whole issue of Interim Supply. I mentioned that if you look at traditional supplies until the end of June, if you multiply that by four, as I said earlier, you would get $6 billion. I do not think we have $6 billion to spend, so it is probably a bunch of up-front money in the first three months of expenditure here. But I think it does signal one thing, Mr. Chair, and that we do have an era in which the government's coffers are, if not flush, Mr. Chair, they are a lot more - a better word, a lot better off than we thought we were two years ago, or than this government said they were two years ago. We now have increased revenues as a result of the price of oil; extreme new dollars as a result of the price of oil. We got a very good advance from the Government of Canada and a good deal with respect to the Atlantic Accord, and we have even gotten other economic indicators doing very well.

I heard today, Mr. Chair, that the retail sales numbers for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador are up 6 per cent in January over last year; 6 per cent year over year and four months in a row where retail sales are up. That means, Mr. Chair, that people are spending money. It means that the government is also collecting HST revenue. It means that the government revenues are actually up. We expect good things from that Budget that we are going to get on March 30.

Not only that, it is time that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador as a whole, not just benefitting from decisions that were made - and I have nothing against any decisions that were announced in the last two weeks. Some very positive decisions, for example, for Labrador West in terms of moving forward on a new hospital and recognizing the need for the College of the North Atlantic to have a permanent home in Labrador West. All of their expenditures for long-term care announced, decisions about education that have been made, we look forward to those. There are some things that were left undone and needed to be done and needed attention. We recognize that these are very positive steps. We understand there is going to be some significant dollars in this budget for school construction and there are a lot of issues that need to be dealt with, including some in my own district, so we look forward to that.

I want to just talk briefly - I know I am speaking with leave - about something that is very dear to my heart and has to do with whether or not the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, as a result of our prosperity with respect to the offshore oil, are going to have what I have called a social dividend. Are we going to be able to do and look forward to something that I think the people of Newfoundland and Labrador deserve, and that is fairness and equality in medical care. When I say medical care, I mean inclusive medical care, because there is one area of direct medicine - and I will talk about dental care in a moment - but there is one area of direct medical care in which there is still a high degree of unfairness in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and a low degree of access for between 35 per cent and 40 per cent of the population who do not have a drug plan. They do not have access to drugs for medical therapy unless they pay as they go.

There are those who are on social assistance and have a drug card, and they get whatever drugs are on the formulary. There are those who have old age pension and a supplementary benefit who are entitled to a senior's drug card. Then there are those who are lucky enough to have a plan with their workplace. We have one here. Every member of this House of Assembly has a drug plan, and our families, and every person who works in this building and work for the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, but there are over 35 per cent of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador who, if they get a prescription, have to go to the drug store, find out how much it costs, and then decide whether they can afford to pay for it.

That is an excruciating decision for some people, and every member here knows it. I see some nods opposite. Every member here knows it, that if you go to the drugstore and you find out that the drug that your doctor just prescribed costs $80, you have a tough decision to make if you do not have that kind of money. If you have a heart condition, if you have - some other people have drugs that cost $200 or $300 or $400 a month. That is a mortgage payment, that is a rent payment for many people, and these people either do without those drugs or get so sick that they end up in hospital and the drugs are provided for free in the hospital. That is something that I believe we are now in a position to change in this Province.

We had a briefing there recently, and some of the members opposite may have been participating in the briefing by the same organization on behalf of the Diabetes Association. A medical doctor gave the briefing, and what she said was: When somebody comes with a new diagnoses of diabetes, the first question that the doctor asks the patient is: Do you have a drug plan? Because that determines what treatment options are open to the prescribing physician in terms of dealing with something that is a growing concern amongst the population of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Yes, we have to do our best to have prevention programs to decrease the amount of diabetes. Yes, we do, and I want to see more of that, and we will be arguing about that later, but for those who have diabetes, to go to a doctor and have the first question asked, not how are you doing or what options are open for you, but do you have a drug card? Because if you have a drug card I can prescribed certain medications and if you do not have a drug card we have to do it another way.

Well, that other way is less expensive but it is also probably less efficacious, probably less effective, in treating your illness, and that is differing medical treatment on the basis of income. I would challenge anybody in this House or in this Province to say that there are not people who are making decisions on a daily basis between filling their drug prescription and paying their rent or paying their light bill or putting food on the table, and that is what is happening in far too many houses in this Province. As I say, the number that I had been presented, and no one has contradicted it yet, has been between 35 per cent and 40 per cent.

Ironically, Mr. Chairman, when we in Canada compare ourselves to the Americans in terms of medicare and say, oh, wonderful, we pat ourselves on the back as a country because we have the legacy of Tommy Douglas to benefit from, and I think it is a great one. When we look at the Americans, we say: Don't they have a terrible system, because 35 per cent or 40 per cent of Americans do not have a medical plan and cannot have access to medicare unless they can pay for it. In the United States, where a cancer diagnosis for many people is tantamount to a bankruptcy because they cannot afford to pay for medical care, well, we have a similar problem in Newfoundland and Labrador on the issue of drug care and drug therapy.

I think, Mr. Chairman, when we are looking at our new found prosperity, if you want to call it that, our look at prosperity, our glimmer of prosperity, we should be trying to find ways to make things fairer for people in Newfoundland and Labrador. Actually, our cousins out west in Alberta seem to be on the pig's back in terms of revenues and surpluses, $10 billion last year, and I don't hear an agenda of fairness coming out of them, but I heard yesterday that the Mayor of Calgary is saying, let's reduce, get rid of property taxes. They have no sales tax, we will get rid of property taxes. So, the more property you have, the more you will benefit from it. Well, that is not the way. I don't think, and I would not even ascribe to members opposite, I do not think that people opposite think that way. I think if there was a means to do it, the people opposite would want to have equity prevail and that we, as a people who believe in egalitarianism, would want to see problems like the one I am mentioning solved first, and that if we have - as I said before, what is the point of having these increased revenues and prosperity from the offshore if we are not going to use it to better the lives of the people of this Province? Not just roads, I am all in favour of roads, we have to have paved roads, we have to clean up the infrastructure, we have to do all that, but we have to do something about social inequality that continues to exist.

