May 10, 2004 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 27


The House met at 1:30 p.m.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

This afternoon we have Statements by Members. We have the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, the Member for Humber Valley, the Member for Port de Grave, and the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This past week I had the opportunity to join with thirty-four others in representing Newfoundland and Labrador at the Nunavut trade show and business conference in Iqaluit. This is the fourth year in a row that Labrador businesses, Chambers, Aboriginal groups, zonal boards, education and health boards have partnered with Nunavut to provide new opportunities for employment, training and innovation in the North.

Mr. Speaker, the geography, the culture and the challenges are very similar between Nunavut and Labrador allowing us to share information and solutions that work for our communities and our businesses. I had the opportunity to meet with a number of ministers in the Territory and to explore opportunities that exist for marine transportation, health, fisheries development and information technology.

We were hosted by a fellow native Newfoundlander and Labradorian, the hon. Ed Picco of Portugal Cove, Newfoundland, who is currently the Minister of Education for Nunavut. Mr. Speaker, he is an example of how residents of this Province are making their mark all over the world as leaders and activists.

I would like to take this time to thank Mr. Picco, the hon.Oliauk Akasuck, Minister of Environment, Wildlife and Fisheries, and Mr. Steven Cook, President of the Baffin Chamber of Commerce, and all others who embraced the Labrador delegation on our visit.

I would also like to ask the House of Assembly to join me in congratulating the Town of Happy Valley-Goose Bay and Councillor Madeline Kelley on signing a twin-town partnership with Iqualit, and also the Marine Institute of Newfoundland and Labrador on signing an education partnership agreement with the Arctic College of Nunavut.

Mr. Speaker, the business community of Labrador is very active and certainly proved that the skills and knowledge they have gained is applicable all throughout the North, and indeed the world.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS GOUDIE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to congratulate a team of high school students from my district, who this past weekend won the Envirothon competition held here in St. John's.

In the competition focused upon the environment, teams from all over the Province were given a problem and asked to present a solution based upon a number of factors, including the results of field testing. One of their three teams from Elwood were given the highest ranking by the judging panel and won the competition.

 

Under the sponsorship of teachers Mike Ball and Angie Thornhill, students: Gerry Ball, Dave Ball, Matthew Pearce, Sarah Wight and Brendan Wood have won the right to compete in an international Envirothon this coming July in West Virginia.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all Members of the House of Assembly to join me in congratulating the team from Elwood High on their success and wish them luck in West Virginia this July.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Mrs. Nellie Strowbridge, originally of Port de Grave, on recently completing and publishing her third children's book entitled Dancing on Ochre Sands.

Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Strowbridge is no stranger to anyone in the Trinity-Conception area. For eight years she wrote a weekly column, Things to Talk About, in the local paper The Compass.

Strowbridge has had essays, poetry and stories published across North America, receiving many awards for her work, including sixteen from the Newfoundland and Labrador Arts and Letters Competition.

She says Dancing on Ochre Sands is a very upbeat book and deals with life and death in a positive way, getting things that you deal with out of your system.

The book begins in her childhood, reflects back to her grandfather, a miner of land and sea and dances through the cycles of life.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to join me in extending congratulations to Mrs. Nellie Strowbridge on her recent accomplishments in the literary field.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to recognize and congratulate the CeeBee's Girls Hockey Team of Harbour Grace and their head coach Bud Chafe.

Mr. Speaker, the CeeBee girls were the proud winners of this years Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial B Female Playdowns. These fabulous athletes from my district defeated the Tee-Pee Flyers of Whitbourne 4-3 in overtime, to win the tournament.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chafe must be acknowledged for this endeavour as he and his group formed the team after a two-year break from female hockey in the Harbour Grace area. Upon looking for interested participants, Mr. Chafe found more than enough willing to strap on the skates to represent their community in the All-Newfoundland tournament. As a result of the many practices, hard work and dedication from both players and the coaching staff, the CeeBee's took home the gold.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to join with me in congratulating the Harbour Grace CeeBee's and their head coach, Mr. Bud Chafe, on their victory in the recently held All-Newfoundland tournament.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

 

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

 

I am pleased to rise in this House today to inform my colleagues of the success of the Offshore Technology Conference which was held last week in Houston. I led a delegation of close to 100 people from Newfoundland and Labrador who were there to promote the success of our current projects, the potential for new discoveries and our capability to support and service the oil and gas industry.

What initially struck me upon my arrival at the OTC conference was the sense of excitement that is being generated by this Province's petroleum industry. Frankly, there are many reasons for optimism. The fact is the discovered resources off our Province represent close to 80 per cent of the total discovered resources off the east coast of Canada. Furthermore, our production represents 81 per cent of the total production off the east coast of Canada. We are certainly, in many ways, leading the way in the offshore petroleum industry.

The success of our two current producing projects is found in the Jeanne d'Arc Basin with the Hibernia and Terra Nova fields. By early 2006, our third major project - White Rose - will go into production and then this Province will be producing close to half of the country's light crude oil.

And now, in addition to the highly prospective Jeanne d'Arc Basin, we will see more exploration in two additional areas. Significant commitments have been made for exploration in the Orphan Basin and seismic surveys are planned. Last week we announced the completion of successful negotiations to convert the former federal exploration permits to modern-day exploration licences in the Laurentian Sub-basin, ending a thirty-year moratorium on exploration in this sub-basin. We also anticipate that seismic work will be undertaken this year and drilling could happen within eighteen to twenty-four months. In that respect, Mr. Speaker, we would like to welcome publicly, Conocco Philips and Imperial Oil to the emerging offshore oil and gas industry in Newfoundland and Labrador, particularly in this basin.

The announcement by my federal colleague, the Minister of Natural Resources for Canada, the hon. John Efford, last week to put in place a five-year moratorium on duties imposed on mobile offshore drilling units is another positive step to encourage offshore drilling activity.

Mr. Speaker, the OTC in Houston was an excellent venue for the delegation from this Province to network with major players in the oil and gas industry. These face to face meetings are among the best mechanisms we have to tout our oil and gas potential. In addition, Mr. Speaker, just so people understand the magnitude and significance of the conference, there were 42,000 delegates attending the conference. I certainly commend the Newfoundland and Labrador delegates for the exemplary representation they provided during this past week.

Among the delegates from this Province were representatives from the Cities of St. John's and Mount Pearl and the Town of Paradise. I joined Mayor Andy Wells at the World Energy Cities Partnerships reception, and it is evident that the City of St. John's is becoming an important partner in the World Energy Cities organization. As the Mayor indicated, the City views the World Energy Cities initiative as an important element of the City's ongoing development strategy. Mayor Wells was complimentary of our pronounced presence in Houston. He indicated that he also sees the renewed interest in exploration activity in our offshore and the possibility of new companies entering the exploration game.

Mr. Speaker, our government wants to build on our partnership with our municipalities to see new development in this industry. Another critical partner for the department is the Newfoundland Ocean Industries Association.

I look forward to NOIA's annual conference and the Offshore Petroleum Show which takes place early next month in St. John's. Many new groups and companies will be in attendance at that show for the first time. This will provide us with another opportunity to promote our industry and the investment opportunities that it presents to the Province.

Mr. Speaker, we have momentum in our offshore oil and gas sector. We need to continue the excitement generated by the tremendous land sales in the Orphan Basin and the opening up of the Sub-Laurentian Basin and what that could potentially mean for the Southwest Coast of the Province. We need to get the next development off the ground and we need to continue to promote exploration in order to find that next discovery or discoveries. This government is committed to working with industry to see how we can make that happen in the best interests of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, with the anticipation of further growth in this industry, it is abundantly clear that we need to see a positive response to our proposal to the federal government to ensure that this Province receives more benefits from this industry under the Atlantic Accord. This is crucial to government's agenda , it is crucial to the needs of the people of the Province, in order for us to grow our revenues and support the social and economic agenda of the people of the Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate receiving from the minister an advance a copy of his statement here today. I am very pleased indeed to see that he took the time to go to Houston. This international conference is indeed very, very important for this Province, and it is nice to see that our minister took a lead for the Newfoundland and Labrador delegation. I point out that it is indeed international. Some here might not have an understanding and appreciation of just how big it is, but it is really, really big and it is really, really important for this Province from an economic development point of view and from the offshore oil industry as well.

It is nice not only for the minister, who is new in this role, to get an update on the industry, but to meet some of the major players, because these major players are going to be coming here from time to time to try to take advantage of the opportunities that exist here. It is nice to see that our minister has now met face to face with some of these people because that is ever important when you are sitting across the table and trying to do deals with these people.

I am very pleased to see, as well, the federal government finally - we were fortunate in the court case to win the decision regarding the Sub-Laurentian, and it is very pleasing now to see that the federal government has finally come to its senses in a timely fashion and done the conversion on the leases to exploration permits, because it is only if we ever get exploration that we can ever count upon discoveries, and we need the discoveries to get to production, which gets us to supply and gets us to employment and gets us to money. The issue of how much money, and whether we will get our fair share of the monies, I will leave for another day; because the revenue sharing and the benefits that we receive, as a Province, everyone is well aware, we do not feel we get our fair share and that is certainly a bigger issue for another day, but the conference itself is very pleasing to see.

We have done very well in growing this industry from non-existence to an infancy stage to now early childhood, shall we say, because it has not seen anywhere near where it can potentially go. St. John's has benefitted, and the Avalon. We see Marystown and the Burin Peninsula benefit, and hopefully with the Sub-Laurentian we can see Southern and Western Newfoundland benefit because it is geographically positioned perfectly to do just that.

I commend the minister on his attendance there. Continue to fly our flag. Continue to meet these people and take advantage of every opportunity that we see in this industry for this Province and our people.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We were certainly glad to hear of the participation of this Province and the strong delegation in Houston. We do have a maturing oil industry and we have proven that Newfoundland and Labrador companies and individuals can participate fully in the development of this important industry in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I just want to comment, though, on the suggestion by the minister that by the year 2006, Newfoundland and Labrador offshore will be producing one-half of Canada's light crude requirements. I would be very much happier, Mr. Speaker, if he could also say that in the year 2006 we would receive as much revenue, as a Province, as the provinces that produce the other half receive from their production of Canadian light crude. We have a significant problem, Mr. Speaker. We need to review our licensing arrangements and we need to review our royalties. We have discovered, Mr. Speaker, that the principle beneficiary of our oil resources is not the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, nor is it the Government of Canada, in fact it is the oil companies.

We have got to look, Mr. Speaker, to find ways of ensuring that we, in fact, as the owners of the resource, do become the principle beneficiary, because so far we have already seen, as of May 2003, a year ago, that Hibernia has already extracted 40 per cent of the proven reserves, and Terra Nova has already extracted 25 per cent of -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MR. HARRIS: For a few seconds?

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MR. HARRIS: The Terra Nova project has also extracted 25 per cent of the proven reserves that they have. We hope they will find more and this will continue on.

We are in a serious circumstance, Mr. Speaker, and we really ought to be having a strategy that is going to be led by this government and going to be serious and meaningful in terms of putting ourselves in the position that the other producing provinces are in.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS E. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inform the House of a very important event taking place in our Province this week. This week the nursing profession is celebrating National Nursing Week.

Mr. Speaker, National Nursing Week recognizes the important role nurses provide to our health and community services system. This week also allows the profession an opportunity to draw attention to its members' significant contributions to health care and the health and well-being of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

The theme for this special week is Nursing: Knowledge and Commitment at Work. Today, registered nurses and nurse practitioners are constantly challenged to seek new knowledge to deal with increasingly complex health issues and the changing nature of their work environments. Despite these challenges nurses are committed to ensuring that their patients and clients receive high quality care. The theme is an excellent description of those in the nursing profession here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

The Association of Registered Nurses of Newfoundland and Labrador has over 6,000 members, Mr. Speaker. As the Minister of Health and Community Services, I would like to point out that these members have been instrumental in setting the highest standards in promoting good nursing practices, education, as well as advocating for quality health care for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I would also like to inform the House today that this year the Association of Registered Nurses of Newfoundland and Labrador is proud to be celebrating their 50th Anniversary of making a difference in the regulation of nursing in our public's interest. For fifty years, members of the Association have made tremendous contributions to the lives of individuals, families and communities in our Province. Nurses truly are valued by us all.

Mr. Speaker, the Association also has a long history of working with government in providing advice in policy, as well as partnering in reshaping our health system to ensure it remains consistent with the changing needs of the population over the years. In recent years this has included the promotion of Primary Health Care Renewal, as well as moving nursing education into the university and participating in the Province's development of a new Mental Health Strategy.

Mr. Speaker, this government continues to recognize the integral role nurses play in our health and community services system. In recognition of the invaluable services they provide, most recently in Budget 2004, government announced the creation of a chief nursing position within the Department of Health and Community Services. This position will help in addressing nursing issues, including primary health care renewal, scope of practice and recruitment and retention. The department is working in partnership with the nursing community to fill the position.

Mr. Speaker, I am sure all Members of the House of Assembly would like to join me today in congratulating the Association of Registered Nurses of Newfoundland and Labrador as we recognize National Nursing Week and on the event of their 50th Anniversary. On behalf of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, I would like to thank the Association of Registered Nurses of Newfoundland and Labrador and the Newfoundland and Labrador Nurses Union for playing such a formidable and invaluable role in the health care of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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.

I am pleased to join with the minister today and members of this House in congratulating the Association of Registered Nurses of Newfoundland and Labrador as they recognize their National Nursing Week and also on the event of their 50th Anniversary.

Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister, that the real test of how much this government appreciates nurses and the work they do will certainly come when they start negotiating the new collective agreement with nurses. I ask that they show real dignity and real respect for the profession at that time and for those who work in the nursing field by honouring a very open and a very fair collective agreement process, and not see what we have just seen with the public sector strike which was provoked by the government unnecessarily, and at the end of the day, left only workers demoralized and with regressive benefits.

Mr. Speaker, I have to say that nurses and nurse practitioners are the main level of primary care for health in most rural areas of this Province, especially in isolated regions. Mr. Speaker, the work that they do have proven to be invaluable in our health care system, especially in reaching out to those in the most remote areas of our Province. I have to say that they need to be commended and congratulated because it has been very tough times for nurses, especially when it comes to recruiting and training personnel within the Province. I hope that we can continue to see bonuses of recruitment and retention provided to those in the profession -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MS JONES: - to ensure that we have a good level of service all throughout the Province.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We, too, would like to acknowledge the minister's statement and recognize National Nursing Week in this Province and in this country.

Mr. Speaker, the theme, fifty years of making a difference, and we all know the difference that nurses make in our lives, generally at a time when we are at our lowest and weakest. There are many stories abound about the connection between nursing and getting better quicker when we are in the hospital. Many patients will tell lots of stories about the care they received from nurses and from other people who are involved in the delivery of health care in our Province.

Mr. Speaker, nurses and nurse practitioners are also involved in a lot of things in our community, such as wellness programs, illness prevention programs and all sorts of other things that we, as a population, need and rely on.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MR. COLLINS: By leave to clue up, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. COLLINS: Again, Mr. Speaker, we do acknowledge National Nursing Week and hope that they have a celebration which reflects the nature of the work and the services that they provide to us.

Thank you.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are for the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and Labrador Affairs.

Minister, the Premier today is leading a delegation at an international air show in Berlin to promote the base at 5 Wing Goose Bay, a very vital issue for the survival of Labrador, in particular, the Upper Lake Melville region.

Minister, recently a coalition consisting of local and interested people was formed in the Goose Bay area to spearhead a drive to promote and fight for the very survival of 5 Wing Goose Bay. Minister, today people in Labrador are wondering why members, or a member, of such an important group was not asked to be a part of this important mission?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As the member indicated, the Premier is leading a very important delegation for important meetings in Europe this week on the future of 5 Wing Goose Bay and the future of foreign military training in Goose Bay.

Mr. Speaker, I can only say to the Member for Torngat Mountains that there is a representative from the workers at the Base in Goose Bay, Mr. Randy Ford, I believe, the leader of the union local on the Base at 5 Wing Goose Bay. He is part of the delegation. I am sure he will do an admirable job of representing the views of the people in Goose Bay on this issue.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: On a supplementary, the hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

No one is going to question the presence of Mr. Ford on this mission. He is very important to the Base in Goose Bay.

Minister, as you are aware, any new deals with foreign countries regarding 5 Wing Goose Bay will first have to be sanctioned, monitored and agreed to by the federal government. Nobody or no one has worked harder for the stability and renewal of 5 Wing Goose Bay than the MP for Labrador, Mr. Lawrence O'Brien.

Minister, can you tell the people of this Province, and in particular the people of Labrador, why the MP for Labrador, Mr. O'Brien, was not invited to attend such important meetings?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, this is a delegation led by the Premier of the Province. This is a provincial delegation, as part of our commitment to 5 Wing Goose Bay. We have indicated that we will, to the best of our ability, carry out lobbying efforts and work with the federal government to identify new opportunities and continue the presence of foreign military training in Goose Bay.

If the Member of Parliament for Labrador wants to be a part of any delegation that we lead, I am sure, Mr. Speaker, he will be more than welcome. At this point, I have no idea why he would or would not have attended. I can only say that, from our perspective, there is a significant role for the federal government in maintaining 5 Wing Goose Bay, and we believe that Mr. O'Brien needs to lobby intensively his own colleagues in Ottawa, to make sure that they continue their commitment to 5 Wing Goose Bay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess the people of this Province are seeing again, obviously, from the answers we are getting from the Minister Responsible for Labrador, that the Premier did not consult with his Cabinet nor his caucus as to whom he should include on such an important meeting.

Minister, each year we see less and less Canadian Forces personnel stationed at 5 Wing Goose Bay. With a federal election in the very near future, and as the Minister Responsible for Labrador Affairs, can you tell the people of Labrador what commitment you have from the present federal government to maintain the viability of the Base, and what assurances do you have to confirm the presence of Canadian Forces personnel at 5 Wing Goose Bay in the future?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I can say to the Member for Torngat Mountains that the commitment that we have from the federal government is the same commitment that he has heard publicly by the Minister of National Defence, that the federal government are committed to 5 Wing Goose Bay for the next couple of years. They have indicated that their commitment is in the form of reducing the costs to our foreign allies who train at 5 Wing Goose Bay in the next two-year period. Beyond that, there is no commitment at this point. We hope that the federal government will step up and ensure that their commitment is much more long term than that.

Mr. Speaker, the questions that the Member for Torngat Mountains is asking, I hope that during the coming weeks and the coming months, during the federal election, that he will pose those same questions to the Member of Parliament for Labrador, Mr. Lawrence O'Brien.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

As we speak, there are at least 200 people on the Northern Peninsula who are wondering if they are going to get work this year at their plant in New Ferolle, but all that this minister has done so far is to inflame the situation concerning the licence up there.

Last week, in The Telegram, this minister, in response to the owner of the plant, Mr. Cliff Doyle, said, and I quote: If I have to, I will drag Mr. Doyle's name through the mud.

Mr. Speaker, on Friday, the minister also stated in the same newspaper that his officials are seeking a solution to the outstanding issue surrounding the licence of this plant. I ask the minister: Can he update us today as to any progress he is making on that issue?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In the interview with The Telegram, I indicated that I would deal with the facts, Mr. Speaker, and that I did not want to drag Mr. Doyle's name through the mud; however, I did say that if the person involved insisted on continuing with this in a public manner then I would have no choice but to say exactly what the position of government was as it relates to outstanding debts related to the New Ferolle operation. All I can say at this point is that we have had discussions with the various parties. We have indicated that we would entertain a proposal from them to deal with the outstanding debts to government and the outstanding debts to the private judgement creditors. We have received one proposal. We found it to be deficient, Mr. Speaker. We indicated that to the parties verbally, and there is a -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister now to complete his answer quickly.

MR. TAYLOR: There will be a written submission to them officially indicating that, and we will await another proposal from them.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I might add again that it was this minister who talked about dragging Mr. Doyle's name through the mud, not anyone over here.

Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that Mr. Doyle is prepared to put a repayment schedule on the table to this minister with regard to the debt that he owes the Province, but no one in his department, nor he, has spoken to Mr. Doyle since last Monday, the day that he made the statement about dragging his name through the mud.

I ask the minister: Why is he dragging his heels on this issue, especially when it concerns 200 people in an area that is probably the most economically depressed area in our Province? When are you going to do something? When are you going to sit down with Mr. Doyle? When are you going to talk to the man and try to resolve the issue, so that these 200 people can look at, at least this summer, and know that they are going to have some employment?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we are eager to receive a proposal from Mr. Doyle. We have not received anything from Mr. Doyle. We have received something from one of the other parties who are involved here.

I will say this, Mr. Speaker, I will read from a letter back in May 7, 2003, which says, "Officials with my Department have informed me that before the loan guarantee payout you had indicated that there were plans to restructure the financial affairs of James Doyle (Sr.) & Sons Limited, and new investors were prepared to invest much needed capital into the Company. It seems that no new investment ever materialized. Subsequent to the guaranteed payout in 1997, Government has not taken action to enforce its security, thereby affording you every opportunity to restructure the Company and deal with the debt due to the Province."

That is one paragraph, and I could read much more (inaudible) -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister now to complete his answer.

MR. TAYLOR: - in a letter from Joan Marie Aylward, the then Minister of Finance, to Mr. Doyle.

Mr. Speaker, we would be more than happy to receive a proposal from Mr. Doyle. We are not looking for the $771,000 up front, but -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, we do want to see a viable realistic plan to deal with this debt.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, in the past month here, I have been asking the minister short, simple questions, and yet he speaks for five minutes and says absolutely nothing. He has not spoken to Mr. Doyle since last Monday, when he besmirched his character in the local papers here. Neither he nor his department have been in touch with him for over a week, but I think the real reason, Mr. Speaker, is the word that is coming out of St. Barbe District today, that the minister has no concern, and he certainly does not want to get the plant open in New Ferolle, because -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the member now to get to his question.

MR. REID: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the word on the Northern Peninsula today is that the minister doesn't want to open the plant because he wants to transfer the crab license from New Ferolle to St. Anthony.

I ask the minister: Is this true, and, if so, have you consulted with the Member for St Barbe on this issue?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I said, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Doyle is well aware of what the issues are surrounding the New Ferolle license. He is aware that there is a dispute over control of ownership of the plant in New Ferolle, and there is a substantial amount of money outstanding to the government and the private creditors.

As for the rumor, Mr. Speaker, that the member is perpetrating right now, I have no desire to transfer any license from New Ferolle to St. Anthony. That, Mr. Speaker, is why I established the Fishing Industry Licensing Board back on February 4, so that politicians like me and him will not be able to interfere politically with that anymore.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: It will be a decision based on a recommendation from the licensing board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Right now, Mr. Speaker, I have no authority under the current policy to transfer any license.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the minister talks about his arm's-length licensing board, but the minister actually said himself that, that board will report to him, and he doesn't have to live by that decision.

I ask the minister today to stand in this House and make a commitment that, regardless of what happens in New Ferolle, that license will not be transferred out of there.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The dealings between New Ferolle and anybody are a matter of a private business arrangement. At this point, Mr. Speaker, we have had no indication from anybody that they want to transfer any license. Even if we did, we are not in a position to be able to do it. I have no intentions of transferring either license from New Ferolle to anywhere or from anywhere else to New Ferolle, Mr. Speaker. When that comes up, somebody will have to deal with it, if it comes up.

Mr. Doyle, at this point, if the license were issued, would get the license, unless there is an arrangement otherwise between Mr. Doyle and some other company or some other operator, Mr. Speaker. At this point, anything would be speculative and hypothetical, that the member is talking about, and I am not going to deal with speculation, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Education.

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that education is not the priority of this government. The first indication was a no-show Premier at the education debate at Memorial University during the election. Then, in the first 100 days of this government, they gutted the Department of Youth and Post-Secondary Education. Now, in your slash and burn budget, you cut the College of the North Atlantic's operating budget by $2 million. Last week, they responded by firing thirty-five staff, scrapping programs and postponing new programs indefinitely.

Mr. Minister, are you at all concerned that your right-wing agenda will result in a diminished educational system for our post-secondary students?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the hon. member for the question. I can assure the hon. member opposite that we are committed to education in this Province at both levels, the K to12 system and our post-secondary level.

I would like to read, in part, a portion of the release that was issued last week by the College of the North Atlantic. It states, Mr. Speaker, "Faculty layoffs are as a result of programs that are being suspended for the coming academic year due to low interest and low enrollments by students. The removal of these programs from the College's program plan is part of the regular annual process of program review, which ensures college offerings remain relevant and responsive to the ever-changing needs of students and industry."

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister now to complete his answer, quickly.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the hon. member, the Board of Regents of the College of the North Atlantic has done an admirable job, yes, in responding to a request but at the same time doing nothing different than they do each year in providing the courses that are most relevant to the majority of students.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This government got elected on the platform they had in their Blue Book as being the absolute truth. Can anyone believe what you have in your Blue Book? It is evident that you do not believe your own propaganda. Let me refresh your memory. In this book, your Blue Book, you stated: the PC Party is committed to, and I quote, "Cover increased operating costs of Memorial University and the College of the North Atlantic, so they can freeze tuition fees, so they can maintain the current level and quality of programs." Another broken promise by your government. How can our post-secondary institutions continue to provide high quality education to our students when you do not even see education as a priority?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can only repeat to the hon. member what I had said earlier, that this government and this minister, and this government led by the hon. Premier, we are committed to not only the K to 12 system in this Province but to the post-secondary system. I thank the hon. member for, in part, answering my question because we have maintained the integrity of the implementation of a tuition freeze for all of our students, I say to the hon. member.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: And we are saying to the students in this Province, whether it is at the university level or at our public college institutions, that we respect their situation and we are doing what we can for them.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It appears that last week's announcement is just the tip of the iceberg that is yet to come. You quoted something from the President of the College, so I will quote something. Last week in her news release of May 7 and in her interview in The Telegram, she said that the College "...will likely become smaller and probably even more centralized."

It appears that it will only be a matter of time before campuses will start closing, more teaching positions will be cut, more courses cancelled and more services reduced. When will you live up to your Blue Book commitment and stop gutting our education system, as you have been doing for the past seven months since you got into government?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: I can say to the hon. member, Mr. Speaker, that again, I want to assure the hon. member, and reassure the people of the Province, that we have a full time and serious commitment to education in this Province at all levels, whether it is the K to 12 level or the post-secondary level. I can give the hon. member that assurance. We will stand by it, and every action that we take will be proof positive of that fact.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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 also for the Minister of Education.

The College of the North Atlantic, Mr. Speaker, in 1993 received a grant of $87 million from the then government. By 2003 it was down to $52 million. Mr. Speaker, this government appears to have continued the practice of gouging money out of the College of the North Atlantic, started by the previous Liberal government, and we are now down $37 million less than the College received in 1993.

Can this minister tell the House whether or not the days of the College of the North Atlantic are numbered, as the President of the College feared in a quote in The Telegram last Friday? Is that the plan of this government, to continue to reduce the College of the North Atlantic and leave it open to private college systems?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I can give every guarantee and assurance to the hon. member opposite that nothing is further from the truth. We are committed to public education in this Province. Yes, the Board of Governors had a difficult task to perform last week in response to what was being requested of them during the Budget process. However, Mr. Speaker, I can give the hon. member every assurance that we are committed to public education and what that means in its entirety.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to know from the minister where that commitment is. He just read out some suggestion that this was all part of a routine. In fact, Mr. Speaker, the college has cancelled or shelved two courses that were scheduled for the Stephenville campus, one in film and video and the other in cultural management. These are very important programs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I am getting significant interruptions from the other side. The floor belongs to the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Obviously, Mr. Speaker, these programs need to be promoted properly in order to get the kind of interest to develop these programs as well as other programs that people are crying out for and waiting for years sometimes to get into these programs. I would like to know where the evidence of his government's commitment is to the College of the North Atlantic?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Perhaps the hon. member was not listening to the earlier set of questions and the response. I would like to once again make reference to, in part, what was said in the release last week by the Board of Governors. "Faculty layoffs are as a result of programs that are being suspended for the coming academic year due to low interest and low enrollments by students. The removal of these programs from the college's program plan is part of the regular annual process of program review, which ensures college offerings remain relevant and responsive to the ever-changing needs of students and industry."

Mr. Speaker, again, what the college has demonstrated here is that it is responding to the needs of students by looking closely at programs and making sure that the courses and programs which are offered are best suited to the needs of the students of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What the college is responding to is the budget moves of this government and the previous government. Why is there such a dearth of programs available for people who want to learn the trades and apprenticeship programs in this Province, things that we need for our growing industry? Why is that a continuing problem in this Province?

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, what the college is doing and what it has stated last week is that it is responding to the offerings, remaining relevant and responsive to the needs of students and industry generally. Mr. Speaker, we have some seventeen campuses of the College of the North Atlantic here in this Province and what has happened -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. OTTENHEIMER: And a difficult task, I acknowledge that. But the Board of Regents has chosen, in some cases, one or two programs that it deemed perhaps not appropriate to continue in view of the request that was made by this government. All in all we have a post-secondary system, in particular a public college system, which is second to none, is fully accountable and it meets the needs and the demands of our students here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

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.

My questions are for the Minister of Health and Community Services.

The St. John's Health Care Corporation and the Health Boards Association have both outlined concerns with the backlog of surgeries, diagnostic testing and other clinical appointments that accumulated as a result of the public service strike. The minister two weeks ago refused to address the problem directly, instead she indicated that she would solicit proposals from the health care sector. Can you tell me today, minister, what plans you have in place two weeks later to deal with the problem?

MR. SPEAKER: he hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS E. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I indicated to the House last week, I have gone out and asked the health care boards to come in with a plan to indicate how they are going to address the backlog. At this point in time, the boards, especially in relation to the St. John's Health Care Board, is devising a plan in anticipation of discussions with the department.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have been through a four-week public sector strike. The minister has been almost two weeks now and she is failing to address the problem, and it is to the detriment of those people who are out there on those wait lists.

Tell me today, Minister: Will you allocate the necessary funding to cover overtime and other expenses that are needed to increase the capability of the health care system to meet the demands for heart surgeries, cancer surgeries, and other tests and procedures?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS E. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I have already indicated to the hon. member, I am waiting for the health care boards to come in with a plan.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS E. MARSHALL: I would like to indicate to the hon. member that even additional money does not always help to alleviate the problem, that there are constraints in the system with regard to availability of equipment, time, operating rooms, and things of that nature.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to ask the minister: What were the total savings in the health care system during the strike, and will those dollars remain with the boards?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS E. MARSHALL: As I have already indicated to the hon. member, I have asked the boards to come back with their plan. I have also asked them to identify savings as a result of the strike -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS E. MARSHALL: - and provide the information to me.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the members to my right if they would be helpful and permit the minister to answer without significant interruptions.

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Okay.

The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, last week the Minister of Government Services indicated that she was waiting for Cabinet to approve her automobile insurance legislation. Can the Minister of Government Services tell the House if Cabinet has met, and when will her government quit accommodating insurance companies and lawyers and introduce this legislation, and for once, just for once, do something for the people of this Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It happened that the Cabinet met last weekend. I have the insurance reform ready to be tabled in the House this session.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister that the Premier said that it was going to be the week before Easter or the week shortly after. This session is winding down and we still have not seen it. We have been receiving telephone calls and e-mails from people every day, saying -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SWEENEY: - they are still being mailed increases.

Mr. Speaker, it is easy to know that the Premier is out of town today; the bleacher creatures are acting up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SWEENEY: When government announced their new reform package this winter, Mr. Speaker, they announced a rate freeze.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the members to my left for their co-operation, to permit the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace to continue his question.

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, when government announced their new reform package this winter, they announced a rate freeze. Minister, why has your inaction resulted in people facing further increases as we speak today?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I find it somewhat disingenuous of the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace to get up and ask questions about when the legislation is coming here, when will it be? - it is the third or fourth time - when he knows, or he ought to know, that it was explained to the Opposition House Leader, that they would have that legislation next week.

Now, my advice to the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace is that if he wants to know anything about it, talk to the Opposition House Leader. The legislation will be tabled next week. Until that time, you can continue asking the question but you will get the exact same answer, I say to the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, I do not wish to take any time because we only have a minute left here, but just to clarify, the second question that the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace asked - maybe the Government House Leader does not want the minister to stand and answer it. His answer and his interjection right now have nothing to do with the second question that was asked by the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace. Maybe he might be courteous enough to allow the minister to answer the question that was actually asked. It had nothing to do with his comments.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, it is obvious the game that is on here this afternoon. We were told by the Premier a month ago that this was going to be brought forward. People are still suffering from high rates.

Mr. Speaker, the same minister, a new topic. Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago I asked the Minister of Government Services about the status of the Petroleum Products Pricing Commission. The commissioner finishes his contract in two weeks and rumors are still floating that the office will close. The Premier has stated that the office will remain in Grand Falls-Windsor. Will the minister now confirm what the Premier has said, and inform the public if we will have the gas price regulation in two weeks' time, Mr. Speaker?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, in the House a couple of weeks ago, I told the hon. member that the government is committed to the Pricing Commission. I am in the process right now of taking a restructuring of that particular Commission and I will announce that shortly in the House.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: We have time for one quick supplementary.

The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

MR. SWEENEY: Can the minister confirm that the office will still stay in Grand Falls, as the Premier spoke on earlier?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, I have no intention of moving the office out of Grand Falls.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair would like to present the Annual Report for the Child and Youth Advocate for 2002-2003.

Notices of Motion

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On behalf of the Member for Bay of Islands I would like to present this Private Member's Motion:

WHEREAS the fiscal state of the Province has been misrepresented by the provincial conservative government; and

WHEREAS this misrepresentation is political maneuvering on the part of government to create a public mood that would enable them to implement their right wing conservative agenda; and

WHEREAS arts and culture activities contribute to both the economic and social life of this Province; and

WHEREAS the reputation of the art and the culture of this Province will be severely damaged; and

WHEREAS we are in danger of losing valuable and world renowned curators and staff; and

WHEREAS art currently owned by this Province is not properly stored and in danger of being damaged; and

WHEREAS there is a fine arts program at Sir Wilfred Grenfell College attracting students from all over North America; and

WHEREAS local artists used the Provincial Art Procurement Program as a major advantage in promoting local art and helping local artists;

BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly supports the opening of The Rooms and the Corner Brook Exhibition Centre without delay, as well as a restoration of funds to the provincial government's Art Procurement Program.

I present that on behalf of the Member for Bay of Islands.

I also give notice, Mr. Speaker, that with regard to Private Members' Day on Wednesday, which is the Opposition side, we will be proceeding with the motion earlier presented by the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune dealing with ferry rates in the Province.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: A notion of motion, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice, and by leave, move that the following heads of expenditure be referred to the Resource Committee: the Department of Business; the Department of Environment and Conservation; the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and Labrador Affairs; the Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development; the Department of Natural Resources; and the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, that the following heads of expenditure be referred to the Social Services Committee: the Department of Education; Health and Community Services; Justice; Municipal and Provincial Affairs; Human Resources, Labour and Employment, the Status of Women, and the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation.

Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, that the following heads of expenditure be referred to the Government Services Committee: Finance; Government Services; Transportation and Works, and Aboriginal Affairs; and the Public Service Commission.

Mr. Speaker, I give further notice, and by leave, move that the following committees be comprised of the following members. The Resource Committee: the Member for Bonavista North, the Member for Trinity-Bay de Verde, the Member for Windsor-Springdale, the Member for Gander, the Member for Twillingate & Fogo, the Member for Grand Bank, the Member for the Bay of Islands.

Government Services Committee: the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's, the Member for St. John's Centre, the Member for Terra Nova, the Member for St. John's North, the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace, the Member for Torngat Mountains, and the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

For the Social Services Committee: The Member for Trinity North, the Member for Humber Valley, the Member for Conception Bay South, the Member for Burin-Placentia West, the Member for Port de Grave, the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, and the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile.

MR. SPEAKER: The Government House Leader is asking for leave to move these motions now. Does the Government House Leader have leave to move these motions now?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

All those in favour of the motion relative to the Estimates Committee signify by saying aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: Those against?

The motions are carried.

Petitions

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today in the House to present a petition on behalf of my constituents and people of Labrador with regard to the Labrador Marine Services.

Mr. Speaker, the people in this area of the Province are not at all happy with the decision that government has made to relocate the Labrador passenger ferry to the region of Lewisporte. Mr. Speaker, the people in Labrador went out to these consultations and made their views widely known to a consultant that was hired by the government, paid by the government, to give them recommendations on how the marine services should operate for Labrador.

The recommendation, Mr. Speaker, was this: that the Labrador passenger service be based in the Cartwright-Goose Bay area to service that part of the Province, not in the community of Lewisporte.

Mr. Speaker, people in Labrador are outraged at the fact that this minister and this government could make a decision to move the Labrador ferry service to Lewisporte at a cost of over $2 million a year. The original figures were at $1.7 million, but now when you talk about basing the freight service at the wishes of the north coast out of Lewisporte as well, we will see an increased cost of $2.1 million on an annual basis to do this. Mr. Speaker, this is wrong and the people of Labrador are not happy with it.

Mr. Speaker, the minister says that he had support in Labrador for his decision. A week ago, I met, on May 1, with representatives from the Town Councils of Happy Valley-Goose Bay, from Labrador City, from the Chamber of Commerce in Labrador West, Central Labrador, Southern Labrador, the Labrador Straits, and the zonal boards in all the regions of Labrador as well, and these people were not at all happy with this decision. In fact, they were extremely upset by the fact that $1.7 million more was going to be spent out of the Labrador fund to give them lesser service this year than they had prior to 2003, prior to 2002. There will be twenty-five less trips out of Happy Valley-Goose Bay this year for people wanting to use that service.

Mr. Speaker, as a result of government basing the Labrador ferry in Labrador, for the people of Labrador, we saw the numbers on that ferry service grow from a little over 7,000 people to 12,000 people last year. That is a sign of the demand for the service and the satisfaction with using that particular route. What government has done here was absolutely wrong. They have betrayed the people of Labrador. They have not listened to the leadership in Labrador, the municipalities, the chambers, and the zonal boards, who have said to this government: The Labrador ferry service should indeed be for the people of Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MS JONES: May I have leave, Mr. Speaker?

AN HON. MEMBER: No.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been denied.

MS JONES: Thank you.

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise again to present a petition on behalf of the people of Southwestern Newfoundland, not only in my District of Burgeo & LaPoile but also inclusive of the Codroy Valley area, which is represented by the Member for Stephenville East. I believe this is my eighth different petition on that issue, and they keep coming in. I made a commitment that, as long as they keep coming, I would honour them by presenting them in the House of Assembly here.

It deals with, I don't know if you would call it impending or possible downgrading and decrease in hospital health services in the Port aux Basques area, particularly in the Dr. Charles L. LeGrow Health Centre. This is, as I say, my ninth petition here. The letters have been sent to the Premier's office, sent to the Minister of Health and Community Services. There has been a forum held, and they are very disappointed. The forum was held two Sunday nights ago and again, for the second time running, the minister declined to be there, the Member for Stephenville East declined to be there, and the government did not even send out a member from the Department of Health and Community Services, a deputy minister or an ADM.