I mentioned drug therapy. There is also dental care. Dental care is clearly one of those things that defines the difference between social classes in this Province. You have access to dental care as a child, free up to a certain amount of money, but people who go to dentists have to be ready to pay unless they have a dental plan. Dental plans are rarer than drug plans, so this is another area where we have to start looking at social inequity.

I am just asking members opposite. I do not know what the state of the Budget is. We will see all on March 30 what the current projections are from our petro dollars for the next year. Maybe it is only going to be for the next ten years that we will have significant revenues, but let's figure out a way of solving some of these problems now. I want to see this, I really want to see this, on the agenda of government and on the public agenda over the next little while. It is something that is a part of the continuing legacy of what I believe Tommy Douglas brought to Canada, an attitude that if there is a problem like that, that needs to be fixed, it can be fixed regardless of the obstacles. We saw some of those obstacles on TV the other night. We saw the doctors of Saskatchewan refusing to participate in what they call socialist medicine. They wanted free enterprise medicine. They went on strike and doctors volunteered to come from the U.K. and serve in Saskatchewan while the doctors, who were supported very strongly by the American Medical Association- that was pretty interesting. It was pretty interesting to see the American Medical Association front and centre attending meetings with the Premier of Saskatchewan saying that, we were prepared to see socialized medicine come to North America. They were putting their dollars behind the Saskatchewan Medical Association to try to stop medicare.

Now, most doctors you meet today will say that medicare is the best thing ever happened to them, because they have a guaranteed income, because every patient they treat they get paid for the services that they provide. That was then, Mr. Chair, back in the early 1960s, when the medical profession feared medicare but the people wanted it and the people prevailed. I think the same thing can be done in terms of drug care, not just having the public pay the full shot but finding innovative ways to keep the costs down. What about government buying of drugs? Why do we need to go through middle men and pay them a commission? Why can't we have a group of provinces deal directly with the drug companies and have a group-buying situation where the cost is shared, where the overhead is eliminated, where the middle men are eliminated and where the commissions are less, on the issues of drugs that are widely prescribed and necessary to make sure we have a good plan.

These are the kinds of things that a progressive government should do. I know, despite the fact that their federal cousins do not call themselves progressive anymore - in fact, there have been some suggested joke names for the party, call themselves the regressive conservatives. Members opposite still call themselves Progressive Conservatives and I invite them, despite what their federal cousins might say or do, to look at this kind of progressive social legislation and social programs that are needed in Newfoundland and Labrador.

The time has come, Mr. Chair, when the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are going to be demanding and seeking and asking for equality when it comes to medical treatment, and drug therapies are a very important part of that. I will be the first one in line to urge them on and to encourage them to expect this from a government that is going to have the kind of revenues that this government will have, that we will hear all about at the end of March.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR (Harding): The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Chairman, I thought I should take a few minutes this afternoon to speak to some of the matters further relating to FPI. I know a couple of hon. members have made reference to it in speeches this afternoon. Unfortunately, I was not here in the House to hear it all, I had other business that had to be attended to, but I guess I will respond to what I heard.

First of all, the hon. gentleman for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi made reference to the size of fish being caught and the necessity to ship some of that, in an unprocessed state, outside of the Province. We have to be very careful here, Mr. Chairman. I am not a spokesperson for FPI nor do I intend to be. I certainly cannot speak for DFO, but I can speak for union members who are trawler men who I have talked to. I can speak for officials at DFO who I have talked to. I can speak for people in the industry generally whose advice I respect. The bottom line is this, Mr. Chairman: In terms of yellowtail, in particular, there is no known way to anybody, to any fisherman, to stop catching the small fish. The only way you can do it is have no fishery. Some of that fish is of commercial size, some of it is medium size and some of it is extremely small, but there is no technology available, so I have been told - I have been told it by the fishermen, by the trawler men, the people who know what they are talking about, that everything has been tried. They have been trying letting it go, they have been trying having different technologies within their traps and so on, but it cannot be done. It cannot be physically or technologically done.

Therefore, what they have been forced to do by DFO - and rightly so - is to grade it and bring it in. If a market can be found for it - and it should be non-processed fish out of the Province. It is not a new thing, Mr. Chairman, this is something that ministers for years have had to deal with. There is a minimum size below which the equipment that FPI has in their plants cannot cut. This fish is cut by machinery as members will probably know, so there is a size below which the cutters cannot be set and therefore they cannot cut the fish with the machines below that certain size. You can cut it by hand, but to get a three inch filet, Mr. Chairman, by cutting it by hand, obviously everybody would realize that you would lose your shirt in short order.

What has been done in the past? Sometimes people have turned a blind eye and by accident somebody finds a dump load of fish in the New Harbour dump. That has happened in the past. That is one thing that has been done with it. A lot of it, Mr. Chairman, in the past has been put into animal feed. A lot of it has gone right straight through meal plants. One thing is certain, Mr. Chairman, that there is a certain size below which it is not economical to process.

There is a market in China. The market in China, compared to the salary rates here, is certainly not even close. They can cut that stuff by hand and some of it does get cut by hand and shipped back to Burin, and there it gets processed into secondary processing. That, Mr. Chairman, is the reality of the situation.

Having said that and admitting that, and having admitted that that has been the case for x number of years with various species, certainly yellowtail and certainly 3O redfish too, those two species, there has to still be some minimal amount of processing done in the Province. Because do not forget, Mr. Chairman, the fish is not generally frozen and shipped out, it is generally brought in, put in a plant, gut taken out of it, head taken off it, cleaned up, put in a box and frozen, so there is some labour here. There is some return for the people in the fish plants, and the people in the fish plants know this. The people in Fortune know it and the people in Marystown know it. If, for example, the operator in Gaultois were not allowed to ship perch, redfish, out in a semi-processed form there very likely would not be an operator in Gaultois today. We have to be careful about cutting off our nose to spite our face.