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MR. PARSONS: Pardon?

I say to the Government House Leader, the meeting was held in Port aux Basques. It had to be cancelled the first time because the government members would not attend, so they rescheduled to accommodate government members. The second time around - it was held two Sunday nights ago in Port aux Basques - the minister again refused to attend, the Member for Stephenville East refused to attend, and they would not even send someone from the Department of Health and Community Services to at least respond to any questions that might have been raised.

There are many facets to this issue of health care in Southwestern Newfoundland, and one little piece, but a very important piece, that I was clued into recently by a doctor there, Wendy Graham, who is a -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. PARSONS: - a young female doctor who came into town, and has her family there, committed to stay in rural Newfoundland as her home there. What I did not realize, as part of this downgrading of health care services, she pointed out quite adequately and clearly, if you do not allow the services to be done, such as obstetrical and surgical procedures, in places like Legrow, doctors like her who have certain skill sets will not stay. They cannot stay because they have to keep their skills up to a certain level in order to be certified in those areas. So, I say to the minister, that is a very important but vital piece of keeping services in these areas, because the doctors we do have, we have enough problem as it is with recruiting and retention, and if we not even going to allow them, once we get them into the areas, to do the basics to maintain their credentials, we are going to lose them; not because they want to leave, but because they would have to leave in order to keep their professional status. They do not just want to be, you know, general practitioners. They come to town and they have certain skill sets and they want to keep them. So, I say to the minister, that is another facet of this whole issue of rural health care that we have to be very cognizant of and aware of when we make these decisions about what services get provided in what areas of the Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Orders of the Day

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

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

Motion 1, to move that this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the government.

I understand that the Leader of the Opposition has about eighteen or nineteen minutes left from where he left off the other day. I am looking forward to every second of his response. I have some notes made, Mr. Speaker, and I am looking forward to an opportunity some time this afternoon, tonight or tomorrow, to respond to some of the points he has made thus far.

Thank you.

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

It is nineteen minutes that you have left, Sir.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am sure that the Government House Leader remembers that, even though I was limited to an hour, of which I have about eighteen-and-a-half minutes left, he said that if I wanted to go on a little while beyond that, he would gladly accommodate me because he was delighted to hear and provide an opportunity for anything and everything that I had to say.

Mr. Speaker, if I could, I could show him a copy of Hansard in which that is actually quoted, but we may not need it today. I would admit that I have had several opportunities now to speak fairly fully and broadly to the Budget, and I will do that again for the next fifteen minutes or so, but again, before I do that today, I would like to point out that in Question Period today we were raising an issue - which, again, all of these issues are directly or indirectly related to the Budget - about the future of 5 Wing Goose Bay in Labrador. Just a few weeks ago, as a matter of fact, there was a private members' motion in this Legislature, introduced by the government, and I believe introduced by the Government House Leader, on behalf of the Premier, because he had given notice of it and was not here, about seeking the support of the Legislature for the future of 5 Wing Goose Bay.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. GRIMES: Done for the Member for Lake Melville.

We all supported it unanimously. As a matter of fact, the government even agreed to an amendment that there be an all-party committee formed to show that this was not a partisan issue in Newfoundland and Labrador, that it was not a Progressive Conservative issue that was being opposed by the Liberals or the New Democratic Party, but that it was supported by all members in this Legislature. It was unanimous, because we all recognize it is important to the future of Newfoundland and Labrador.

The disappointing part in some of the questions today, Mr. Speaker, is the fact that, with that kind of a motion and with that kind of support from the Legislature, the Premier and the Minister for Labrador Affairs today, in answering a question, says, well, he is gone off to Europe by himself, with the Parliamentary Assistant from his own party, and with the representative of the union from Happy Valley-Goose Bay, from 5 Wing Goose Bay itself, who a week or so ago had retired or resigned and came back on the job to go over - which is fine, and I am glad to see that he is there, but now it was not important to have anyone there from the community at large, which is what the coalition represented.

The Premier, leading a provincial delegation, decided - because again we are back to the one-man show - he was going to take his own people only. It is not an important symbol in his mind to show the people in Germany, to show the people in Italy, if they go there - because the Italians also have a presence - that the community at large, not only people whose jobs are directly impacted on the Base but everybody in the community at large in the Upper Lake Melville region, Happy Valley-Goose Bay, and all of Labrador, support the initiative. He decided he did not want that voice as part of the delegation. Mr. Trimper, who was the Chair of the coalition, was not invited.

He said that it was not important. It was a provincial initiative, he said, so it was not important to have the federal MP who led the delegation, by the way, and set up the meetings with Prime Minister Martin in Ottawa to start the initiative. He initiated the meetings and the Premier agreed to go and lead the provincial delegation, but now it was not important, said the minister today, because the Premier did not think it was important to take the federal minister along to encourage the Germans and others to continue a presence.

We also find out, of course, that more seriously again - and we will pursue this further later in the week - more seriously again, while it is important for just the Premier and a couple of very narrow interests to be gone to deal with the Germans and maybe the Italians, that there is no commitment at all and no extra work done on the Canadian presence beyond 2006. That, in fact, we have a federal election that is going to be called any day now and we have the Premier, with his own little group, does not require the broad-based community support. He doesn't require the federal support, doesn't want it as part of his delegation, but we are having the minister acknowledge that they don't really have any commitment, on the eve of a federal election, from the federal government itself and from Prime Minister Martin, that there is going to be a Canadian presence, even, in Happy Valley-Goose Bay beyond the year 2006.

I think what we should have, clearly, as soon as we can have the Premier come back - I hope he is going to pack his bags and head right straight to Ottawa and maybe kiss and make up again with Mr. O'Brien, the federal MP, who he snubbed this time. Maybe he will want the Coalition Leader, Mr. Trimper, to go to Ottawa again. He was important enough to take the last time. Maybe the motion that they voted for, that they have an all-party committee, to show that it is supported by everybody in this Legislature, that he might think it is okay to take a representative of the New Democratic Party, a member from Labrador, to show that it is all of Labrador that supports this and thinks it is important, as well as a member from the Liberal Party. It certainly wasn't seen to be important in Germany and in Europe this week.

Mr. Speaker, that is not what I want to speak about today. I want to go back to the issue itself and just put it in its context again. The Government House Leader gave, again in calling the Orders of the Day, the notion that we are debating a motion saying, they want the Legislature, they want us, to agree with the budgetary policy of the government, which is the Budget as read. We don't agree with it. We have said that and we have amended it to say that we, instead, condemn the government for its failure to accurately represent the true picture, and we have had a chance to speak to that.

I am now speaking to a further amendment that says: This House rejects the government's Budget statement because it is predicated upon mythical and inaccurate information. Mr. Speaker, that is what I want to spend my few minutes talking about, my remaining few minutes today.

Again, I will begin by recommending to all members. and to anyone publicly who has an interest, the speech made about this amendment by the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi when we last addressed this issue a week or ten days ago. I will cover some of the similar ground. It is the notion that, in fact, here we have a Budget that we cannot support because it is predicated upon mythical and inaccurate information.

Mr. Speaker, what we have - and we saw it in the debate last week about the terrible back-to-work legislation, the completely unnecessary, crazy, idiotic, back-to-work legislation, that the puppets all stood up and gave their prepared speech and talked about the future and debt and indebtedness and children and grandchildren and did what they were told and voted for it: no exceptions, none at all. Mr. Speaker, completely unnecessary and completely unrelated to the issue at the time, in which the people were already back to work and, in fact, they had already achieved a two-year wage freeze by agreement from the unions. There was only a little bit of disagreement over a sick leave issue which is going to save no money for this government in this term of office at all, which is likely to be the only term of office that they are going to get and be endorsed by the people of the Province. They voted for something that had no impact at all, because they believed a statement, by the way, that has only been made in the Province and only verified from two sources, verified by the Premier and verified by Mini-Me, the Minister of Finance. Those are the only two, and their statements have been: We are drowning in debt. We can't pass this on to our children and grandchildren. That is their message.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the Leader of the Opposition if he could refrain himself from using language that is intended to insult members and to take away from the integrity of members and the integrity of the House. We are enjoying his speech. If he could co-operate in that regard, we would all appreciate it.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The phrases that I use are common phrases in the public domain with about 250,000 hits out in cyberspace, and everybody knows who I am talking about. The member opposite does not take any offence to it because he knows it is true. As a matter of fact, when I talked to him about it over the fence the other day he was getting quite a kick out of it; the fact that he now has a well-known new moniker in Newfoundland and Labrador that will stick with him for the rest of his life.

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

MR. SPEAKER: A point of order has been raised by the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to indicate that what he has indicated is absolutely false. I have never spoken to him then, and I think this House has stood on the integrity of telling the truth. It is absolutely false what he has said. I will ask him to withdraw it because it is not true. I do not like falsehoods being perpetrated in this House, especially when they are directed to me, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair cannot determine whether statements made outside the House are true or false, but I ask the Leader of the Opposition if he would, again, refrain from comments. They may be common in many other places but that does not mean they are parliamentary. Therefore, I would ask the hon. member if he could refrain from using comments that are derogatory and do not add anything to the integrity of the parliamentary process.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I did not realize that the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board was after getting so sensitive in his years as he continues on. Obviously, he does not like the truth too much because this Opposition has sanctioned him, in our own way, by refusing to listen to him because of the fact that we can't believe what he says.

Let me make the point again, Mr. Speaker. The source about drowning in debt and the source about saying we have alarming correspondence from the bonding rating agencies has only been put in the public record in Newfoundland and Labrador by two people, by the Premier of the Province and by the Minister of Finance and the President of Treasury Board. Unlike other phrases that have been put into the public domain that they dismiss because they do not fit the myth and they do not fit the debate we are having today about the fact that the Budget is predicated upon mythical and inaccurate information. The inaccurate information, Mr. Speaker, comes from these two political sources because it suits their particular agenda, but it is not supported by anybody else. As a matter of fact, let me explore it further.

The myth is completely exposed and shown to be exactly that - if you go to credible sources like the bond rating agencies themselves, such as Moody's and the Dominion Bond Rating Service. In fact, their statements, which are in these documents that were provided to this new government before they decided to go and get a brand new one because they did not like what these said. These particular statements were provided to this particular government after the election. The Dominion Bond Rating Service confirmed, on October 29 - which is after the election last year - the credit ratings of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and indicated that the trends remain stable. Now, unlike the myth, which is we are drowning in debt - which is the statement that has only been said by the Premier and the Finance Minister. The statement about debt says this: total debt, as measured by the Dominion Bond Rating Service, rose to $10.3 billion. However, the debt, the GDP ratio dropped 7.9 per cent to 64.3 per cent - and this is very telling, Mr. Speaker. The debt, the GDP ratio, which is your ability to pay for it, dropped to its lowest level in at least two decades.

The Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi described it in English the other day by saying: Yes, the debt went up. It is like somebody deciding to buy a bigger, newer and more expensive house. That is all that the Premier and the Finance Minister have said: You have a more expensive house and you owe a bit more money. They left out the other part that your ability to pay for it is better than it has been in the last twenty years. You have more money. You have more than enough money coming in to pay for your new, bigger house and have some money left over as well. Now, that is the part they conveniently leave out because it does not fit the myth and it does not fit the inaccurate information that they have been feeding, in a frenzied fashion, to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, ever since January 5 when that infamous speech was made that led down the road to the strike that just finished and so on. So you have those particular issues.

It is true, Mr. Speaker. I believe there is a well-known saying that you can actually deceive people more effectively with the truth than you can with a lie. You can actually deceive people and lead them in a certain direction if there is a kernel of truth in what you are saying, and that is what we have here. The part that was said is true. Yes, we bought a more expensive house and we owe a bigger mortgage but the part that is left out is equally true, but it was not even mentioned. Members opposite did not even hear it and do not want to hear it today because they want to sit comfortably in their skins, sit comfortably in their seats, stand up with their prepared speeches like last week and say: Oh, I cannot pass that debt along to my grandchildren. What they forget and what they want to leave out is the part that you have a greater ability to pay for the new house than you have had in the last twenty years. The circumstance in the Province has improved remarkably.

That is very, very telling, Mr. Speaker, because those are the kinds of things that the government deliberately left out. Let me give you a few examples. These are the reports given to this government - this government. Again, an analysis from Moody's Investment Services, one of the three recognized bond rating agencies, net direct and guaranteed debt as a per cent of GDP, in 1999 was 49.5 per cent. They say we are drowning in debt and the debt has gone up, but guess what it is now? It was 49.5 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product, which is all the monies generated in the Province. Guess what it is going to be this year? It is worse, according to you guys, right? We are drowning in debt now, right? It has to be worse. It was 49.5 per cent five years ago. Guess what Moody's says it is going to be this year? Thirty-nine point five per cent, Mr. Speaker. The first time they heard it. The first time the Opposition heard it. The first time a lot of people in Newfoundland and Labrador have heard it, because the government has built the whole Budget exercise predicated on a myth that we are going into a downward spiral, that we cannot pay our way, things are getting worse, we are drowning in debt, and Moody's itself, which is one of the bond rating agencies that we were supposed to have this alarming correspondence from, the correspondence says: Your ability to pay - you used to have debt at 49 per cent five years ago. It has not gone up to 50 per cent or 55 per cent or 60 per cent, which is what the Premier would like you to believe, which is what the Finance Minister would like you to believe. It has actually gone down ten full percentage points, and ten points out of fifty, by the way, is a 20 per cent improvement.

To use the mortgage analysis, it means: Can you buy a bigger house? Absolutely. Do you have a slightly bigger mortgage? Absolutely. Do you have the ability to pay for your new mortgage? Guaranteed. Not only that, you are 20 per cent better off, in terms of your ability to pay for the new house. You have more money left over to pay for your new house than you had left over when you were paying for your old house five years ago because the circumstance in the Province is that much better.

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately that is what happened in this whole Budget exercise: The government perpetrated a myth on the people of the Province, and they continue to do so.

The other part, Mr. Speaker, is drowning in debt. Remember the infamous saying of the January 5 television address? The Premier saying - he refused to answer in the House. I have asked him myself at least ten times. He refuses to answer the question. He puts the Minister of Finance up to answer the question. He will not answer it himself. He went on television and said: I have to spend the first billion dollars to the bank to pay the interest on the debt, and he said it is 25 per cent of all the money we have. I have to give it to the bank.

No greater ‘mistruth' has ever been told about paying interest to the bank. The actual fact, again, from the bond rating agency - and the line is: Total interest expense. Total interest expense, the money sent to the bank. It was never 25 per cent. It was not then and it is not now. In 1999, it was 15.3 per cent. The Premier wants us to believe it is 25 per cent, and today it is down to 13.7 per cent, and that is the information that this government had before they went through the exercise of going out and fabricating the infamous PricewaterhouseCoopers report, and all those kinds of issues, to try to scare the daylights out of people, to make us think the sky was falling, and all those types of things. Mr. Speaker, the myth has been exposed.

A couple of other things, and I will do this fairly quickly because I am running out of time and I do appreciate the opportunities I have had. The Government House Leader, when he addressed this the last time, talked about the Hydro debt, because when they talk about debt they want to talk about all the debt: the direct government debt, which is only $6.9 billion, the debt that is in Crown corporations, the debt that is in the school boards, the debt that is in the Municipal Financing Corporation, the debt that is in the hospital boards, the debt that is in Hydro.

Hydro, Mr. Speaker, remains self-supporting. The Government House Leader got up the last time and said: The Hydro debt is there and it is a problem because it is guaranteed by the Province.

The statement right in Moody's says this - and it is worth reading - the self-supporting nature of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro's debt mitigates any concern that the Province needs to have by virtue of guaranteeing it -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MR. GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

MR. GRIMES: Just for a second to finish up, if I could, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Does the member have leave?

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been denied.

MR. GRIMES: Leave has been denied by the Government House Leader, even though he promised me in Hansard that I could speak. Today he has changed his mind, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to say a few words on this amendment put forth by the Opposition.

Mr. Speaker, I find it quite amusing that the Leader of the Opposition can stand in his place each day and go on and talk about mythical budgets and mythical numbers. Over the years, when we were on that side of the House of Assembly, how often did I stand up and question their Budgets based on their information put forward? They now, themselves, will admit that they did not bring down a balanced Budget year after year. One year they came close, and we now know that was not a balanced Budget at that point in time either, when you look at the true figures of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

We have a member on the opposite side of the House who likes to talk about mythical numbers, when in reality the best person in this House of Assembly for using mythical numbers has been proven over the years to be the Leader of the Opposition himself. He can get up and he can twist figures right, left and center, Mr. Speaker.

Another thing, he was over there - and he cannot get on his feet, Mr. Speaker. I saw one other member in this House of Assembly - I will not name him, he is not here now - who could not get on his feet without insulting someone. He is a pro at name calling, Mr. Speaker, and we saw it here again today when he was on his feet. We cannot have members in the House twisting facts and figures all the time to their own benefit.

Mr. Speaker, we brought down a Budget this year. Yes, some will say that it was a difficult Budget, and I would agree with that, Mr. Speaker, and we have good reason. So, the question has to be asked: Why would a government bring down a Budget of this nature, where we had to cut out of the Budget $240 million? Each department was asked to review their programs and see if they could have a 10 per cent saving. I found it in the Department of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. Other departments could not come up with it, and some came up with a bit more, but we tried to be reasonable, to try to counter the road that we were going down for the past fifteen, twenty, twenty-five years.

Members on the other side of the House will stand in their place day after day and condemn this Budget, Mr. Speaker. They have a job to do, I suppose. That is what they say, they have a job to do, as the Opposition, but they should basically sit back and take a dose of reality themselves and say: Why are we in the position that we are finding ourselves in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador today?

Mr. Speaker, as I said, previous Budgets were not balanced. We have a Budget now, this year, that is going to be some $840 million. When you look at the overall picture, the accrual method of budgeting, we are going to be $840 million in debt, based on this year alone.

Mr. Speaker, that is a lot of money. We do not like to have to do what we have done this year, but there is some good news also, Mr. Speaker. Already we have people in the public service, since we formed the government on November 6 of this year, who were in temporary positions year after year after year, and we are trying to make those people permanent. We have gone a long ways down that road.

Mr. Speaker, we want to protect the future of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. The only way that we can do that, of course, is to basically get our financial house in order. We have taken steps along that route, Mr. Speaker, but it has to be a two-pronged process. We have to get our financial house in order and we have to grow the economy.

As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, we saw in the paper this past weekend, in papers across the Province, I would imagine, an advertisement for a deputy minister and other people for the Business Secretariat, that the Premier of the Province is going to head up himself. The reason for that, of course, is to try to grow the economy and try to support small- and medium-sized businesses in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. How do we do that?

Mr. Speaker, I have had calls from people recently and they were trying to compare the Budget and saying: How come it is just the ordinary man who has been hit this time in the Budget? Why aren't businesses being hit harder?

I questioned that myself during the debate with the Cabinet and the different departments, looking at trying to prepare the Budget. Basically, the taxes in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador are fairly heavy. We basically fall in the middle, Mr. Speaker, we basically fall in the middle, when you compare the ten provinces.

MR. COLLINS: Not corporate taxes.

MR. J. BYRNE: The member opposite, the Member for Labrador West, says it is not corporate taxes though. He is right. Then again, I would say to the member opposite, when you look at the businesses in Newfoundland and Labrador we have a payroll tax that was brought in by the previous Administration many years ago and basically it was a tax on jobs. If you created jobs in the Province you were taxed.

At that time, when they brought it in, if you had a payroll of over $300,000 you had to pay a percentage on that. I cannot remember at the time - it has been decreasing since - when we fought long and hard as Opposition members to try and get rid of the payroll tax because it was a tax on jobs in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. When you look at the overall picture and take everything into consideration, and you are trying to grow the economy, Mr. Speaker, I suppose people in the private industry could say - not in industry but individuals out there could say: Well, maybe the businesses should be hit a bit harder.

Again, the best living a person could have, I suppose, is to have a job in Newfoundland and Labrador. Private industry creates jobs and, in turn, pay taxes to pay for the services that we all receive in health care in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I missed that comment, I say to the member opposite.

There is some good news in this Budget, Mr. Speaker. For example, this is one: This year housing starts are estimated to be 2,600 units - new housing in Newfoundland and Labrador. It was only the other day I heard an announcement that this is now up to 3,000. So that, in itself, will create jobs, pay payroll taxes, income taxes. These types of things will help generate revenues to pay for the services that we so desperately need in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

It says: Capital investment is expected to increase 10.5 per cent to almost $4.2 billion, the highest level ever. Mr. Speaker, that is all good news. This is even better when we get our financial house in order.

As I said the other day in the House of Assembly, if we could take that 25 per cent of every dollar that is going to pay the debt of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador - and the Leader of the Opposition was just on his feet a little while ago referring to that. He was saying, that is not quite right. I cannot remember the figure he used - 17 per cent or 18 per cent. That is strictly for the debt itself or the interest, Mr. Speaker, but when you look at the overall debt at the health care boards, the school boards, different organizations, Crown corporations, it is up around twenty-five cents on every dollar that we pay as a Province to retire our debt. Too much! It is not sustainable and we cannot continue down that road.

As I said before, we inherited a financial mess in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, and people out there are starting to realize this. Members on the other side of the House themselves realize this. The Leader of the Opposition, himself, said a few weeks ago that we are in a financial mess and it has to be straightened out. Now, when we have people like the Leader of the Opposition standing here and saying that - but when he stands on his feet in the House of Assembly and questions us and gives his speeches, he says something completely different. Why? Why would he be at that, other than for political reasons alone? That is all it is about.

As I said earlier, the Opposition have a job to do, so be it. We will live with that. We are all big boys and girls in here in the House of Assembly, Mr. Speaker, but at least when they get on their feet in the House of Assembly that they try to show some integrity and be forthright, be honest and try to agree with what we are trying to do. I can see them wanting to point out any flaws, errors or omissions and whatever in here that we make, as a government, that is their job. Really, what we should be doing, and I have said this many times - I said it at the caucus table, I said it at the Cabinet table, I said it in public. What we need to be doing, as the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, we need the federal government, the provincial government, the municipal governments, Mr. Speaker, we need industry, we need all private-public sectors out there to come together and come up with some sort of a plan to put this House back on track; the financial house back on track in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. I do not think that is being unreasonable.

We have a lot of services to give to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and that is what government is all about, to provide services; education. Health care is a major one, Mr. Speaker, and if we do not have the wherewithal to do it - as I said the other day, out of every dollar that we collect in revenue we have twenty-three cents to go to services. Now, twenty-three cents, when you look at health care - aside from the salaries and benefits - twenty-three cents of every dollar has to go to services. We have health care - we have all the supplies which have to supply the hospitals within the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador; costs, transportation costs.

Transportation itself, in the Department of Transportation and Works we have the ferry systems operating in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We have snow clearing, just to purchase - can you imagine, Mr. Speaker, what it costs in the run of a year to supply fuel for all the vehicles in the Department of Transportation and Works for say, snow clearing and the ferries themselves? So, twenty-three cents on every dollar for all of these services is not a lot of money.

Again, I want to get back to why we find ourselves in a situation to bring down a Budget that we just recently brought down. Back in the early 1990s former Premier Clyde Wells brought down a pretty hard Budget at that time too, Mr. Speaker, and he laid off 3,000 people; public sector workers went out the door just before Christmas. Three thousand laid off, not through attrition like we are planning on doing. Now, members on the opposite side will stand and say: Oh, yes, you are having layoffs. Yes, I agree, Mr. Speaker, there are some layoffs but it is not amounting to 3,000 in one-fell swoop. In the hundreds, but again, through attrition. By the way, Mr. Speaker, many of these people are - we have a plan in place to try and bring these people back into the system when we have attrition and have people going out the door. We will try and get them back in. So they will have priority - be on a priority list to get back into the system. It is not something that the previous Administration did.

When you sit back and size it all up, when you look at the debt of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, $11.5 billion for just over 500,000 people. Too much, Mr. Speaker! It is unsustainable. That debt, by the way - and I will say it again because I think people need to hear this, especially people on the other side. They need to hear that this $11 billion debt for 500,000 people doubled from the mid-1990s to now. So, from 1949 to the mid-1990s, early to mid-1990s, it was $5.5 billion, and right now it is $11 billion. From 1999 to now it was increased by $2.7 billion. Can anyone fathom how much money that is? I cannot, Mr. Speaker. On each man, woman and child in this Province, the debt on each individual is insurmountable and we have to get it under control. The only way we can do that is to go down the road that we are going down at this point in time.

We want to help the people of Newfoundland and Labrador in the long term. It is easy, I say to you, to stand in this House of Assembly and just dole out the cash and say: Let that problem build and we will put it off until another day for someone else to handle.

It would be pretty easy, pretty easy for us to do. I remember last month, during the debate on Bill 18, I got a few e-mails from people saying: Jack, have some backbone. Stand up and show some spine. Speak up and be against this Bill 18.

Mr. Speaker, sometimes it takes more guts to stand in this House of Assembly and do what is hard to do. You do not like to do it, but you have no choice in it. Again, every time someone on the other side of the House stands and says: Members on the other side of the House are doing something that does not need to be done - the Leader of the Opposition is very good at it. Then again, I think that is like closing your eyes to something that is gory, getting worse by the day, and leaving it for someone else to deal with. It is not the right attitude, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair was on her feet the other day and this is what she said. This was the other day. She was on her feet and we were talking about the $11 billion debt we had. We were talking about the deficit this year, of over $800 million, and last year it was over $900 million. This is the comment, now. She said: So, we owe a few dollars. So, we owe a few dollars. Also, she said: And we have somewhat of a deficit.

Mr. Speaker, that hon. member was a former minister in the previous Administration. We owe a few dollars. Eleven billion dollars. Is it any wonder that we are - I should not say we - that the Province, is in the mess that it is in today? It was contributed significantly to, by the previous Administration. They are up there every day criticizing us, and we are here six months - six months - trying to put our fiscal house in order. They were there for fifteen years, and what did they do? I will tell you some of the things they did. For example, just before the last election, six months before our contract had to be renewed, they awarded the ferry contract in Labrador, across The Straits up there, somewhere of $16 million to $20 million, six months prior, to a well-known Liberal - not going to tender or anything of that nature. Don't go and do that. No, no, we cannot be at that. We have to take care of our buddies. That is what they did, Mr. Speaker, before the last election, six months before that.

Also, some of the reasons why we are in the situation that we are in today, and the debt that we owe, and the irresponsibility of the previous Administration, can anybody remember when the previous Premier, Mr. Tobin, had a news conference in Labrador announcing the Lower Churchill deal with Mr. Bouchard, the then Premier of Quebec? One million dollars on a news conference in Labrador.

AN HON. MEMBER: It was $1.45 million overall.

MR. J. BYRNE: I stand corrected. It was $1.4 million on a news conference and the members on the opposite side are disappointed because they were not invited. Mr. Speaker, that is the attitude that we had to deal with. That was one.

Can anybody remember, Mr. Speaker, before the last election - and they tried to make an issue of this here last week in the House of Assembly - the previous Administration spending $350,000 on a good news campaign, saying, good things are happening in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador? Now, $350,000, from my perspective, that should have been spent in an election campaign, not the taxpayers' dollars - spent to say how good things were in Newfoundland and Labrador. We see today how good things are in Newfoundland and Labrador. They are improving, Mr. Speaker. They will improve. I have no doubt about that, that things will improve in this Province, but it is because of the fiscal responsibility of the Administration that is in power today in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Other things that have happened, Mr. Speaker, and we have said over and over again, the Trans City deal, something like $20 million over a number of years given to their buddies to build a few hospitals. By the way, the contract was awarded, taken back, and they were sued - this government was sued - and they had to pay out $4 million, I believe it was, to settle a court case when they were being sued for tearing up the contract that they had, completely ignoring the Public Tender Act altogether. The list goes on and on and on.

Again, Atlantic Leasing, where we had the Murray Premises down there that was leased out, again showing irresponsibility on behalf of the previous Administration. We wonder why the former Minister of Fisheries and the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, is saying that we owe a few dollars and we have somewhat of a deficit when they are talking $11 billion, actually $11.5 billion, Mr. Speaker. I think we need to get our fiscal house in order, which we are trying to do.

Mr. Speaker, I can go on and on. The members on the other side of the House are getting a bit frustrated with hearing the truth. As I said, Mr. Speaker, oftentimes the truth hurts and they realize that we, as an Administration, will continue to do what we believe and feel in our hearts is right for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. We want to, in the long term, have the other provinces look at Newfoundland and Labrador and say to the rest of the country, and internationally: Look what Newfoundland did.

Mr. Speaker, we can go on here. The federal government has to play a major role in the turn around of this Province. I want to talk about the Atlantic Accord and the mistreatment of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador with the Atlantic Accord. That was put in place for the offshore, and Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, Mr. Speaker, were supposed to be the primary recipients of the offshore. That is not happening today. The Premier has taken that on himself, to try and negotiate something with Ottawa. We have an upcoming election and maybe it would be a good time for members on both sides of the House, I say to the Opposition House Leader - now would be a good time for the three groups to get together and try to put some pressure on Ottawa in this upcoming election, and say: Listen, it is time to treat us fairly. It is time to sit down and treat Newfoundlanders and Labradorians as an equal partner in Canada with the other provinces, not to completely take, take and take.

Now, some people would say - and I have talked to lots of people on the mainland, Mr. Speaker, over the years and they feel that we are a charitable group down here, that they have to give, give, give to us all the time. When you sit down and size it all up and look at what we contribute, fiscally, socially, economically or whatever, to the Country of Canada, I think it is time now that we all come together and do something to benefit the people of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I notice my time is pretty well up. I am sure I will have lots of time to speak in the future on the Budget. I will take my place. I am sure someone on the other side will want to respond.

Thank you.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Thank you very much.

I don't know if I will require the full twenty minutes or not. I appreciate an opportunity to speak to the sub-amendment to the Budget today.

I was very interested in some of the comments made by the hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs; somewhat all over the place, I guess, as one tends to do in this Chamber from time to time. That is understandable. I really took note of some of his comments about living in the past and regurgitating some of the history of the past administrations and so on. I guess, that is fair ball from a new administration. That is what we have to expect, a reference to the past from time to time, because they have no record themselves to speak of, to date. They have only been here seven months or so, and if you were to listen to the teacher who I referred to in my earlier speech, who was grading their first semester report, they haven't done too well. I don't believe they got either passing grade on any courses they have done yet. So I understand why he, at this point, still has to keep talking about past events.

There is also an old saying that I learned quite early on in this House: Keep your words very soft and very sweet because you never know when you may have to eat them. I learned that lesson over and over, so I will try to keep my words soft and sweet because I am prone to eating mine from time to time as well, as most of us are here in this hon. Chamber.

The last day I started on the Budget, I said I was going to take a four-year report, albeit we had twenty minutes, and I stated the process of explaining that we had about four years. It works out to about eight semesters, and we have about one semester completed by this government to date. My intention was to grade them after each semester and see, at the end of the day - I am only one person judging, of course. The electorate of Newfoundland and Labrador will, at the end of those eight semesters, cast the deciding report card and decide if this group have or have not passed.

I reviewed some of the things that have been done to date on the Budget, on a general overview type of process, and gave the government some marks, shall we say, on some of the courses they have taken to date, but I did not refer much to the courses that they ought to take over the next four years. There are, in fact, some very highly recommended courses that they should take, because I think if they do take them and if they do study well and they do pass - and I say some of this in jest, but it is a very serious vein throughout - if they do study well, and get a good passing grade, we, as a Province, will be better off at the end of the eight semesters, and no doubt they should get a passing grade. They should get their degree, as we say, at the end of the four-year term.

One of the courses, of course, is economics. It is always very beneficial if anybody takes economics, particularly a government who are administering the resources of the Province and where we stand. So far, this government - somewhat concerned about the limited economics study that they have done. There is macro, of course, and then there is microeconomics, anyone who is familiar with it at all. I am certainly no guru in that area, as Dr. House would be, but it is the comments of the economics. For example, Dr. House, a very qualified, very experienced person in his field, in economics and so on, development, resource development, he has been inducted as deputy minister into the Department Innovation, Trade and Rural Development, and we wish him well. Again, it is a case of only time will tell whether his experience and his ideas are going to work in this Province. We have had some past experience with it. For whatever reasons, it did not come to fruition the way everyone had hoped and wanted it to, but we will certainly see.

We have had talks, when we refer to economics again, part of that course should, of course, take in the Rural Secretariat. Now, from my reading so far - and I would like to hear more about this, and I am sure we will from government over time - the newly-proclaimed Rural Secretariat seems to be the SSP that was under the former Administration, the Strategic Social Plan, basically reincarnated, a new name stuck on it. Maybe some new individual is going to be brought in and new terms and conditions given to their mandate, so I am anxious to see what is new about this piece of the economics course that they are going to teach the people of this Province in the next four years when it comes to this Rural Secretariat, particularly who is going to have involvement in it, because we have our zone boards around the Province now - we have twenty zone boards - how do they fit with the Rural Secretariat? What kind of input will communities around the Province have into the Rural Secretariat? We know how it was structured under SSP. Is it going to be the same? If not, what is different? Why is it different? I am aware, for example, already, that the Town Council in Burgeo have written to the minister and said: What is this Rural Secretariat? How can we have some input into it? Can we have some input into it? She has responded to say, yes, she anticipates they will get some involvement, but only time will tell again how she intends to take the grassroots and the municipalities in this Province and incorporate their ideas into the Rural Secretariat. That, from an economics perspective, we would like to see.

Again, you might have some assets from an economic point of view or development point of view, in that economics course, that you are not using. For example, we had a deputy minister by the name of John Scott, and Mr. Scott was shuffled off to the MMSB, the Multi-Materials Stewardship Board, to make room for Dr. House, who went into Industry. Mr. Scott is a $130,000 employee, very experienced, very well trained, has a lot of knowledge and a lot of information in the field of rural development. In fact, it was called Industry, Trade and Rural Development, that he was the deputy minister of. Now, that costly $130,000 salary has been parked over at MMSB where the Chair used to get paid a stipend, I believe it was $20,000 a year. Quite a difference. I would suggest that we ought to, as good students again, in taking the course, we have to make sure the course is properly developed, that the economics course should utilize assets that we have there.

I saw recently an announcement on the government Web site, that the Premier is advertising for a deputy minister for his Department of Business. Surely, we need not - if we are talking about wise use of government funding, one has to consider: Why would we be looking for someone to bring in as a deputy minister at another $130,000 cost, a Deputy Minister of Business, when we already have a Mr. Scott who, as I understand it, is down at MMSB, and he is certainly, I would say, overqualified to be there. I have had the pleasure of working with Mr. Scott and he definitely is very qualified, so I do not know why we have to go outside and advertise if we have someone of his caliber there to fill in that spot, not only as the deputy minister, but even if he were utilized as the information officer that the government has gone off to advertise for, for this new Department of Business.

It is not only good to come up with new ideas and have a new approach, but there are some things in the old system that are still very valuable and still very useable and have a purpose in our system.

Another course that the government ought to take within the next four years - and we have not seen much evidence of it in this Budget at least - is statistics. Statistics, of course, they say you could make statistics show anything, but I mean it from a very productive point of view when I say statistics. For example, out-migration. We know that we have had a long arduous task in this Province to come from massive out-migration in the last ten, twelve or fifteen years to trying to get more people in than leave, the net-migration factor.

We were fortunate. Last year, 2003, was the first time in fifteen years that we had a positive net-migration. Some naysayers might pooh-pooh the idea that we had 359 people into this Province last year more than left, but that is the first time we have ever had a positive sign. Quite frankly, we would all like to see that positive trend continue so that fifteen years out, that 359 has become 35,009 so that our population has grown and not diminished.

In your statistics course, pay very close attention to that out-migration factor that was positive last year and hopefully it will stay positive in the next four years. So far, from what we have seen in this Budget, there has not been much encouragement to suggest that the out-migration figures will stay on a positive note. We have to provide opportunities for people to stay here. We have to provide opportunities for people to come here. We have to get our people trained and have the industries here that they can work in, in order for those figures to continue to grow.

Today, for example, in this House, the Minister of Natural Resources gave a Ministerial Statement talking about the positive and exuberant feeling that existed at the oil show in Houston. So it should, we have a great industry there, but there is no point in growing the industry if, as we grow it, the very skilled people that we need to work in it have left because there have not been opportunities for them here in this Province or we have not trained them properly. Of course, that is your future return on your investments. We make all kinds of investments, educationally and everything, but the greatest investment is in people's education, training programs, CONA and so on, public education systems, so that the people who take the courses get the training and stay here. That is our biggest asset, when they stay here and are contributors to our economy by working here.

Mathematics is a very important course that every Administration should take, of course. We have seen some evidence of the mathematics in this Budget so far. In fact, we had a big pre-course, I would call it, a pre-math course, before we ever got to the Budget. I would call it the Gourley-Sullivan report, because it was a foundation course. Again, like most foundation courses, of course, as most people say with anything, what comes out depends on what you put in. I guess my concern here, Mr. Speaker, was that Mr. Gourley's report, shall we say, was suspect in many, many regards. What exactly was he instructed to look at? What are the credentials? What are the specifics of his report that he came back with and how reliable is his report? I think we have had several people - including a certain Mr. Mackenzie who did some work on behalf of the union movement in this Province - who pointed out some very good questions and concerns that would suggest that Professor Sullivan and Dr. Gourley might not necessarily have given us the full meal deal when it comes to this Budget here. Maybe we know a little bit about how to fudge figures to get the results that we want, but I give them an A+ so far for the preparation, the studying and the spin piece; not a problem. I give them an A+ on that but I give them a D on the content that came back from the Gourley-Sullivan report, I call it.

Now, another very important course that we have to keep an eye on in the next four years is anatomy. Of course, human anatomy is very, very important and this is one that, really, this Administration has to take note of. The question was raised of the Minister of Health and Community Services, for example, in Question Period here one day. The comment was made: Well, minister, we know you have a head for figures but do you have a heart for people? That is a pretty rough statement to make and only time will show, of course, if we have that. In our anatomy course it is definitely recommended that this Administration has to take this course, and we will be watching to see. For example, a hand, a part of the human body is not meant to slap people, to beat people about. Usually the hand is preferred if you hold it out to people to help them, and that is what we would like to see in this Province. That this Administration, and government, over the next four years use their hands to help people and not to swat people, not to dominate people.

The head, of course, a very important part of the body. Not only is it a container for the brain and some other vital organs of course, but it allows us to think. It allows us to listen and it allows us to communicate. If the Administration - who so far in this Budget have not listened to very many people, only outside of Dr. Gourley and Professor Sullivan. They have not listened to very many people so far. If that is going to go on over the next three or four years, I fear where we are going to be if you do not use your head to make sure that you learn all of the things you need to know. Listen to all of the different ideas that there are and come to a very rational, sensible approach, based upon much input. If you limit your input in the first place because you do not communicate with people, again, you are limited in what your options are and where you might want to go.