I will tell you one thing that is certain, Mr. Chairman: While we are prepared, with the concurrence of the people involved here, like the union, the trawler men and so on, to give consideration to shipping out of the Province, what we are not prepared to do is to give blanket approval to ship two-thirds of your quota out of the Province. That is exactly what FPI was trying to run under our nose over the last several weeks. I am telling you, and I have told them, the Premier has told them, we have told them as a government, we are not going to do it. You might as well get it off your plate, you might as well get it out of your system, because it is not going to happen. We are prepared, in a reasonable fashion, to consider some degree of shipping out smaller sized fish unprocessed, but we are not ready to do anything unless you, and until you, attend to your responsibilities to your employees.

We have said, Mr. Chairman, that we are prepared to engage in a worker adjustment program. That does a lot to solve the problem for maybe 300 people or so, 270, 280, maybe 300. We believe that FPI has a responsibility there too, we believe the Government of Canada has a responsibility there, and we are prepared and have, in fact, engaged on it. I have had meetings with the federal minister, our regional minister. He knows what the numbers are. I think the Premier has written the Prime Minister since the new government took over and told him that this was our number one objective. We are prepared to put our money forward on that. We are prepared to work with the union and the company in terms of what you do with the rationalization of the seniority plans, because there is a different seniority plan in each plant. It is not union wide, it is different in each plant, and they have to be melded together. We are also prepared, Mr. Chair, to say that, if we are going to go through that kind of an adjustment the people who ought to come out will be the people who have the greatest seniority, who are fifty-five years of age and over, not the people at the low end of the scale. We are prepared to engage in that, but we are not prepared to let FPI off the hook one iota.

I said in this House today, Mr. Chair, I said out in the scrum just now, this House is open now until May or June I guess, until we get the work of the government completed, the Budget passed and whatever legislation we have passed. This House is open and I say to FPI, Mr. Chair, that if they want to play hardball they are dealing with the right crowd to play hardball. We are prepared to be reasonable, we are prepared to be flexible, but we are not going to be led around by the nose. They have a responsibility to the people in the communities.

One thing we are not going to do - I talked about the processing of two-thirds of their product. I think the federal minister is correct. The federal minister has said publicly that if they do not land the fish for processing in the province that it is adjacent to, in this case it is Newfoundland and Labrador, well then they have no right to harvest it. He said that. I cannot make that statement. I can make it, but I cannot enforce it. The federal minister can enforce it because the fish in the water is under his jurisdiction. If they are not prepared to do something better, significantly better, than want to ship two-thirds of their quota out of this Province, then if that means you go to the wall you go to the wall.

Also, Mr. Chair, we wanted to do our due diligence on this when it all started back in December, so we said: We are going to send in a set of auditors and have a look at your books. I suppose, theoretically, technically, perhaps they could have said no, but on the groundfish side they cooperated. Boy, did they cooperate! I mean, anything we wanted, bundles of information, any personnel we needed access to - not we, I mean the auditors who we engaged on our behalf had no problems. Everything went clickety-boom because I suspect that they knew - not suspect, they knew - that our auditors would generally find what their auditors found, what their auditors were telling them.

Mr. Chairman, when we went back a little while ago and said, we want to look at the rest of your books now, what is the contribution from crab, what is the contribution from scallop, what is the contribution from the other things that you are doing, well I tell you, we have not had the same degree of co-operation. We are still fighting about that today. We are still fighting with the company today and demanding that they have the same degree of co-operation, because it is the same set of auditors who were in there before doing different work, that the same co-operation we had then, we have now. One has to ask the question, why don't we have it? Why do we have to fight tooth and nail on behalf of our auditors to get information? If it is going to tell a different story, maybe that is what it is, but we are not having co-operation.

CHAIR: Order, please!

I want to remind the hon. minister that his time has expired.

MR. RIDEOUT: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

CHAIR: Leave has been granted.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Chair, I will not unduly take anybody else's time because I know in this debate we can come back at it again if there is time, but I just make the point that on the second audit that we are doing we are having far more difficulty getting the information that the auditors require to do their work than we had on the first one.

The other thing that should be clear, and has been clear, is that we are not prepared to engage in any weakening of the FPI Act at this time; none whatsoever. As I said in Question Period today - I do not know if it was in Question Period or outside - the House is open and if necessary we can always strengthen it.

Mr. Chair, there should be a clear message. I do not know how long it is going to take to get through to some people involved with FPI. We understand they are not a charitable organization, we understand we cannot force them to lose globs and globs of money, we understand all that, but you also have parts of your company that are making money, eight hundred and some odd million last year. Therefore, there are parts of this company that are in very good shape. We will work with you to do an Older Workers Adjustment Program with the Government of Canada, and after that, FPI, you should be able to take care of everybody else who is involved at this present time with you. Right now we are talking about the Burin Peninsula.

You say you have no interest in any further work at Fortune. Well, we will go and look for something for Fortune, and we do have a party interested in Fortune, but it is going to take some product to get them there and get them over the hump.

This tale is far from being over. FPI knows from the get-go that they are not coming in here and putting through, under our nose, something that - and we are not going out to try to sell it for them. I mean, the audacity of coming in here and saying: Here, we would like to try this on. Then they would come the next day and say: We would like to try that on.

I have been around a long time and I have seen a lot of businesses come and go in this Province from the mining industry to the fishing industry. Whatever I saw in the past thirty years, if a company had a plan, they would come and put it in front of you. If you did not like it, you could fight over it, but this crowd has no plan, Mr. Chair. They come in and put something in front of you today and say: What do you think of that? They go and put it in front of the union tomorrow and say: What do you think of that? Then the next day that is off the table and something else is on.

There is no plan. They do not know where they are going. They have no plan for a long-term commitment. This company has problems. It has serious problems at the top, and it certainly has some financial difficulties, but it is going to take leadership to solve them, it is going to take vision to solve them, and the company had better get on with solving them because we are not going to let them off the hook in terms of the other things they would like to do, Mr. Chairman.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to have a few words on this bill this afternoon. It is money bill. Given that it is a money bill, we do not always have to stick to something that concerns the Budget or money, but I am going to try to do that this afternoon because the last few days and again this afternoon I have been listening to the Premier and his Minister of Finance talking about surplus budgets and all the things they are going to do with the surplus. We hear mainland economists talking about how Newfoundland and Labrador is going to, again this year, lead the country in economic growth. We heard the Minister of Finance this afternoon rise in this House and say there are more people employed in this Province than ever in the history of the Province. I sat there and for a short while this afternoon I thought that I must have been in Alberta and we were listening Premier Klein and the Minister of Finance, McClellan, in Alberta, talking because what they are saying, and painting such a rosy picture, is certainly not what I have been experiencing in this Province in the past year, and it certainly has not been what my constituents in the District of Twillingate & Fogo have been experiencing in the past twelve months.

Let me give you example, Mr. Chairman. I represent four islands in the District of Twillingate & Fogo, that being Twillingate, New World Island, Change Islands, and Fogo Island. I have represented those people, have had the privilege and the honour to represent those people, for the past eleven years. I can honestly say to you in all sincerity that this has been the worst year that I have experienced, and the people of that district have experienced, in at least the last eleven. I would go so far as to say, Mr. Chairman, that they have not - in talking to the people out there - experienced a year like this year in recent memory. To hear the individuals opposite rise this afternoon and talk about all of the great things that are happening in the Province leaves me to wonder if my district is the only district that is suffering, but I know that not to be the case, Mr. Chairman, and I will get on to that later.

Let me talk about my district for a few minutes. Take Fogo Island, for example. I have the pleasure of representing them in the House of Assembly, even though I worked in the other part of the district before being elected on New World Island. Fogo Island experienced hardships in the past through the failure of fish companies. Back in the 1960s, when Joseph Smallwood tried to resettle them, they said: We are not leaving. Regardless of the hardships we encounter, we are not leaving, and they established the Fogo Island Co-op. The people on that island have made that co-op work for the past thirty or forty years and they have also managed to eke a very good living from the sea.

I can remember, just two and a half years ago when I sat over there as Minister of Fisheries, standing in this House of Assembly and bragging about the fact that there was zero unemployment in Fogo Island and that no one out there, or very few, did not qualify for EI, or unemployment insurance, in the fall of the year, or the winter. In fact, it was just a couple of short years ago that they ran the plant, right up until I think it was late November or early December, and that they managed to provide themselves with a good living.

This year, I say, Mr. Chairman, I am not finding the same thing. The people on the island, in no part to themselves, have found themselves in a very, very dire economic situation. This is the first year, for example, that the Fogo Island Co-op has not been able to provide employment to the extent that its workers would not qualify for unemployment insurance this year. I think the Minister of Fisheries knows. He is well acquainted with Fogo Island Co-op, having been the previous Minister of Fisheries back in the 1980s, and he knows the fishery far more than his predecessor, the member representing The Straits & White Bay, but the fact of the matter is that a number of fish harvesters in that area have been calling me - grown men, not all of them young - have been calling me since, basically, the fishery collapsed last June or July, begging, almost, what should they do? It is not just on Fogo Island.

Change Islands - I have women who call me and my assistant on a daily basis, crying because they do not have the money to provide for heat and light and food. You might say that I am exaggerating, but I can tell you I am not.

New World Island - they are leaving New World Island in droves, the likes of which I have not seen, and I went there to live in 1982, some twenty-three years ago. They are leaving in droves. In January of this year, twenty-five left the Town of Summerford, heading for Alberta.

Twillingate, even though they are lucky enough to have a shrimp plant down there, as they have a crab plant on New World Island, even though they have a shrimp plant there, they were not spared the desperation that they experienced in the fishery this year. I have had elderly, not elderly gentlemen, but I had one particular individual who called me; he was sixty-four years old. He had fished all of his life. He made a good living from the sea, and he provided for his family. He called me in the early fall and said: Gerry, this year I didn't make any money and I don't know what to do - because normally they made a good living and he had made a good living. He told me that the enterprise that he owned, just two years ago he could have sold for $500,000 and he said he could not sell it today if he tried. He could not give it away. Sixty-four years old. I asked him what he was going to do. He said he was going to go and cut brush in Northern Alberta where he was going to work twelve hours a day, seven days a week, for three months before he got his first break - at sixty-four years of age cutting brush, something that he did not do before. He had to go and do a chainsaw course so he could go to Northern Alberta.

I had another individual around the same age call me from Durrell on Twillingate Island and he told me - in fact, he wrote the Premier about it. He said: It is strange that I have to leave my Province and go to Alberta, where the oil in Alberta is doing more for him than the oil in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Chairman, it is widespread throughout my district. To stand here, or sit here this afternoon and listen to the Finance Minister talking about how much employment is in this Province, there is record employment levels in this Province, I wonder if we are living in the same world because it is not just my district. I could go on and on and on giving you examples of the hardships individuals are experiencing in the thirty-nine communities that make up Twillingate & Fogo District on the Northeast Coast of Newfoundland and Labrador, and I am not lying. I think that any of the members opposite who now sit on the government side, who represent rural areas of this Province, have witnessed the same thing. These have been a proud people, I say to those opposite. These are not people who look for make-work projects, but this year, due to no fault of their own, and in some part because of what the government tried to do last spring with them in forcing raw material sharing down their throats - and the fishery got off to a very late start, and as a result, they did not make the income that they normally made from the fishery, are finding themselves having to leave. I find that to be very sad, Mr. Chairman. What has this government done for them in recent years? What has this government done for them in recent years, I ask the members opposite?

I remember the Premier, when he was the Leader of the Opposition, going to my district; the promises and the commitments that he made to the people of my district, like he made to the people throughout the districts of this Province. We all heard him say: We have a plan for rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Well, Mr. Chairman, if you talk to the people of my district, if you talk to the people of Joe Batts Arm, Barred Island, Shoal Bay, if you talk to the people of Tilting and you talk to the people of Stag Harbour, Herring Neck, Valley Pond, Tizzard's Harbour and Crow Head, they will tell you that they know what the plan is. The plan is to move them out of rural areas of the Province. If they cannot find a job on the Avalon Peninsula then go to Alberta where all the rest of your relatives have gone. I know, Mr. Chairman, what they feel. I have two sisters who live in Alberta. I have a nephew who got laid off last Christmas Eve who has had to move to Alberta to find employment. I know what they have experienced.