Now, the brain; the brain is another part of the anatomy that this Administration is going to learn all about, I am sure. Probably the single, most important bodily part. It requires oxygen, of course, but it does not necessarily be ‘oxferdized' shall we say. Any reasonable, commonsense brain will tend to get the task done if one has with that a good dose of hard work. But, a very important part of the brain - and I do not know if they have gotten into much work on it yet, but I am sure this Administration is going to be looked at to find it, and that is the conscience. Somewhere there has to be a conscience as part of the brain.

Again, in assessing the exam results, over the next four years the people are going to look at this government and see if you have taken anatomy, see if you have found that brain piece but, very importantly, see if you have found that conscience piece and the heart, of course. The heart is probably the most important part because it is the pump that keeps everything else alive and moving. You have to have a heart. Now, we have not seen much of that in this Budget either so far, seriously. I talked about, earlier on - I compared it to the cough medicine, Mr. Buckley; Dr. Buckley's cough medicine. Well, I said, they say it might taste horrible but it is good for you and my comment was: No, this was not either. This did taste horrible and this was definitely not good for you, this Budget. I stand by those words.

On the heart; the heart has a lot of things besides the pump. Again, I implore the members opposite, in your deliberations and when you get around to your future budgets - the heart also looks after, besides the physical pieces of the anatomy and functioning, there are things like the compassion issue, there are things like caring, there are things like humanity. These are all wrapped up in that piece of the heart, too. So, it is not only an anatomy course from a physical perspective, you have to look at it from the other perspectives that are wrapped up in these pieces. The individuals, the social and the political, all wrapped up there.

Of course, another very, very important course would be history. I will not even deal with the labour relations course today because so far, as everyone in this Province knows, this government did not take a labour relations course.

MR. SKINNER: (Inaudible).

MR. PARSONS: You did not, I say to the Member for St. John's Centre. They did not take a foundation course in labour relations. You have completely, as an Administration, and utterly flunked your first test on labour relations, as we saw here in this House last week with Bill 18. I say no further today on labour relations because that would require a twenty-minute speech in and of itself to deal with how this Administration has failed miserably. They did not even get an F grade on the issue of labour relations. Now that course, there is a lot of work required. I have assurance, of course, from some members opposite that they definitely intend to put that on their agenda as a course to take in the future.

One course that I also must avail of - it is very, very important - and that is history. Now, we have talked here about economics and statistics and labour relations and math and an anatomy course and so on, but history. It is very, very important to take a history course because they say if you do not know from whence you came, you have no idea of charting where you wish to go. So that is why it is very, very important, history. History not only teaches us of the good things that we did and the right things that we did, history also teaches us of the mistakes that we made. I say this not in a critical way, but in a very serious way. I feel that this Budget did not pay attention to that piece of history sufficiently enough to put us on the right course. I am not doubting the motivations of the government as to where they think we ought to go and yes, agree that we do need to make some very serious decisions, but I have serious reservations about whether it was thought out well enough before it was put together. It is like looking at the forest and the trees. This Budget is only one tree in the forest of all budgets. Some of the moves that I have seen here leave one to wonder, not if you had the commitment to try to get on the right track, but if you really thought out about when you get to the end of the track where you are going to be.

I think of moves, like the fees, for example. One hundred and fifty-three different fees in the Province have been increased. Everything from your birth certificate to your death certificate, and everything you can imagine in between, has been increased. I call it the nickel and dime approach, whereby you make sure that you are going to tee off every single Joe and Martha Chesterfield that exists in this Province, everyone of them, because you are going to impose a fee on them. Rather than take some more - I would say rational approach to raise the same amount of money, such as a minor increase in corporate taxes. It is great to say we need the money to do the things we need to do but it is how you do it.

It is not just simply a case of irritating Joe and Martha Chesterfield out there. It is the fact that - why would you go and put people through all of that misery if it was not necessary? We even have questions that I am still trying to get the answers to - I have to go to the Minister of Government Services, actually -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just to clue up. On that note of the fees, someone in my district asked me over the weekend - and I do not have the answer, I have to go to the minister on it. Apparently in the Province if you have a rubber tire vehicle like a car or a truck, a pickup or whatever, your fee has gone from $140 to $180. It is a $40 increase. This person calls me, who is in the construction industry, and says: I have oodles of equipment - but the rubber tire backhoe that he uses has gone up more than $40. He has gone from $140 to $200-and-something. I do not recall the exact figures now. That is the only piece of equipment, out of all the equipment that he owns in the construction industry, from excavators, rubber tired and otherwise - there is a rubber tire backhoe in this Province that has a fee increase that is not in-line with every other rubber tire vehicle in the Province. A very legitimate question. That is why I wonder - I am sure I will get the answer, and there is probably a very logical answer as to why backhoes have this difficulty attached.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I am partway through my assessment of the Administration. The Budget so far has only given us an A+ on one course that they have taken, and that was on the math one, particularly the preparation by Dr. Gourley and Professor Sullivan, but a D on the rest of the course.

I will continue my assessment of the details because there are oodles of stuff in this Budget that the people of this Province are just now beginning to get their head around, such as the teacher cuts and the cuts at CONA, and the massive layoffs that have occurred, and I will have opportunity, I am sure, ample opportunity over the next three or four days, to get into some of the details.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to make a few comments on this motion today, the amendment, not to belabour it for too long, but I actually started to make these comments a few days ago and I just wanted to conclude on some of them.

The Member for Burgeo & LaPoile made some good points. People will grade you and they will assess what you do over time. I guess the way he has broken it down into semesters, I think is the way he put it, that is fair enough. That is what people have to do. That is democracy, that is the country that we live in, but people also realize that what you face as a big picture is what we have to focus on. They have to realize that.

The statement has been made over and over, and I guess it will be worn out over time, that you did not get into the mess that we did overnight and you will not get out of it overnight. It happened over, to be fair, not just the last fourteen years of administration by this previous government but back through the years since we became a Province of Canada, I guess the argument could fly. Throughout time the mistakes have been made, and to this point - everybody can agree on this - this Province does not get from its natural resources, in other words revenue, what we need to run this Province properly.

Mr. Speaker, although we hear criticisms continuously, and constructive criticism, fair enough, we have done it for a number of years and you label the point, you make the best argument you can for where money should be spent, that is the Budget Debate. That is what it is all about, and as governments come and go the same arguments are there, that in this Province, with the population that we have and with the geography, there are challenges, but at the same time we all agree that with the resources that we have from our fishery to our forestry and mining offshore and so on, we should be doing better. Now, that is the argument that is consistent no matter if you are in Opposition or in government throughout the years time after time again.

As you hear the debate back and forth on the Budget, Mr. Speaker, and you hear the different arguments for where money should be spent, the bottom line is, if you walk around this Province or if you drive around this Province and talk to people throughout rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and in the rural district that I come from, people expect the basics. I have said it many times in this House, and I will continue to say it, no matter what side of the House I stand on. The basic infrastructures that we feel we deserve as people living throughout rural Newfoundland and Labrador, as in road work and simple, clean, drinking water, it seems like no matter what the argument, or what person you talk to throughout this Province, when you talk about infrastructure, those are the basics.

When you talk on the other side of social, it is education and health, the same points are always there continuously from the members who have stood here in this House over the years to debate the same issue. The fact of the matter is that people, no matter where you live in this Province, feel they deserve a decent road, decent drinking water, decent access to health and education. Those are the basics. That is where the argument always seem to come down. We can argue back and forth in this House, and people have gotten up, but the fact of the matter, Mr. Speaker, when you talk to people in general, they do not listen too much to the numbers. They do know the basic numbers, that this Province has a $12 billion debt. That is a fact. That is what we have to look at every day. That does not go away. Twelve billion dollars does not go away. The other fact is, there is interest paid on that debt. If I have the numbers right - the Minister of Finance is not here today - I think it is somewhere in the area of $500 million to $600 million dollars a year on interest.

So we are looking at a Province that basically, in the area of $4 billion, $4.2 billion to be exact, we spend annually in this Province to try to upgrade roads, get better drinking water, to help people's health care and education; we have a $4.2 billion budget. Right off the top, it is $500 million to $600 million interest on that long-term debt we have; at the same time, $870 million short this year in our accrued budget. Then, Mr. Speaker, we have to deal with the reality. Where do we spend that money? Who sits down and decides? Because the fact of the matter is, I would like to sit down, and I am sure any member in this House would, and say: Listen, this is exactly what I need for road work this year - and every member here could give their own story of their district and how desperately we need a good roads program.

I am trying to zero in on that particular one today because it relates to my department more directly than a lot of people stop to think about. Without a good roads program in this Province, tourism is suffering, and there are specific examples all over Province. You get the testimonies - I know I have gotten them in my district - where people with the RVs and families driving around the Province decide to go and look at - I remember one right off the bat - a new trail system in Harry's Harbour, in my district in Green Bay, a beautiful area of the Province, a magnificent trail. I have a number of those throughout the district, but this one in particular is a story at the Springdale Junction last year, when somebody stopped. They were about to go down that trail in their RV, and got to the road, gravel road sixteen kilometers - no way, they are not going there.

Mr. Speaker, that is a fact. That is what happens. I know that I have heard members from across the way explain some of the similar situations in their district. In fact, the roads and the basic infrastructure in this Province affect everything. Here we are trying to promote tourism and the fact of the matter is, out in rural Newfoundland and Labrador is our best kept secret, and everybody, long before I became the Minister of Tourism, had said it. Especially now I hear it over and over, because people around the world - as we are getting indicators, and I will be having some more information on that in the coming days, indicators of tourism in this Province picking up steadily in the last number of year.

I am going to finish the story that I started to tell the other day about some reaction we are getting from the Eastern Seaboard in the United States, and what they are looking for in tourism. We have it right here. More than ever, since 9-11, since the Iraq war, and all those things that we see worldwide that we think are far away from us, and not affecting us, they are, in fact, affecting us right here in this Province, and especially in tourism.

In a radio interview, and this is what I was talking about the last day before I was cut off for time, about three or four weeks ago now, myself and a representative from Maxxim Vacations had the opportunity, at a conference here in St. John's, to speak on live radio. It was supposed to be for ten minutes each, on Newfoundland and Labrador tourism, piped through a live radio feed into the Eastern Seaboard, mostly in the New York, Boston area. I do not know what the caption group was for that particular area, but I am sure that there is sort of like 40 million to 50 million in population in that particular area of the United States.

We had supposedly ten minutes each to speak on tourism in Newfoundland and Labrador. The conversation started off so well, Mr. Speaker, back and forth, I was really impressed by how much information, and how much the people at the radio stations in the Eastern Seaboard of the United States knew about this Province. One of the discussions that got started was 9-11 and how, in fact, people were treated when they came here, in Gander, in St. John's, on the West Coast and throughout the Province, and how the people of this Province made a name for themselves. Because really, the fact of the matter is, in that particular incident, people came to this Province who probably would not have come here. Now, of course, people say that word of mouth, and people talking, is one of the best ways of advertising your Province.

Mr. Speaker, on that particular day, instead of the ten minutes each, we were given half an hour. They extended it twice, so that we could get more time to speak to the broadcasters, and there were questions back and forth. The thing that was so dominant, that kept coming back time after time, was the fact, number one, of the people. Every single comment that came back, it was definitely the people and the hospitality and the uniqueness, the friendliness of the people of this Province.

Also, coupled with that, Mr. Speaker, was the fact that it is a place where it is safe, pristine, a simple life, and people treat you well. That is what they are looking for. There is no big secret to what people, and what the trends are in tourism throughout the world, throughout Canada, and throughout the United States. People are looking for a safe, simple, pristine place to go to, like the trail we talked about in Harry's Harbour. They are not looking for long lineups to get on the water slides and that. They do that in other parts of the world. That is Florida, and that will always be there. People in the trend, in the last two or three years or four years, are looking for a place that they can go in the world, that they feel safe, and that they feel welcomed and at home. They do not want big populations, real hot weather. We do not have hot weather, Mr. Speaker, but they are also learning that we have a decent summer, we gave decent falls and springs and, as a matter of fact, our tourism season for the winter is growing because of snowmobiling and skiing and so on.

We have it all here in one package. The thing is now, Mr. Speaker, and what I point to, in this particular point, is the $1 million that we added to the marketing budget in this Province this year. Just so that you know, from the Canadian Tourism Association, they gave us numbers that tell us that from every $1 spent in marketing, $10 is returned.

Mr. Speaker, we are still not up to the level of our biggest competitors, which are the other Atlantic Provinces, because that is the same type of market that they work into. Newfoundland and Labrador has been below in spending money on marketing. Mr. Speaker, this year, that commitment was made of $1 million, and I would hope that increased marketing and what we are doing in this Province will bring more and more people here. Last year 440,000 people visited, came into Newfoundland and Labrador from throughout Canada, throughout the United States and around the world. Basically, our population doubled. That is people coming in. They indicated this year - and I will have some specifics on it in the next couple of days - that we are going to see an increase this year in the number of people visiting the Province.

The other good news, Mr. Speaker, and something that I want to mention today, is that last year 15 per cent less people left Newfoundland and Labrador to go on holidays elsewhere. They stayed in our Province and vacationed here. That is what I urge all members and all people in the Province to do because there are people - even as late as this winter when I was on the Northern Peninsula. Somebody from the Avalon Peninsula saying it was the first time they had been to Plum Point; somebody saying they have never been up to the great Labrador before. What a vacation that is. So the potential is here, not just for people to come inside and enjoy tourism throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, but for people within the Province to go explore our own backyard, to see what we have in that beautiful White Bay, Green Bay area, in my own area, which I am always promoting. There is so much to offer there. Now there are tourism strategies coming out from around the Province. People are working together to try and bring together a good strategy so that we can develop, on the ground, our products so that when people come here they have the accommodations and so on. So, that is what we are looking towards.

There is not all negative in the Budget. Nobody ever mentions - and I do not expect that, Mr. Speaker, from Opposition members, especially. It is the same as myself at times, but the truth is - the fact is, we have committed that $1 million to marketing and tourism. It is going to mean increased tourism in this Province. That means increased investment. Mr. Speaker, what is really important is that affects rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Some 25,000 people in Newfoundland and Labrador work directly or indirectly with tourism. Some 2,400 businesses work directly or indirectly with tourism. So, the potential is there. Through indicators from the National Tourism Association, they believe there will be over 400,000 jobs created in the tourism industry throughout the country over the next decade. It is in the right direction. I have spoken to people who have some great ideas. What it is really doing is allowing Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to be creative, to look at what is around them in their backyards. What they never thought before was such a great thing, they realize now that it has tourism potential; that the simple things are the best things that work. People are coming to relax, feel safe and feel at home. There is no better place in the world than in Newfoundland and Labrador for that. So as we develop that strategy on the ground, but also develop our tourism marketing and expand on that, we are going to see improvements in the tourism industry in this Province.

Culture and heritage, Mr. Speaker, is the foundation to all of that. Although I know a negative could be taken from the fact that we have delayed the opening of The Rooms - which is what it is, it is a one-year delay. The fact of the matter is that by next year when we do open that, we will be ready. We will do it right. We will make sure that will be a part of this Province's culture and heritage, as it should be, and that it is an icon to this Province, that as years go by we will understand the importance of that facility to this Province. But for this particular year, and with the situation we are facing as a financial situation in this Province, it is a delay and no more than that. I believe it gives the people in the arts and culture and heritage community more input, and have more say on how they would finally open. I am willing to work with those groups. I have already met with a couple of the groups and I have certainly gotten lots of feedback through e-mails, telephone calls and letters about some suggestions of what we can do when we do finally set a date, which I hope will not be too far from now, Mr. Speaker, and move towards that time. As one artist said to me, really one year is a very short time in the life of culture and heritage. The fact is, we will move on. We will set a date. We will get to that point. We will consult and involve the communities in how they think this should move forward.

All of those are positives, Mr. Speaker. This is a department that will move forward and grow in this Province but we need to make sure we develop - as I said in the beginning - our infrastructure. The basic infrastructures of roads and water and sewer is important so that if we are going to have people come into the pristine environment of rural Newfoundland and Labrador, into the small communities that they want to see, than they have to have, at least, a decent road to drive over.

I have been talking to the Minister of Transportation, Mr. Speaker, and he knows, as well as we all know in this Province, and former ministers I have spoken with, it is a daunting task. The fact of the matter is, we have hundreds and hundreds of kilometres of gravel road still in the Province. Then, Mr. Speaker, what has made it worse - and this is not to place blame anywhere, because over a long period of time the fact of the matter is, there is still over 800 kilometers of gravel road in our Province in the year 2004. It is somewhere in the area - I do not have the latest number - of 1,500 to 1,600 kilometres of old paved roads. In others words, some of these old paved roads can be actually worse at times than gravel roads because they have been there for twenty, twenty-five years and they are deplorable. They have to be changed. Over time these have deteriorated. In my district, the La Scie highway, the Little Bay road, Fleur de Lys road, some of those paved roads are twenty to twenty-five years old. I know other members have identified in their areas similar problems, but this is a huge problem.

Although I am glad, Mr. Speaker, that this year we made the decision to add that money to the roads program to bring it to $30 million this year, that will help a little bit but it is nowhere near what we need. I am hoping that we are going to continue - I know I will make my points when I meet with my counterparts across Canada, and I am sure the Minister of Transportation is going to do it. I know the Minister of Municipal Affairs plans some meetings in Ottawa soon that we have to partnership with Ottawa to come up with a full extensive program that is going to address the roads program. What we are really doing now is just keeping it down. That is all we are doing. This year we would all like to go to our districts and say all of those bad roads are going to be done, but they all will not be done this year. That is the fact of the matter. We will try to get our fair share out of the small amount of money that is in the Budget, $30 million, but the truth is, we need somewhere in the area of $300 million, $400 million or $500 million to do a just job so that we have a decent infrastructure.

If there is anything, Mr. Speaker, as you go throughout this Province - and I know all members know this. When they see a new bit of pavement going down after driving over such a terrible road, especially bus drivers and children going back and forth to school, there is nothing more welcome when they see that blacktop coming down and they can have a decent drive back and forth to their communities and they can welcome visitors to their communities.

Mr. Speaker, that is important, and it is directly related to the Budget. It is directly related to infrastructure related to tourism because it goes hand in hand. If we are going to see those increases in numbers - and I really believe we are going to see it this year and we are going to continue to see it for years to come. I think we are just beginning to break through into tourism and really scratch the surface. As we see an increase in people coming into this Province with their RVs, with their families and their vehicles, and they want to go down through small town rural Newfoundland and Labrador and see what we are really all about - because that is what they are saying. They want to come and go out to those small communities among the people and see what it is like on the coastal areas of our Province. They are not going to go down there if there is twenty or thirty or fifteen kilometres of gravel road or old pavement. Mr. Speaker, that is what we are going to work towards. It is a part of a plan.

Just to conclude with this, Mr. Speaker, as we look at the budgetary process and what we have done this year - and that was the theme I started with - that this is the big picture. It is not something just to get us through April month of every year. That is what I have always complained about, that we struggle through every year, through April month to the end of the fiscal year and then we can see what we push out there to put out the fires. What we would like to see, Mr. Speaker, and I have always said, a long-term plan, multiple years so that people in this Province know that in year two, year three and year four we are going to see improvements. That is how you see improvements. Nobody expected any government to take over, no matter what political stripe, to say that after six months it is all going to happen. It is not. We have to deal with fiscal restraint and then we have to move on.

This is the prong, Mr. Speaker, the second prong that I am talking about since I have stood here today. The second prong is growing this economy, and one of those avenues is in tourism. It is a bright spot for this Province. It is something where we have a lot of work to do still, but we have the product. We have to develop it and make sure that people come here. I think the timing is perfect for it. It could not be better, and remember what happens.