Mr. Chairman, what did this government do after they made the promises that they knew the answers to rural Newfoundland and Labrador and they were going to do this, this and this? In my district, all they did since they came to power was cut services, increase every single fee for the service that government provides and they said go to Alberta and go to work. They closed court houses. They closed social services offices. They closed the highways depot in my district and now it is looked after from Gander Bay. I will tell you, if anyone has driven down through Gander Bay lately they will tell you that the crowd over in Gander Bay who works for highways cannot do what needs to be done in Gander Bay let alone what needs to be done on New World Island and Twillingate Island.

Then they came up and said that they were going to eliminate ferry rates and bring it inline with the cost of road transportation. What have they done in the two years that they have been in power? They have increased the fees by 25 per cent. Then the Premier of this Province had the audacity to write the three national leaders during the federal election and demand that they reduce the ferry rates between Newfoundland and Cape Breton by 15 per cent. The same Premier who has just risen the ferry rates that he is responsible for by 25 per cent.

Now, Mr. Chair, we don't have to just talk about my district, because it was just a little over a year ago that we sat in this House of Assembly and we dealt with the people in the galleries who were being laid off in Harbour Breton by FPI. I would like to talk about FPI this afternoon because the Minister of Fisheries just brought it up. We heard what FPI said to the people of Harbour Breton a year ago, or a little over a year ago. We also heard the crowd opposite say: Don't worry - like the Minister of Industry said today and the Premier said today: We will stand shoulder to shoulder with you. We heard the Premier make that speech. We saw the tears in his eyes when he was in Harbour Breton last summer. He was all over the file. It wasn't going to close under his watch.

MR. CHAIR (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

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

MR. REID: Mr. Chair, by leave? I am only getting started.

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

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. CHAIR: The hon. the member, by leave.

MR. REID: Anyway, Mr. Chair, we have seen what has happened to the people out of Harbour Breton, they are in just as dire straits today as they were some fifteen months ago. Then what happened last fall, eight months after the closure of Harbour Breton? What happened to Stephenville? Who remembers the Premier standing in front of the mill during the election of 2003? It won't close under my watch. Well, I say to the minister and the Premier today, it did close under your watch. I can tell you one thing, Harbour Breton did not close under our watch over here. Marystown was not being threatened with half of its workforce being eliminated. Fortune did not close under our watch because we told the Board of Directors of FPI, we will hold you to your commitments, and we did.

Let's go back to Stephenville. The Minister of Mines and Energy, the Government House Leader, stood in front of a camera back in August or September of this year when he talked about Stephenville, and he did not say there were 300 jobs being lost in the Bay St. George region. He said there were 901, I believe, direct and indirect jobs being lost in the Stephenville region, but don't worry. We are going to establish a Cabinet committee. We are going to stand shoulder to shoulder with you. We are going to stand shoulder to shoulder with you, just like he said we are going to stand shoulder to shoulder with the people of Harbour Breton, and what has happened since then? What has happened since then? What is this glorious committee that you established of Cabinet? What have you been doing? What have you been doing? It is my understanding now that the committee that was established in Stephenville to try and determine what they can for that area is now acting as an employment agency for Alberta companies so that no longer do they have to come down there. All you have to do is go to the committee in Stephenville and they will put you on to a job in Alberta.

Now, I hear today the Premier stand on his feet, and the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development, and tell the people of Fortune and Marystown and Burin: Don't worry. We are going to stand shoulder to shoulder with you. All I can say is, good luck to those people and I hope that, when they stand shoulder to shoulder with them, they do not have to buy tickets and fly to Alberta and fly to Fort McMurray, because I say to the Minister of Innovation and the Premier, if you are going to stand shoulder to shoulder with the people of Harbour Breton and Stephenville and those who are losing their jobs on the Burin Peninsula, you are going to have to go to Alberta to stand shoulder to shoulder with them.

In closing, Mr. Chairman, I would like to just say that all areas in rural Newfoundland and Labrador are suffering, and they are suffering greatly. The people in my district are not unlike the people on the Northern Peninsula. They are not unlike the people of the South Coast. They are not unlike the people of the Bay St. George region. They are not unlike the people who lost their jobs in the mill in Corner Brook, and they are not going to be unlike the people who are about to lose theirs in Grand Falls-Windsor when Abitibi pulls the next plug and says they are closing number seven, because we have heard nothing from this government when it comes to employment prospects in this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MS JONES: Good speech, Gerry.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Chairman, I just heard somebody say to the Leader of the Opposition opposite, it was a good speech. It wasn't a bad story to tell, but never let the truth or the facts interrupt a good story, I say to the Leader of the Opposition.

I do want to deal with some of the issues that he has raised. There is no question today that there are certain regions in the Province that are facing challenges. Unless we acknowledge that, then there is no way in which a government can realistically or legitimately work to try to solve some of those challenges, and that is exactly what we are trying to do, but to stand today and talk about, that nothing has been done, that government is not doing anything, that we have been remiss and absolutely compliant in the outright destruction of rural Newfoundland and Labrador, because that is what the Leader of the Opposition is talking about, is absolutely false. Let me deal with a couple of the myths that he just put forward.

He talked about Stephenville, as if we did nothing for Stephenville with respect to the Abitibi mill. Here is the truth, here are the facts, and they are exactly that. For eighteen months, Abitibi was dealing with the former Liberal Administration about trying to correct a legitimate energy issue they had in terms of cost of power for the Stephenville operation. They did not face the same issue with respect to their operations in Grand Falls-Windsor because they were sitting on the Exploits River that generates significant, and almost enough power to run their entire operation. For eighteen months the former Administration did not engage with them. They put in place a deputy minister committee that produced no results - not that the deputy ministers who were involved in that committee did not produce, but the will of that Administration was not there.

We got involved and took over government after the election of 2003. It was an issue immediately. I can tell you from my own perspective - as the minister who was appointed for both forestry and agriculture and mines and energy at the time, and subsequently the departments came together as Natural Resources - IOC, Abitibi, Kruger, all the large industrial players, with inside six weeks, were banging on the door with their hands out to government saying: Give me, give me, give me. That is the nature of industry. I do not blame them for asking, but we took our time to try and understand and deal with the issues.