The Northern Peninsula was an example, when I was up there, Rocky Harbour. As that developed and tourism developed, then private investment started and people started to believe that there was not such a high risk to invest in tourism opportunities. So then we get the private sector involved and we work hand in hand. That is how it is going to work. When you see the number of RVs and people, the strange licence plates driving through small communities, Mr. Speaker, and stop at the restaurants or stop at the bed and breakfasts or camp or whatever they plan to do, they are spending money in this Province and that is important for all of us because that means more money for roads and more money for water and sewer. It is all interconnected but it is connected with the plan that we have to move forward with in year two and three and four and onward after that, Mr. Speaker.

That is the point, connect it all together. Look at the long-term approach. Hopefully, we will see increased numbers in tourism this year. Our indicators are certainly showing that. I guess we will not know until the end of the summer what the real numbers are but I am hoping that as we go throughout the summer we can update the Province and we can see those increases which means dollars in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, these are just some comments about tourism related to infrastructure, which I think is an important part of this debate.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I must say that we have spent a lot of time on this horrendous Budget since it was brought down by our Finance Minister and the President of Treasury Board, and I am no more convinced today to vote for that Budget than I was when he brought it down.

In fact, it was very interesting when the Minister of Finance, the President of Treasury Board, was interviewed from Confederation Building, right outside here, and that was done by Lynn Burry from NTV. She said: Mr. Sullivan, this is your first budget. I guess you would rather be delivering a different budget to the Province. The Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board answered: No, not really. In other words, he was satisfied and happy to deliver the Budget that he brought down to the people. I suppose you could verify that by what he started off with in his Budget.

It was interesting that the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile, the official Opposition House Leader, was making an analogy of the record of the new government as compared to semesters in taking an educational course or a degree. He talked about the anatomy and how this government should have heart and they haven't shown it, and it is clear in the first page of their Budget book. The first thing they wanted to do was balance the budget on a cash basis. Now, the Minister of Finance raved and ranted about cash and accrual. You will never hear that man talk about accrual basis budgeting as long as he is in that chair as the Finance Minister, supposing it is only a few days or a few years. You will never hear that man talk about accrual accounting again.

What he should have said first, which he never, he said last, was: To ensure that our health and education systems meet the needs of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and are sustainable into the future. He looked at that as being the last thing on his mind and the last thing on the minds of the government, the new government we have here.

His first item was to balance the budget and he didn't care how he did it, as long as he balanced the budget. The second was to expand the economy and create jobs. Well now, that is a big mystery, because there was nothing in that Budget about expanding the economy or creating jobs. It was all about saddling the ordinary man and woman on the street with new fees. They talked about no new taxes. Well, if fees are not taxes, what are they? Now, what was there about creating jobs? Zero. Not one thing.

It is a funny thing how people get conned sometimes. This wonderful book here called the Tory Blueprint, that was supposed to be the bible, that no matter what they said they were going to live up to that Blue Book. Well, so far it has been nothing short of propaganda and broken promises. That is all that came out of that Blue Book. Today, there was a classic example. Day after day in this House, all we hear about is broken promises to the people of this Province. The Minister of Education admitted today that he is asking the College of the North Atlantic and Memorial University to go back and take $2 million out of their operating budget. He actually cut $2 million out of their operating budget. It was nothing but broken promises, because right in his Tory Blue Book he, and part of his team, said that they would make sure that there was enough money with the College of the North Atlantic and Memorial University, they would cover not only operating costs but increased operating costs. That word is particularly important: cover increased operating costs at Memorial University and the College of the North Atlantic, so they can freeze tuition fees and maintain the current level and quality of programs. Well, now, if that is not an outright broken promise, I do not know what is. That is an outright broken promise. It is a betrayal.

As I said today, the first indication that people of this Province got from this government that they had no interest in education was that our Premier, today, was a no-show Premier, a no-show PC leader who had no interest in education. In fact, he did not show up at Memorial University, as did the other leaders, to debate education matters. He had no interest, and that was clear enough because in the first 100 days of being elected, he and his ministers, the Minister of Education, decided that they had no interest in post-secondary students. The first thing they did was dismantle the Department of the Youth and Post-Secondary Education. That was their first item. Then, after a mass of student protests, they said: Okay, we will continue the tuition freeze for this year - but they did not go beyond that. In the same breath, they said: College of the North Atlantic and Memorial University, that tuition freeze that you got there, go find it in your operating expenses and your operating budget.

You know very well that when you have to find $2 million, you just do not find it underneath a rock. So, what that amounted to was, on Friday or Thursday afternoon, the President of the College of the North Atlantic announced thirty-five job cuts, seventeen of those being professional instructors and eighteen being support staff. Of course, she said, her own self, in being interviewed by The Telegram: Yes, the days could be numbered. In ten years' time it will likely become smaller and probably even more centralized. She said the move was necessary, after government reduced the college's operating grant by $2 million this year. She said it in her own words. They were tasked with the orders, I guess, to go and find $2 million in operating expenses. Do you know something? We, as the former administration, last year, provided an income tax credit for students paying on the Newfoundland and Labrador portion of their student loan. This government, the new government, has come out and cancelled that. This was a brand new incentive that the Canadian Federation of Students right across this country rallied around and said: Gee, what a novel idea, this is a good move. It appears on your income tax for this year. Everybody has completed their income tax as of April 30 of this year. There was a tax cut on your income tax this year, but don't look for it next year because this new government has already axed that one. It won't happen.

This same new government decided they would go out and consolidate school boards. Absolutely no consultation whatsoever! They decided, whether it was a one-man show or a complete Cabinet - who knows - that they would go out and consolidate school boards. They talked to nobody, they just decided to swing the axe. They used no rationalization whatsoever, because if they did Grand Falls-Windsor would be the headquarters for that new school board. I don't think the Minister of Education can look me straight in the eye and deny that. We have the most modern facility, we have almost a brand new school, a brick school, one story completely accessible, and there was a quarter of a million dollars spent on it in upgrades. There is no rent to pay. We are completely wired for computer training, for professional development of our teachers in the area, and we are absolutely in the middle of the whole entire district, from Baie Verte right out to Carmanville.

If you look at the geography alone, we are already responsible for forty-five of the seventy-five schools that are within those two districts. Now, can you tell me the rationalization when they chose Gander over Grand Falls-Windsor? There is none. There is an elected school board that they are going to toss out the window, who were democratically elected. They have no say. They must get out and make way for an appointed Board of Directors.

Now, if this is the way this new government is going to operate, who can believe them, when they have no evidence to support any of the measures that they are taking, no evidence whatsoever? Absolutely no evidence! When you think about how this government fabricated a financial report - that has been the only successful thing they have been able to do, the greatest con job in all of history, to fabricate the finances of this Province, to achieve their agenda of going to the public service, knowing that the public service had a contract expiring March 31, sit on the issues that they wanted done, not make a move, put the whole public service out for almost a month without a salary, they were going back without any increase, and put the Province in ransom, all from a fabricated con job of a report.

I remember quite well when these same people were sitting in the Opposition. I remember their leader at that time was Lynn Verge, many years ago, and Lynn Verge was making a comment about former Premier Brian Tobin. She was saying: Brian Tobin, all fluff and no stuff. That is what she said. Now, what would you call this new Premier, who was on a growing the economy agenda, when he puts out a new Budget book and there is zero information in there about growing the economy? Do you know, he got away with that? He got away with that. This was supposed to be the bible of all bibles for the Tories. Everything they are going to do is in this book and we can see, day after day, there is nothing but betrayal and broken promises by this government.

He came out and conned the public by giving out false information, and so far there is absolutely no way, or nothing in this Budget that talks about growing the economy. I did hear him say on Friday that he is going to move to the second prong. He is definitely moving to the second prong. The heat of the first prong has him sizzling. You ask anyone around this Province today what they think of this new government, and the failing grade that my colleague, the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile, talked about, is clear, no matter where I go all over this Province, and I have said that many times.

This is a Premier who is going to have his own Department of Business, his very own Department of Business. He cannot operated from the eighth floor in the Confederation Building. He has to have an office in Ottawa. That office is Ottawa is going to cost $350,000.

MS FOOTE: (Inaudible) have one in Europe by the time he gets back.

MS THISTLE: Yes, he might have one in Berlin. You never know, by the time he gets back, but he is going to have one in Ottawa at a starting cost of $350,000 a year.

Now, (inaudible) this Premier decides to appoint a deputy minister, and most recently, as late as this weekend, he had this flashy ad in The Telegram about looking for a couple of new deputy ministers, mind you. Now, that is new. Who wrote the ad for that newspaper article? It certainly was not the Public Service Commission, because if you have been looking at ads that have been coming out of the Public Service Commission they are pretty, pretty tight and pretty straightlaced and almost like a script, but this was a different ad. So, I would suspect that this ad came out of the Premier's office.

AN HON. MEMBER: It grabbed your attention.

MS THISTLE: Don't worry, I am not intending to apply for it. I am not intending to apply for that job, I would say to the Member for Trinity North. I am happy serving the people of Grand Falls-Buchans.

Anyway, this Premier decides sometimes he will appoint a deputy minister and sometimes he will actually let somebody apply for that post. Now, he is looking for a couple of deputy ministers out there now: one for his new Department of Business, his own Department of Business, and he is looking for an information officer. All of these people, he must be waiting for them to tell him how to grow the economy. That is what he is doing. He is waiting for them, because it sure is not in this Budget book. He has taken the heat ever since January 5, I would venture to say. He has taken the heat for all of his bad moves that he has made. He has infuriated people around the Province, and he is talking about growing the economy.

Well, I think he should look and see who his speech writer was for the Economy book that he put out in the fall, because that is nothing but proper rubbish. He is talking about growing the economy and then he is saying, he is predicting out-migration. Now, how can you do both? How can you grow the economy and predict out-migration? Well, I tell you, that is not a very good message for the Premier, an expert in business, trying to send out to the people who might be interested in doing business here.

Then he came out and said, we are going to put our office in Ottawa - but this is a tight Budget. Then you had the Member for Windsor-Springdale scrambling around like a scald cat trying to substantiate what the Minister of Health said. We did not have enough money to build a cancer clinic in Grand Falls-Windsor, according to this new government. I think it was telling, when Linda Swain opened up her Open Line show this morning and that was one of the items that she talked about. She is relieving Bill Rowe this week, and one of the items that she talked about was - she did a marvelous job on Friday, a marvelous job, for the Mother's Day radiothon. I have to complement Linda Swain and VOCM. They raised $40,000 for equipment for the Grand Falls-Windsor hospital for lung treatment and lung diagnosis. When you think about, in this Province, we just came off almost a thirty-day public sector strike, and people were able to pick up the telephone and call in, during four hours on Friday morning, and pledge up to $40,000 in donations for this worthy project.

What does that tell you about the people of Newfoundland and Labrador? They have the biggest hearts of all. I think this government should sit up and take notice, what people are able to do of their own will. Here we did not have enough money, so-called, to finance the hospital, the cancer clinic in Grand Falls-Windsor. I tell you, it was heartbreaking last week when I turned on NTV and I saw the sign being taken down, that there was no longer going to be a commitment by this government. Of course, in blue spray paint, was: The PC government cancelled this project. How true it is, the PC government cancelled this project.

Yet, you can take $350,000 and you can put an office in Ottawa, you can put a deputy minister over in the Multi-Materials Stewardship Board, you can pay him $130,000 a year, when you were only paying a volunteer $10,000 a year to run that project, and now you are out looking for executives to run the new Department of Business that the Premier has absolutely no idea how he is going to grow the economy of this Province.

His only idea to grow the economy of this Province is to inflict pain on ordinary people by raising fees, up to 153 fees, that ordinary people are going to have to pay extra in this Province. When it comes to new ideas, he has none. Now, that is a big shocker, to take a man who is supposed to be an expert in business - and so he was, I give him full marks - but he has no idea on how to grow the economy of this Province. No idea.

As was said, and I said it here last week, according to the Member for Windsor-Springdale, he confirms the PCs commitment to hospital redevelopment. Now, by golly, I would like to know what he did confirm. All I know is that there was a big scrabble for damage control.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MS THISTLE: My time has expired?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: No leave.

MS THISTLE: No leave?

I started -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MS THISTLE: I have one minute left.

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

Everyone has twenty minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I want to move Motion 6, To Move pursuant to Standing Order 11 that the House not adjourn at 5:30 today, and further, Mr. Speaker, Motion 7, that the House not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. tonight.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

It is moved and seconded that House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on today, Monday, May 10.

All those in favour?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: Against?

Carried.

It is further moved that the House not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. today being Monday.

All those in favour?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: Those against?

Motion carried.

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

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to advise you that I copied down the time. I looked at the clock and it was 3:57 when I started and you asked me to take my seat at 4:16. By my record, I had one minute left.

MR. SPEAKER: I say to the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans, that, in fact, she had started to speak before I started the stopwatch here, and she was speaking for twenty minutes and ten seconds according to the watch that we keep the record of time with here.

The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I was going to rise, actually, on a point of order during the few comments made by the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans, but I decided, not to take from her time, that I would wait and just speak for a couple of moments, because I know there are other members who wish to participate in this particular debate.

I have heard now, on several occasions, the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans make reference to the fact that the transitional committees that we have put in place are appointed members. Mr. Speaker, it is important that we recognize something and distinguish a point that is made repeatedly by the member opposite. Yes, they are appointed members, but they are largely made up of duly elected members of present school boards. Even though, Mr. Speaker, it is true that our transitional committees are appointed committees, and they are there primarily to afford a smooth transition from the total number of eleven boards to what is being recommended to five, it is important to reiterate the fact that they are not simply appointed members, people who have no experience and have no connection or relationship with the education system. The vast majority of members who we have appointed for all three new boards, Mr. Speaker, the Eastern School Board, the Central School Board and the Western School Board, by and large, come from the present day duly elected school boards, and it is important that we remember that.

I have listened now, on several occasions, to the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans stand in this House and say to the people of the Province, that is not the case. I could have stood again on a point of order and drawn reference for clarification and to correct that point. It is important, Mr. Speaker, that the people of the Province clearly understand and not accept the information that continually is being repeated by the member opposite, which is simply incorrect. The vast majority of the members of our transitional boards, of our three newly dedicated boards, in the Province, come from the membership of the duly-elected representatives who now sit on school boards.

Mr. Speaker, the announcement that was made several weeks ago makes it perfectly clear that we have eleven boards being reduced to five. There is no change to the Labrador School Board and there is no change to the Francophone School Board. The other nine boards, which, by and large, are the Island Boards with the acceptance of a portion of Southern Labrador, are emerging and consolidating to three boards. The Eastern Board, the Eastern Newfoundland School Board, is a merger of what are now four existing boards: Avalon East, Avalon West, the Vista School Board and the Burin Board. The new Central Newfoundland Board is a merger or consolidation of the two Central Newfoundland school boards that are presently housed in both Grand Falls-Windsor and Gander. The new Western Newfoundland School Board is a merger of the Cormack School Board, which is based in Stephenville, the Western Newfoundland School Board that is now based in Corner Brook, and the Great Northern Peninsula School Board, which presently has a head office in Lower Cove on the Great Northern Peninsula. So it is a merger or a consolidation.

Again, the purpose of my speaking now for a few moments on this point is to once again emphasize the fact - because it is repeated by the member for Grand Falls-Buchans and it is simply incorrect information - it is too emphasize the fact that our newly appointed, recently appointed, transitional committees, which, in effect, will become school boards in due course, and I will speak to that in a moment, that our recently appointed transitional committees are made up, the majority of this membership, from present day duly-elected school board membership. For the member opposite to repeat, on a regular basis, that is not the case, is simply not the case, and it warrants correction and clarification.

On the point of our new school boards, for the purpose of interest - this may be of interest to the public - it is important to recognize a few facts and a few dates. The transitional committee will, in effect, become the new school board as of September 1, 2004, and the present day duly-elected school board will cease to operate as a legal entity as of August 31, 2004. There will be a period of time - and, again, this is for transition purposes - when the newly appointed or recently appointed boards that will become, from a legal point of view, the new school board as of September 1, will remain the school board until we revert, once again, to the normal election process which will coincide with municipal elections throughout Newfoundland and Labrador in September of 2005. So, there is a period of approximately twelve months when the transitional school boards, in effect, will become the new school board and will remain as such until the elections are held in 2005.

Mr. Speaker, I want to state something that I feel is important, that we should keep saying, and members on both sides of the House should keep repeating the point I am about to make. We are talking, by and large, of volunteers, Mr. Speaker, whether they are on the present day school board or whether they are on the transitional committee. We are talking about a group of individuals, dedicated men and women throughout our Province, who are prepared to commit their time and their energy and their effort to education in our Province. When we, as politicians, have an opportunity to make reference to this, we should do it. We should always do it, and that is pay tribute to the many volunteers. In this case, it is education, it could be health or, indeed, it could be many other government agencies or boards. We have to recognize the good work, the devotion and the dedication of so many volunteers throughout the Province who are willing, on a very voluntary basis, obviously, to give us their time and their energy in a particular interest and area.

It is an opportunity for me, as the Minister of Education, to state publicly that we truly appreciate the good work of our volunteers who presently sit on school boards throughout the Province, many of whom will no longer be on school boards once the August 31 date arrives. This spirit of volunteerism and commitment and conviction and devotion will continue by representatives of the recently appointed transitional committees, and, as I just indicated, they will continue to act as the new school board members once September 1 rolls around.

It is an opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to recognize the good work, in this case, of people committed and devoted to education, either by their position on present school boards as duly-elected school board members or, in most cases, those same individuals who have agreed, on a voluntary basis, to, once again, show their interest, demonstrate their interest, to education in our Province, and are prepared to sit on our transitional committees. For what, Mr. Speaker? For this reason: because they are truly dedicated to the welfare and the interests of our young Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who are attending schools either at the Kindergarten level or up to Level III. They are committed to that and I think it is important, Mr. Speaker, that we recognize that particular reference.

With those few comments, I understand the member opposite wishes to speak.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to take my time to speak to the Budget, obviously a Budget that, from the people I have spoken with, has not gone down very well throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. I think one of the issues associated with this Budget is the whole issue around employment opportunities, or the lack of, as a result of this Budget.

Of course, we know in Newfoundland and Labrador that employment means everything to the people of our Province. It does not matter, when you talk to people, whether they are not feeling well or whether they wish they had something else to do. It all goes back to having that job, having that opportunity to work. We all know that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, if there is anything that they want, they want that job. It is funny, when people are employed, they have a totally different outlook on life. They think positively about everything. The fact that they are able to provide for their families, the fact that they can get up in the morning and go to work, the fact that they know they have the security of a job, it makes all the difference in the world to them. That is why I feel so sad by this Budget because I really think it takes away that positive attitude, that opportunity, for people in Newfoundland and Labrador to actually be gainfully employed. There are a number of issues within the Budget that point to that and to that outcome.

Interestingly enough, I read the stats from Statistics Canada which said that in April we saw 4,000 fewer jobs in Newfoundland and Labrador. That, for me, was really telling. Again, I go back to the Budget because if you look at what has happened in Newfoundland and Labrador for the past two years there has been a trend, Mr. Speaker, and that trend has seen more people being gainfully employed. In fact, it has been such a positive trend that we were really hopeful that we would see this continuing for some time to come. Unfortunately, what we are seeing now, in April, is 4,000 fewer jobs in the Province. I really, sincerely, believe that a lot of that has to do with this Budget and the implications for some of the decisions that have been taken by the present government.

We also need to look at what has happened with post-secondary institutions in the Province and the impact that will have on employment opportunities. Again, when we think of our young people who are going to post-secondary institutions, whether it is to the University or maybe to the College of the North Atlantic in their various campuses - there are eighteen of them throughout Newfoundland and Labrador - these students want to be able to stay in Newfoundland and Labrador and work. Unfortunately, what we are seeing happening in this Province as a result of the Budget is that opportunity may very well not be there for them. In fact, it may very likely not be there for them.

We talk about the College of the North Atlantic and what the President had to say over the weekend, what she was quoted in the newspaper as saying. The fact of the matter is, the College of the North Atlantic has been asked to trim $2 million from its budget. How they can do that and still continue to offer that quality programing, that variety of courses that are so badly needed, is a question, I think, for all of us. Clearly they are not going to be able to do it. The irony in all of this, of course, is that we have a government telling our post-secondary institutions, and in this case CONA, that they have to cut their budget by $2 million. At the same time we have the Parliamentary Secretary, the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne, who, as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Education, talked about the fact that there is a looming skill shortage in the Province. Now, how you can say on the one hand that you need to take $2 million out of the College of the North Atlantic and on the other hand say we have a looming skill shortage in the Province without taking to the powers that be at the College and say: How are we going to respond to this looming skill shortage? is beyond me. We have one person saying one thing and another person saying another thing.

If we have a looming skill shortage in this Province, and I do not doubt that we do. I remember when I was the Minister of Education, it was something that was front and centre for us and we talked to the College and the University about how best to respond to this skill shortage, but you cannot expect post-secondary institutions to trim their budgets by $2 million and still be able to respond positively to the fact that we have to find a way to ensure that our young people get the training necessary to respond to any job opportunities that may be there.

If you have a skill shortage, then you must find a way of providing that training for our young people, and we want them to stay in Newfoundland and Labrador. I thought that is what all of this was about, growing the economy, making sure that our young people had employment opportunities in the Province where they want to live and work. That clearly is not going to be the case for a lot of our post-secondary students. In fact, if you read what the President of the College had to say when she talked about having to reduce the Budget by $2 million. "This is a difficult and painful undertaking," said College President Pamela Walsh. "However, in making these reductions we tried very hard to minimize the effects on our employees, our current and prospective students, and the areas of the province we serve."

Now, that is asking someone to look at doing something that they do not want to have to do because they know full well that the repercussions of doing that are going to be serious on Newfoundland and Labrador and on Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. Employment opportunities, again it goes back to that job. I go back to the Budget, and I sincerely believe that this Budget will mean fewer job opportunities for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

I have to refer again to the capital projects that have been cancelled, the capital projects that have been deferred. I look at the one in the District of Grand Bank, in Grand Bank in particular, the new health care facility that has been cancelled. In fact, the tender has now gone out to remove the steel, and not only to remove the steel but to bury the foundation work, so that it will never again be able to be looked at without costing an inordinate amount of money. There is $3 million gone into that facility, and it is gone, it will never again be resurrected by this government, obviously, but it will make it even more difficult for any other government to do.

With that project, in addition to a badly needed health care facility, there were going to be employment opportunities. There were so many people in that area who looked forward to having an opportunity to go to work on that new facility. Their dreams have been dashed, their hopes have been dashed. They sincerely thought that there was going to be an opportunity for them to go to work on that new health care facility, and not just the one in Grand Bank but the one in Grand Falls-Buchans as well, or in Grand Falls, in the District of Grand Falls-Buchans.

Again, that facility was badly needed, and when you ask why it was cancelled, you hear from the Premier it was cancelled because they didn't know the state of the Province's finances, that when he made the promise, when the promise was made to build that facility, it was made without the full knowledge of how bad the Province's financial position was. I don't understand, to this day, how you could commit to a $17.5 million facility without qualifying that commitment, without saying, well, it depends on what the Province's books are like or it depends on if the facility is needed.

I know the thorough analysis that went into that. I know all of the stakeholders involved who looked at the need and determined that, yes, it was necessary. On the one hand we have the Premier saying: We didn't know the state of the Province's finances were so bad. On the other hand, we have the Minister of Health and Community Services putting out a press release on the day of the Budget saying: Well, we have determined that there is enough capacity in the area, so we don't need to build it. The fact of the matter is, there were no additional beds going into this facility, so it had nothing to do with capacity. In fact, there were fewer beds going to be in the facility in Grand Bank. There were going to be sixty beds.

At one time the Blue Crest Seniors Home in Grand Bank had over 100 beds. So, it has nothing to do with the fact that there is enough capacity within the area. Who knows what the real reason is? Of course, I have my reasons, I have my beliefs about what the real reason was for the cancellation. Having said that, it has been determined that it is a no go.

Interestingly enough, I had a call today to tell me that, just as the sign in Grand Falls was spray-painted with, PCs cancelled, the sign in Grand Bank, I am now told, has been spray-painted with, PCs said no. I can tell you, we have a very disappointed group of people in the Grand Bank-Fortune area, people who really, again, were relying on this facility. One, because bringing with it were going to be a lot of employment opportunities for the people in the area; but, as well, it was a facility that was badly needed for our senior citizens, an opportunity for a pilot project for our Alzheimer's patients and, as well, of course, a replacement of a very old, dilapidated cottage hospital which now serves as the clinic in Grand Bank.

Employment opportunities, again, I repeat, the Budget has done a job of any employment opportunities that would have come from capital projects that have been cancelled and deferred. Employment opportunities for our post-secondary students have been lost as a result of this Budget. Then we look at The Rooms, and talk about the deferral of capital projects. Well, thank heavens that The Rooms is completed. Thank heavens that it was not at a stage where it could be cancelled or deferred by this government. As it is, the opening of The Rooms has been put on hold for a year. Now, what a message that is going to send. You have tourists coming here, in the summertime, wanting to go and look at The Rooms, seeing this wonderful structure on the horizon and wondering what it is, and when you try to explain to them what it is and they want to visit it, you cannot go because they deferred opening it for one year.

It is sad to think that so much time and effort went into this particular facility. There were so many people excited about their prospects as a result of this facility. I remember reading Russell Wangersky's article, "Artless budget a big mistake". He said, "We get an opportunity to sell the nation on the wealth of our culture - a truly powerful and unique resource - and instead, we close the shop for what could be one of the most important years in the arts in recent memory." He said, the fact, "That the arts community here is on a roll should be no surprise to anyone: Newfoundland and Labrador writers, for example, have definitely caught the attention of mainland critics and publishers."

In fact, we have such a wealth of artists in this Province, and the work that they do is outstanding, and the opportunity to display that, the opportunity to showcase it to the world - because we know, as the Minister of Tourism and Culture said, our tourists come from all over the world. We have such a splendid product here, just in Newfoundland and Labrador, in being who we are and what we are, that they really want to come and see what we have to offer. We have so much to offer. Unfortunately, because of this silly decision, and I have to call it silly, Mr. Speaker, not to proceed with opening The Rooms for a year, it is going to be another Newfie joke. I ask again, why anyone would think it was a right thing to do?

Of course, the other capital project that was, in this case, cancelled, was the exhibition centre in Corner Brook. I have heard the students at Sir Wilfred Grenfell College out there, in particular the art students, decry the fact that it will no longer exist. I know that, during the strike, there were those who built a shelter out there that they called the new exhibition centre. Again, talk about employment opportunities lost as a result of this Budget, the students at Sir Wilfred Grenfell College, and particularly the arts students, were looking forward to the exhibition centre. Young students were looking for an opportunity to showcase their work. To get their work showcased in the Province is very difficult when you are starting out, and, all of a sudden, there was going to be an opportunity for them. Just as there was going to be an opportunity in The Rooms for our established artists and for those to showcase their talent, the same is going to be the case for the students at Sir Wilfred Grenfell College in Corner Brook. I understand where they are coming from. My daughter is an artist. To be able to get that opportunity to showcase your work, to show what you have to offer and, all of a sudden, that opportunity has been lost. Of course, another opportunity that has been lost to those artists is being able to sell their work through the Art Procurement Program, and that has been cancelled for this year. Yet another opportunity for artists established, and young artists, to be able to put their work forward and to have someone look at it and say, yes, we would like to buy that. We think that you are an up-and-coming artist, if it is a new young artist, and we would like an opportunity to display your work in the government's Art Procurement Program. Again, it is a lost opportunity as a result of this Budget.

In a Letter to the Editor today, I thought it was really interesting, it says, "Arts contribute to community's health." The writer says, "Art is not a superfluous sector in our society. Art reflects and shapes our everyday lives. Through art we develop our identity and our intellect as individuals and as a community." That is all we need to say about the need to continue to support the arts in our community, the need to continue to support our culture, the need to have opened The Rooms on time, the need to continue with the exhibition centre in Corner Brook. I think that one statement says it all.

Then we look at the Budget and look at all of the fee increases. I think of the seniors in Newfoundland and Labrador because we have an aging population. I could not believe it when I saw the fee increases to use an ambulance, because we all know that while you are in your younger years your health is relatively good, but when you become a senior citizen your need to access an ambulance becomes that much greater. To have ambulance fees go up in the magnitude that they did speaks volumes again of this government's understanding of where our people are, what their abilities are in terms of their ability to pay. They obviously are lacking that compassion for the low income person and they are lacking that compassion for senior citizens. It is not only the fee for the ambulance that has gone up, but also if your doctor determines you need a medical escort then that has gone up as well. The cost of taking an ambulance has gone up significantly. I think we all know that if you are not feeling well, the last thing you need to worry about is whether or not you can afford the service that you desperately need. Whether it is an ambulance, whether it is the medication, it does not matter. When you are sick, you do not need to be confronted with other worries.

I think of Alzheimer's patients -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There are far too many private conversations going on by members to my left. I would ask members, if they need to engage in such conversation, if they would take it outside the Chamber. The Chair is having great difficulty hearing the Member for Grand Bank.

The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can appreciate that you were having difficulty. I was having difficulty hearing myself, not that I particularly wanted to hear myself, but you are right. With the number of conversations going on across the way, you sometimes wonder if you are talking to anyone. At a time like this, thank heavens for the listening audience at home.

At the end of the day, I go back again to talking about the fee increases and how much they are hurting the most vulnerable in our society. I go back to our seniors, and the fact that whether or not they can avail of badly needed services depends on their budgets; and we know, of course, our seniors are on fixed incomes. We think about those who are low income, the people in our Province, but at the same time we have to think about the fact that not only can they not afford in some cases to take an ambulance if they need one, I heard people say: Well, instead of getting an ambulance I will just call up my neighbour and get them to take me. Now, that might not always be the way to go. In fact, if you are seriously ill you may need the paramedic, you may need that medical escort there with you. So, by calling your neighbour to take you to the hospital you could in fact be endangering your life. That is what this Budget has done to people. That is what this Budget has done to senior citizens.

I think of people who are Alzheimer's patients and the fact that there is a drug available to them that could make such a difference, not only in the life of the patient, but as well for their families. This government has said no. A commitment was given by the previous government to fund this drug and this government has said no.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, it is too late to implore upon this government of the need to do things like fund Alzheimer's drugs, but when you look at all the fee increases -

MR. SPEAKER: Does the Member for Grand Bank have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

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

MS FOOTE: Thank you.

Again, it is sad when we have people who are put in situations where they have no recourse but to sometimes take decisions that are going to be harmful to them as a result of the decisions taken in this Budget.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today just to make a few comments on the Budget. Of course we heard a lot of comments made lately on it and the importance of the Budget and the speeches themselves.

Mr. Speaker, we heard a lot from the members opposite on the deficit, the huge deficit that we have in this Province today. Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt, we do have a financial problem. We always differ whereby how great or to what degree do we have a financial problem? We have members opposite saying that the sky is falling, everything is bad, everything is gone. We have to take this crucial stand right now. If we do not take this crucial stand than our children and our grandchildren are going to have to pay, or we cannot provide the services. Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if we are at that degree, and I am pretty confident that we are not at that degree.

Mr. Speaker, we have to look back at the history of some of the deficit. I think it was my colleague, the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile, who spoke about the history and why history is important when it comes to government, government spending, and the current situation that we now find ourselves in. I will go back to 1989, when I was first elected in the District of the Bay of Islands. I will just give a little bit of history of the Bay of Islands under eighteen years of Tory rule. In 1989, from the lower part of Mount Moriah out to Lark Harbour, there was not one house, not one house, that had water and sewer. If you go on the North Shore of the Bay of Islands, which is approximately one-third of the district, less than 5 per cent had water and sewer in 1989. When I used to go out and tell the people in Corner Brook and tell the people in government about the situation in the Bay of Islands, I was laughed at. No one believed it. In that day and age in the Bay of Islands, part of which is connected to Corner Brook, that people never had water and sewer, the basic need for individuals.

There were a lot of funds spent at the time in the Bay of Islands and I make no apologies for it. I make absolutely no apologies for the money that was spent in the Bay of Islands for the water and sewer services, Mr. Speaker, and I will explain to you why. In the Bay of Island there are three fish plants. At the time, one had a proper water system in Curling. There was a second plant in Benoit's Cove and there was another plant in Cox's Cove. The Bay of Island itself is a bit of a unique fishery where its many needs depend upon the pelagic, which is the caplin, herring and the mackerel. At the time, when the former government was in, the PC government - and I know there are two members opposite who were in that government at the time. All we hear about the Bay of Islands is that we have to increase the fisheries. That is the way of the future, to increase productivity in the fishery. Well, Mr. Speaker, there is just one problem. When you go out and get fish and you want to produce fish but you do not have the proper infrastructure - and in this case a proper water system - you cannot produce fish. You cannot create the employment in the area which is so badly needed. So, do I apologize for helping to put in a water system in Cox's Cove in the Town of Humber Arm South, not only for the residents, for the basic needs of people living in the area, but for employment?

Look at the spinoffs from those initiatives that we had taken back in 1989 to this day. You can see employment has increased and their secondary processing is in place. Productivity all throughout the District of Bay of Island has increased and there are almost 1,500 employees in the District of Bay of Islands who have direct or indirect income with the fishery. That is something that I know a lot of people in the whole of Newfoundland and Labrador - when they think about Corner Brook and that area, they always think about the mill or they always think about the hospital, but the Bay of Islands is a major fishing district.

Mr. Speaker, I make no apologies whatsoever of over the years to help and, as we say, the money that was spent to help create jobs because in the long run, I am very confident that through taxes, personal income tax, corporate taxes and through other revenues, that this money will be put back into the coffers.

Mr. Speaker, if you look back over the years at the infrastructure for the Bay of Islands, again, tourism. I know during the election it was always mentioned that you have to have a proper road system. From 1989 until this day there has been a fair amount of money spent in the Bay of Islands on the roads. Again, I make no apologies for it. There are a lot of areas in the Bay of Islands that were not even safe to drive on. If you go out towards York Harbour and Lark Harbour, you can see the rocks. They were actually coming down off the mountains. There were many times when the road was closed because there were boulders in the middle of the road. A lot of tour operators used to have to check before they brought tour buses out to the South Shore of the Bay of Islands. So the roads were not even safe in 1989. Do I make any apologies - and I heard the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs talk about the deficit. Do I make any apologies because I helped to make the roads on the Bay of Islands a safer place? Of course not. Is it going to pay dividends in the long run? Yes, it will. In my opinion it will. With the employment that we have created, with the infrastructure that has been put in place, the Bay of Islands will pay its way to the coffers.

Mr. Speaker, members opposite talk about the deficit and they talk about how the Liberal government overspent and how the Liberal government never lived within their means. I think the Minister of Environment mentioned last week - and I agree with him. In health care alone, since 1993, the Budget of 1994, there has been over an $800 million decrease in federal transfers to this Province. Is that our fault? What do we do with the $800 million? You have to find the money. Health care is the number one priority for the people in Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, and you have to find the money. You take some from other areas, but you also find ways to spend the money because health care is a major priority.

Mr. Speaker, when you look at the health care in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador with all of the new technology, with all of the new services, all of the new drugs, the increase is steadily going up; 8 to 10 per cent a year is the estimate, Mr. Speaker, of the increase in health care. With such a decrease in federal transfers just for health care, is that our fault? What do we do, not fund the health care system?

Mr. Speaker, if you want to look at the deficit, which, again, I do not feel is as bad as the members opposite are portraying, because I think Newfoundland and Labrador does have a bright future. I honestly feel that we will do well in Newfoundland and Labrador with the infrastructure that we helped create over the last fifteen years.

Last year, Mr. Speaker, was the first year we had in-migration. The first time, I think, since 1962 or 1963, we had in-migration. What did the Premier do? He scoffed at it. I am willing to bet that in-migration will not continue this year. I can assure you that, mainly due to a lot of the steps that the government have taken today. I can assure you in-migration will not be a trend that is going to continue on for the next couple of years.

Mr. Speaker, during the election, when we talked about the Budget process and why there is animosity with the government today, why a lot of people in Newfoundland and Labrador are upset with the government today, and we look at Bill 18 and the way the unions were treated, that is one reason, Mr. Speaker. I said before, and I will state it again, I had the unique privilege of being on the West Coast hearing the Premier and the Minister of Justice saying one thing and while in St. John's the Premier and his government are stating another thing.

Mr. Speaker, I will just make a few notes of discrepancies that the Premier has made in several areas on the West Coast and out here in St. John's, on the East Coast. I look at the long- term care facility, Mr. Speaker, and I look at the document that was sent out in the briefing by the Department of Finance and Treasury Board. There is $4.3 million to be spend this year in additional primary health care projects, Mr. Speaker, $4.3 million. I am of the understanding that $300,000 of that $4.3 million will be used towards the long-term facility in Corner Brook: What is it going to be used for? I cannot find out. What is that $300,000 put towards? What is the main objective of that $300,000?

The Premier of this Province, before the election, and during the election, and the Minister of Justice, the Member for Humber East, stated - and I had many quotes where that was stated - that a long-term care facility will be built within four years. The estimate on the long-term care facility, Mr. Speaker, is $55 million to $70 million, and they committed to have it built within four years. Within this mandate, that facility will be built. Everybody in Corner Brook on the West Coast expected the money would be in this year's Budget.

Mr. Speaker, when we were looking at the priorities for the West Coast, a long-term care facility, our government knew that we did not have the finances. That is why we are going with the three p's. You deal with any senior in Corner Brook, any children of any senior, they did not care how the money came through as long as the service was there and the quality of service was up to the same standard, Mr. Speaker. They did not care. Of course, in comes the Premier, coming in on his white horse. The Premier walks in one day, on the long-term care facility, Mr. Speaker, and says: We have to wait, and we have to make it on a priority list for the Province. We cannot just take it and make an exception because it is my district. We have to do a priority list for all of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, when our government, the Liberal government at the time, said, no, we cannot afford to do it publically, we have to go through the three p's, the Premier jumped in and said: No, we will build it. The Member for Humber East, the Minister of Justice, has it in his brochure. The Premier, on five different occasions, had five different positions on the long-term care facility for Corner Brook, Mr. Speaker. After he promised to have it built within four years, and, of course, I said, great, if you can do it, I will agree with you 100 per cent. I would be the first person to applaud you.

Then, Mr. Speaker, we find out that the Minister of Health met with the health care board out in Corner Brook, and said: oh, no, no. It has to go back on the priority list. People were shocked in Corner Brook, people were shocked in Western Newfoundland and Labrador, that we all assumed - and I was the first one who said it publicly, that if the Premier is going to start the long-term care facility, I will be the first one to stand up and applaud it.

Mr. Speaker, it took almost two years to build the Civic Center in Corner Brook, which is now the Pepsi Center, and that was $23 million. Engineers estimated approximately four to five years, with everything going in order, with no delays, to build the long-term care facility, the actual construction. Here we are now, Mr. Speaker, with a commitment that it is going to be built in four years, with a delay of one year-and-a-half for sure, and if funding is not until next March, by the time the engineering work is completed, it will be the following year. Then the Premier has a year-and-a-half to build a facility, a $55 million to $60 million facility.