The take-home message on Stephenville was this: At the end of the day we reached an acceptable arrangement with the company that gave them exactly what they were looking for. That is what we did.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: We did not say over ten years or twelve years that we were going to start writing cheques without some conditions being applied to it. We dealt with it in increments of three years. We put in place a process that dealt, and would have dealt, exactly with their request on energy costs, rising energy costs. We put in place compliance procedures so that we could investigate and look at their operations and how financially successful or unsuccessful they were, and the company accepted the arrangement we put forward. The fact that they could not conclude, and did not conclude, an acceptable arrangement with the union is not to be blamed on this government. This government did exactly what we felt was necessary to do. As a matter of fact, the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair talks about the Leader of the Opposition, saying: Great speech. She stood up publicly, as other members opposite did during that specific moment in time when we reached that arrangement, and said: I don't agree with giving money to Abitibi -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: - and today she stands up and says: Good speech, to the Leader of the Opposition. I do not agree publicly, she said, with giving corporations that amount of money, and she says that is right again today. So, I am not going to stand here as a member of government, as a member of a team that is trying to work hard on behalf of the people of the province, and listen to a yarn and a spin that has nothing to do with fact but has everything to do with fiction.

Let's talk about, for example - he talked about the audacity of the Premier to ask the federal government to reduce ferry rates between North Sydney and Port aux Basques - the audacity of the Premier to ask for it. Well, I am glad the Premier has the audacity to ask for 100 per cent and $2 billion, because maybe he wouldn't settle for that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: I am glad he has the audacity to talk about equalization and get it paid for last year and the next two, so we could properly plan for the Budget.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: I am glad the Minister of Finance, on direction of Cabinet and the Premier, had the audacity to stick his neck out on health care money. I am glad he had the audacity.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: If you want to compare apples to apples, the point that he was trying to make is that, as a Province, we increased ferry rates by 25 per cent and then we had the audacity to ask the federal government to reduce theirs. Here is the truth.

MS JONES: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: I say to the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, you will have the opportunity to participate in debate, not a problem, and I will sit down and listen to you when you do, and I might even be moved to get up and counteract some of the spin and fiction you might put forward, but the fact of the matter is this -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: The fact of the matter is this: with respect to the ferry service provided by the federal government, it is subsidized to the tune of 57 per cent. Now, that is a fact of life. It is not fiction. If you look at the level of subsidy that we provide to our ferry services, it runs between -

MR. RIDEOUT: Even with the raise.

MR. E. BYRNE: Even with the raise, that is correct, I say to my colleague, because he gave me the information, the former Minister of Works, Services and Transportation - it was subsidized, our services, between 82 per cent and 87 per cent. Just imagine, the audacity of the Premier to ask the federal government to raise it to subsidization levels equal and comparable to ours. Just imagine, Mr. Chairman!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: There are challenges facing certain regions and certain communities and the answers do not come overnight, but I can tell you this, that the work that we are doing and continue to do is ongoing and we believe that it will bear some results.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: You talk about what is occurring and then, from their point of view, about what is not occurring. Today we had a ministerial statement - and I will deal with the mining industry, just for example. This year shipments in mining will go up to about $2.5 billion. The level of exploration commitments in the Province will go to $500,000,000. In mining development and in mining resources, the increase in interest over the last two years has been astounding. We are getting close to where we will have another significant find. Where is all of this activity taking place? It is not taking place in St. John's or on the Northeast Avalon. It is not taking place in Grand Falls or Corner Brook. It is taking place in Duck Pond. It is taking place in Baie Verte. It is taking place in Labrador. The fact of the matter is, it is taking place in rural parts of the Province.

Now, let me say to the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans, she wants to talk about ore resources, the reason that ore resources are in Central Newfoundland right now is largely due to the commitments that this government made on power lines trying to help that company out. For a year-and-a-half, while they were the government before the people of the Province chose a new government, what did they do with ore resources? Absolutely nothing! They did not deal with an issue that came before them.

Now you want to talk about the commitment of the provincial government in terms of Labrador resources or resources in the Province. I remember, Mr. Chair, and I believe you would too, in 1998, on the eve of a 1999 election, the then Administration under the leadership of then Premier Tobin, when the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair was sitting as an Independent over there, that that government, along with the Iron Ore Company of Canada, supported a resource in Labrador to be developed and exported and secondary, from a secondary processing point of view, to be done in Sept-Iles. The Member for Labrador West today, who was elected largely because of his own personality, but largely because the member of the day stood up and supported the government.

Now let's look at what has occurred recently. We had a significant developer come to the Province a year ago and wanted to develop a resource in Western Labrador. Their view was that they were going to slurry pipeline it to Quebec. They came in and talked to me as the minister about how they had agreements with the Quebec Innu, how they were going to build a pipeline and slurry it down into Quebec for processing. My advice to them was this: Have you read the mineral and mining act? If you think for a moment that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador - this government, with the type of philosophy and public policy positions that we have laid down - will sign off on the development and prosecution of a resource within the boundaries of this Province to go to Quebec to be processed, you had better think again.

What happened? Six months later they came - which is only several weeks ago - to see me with their economic feasability study. They laid it out there again: Minister, our rate of return is going to be this. We do not see any other way, but sitting in the meeting with the ADM for Mines, the Deputy Minister for the Department of Natural Resources, I just put my hands up and said: Look, to be frank with you, I am not going to waste your time or your money. I have no intention of doing that. I would rather be upfront and honest and frank with you. There will never be an occurrence where this project and the resource that will be developed from it will be sent to Labrador for secondary processing, supposing that means the project will not go ahead. Guess what happened? Well, we do have a second option. The rate of return is a little lower but it is in Labrador. It is in Ross Bay Junction. That is what we are looking at today, potentially 700 to 750 jobs. Will it happen? I hope so. It will not happen if it means shipping it to the Province of Quebec. It would only happen if it means in Labrador West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: It would only happen if it is in Labrador West.

Now, there are issues that we need to deal with -

CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the hon. Government House Leader that his time has expired.

MR. E. BYRNE: By leave, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

CHAIR: The hon. member by leave.

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

The fact of the matter is this: Is it done yet? No, it is not. Are we closer to having it done in Newfoundland and Labrador, and in particular, in Western Labrador, than we were six weeks ago? Yes, we are. Do we have issues that we need to resolve? Yes, we do. There are issues around power and transportation. The same issues that we will deal with with respect to IOC, but we are committed to resolving them for the people of the Province and for the people who, where that resource will mean the most, in the boundaries of Newfoundland and Labrador.

To say, for example, that nothing is happening in rural parts of the Province does not speak to the truth or the reality. Yes, we have challenges. Anybody and everybody who wants to be frank and open and honest about it recognizes that we do in certain regions, but to say that on the one hand and to ignore the positive things that are occurring in other industries on the other hand, we are failing I think in our duty and our responsibility.

I will talk about the agriculture industry for a moment. There has not been a government in Newfoundland and Labrador's history in the last two years that have invested in the agrifoods and agricultural industry like this government. For example, for the past fifteen years the biggest impediment that we had (inaudible) growth in agrifoods and agriculture was the availability of land for farmers. The average acreage size of a Newfoundland and Labrador farm runs about eighty-six acres. The average size in the Maritimes, about 290 acres. The average size across the country runs about 680 acres, about 680 acres. The fact of the matter is this, it does not take a rocket scientist to understand that if we are going to make that industry self-sufficient, one of the fundamentals required is access and availability to land. But why hasn't anyone acted on that before? Why were we so dependent upon the importation of feed when we have the ability to grow corn, grain, wheat, barley? - which agriculture producers right across the Province are doing. We did not because no one invested in a land consolidation program outside the Northeast Avalon. No one had chosen to invest in a province-wide land consolidation program that would put our industry on par and even ahead of the rest of Atlantic Canada, and we have done that.

I could speak about it more because I know other members want to speak, and I will speak about this more. We, as one fundamental in the next three to five years, will have between purchased land province-wide and more Crown land into the agricultural base that we will have achieved something that no government sought to achieve before and it is called self-sufficiency in land base for agricultural producers. Where is that happening? Is it happening on Water Street? It is not. It is happening in Jeffrey's and Cormack and Musgravetown. It is happening in Whitbourne. It is happening all over the Province, Mr. Chair. It is happening on Mud Lake Road in Goose Bay with an additional 800 acres put in place. It is happening with the science and technology of the division in terms of corn silage projects. It is happening based upon that. The investment that is being made by producers is at historic levels. They are making that investment because they have a government that has made some investments with them.

I look forward to participating in this debate a little later on.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: Order, please!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I wanted to just have a couple of words with regard to this bill. I know it is getting late in the day and I will try and keep my comments as brief as I possibly can.

I think, Mr. Chair, there are a couple of things that need to be mentioned here. I am going to start, first of all, with the situation that happened in Stephenville. I am sitting here today and I am hearing the minister for the portfolio saying that the reason Abitibi closed down their operations in Stephenville is because the union allowed it to happen. Mr. Chair, I cannot believe that government refuses to take any responsibility whatsoever for what has happened in the community of Stephenville, for the fact that this entire company has gone under, the fact that over 300 people are without work, and that there is no main industry there at all. Mr. Chair, to stand here today and say that everything was done that could have been done, that it was left in the hands of the union and the union decided their own demise in this whole operation, is absolutely unbelievable. For them to do that, the only people they were hurting were themselves.

Mr. Chair, I want to make this clear for the record. When government did put out $150 million to try and revive the company and save the operation in Stephenville, it was not a matter of being against corporate investment, government investing in corporations, it was a matter of having a standard that would apply to everyone. At the same time as there were 300 jobs being lost in Stephenville in a pulp and paper mill, there were four plants in my own district closed down and 400 people put out of work. Was there anyone there offering them $150 million to save their jobs or to save their company or to save their industry? There was not. There was not even so much as a meeting, a phone call, or a sentiment of understanding. There was nothing, Mr. Chairman; absolutely nothing.

Do you think, as a member in a rural area of this Province with 400 people out of work, that I was going to stand up and applaud the government for trying to save a national corporation, when they were ready to let the rest of these people in the Province who had no jobs and their companies closing down just go to the wind? Absolutely not, Mr. Chair. I was doing my job and I will continue to do my job, I will let the minister know, and that is to represent the people who elected me and who sent me here.

Mr. Chair, if there is going to be compensation for corporations and if government wants to open the cheque book to corporations to save companies and to save jobs, they can do so and have a standard that applies to all people in the Province and all areas of the Province, and not just be funded government money and have jobs saved in areas that are represented by government members and not other members of the House of Assembly. Mr. Chair, that is unfair and unacceptable and I have no problem voicing my opinion about it.

Mr. Chair, there are probably a number of people who stood here today and said that there is nothing happening in rural areas of this Province. Well yes, there are some things happening and some of it is not that pretty I can tell you. A lot of it is not that pretty. I am going to guarantee you, I live in a district where I see it firsthand. I do not have to go to Marystown, I do not have to go to Fortune, I do not have to go to Harbour Breton, I do not have to go to Bonavista, all I have to do is go home, Mr. Chair. All I have to do is go home and drive through my own district and it is the real picture of what is happening in a lot of these communities around the Province.

It does not matter what name they go by, the people are the same, their jobs are threatened, the industry is failing, and there are a lot of factors that, I guess, accumulate that situation, but today we are talking about the situation with FPI, which is one company and one company which the government of the Province has some control over, where they have some say, where they have some power to be able to determine what the outcome is going to be for the people who are affected in communities like Fortune and Bonavista and Marystown and Harbour Breton. Mr. Chair, I believe that everything in their power has to be done to save the jobs and save the industry in those communities. Whether it is done under the name of a corporation called Fisheries Products International or whether it is done under another corporation, at the end of the day may not be all that relevant. I think the real relevance is ensuring that the industry is protected and the jobs are protected.

Back in the fall, Mr. Chair, I went before a board of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada when they met here in St. John's, and there were probably about forty people sitting around the table at the time. Most of them were fish processors from Newfoundland and Labrador and they were all there bidding for shrimp allocation; new shrimp allocations that, I guess, are going to be announced sometime very soon in terms of where they are going to go and who is going to get them. Also at the table, Mr. Chair, were interests from PEI and from the Province of Quebec and they were all there looking for these quotas. When I went before this committee, I made it quite clear that day, Mr. Chair, and I stand by it today, that if the federal government and the provincial governments do not put a stop to allocating fish quotas to companies to do with as they please, we will have no industry left in this Province. We have seen it not just in the last year or the last two years, we have seen it for a long time, companies that have taken quotas and flipped it to the offshore, processed it somewhere else, sold it somewhere else and put money in their back pockets, and they did it all at the expense of us in Newfoundland and Labrador. Do I agree with that? Absolutely not. It is still going on and it has to change, and if it does not change you are going to find out that there are going to be a lot of areas in this Province that will not have a plant or fish processing in the future, because there will be no obligation on behalf of these companies to do that.

Mr. Chair, I believe, and I have believed for a long time, that quotas that are allocated to these companies, they have a privilege when they obtain them and if they do not process them and develop them to the benefit of the people in our Province, well then they should be taken back and they should be redistributed to someone else, and they should never go outside of this Province to be processed or sold anywhere else.

Mr. Chair, unfortunately my time is being cut short today. I understand that the Lieutenant Governor has arrived and I think we are going to perogy the House today -

AN HON. MEMBER: Prorogue.

MS JONES: Prorogue the House today, yes. We are going to close it - I am thinking about food now. I have been told that my time is going to be shortened today, but I guess we will be back on Thursday for regular sitting of the House of Assembly.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CHAIR: Order please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

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

I move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

MR. CHAIR: The motion is that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

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

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): The hon. the Member for Bonavista South and Deputy Speaker.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. SPEAKER: The Chairperson of the Committee of Supply reports that they have considered the matters to them referred and have directed him to report progress and ask leave to sit again.

When shall the Committee have leave to sit again?

MR. E. BYRNE: Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.

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

SERGEANT-AT-ARMS: Mr. Speaker, His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor has arrived.

MR. SPEAKER: Admit His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor.

SERGEANT-AT-ARMS: All rise.

Mr. Speaker leaves the Chair.

His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor takes the Chair.

SERGEANT-AT-ARMS: It is the wish of His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor that all present please be seated.

The Second Session of the Forty-Fifth General Assembly is about to be prorogued, but before releasing you from your duties I wish to thank you for the careful and sympathetic attention given to the important matters brought before you by My Ministers. Your commitment to your work and diligence deserve our appreciation and our acknowledgment.

Seventy pieces of legislation were enacted during this Session. In particular, legislative initiatives were taken in the areas of justice, the fishing industry, financial affairs, municipal affairs, health, government services, and tourism, culture and recreation.

As noted in my speech opening the Session, My Government introduced, and this House approved, the Smoke-Free Environment Act which provides a 100 per cent ban on the use of tobacco in all public places. Amendments to the Wildlife Act were enacted to provide greater enforcement and increased penalties for violations of the Act, especially related to inland fish species.

During the spring sitting of the House, further automobile insurance reforms were enacted based on the review conducted by the Public Utilities Board and the Department of Government Services. The Rooms Act was enacted during this Session in order to create a corporate body and structure for the management and promotion of the archival, historic and visual artistic resources of our Province. As well, an Act Respecting the Management of Government Information was enacted.

One of the key achievements of this session was the enactment of the Family Violence Protection Act, a significant initiative that will help to protect persons who face the threat of, or are victims of, family violence. This act creates a new mechanism through which victims of family violence can apply to a Provincial Court Judge for an emergency protective order. My Government are proud to have proceeded with this important initiative for the benefit of those who suffer from such abhorrent situations.

Various acts to revise or amend existing legislation respecting health care professional groups were enacted in order to modernize their statutes, particularly in relation to governance and disciplinary procedures. These acts are: The Medical Act, 2005; The Dieticians Act; The Dispensing Opticians Act, 2005; The Hearing Aid Practitioners Act; The Licensed Practical Nurses Act, 2005; The Massage Therapy Act, 2005; The Occupational Therapists Act, 2005; The Psychologists Act, 2005; The Optometry Amendment Act, 2004; and The Pharmacy Amendment Act.

The Fish Inspection Act was amended to tighten enforcement regulations. In accordance with the recommendations of the Cashin Report, My Government introduced amendments to the Fishing Industry Collective Bargaining Act to provide for the establishment of the Standing Fish Price Setting Panel in order to avert a future crisis in the fishery by setting binding prices in advance of the season's start. This new system will be binding on processors and harvesters.

Among the other legislative measures enacted during this session were: An Act To Amend The Public Services Pensions Act, The Teachers Pension Act And The Uniformed Services Pensions Act; An Act To Amend The Liquor Corporation Act; An Act To Amend The Natural Products Marketing Act And The Farm Practices Protection Act; An Act To Amend The Law Society Act; An Act To Amend The Aquaculture Act; An Act To Amend The Victims of Crime Services Act; An Act To Amend The Highway Traffic Act And The Provincial Offences Act; An Act To Amend The Buildings Accessibility Act; An Act To Amend The Motorized Snow Vehicles And All-Terrain Vehicles Act; An Act To Amend The Municipal Financing Corporation Act; An Act To Amend The Forestry Act; An Act To Amend The Pippy Park Commission Act; An Act To Amend The Public Service Commission Act; An Act to Amend The Tobacco Health Care Costs Recovery Act; and, An Act To Amend The Electoral Boundaries Act.

Two important resolutions were unanimously adopted by this House during the session. The first resolution calls on all citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador to seek out veterans in their community, to thank them for the contribution they made to preserving democracy and restoring peace to the world, and to pay tribute to the many veterans who gave their lives for our freedom.

The second resolution urged that My Government make representation to the Government of Canada to rescind the decision to move weather forecasting services from Gander to mainland sites, and to return full weather forecasting services to this Province.

I thank you for the large measure of Supply you have granted. I assure you that the appropriations you have granted have been and will be expended by My Ministers with care and efficiency.

It is my pleasure that the Second Session of the Forty-Fifth General Assembly be now prorogued, and it is prorogued accordingly.

His Honour the Lieutenant Governor leaves the Chamber.

Mr. Speaker returns to the Chair.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: The House stands adjourned.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Pursuant to the Speech of His Honour, this House now stands prorogued.