What is the number one problem, Mr. Speaker? People, who are the field, feel there is no way that can be done. It would take four years minimum with everything falling in order, all the ducks lined up, for it to be built.

The second problem, Mr. Speaker, and we said it - we may have lost a lot of votes on the West Coast by it, but I am willing to stand by it, and people who have spoken - the second thing is before the election, well before the election, we said we could not afford the facility, we do not have the funds to do it, but, no, the Premier said: I will find the funds. So he has to come back to his colleagues - we just found out now that the Gander hospital was cancelled and now it is back on the radar screen. Now that is verbally. In the Budget, it is cancelled. The Grand Bank hospital -

AN HON. MEMBER: The long-term care facility.

MR. JOYCE: The long-term care facility, I was just told, in Grand Bank is cancelled. Now, that was another commitment that apparently they had the Premier on tape down in the district saying that it was going to continue on and that it was going to be built. That is cancelled. We have the cancer clinic in Grand Falls cancelled, because of the lack of funds.

If you look at the Estimates, Mr. Speaker, over the next four years that this government has portrayed, there will be a $10 million increase in spending. With the projected funds they said they were going to reduce, by services, by increased revenues, fees, or, in other words, taxes - just another way, Mr. Speaker - where were they going to come up with the $55 to $70 million for the long-term care facility in Corner Brook?

Of course, the words the Premier used during the election and at a public meeting we had - his executive assistant stood up and the Premier said: Trust me. Well, Mr. Speaker, that is wearing very thin. Ask the NAPE workers, ask the CUPE workers, about trust me.

Mr. Speaker, when you look at a lot of positions that have been taken by this government, and you look at this Budget, I think it is no wonder people are starting to say: We may have been misled here. We may have been led down the garden path. Mr. Speaker, I said all along, if you don't believe me just wait until the pudding is made, because it is in the pudding that the long-term care facility was not started this year and the Premier is committed to have it built in four years.

Look at the MRI, Mr. Speaker, another major initiative out in the Corner Brook area. This is another position that the Premier changed his stand on. Even at his convention in Gander, the PC policy was for a mobile unit; fully endorsed by the PC convention in Gander. When the Premier got out in Corner Brook, he said: Oh, no, no, no. I support a fixed unit for Corner Brook. Then he is back here in St. John's saying: No, no, no. We have to do the best for the people on the West Coast, so maybe a mobile.

After we agreed to go ahead and have the experts decide, Mr. Speaker, the election was on. The decision was made for a fixed unit in Corner Brook, and when the election came up, Mr. Speaker, it was delayed almost six to seven months, because, according to the Minister of Justice, the Member for Humber East out in Corner Brook was saying: We only planned for a fixed unit. We only put a certain amount of money, $800,000, into it, and they had to come up with new money in the budget coming up. They never had the funds, so they had to delay it for almost seven months. The day after the Budget, he was on CBC Radio here in St. John's, not to my amazement but to a lot of people's amazement in Corner Brook, a lot of people's amazement. The Member for Humber East, the Minister of Justice, stood up and said: No, we found the money in last year's Budget.

As we said all along, Mr. Speaker, the money was in that year's Budget but, for political reasons, because they did not want to give the Liberals any credit, they delayed the MRI in Corner Brook for almost seven months.

Finally, once again, Mr. Speaker, look at the schools and the great announcement in this Budget that the school on the North Shore is going to go ahead. The Minister of Education stood up and said, so proud, that the school is going to go ahead on the North Shore, the expansion to the Northshore Elementary. What a good government. What a good government, Mr. Speaker. I informed the minister before, and I informed the minister today, that construction on that school has started today.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the Member for Bay of Islands that his time has expired.

MR. JOYCE: Just by leave, quickly?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave, the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: I just say, Mr. Speaker, that one of the problems that they have in this Budget is all of the commitments they made before and during the election. I just look in Corner Brook, and I look at the long-term facility, the MRI machine. I never heard one member from the Corner Brook area, Humber Valley area, complain about the exhibition centre which now is cancelled - cancelled - but everybody was for it before the election. During the election, everybody wanted it. What a great addition.

Mr. Speaker, I thank you for your time. I thank the members opposite for being so patient.

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. JOYCE: You know, Mr. Speaker, that you speak the truth when they are sitting down listening -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

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

I want to thank you for the opportunity to stand this afternoon and take a few minutes with regard to our Budget for 2004, and to say that I, as well, will be voting against the Budget and will be speaking to the sub-amendment that was put forward by my hon. colleague some time ago.

Mr. Speaker, as I look through the Budget for 2004, there are several items that I would like to touch on. I would like to say to my hon. colleagues across the way, it seems like they are very outspoken today. There cannot be anybody sitting in the gallery looking down at them, because last week they were all very silent when there were people up there looking down that way.

Mr. Speaker, there are a couple of issues that I want to touch on. Number one, we referred in the Budget to where they have asked Memorial University and the College of the North Atlantic to each identify $2 million in expenditure reductions for this year. Mr. Speaker, that is all fine but we know full well what the outfall is from that, because only this past week we have heard talk of the possibly thirty-five-plus people who have already been laid off. I know we heard in the hon. House here today that yes, that has to be done but we also know that it was from the wish of the government that those cutbacks took place.

Mr. Speaker, then we are more or less led to believe that the only contribution to the deficit reduction this year in any taxation way was from tobacco sales. Mr. Speaker, I guess we all learned very quickly on April 1, when the Newfoundland and Labrador Liquor Corporation had to identify $5 million in savings over the next four years, we all knew full well what the major increases in the taxes were to take place there as well.

Mr. Speaker, I know we are still waiting for the reports to come in with the health care system and see where we going to head that way. I had a call this afternoon, and I have to follow up on it later on, and I hope I am going to be proven wrong, but I was told today that there is a possibility of as high as twenty-five beds closing at the Carbonear General Hospital. That is a call that I had within the last half hour, Mr. Speaker. If that is factual, that is devastating to the Conception Bay North area. I can only imagine, if there are twenty-five bed closures, somebody is also going to receive pink slips in that facility as well.

I have to tie to it now, knowing that this is happening, even though I received a letter from the hon. Minister of Health and Community Services with reference to the dialysis machine. I know that I have a letter under her signature stating that this dialysis system will be proceeding and should be up and running by this summer, but I am getting a little nervous. Summer is getting fairly close. I know that there are no renovations even started, to my knowledge, at the hospital at this point in time to accommodate the dialysis machine. Now, if there are going to be twenty-five bed closures at that hospital, I am very fearful of what may happen, but I hope that the dialysis system will be in place before this coming fall. I will even give her a little leave of absence so the people in that area will not have to travel back and forth to St. John's in the winter months like they have had to do in the past.

Mr. Speaker, last week when we were in the debate on Bill 18 - I have to bring it up - just about every individual on the opposite side, when they spoke, referenced that the main reason behind Bill 18, outside of a couple of issues that were used prior to when the strike was on, was for the concern of our children and grandchildren.

Mr. Speaker, that may be true to some extent. We all know that the finances of this Province have to be taken under control.

MR. WISEMAN: (Inaudible).

MR. BUTLER: I have to say to the hon. Member for Trinity North, I am glad that he spoke up because I am very proud of what you are doing to my children and my grandchildren. Every family in this Province, I guess, will come to bear the same burden.

When your Budget came down, you did such devastation to the economy of this Province, the inroads that are set in, the construction industry in this Province, I am going to tell you, will not recover this summer, Mr. Speaker. The other thing -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BUTLER: I want to say a sincere thank you, seeing you are so concerned about everybody's children, for the pink slip that my daughter-in-law received last week, after your Bill 18 went through.

For my grandchildren, I have to say that you are setting a perfect course because we all know the cuts that are coming in the school system - and I know this to be a fact - we were talking about the ratio of students versus teachers. I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, in Amalgamated Academy in Bay Roberts this coming year, and next year, two-and-a-half units will be taken out of that school. That is five teachers over the next two-year period. For anyone to stand in this House and say that by taking five teachers out of Amalgamated Academy is not going to affect the learning and the education system that is already there, something is wrong, Mr. Speaker.

Also, Ascension Collegiate in Bay Roberts, the same thing, five units, five teachers will disappear from that high school over the next two years. I have been told by the people at that school that the class sizes within the next year-and-a-half to two years will be anywhere from forty-five to fifty students per class. I hope I am going to be proven wrong on that; but, Mr. Speaker, that is what is going to come from the major cuts that are coming to the teachers in the system.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. BUTLER: Four hundred and seventy-five.

Mr. Speaker, I heard my hon. friend, the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, when he was up earlier, talking about the 3,000 cuts that took place back in 1989. I have to say, that is true what he said, but I also want to say that he should also know how many years it took for the economy in this Province to swing around after such devastation. I am concerned about the 4,000 people - I will not call them layoffs because you always get shouted down if you say there are 4,000 people being laid off, but if 4,000 come out of the system -

AN HON. MEMBER: Four thousand positions.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BUTLER: Four thousand positions coming out of the system this year or over the next two or three years, Mr. Speaker, is not going to be anything to be shouting and crowing about in this honourable House.

Mr. Speaker, back at that time - and I am not saying that your hon. Premier at the time, Clyde Wells, said it, but he was quoted as saying that he would bring every mother's son home. I know that did not happen -

AN HON. MEMBER: Who (inaudible)?

MR. BUTLER: No, Premier Wells.

Anyway, I am going to say today that if this government stays on the same track that it is on today, I think every mother and father will have to go away themselves to visit their sons and daughters on the mainland, because I know of families in my area - one young lady who is graduating this year from nursing, as soon as the school closes and she graduates, she is heading out to some part of Florida where they are getting paid $40 per hour American money. They also have a signing bonus, but here in this Province we do not believe in signing bonuses.

Mr. Speaker, then it comes to the Department of Human Resources, Labour and Employment. I have to read what was said in the Blue Book where they went on to say, "A Progressive Conservative government will increase the power of the public to influence its agenda and actions through social partnerships with families, communities, voluntary and charitable organizations, professional organizations, business, labour, and cultural organizations."

Mr. Speaker, if that is the case, the people who are out there now just hanging on and wondering what is going to happen to them when the twenty offices are closed throughout this Province - I spoke to one gentleman today, he told me there are fifty people after leaving a little community on the Burin Peninsula over the last six months.

AN HON. MEMBER: Two hundred going from the Northern Peninsula now.

MR. BUTLER: Two hundred, my hon. colleague says, from the Northern Peninsula.

Mr. Speaker, we talk about other cuts that were announced or deferrals in the Budget. The one that comes to my mind is The Rooms here in St. John's, where it is going to be delayed for another year to save in the vicinity of $2 million. Mr. Speaker, I have to ask a question. Once we realize what is going to happen there by closing those doors for another year, I wonder really how much money will we save? We have all those cruise ships coming into St. John's and they are going to see this lovely building down there and they are going to say: How come we cannot get in to visit that site and all the exhibits? Seventeen exhibits this year will have to be cancelled because that building is not being opened. Twenty-eight transitional staff who have been hired to do up those three facilities, those people have been laid off. The list goes on and on.

Then we come to our Budget, again, Mr. Speaker, and we talk about medication. I know I will give credit where credit is due, the new medications that are being put into the Budget this year for - I am not quite sure what the medication was but it had to do with cancer patients. I appreciate that. But Alzheimer's and MS, there are quite a few people around this Province who run into the same difficulty of not being able to afford those very expensive medications. My understanding is that there are close to 5,600 people with Alzheimer's disease in this Province of ours today and 85 per cent of all Canadians who have that dreaded disease are covered in some shape or form with helping with the cost, and it is very expensive. This medication was one that was approved to come into effect and, unfortunately, has been placed on hold again. That is devastating to a lot of people in the Province.

I have to say that the area I come from, which encompasses from Brians Cove to Port de Grave, is a fairly well off area as compared to some when it comes to, I guess, jobs and industry and so on. But, Mr. Speaker, if the economy is being continually set back by people coming out of the system - and businesses, I can assure you, are finding it very difficult knowing the uncertainty. Many people are wondering, not only in HRE offices, works services and transportation, they are wondering if their jobs are going to be there and if they are going to be transferred somewhere else, where and what the cost effect will be to them.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot help but also go back to - all too often we refer to the Auditor General's reports that they bring down. I happen to have a copy of all the Auditor General's reports. I could not find the other ones but I have them from 1996 right up to the year 2000.

I am running out of time, am I?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, I just want to read the statements that are in them, and they are all the same. I understand that when the Auditor Generals do those facts and figures, and put it forward to the House of Assembly, it is based on the information that they had put before them.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to read: I have audited the Consolidated Summary Statements, the financial position of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, as of 31 March 1996. She goes on to say: My responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on my audit. She goes on to say again: In my opinion, these Consolidated Summary Financial Statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I understand that is the terminology used by those auditors, but I cannot find in any of them where it goes on to say what we are hearing in this hon. House, day in and day out, that we are on the verge of bankruptcy. I think if there was any auditor going to do the books and knew that this Province was on the verge of bankruptcy, you would see it listed.

Yes, it is true, all too often they recommend to governments, of all political stripes, the changes that should be taking place. I can honestly say that the former Auditor General referenced many positions there, many times, how government should continue the practice they are doing and make the system all that much better, but never have I seen in any of them to express the feeling that we are drowning in debt. I think those were some of the words that were used.

Mr. Speaker, I go back to just prior to the election, during the election, when the comments were made, that the team led by the present Premier, the Progressive Conservative government, there will be no layoffs in the public service. No layoffs, Mr. Speaker. We all know that layoffs are happening, day in and day out, and we have heard rumours today from our sources that many other people are receiving their pink slips again today.

We will not reduce the public service by 25 per cent. I would say, Mr. Speaker, that by the time all the layoffs are taken care of, and the people who are going to leave the system through attrition, it will definitely reach 25 per cent.

MR. SWEENEY: (Inaudible).

MR. BUTLER: What is the hon. Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace saying?

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I just want to say that a lot of the items that are in this Budget -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BUTLER: - are of great concern to the people of this Province. If the government continues on, it is very easy to lose the trust of the people that they were intrusted with on October 21.

Mr. Speaker, we talk about the Municipal Operating Grants. I have been talking to people in my district and only one of the towns, so far, one the larger towns, has been affected this year; but, like they told me the other day, $40,000 is a lot of money to take out of any budget for any of the municipalities, and the other people are finding it that way.

Mr. Speaker, the other item - and I know full well where the minister and the government are coming from, where we are going to eliminate winter and summer cabin road maintenance for the savings of $800,000. Mr. Speaker, I hope that there is going to be some consideration given to some of those roads because they are classified as cabin roads, but a lot of them have farming operations on them, whether it be various products and produce, berries. Then, again, a lot of those roads are used by people in the winter when they have to go in the woods to retrieve their fuel and so on. So, Mr. Speaker, I hope that will be considered and some consideration will be given to those roads for maintenance, as well as clearing the snow in the wintertime.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, I will conclude with this comment. It says here in the book that we are cancelling, we are doing it right here, the campaign, and we are going to save $500,000. Well, Mr. Speaker, we are going to cancel a program, doing it right here, for $500,000, but we are going to spend $350,000 so we can do it up in Ottawa. Mr. Speaker, that does not make sense to me.

I said the other day, the ministers in the federal government now are flying in and out of here so often, the cruise ship industry is only a drop in the bucket to us. I am wondering if they are going to be coming back and forth after the election is over.

Mr. Speaker, I think the message can be put across clearly to those people up there. They know our concerns. The Premier is going to be travelling back and forth with them. I do not know why we should have to spend $350,000 to operate an office in Ottawa.

Mr. Speaker, on that note, I want to thank you for the opportunity again. I am sure I will have the chance to rise again, Mr. Speaker, to say that I will not be supporting the Budget when the vote comes.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

It being almost 5:30 p.m., by agreement, I move that the House recess and reconvene at 7 o'clock tonight.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that this House now recess until 7:00 p.m., today being Monday.

All those in favour, aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay.

This House now stands recessed until 7 o'clock this evening.


May 10, 2004 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 27A


The House resumed sitting at 7:00 p.m.

MADAM SPEAKER (Osborne): Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bellevue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

If the Member for Trinity North would just calm down a little bit. If he listens, he might learn something for a change.

I want to welcome everybody tonight to the family-friendly House of Assembly.

AN HON. MEMBER: Family-friendly hours.

MR. BARRETT: Family-friendly hours is it, that was in the Blue Book? It was in the blueprint that we would not be meeting in those marathon night sessions and going on into the wee hours of the morning. That was the last thing that we would be doing. I guess, when we look back in terms of since October when this government got elected, or when the PC Party got elected in Newfoundland to form the government, we have been on, sort of, a haphazard course ever since in terms of everything that they said in the famous Blue Book or the blueprint, they have never followed it very, very closely. The situation we have here tonight in terms of they said that the House of Assembly would be a family-friendly place.

Tonight I want to talk on a couple of topics. Particularly, one that really affects my district and really affects what is happening in terms of rural Newfoundland. I think we saw the direction that this government was leading back in November when the government was put together. When we saw how the executive branch in Cabinet was put together in this government, I guess that gave us some indication what the Premier thought of rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Except for four Cabinet ministers, the rest of them are all inside the overpass. We saw some of the things in the Budget that really reflected the urban dominance of this government.

In the Budget Speech - one of the things they eliminated in the Budget, which greatly affects rural Newfoundland and Labrador, was they were saying they would not maintain or plow or grade any class 4 roads anywhere in Newfoundland and Labrador. They indicated that would be a savings of $800,000 from the Budget. That particular proposal has been around the Department of Works, Services and Transportation ever since Joey Smallwood's days. I question, very much, if there is a saving of $800,000 from the department. When I was the minister there I vetoed it immediately, because I do not think there is a savings of that much money. What we are talking about here is the utilization of departmental equipment to grade and plow roads after every other road is done. As a matter of fact, what we are looking at, in a lot of cases, is a bit of extra fuel that is put in the machines. The equipment operators normally would be in the depot. They would not be doing anything at that particular time, waiting to go on call for more snow or the weather conditions to change. So, I do not think the department is going to save $800,000. It is probably more like $80,000 rather than $800,000.

I will point specifically to a road in my district. It is a road called the Davis Cove Road. Davis Cove was a community that was resettled back in the 1960s. Three or four years ago the federal government considered the importance of this community in terms of the fishing industry. As a matter of fact, built a modern docking facility in the community. It is a receiving depot for fish caught in Placentia Bay; all species of fish caught in Placentia Bay.

On the weekend I was told that there are millions and millions of pounds of fish landed in Davis Cove, to be trucked out of Davis Cove, to be trucked around the Province to be processed in our plants. We are talking about millions and millions of dollars of product. Let's face it, who in the world generates new dollars? It is the fishermen and fisherpersons of Newfoundland and Labrador. They generated, last year, roughly about $1 billion in new dollars, not dollars that are passed around from one to the other. This facility there utilizes - and we criticize so often the federal government, and probably I am one of the first ones to do it, but in this case the people within the federal government saw the wisdom and the economic sense of building a modern docking facility to be able to receive and a landing facility for all the various species of fish caught in Placentia Bay. Placentia Bay, as we are well aware, is one of the richest fishing grounds in Newfoundland and Labrador in terms of shellfish, codfish, lumpfish and all other species of fish. Davis Cove is one of the major, major places that receive the fish.

It is interesting, a lobby has started right now to complete the bypass road on Kenmount Road, bifurcation road, and we cannot put a street light there. It is not possible, they say, in terms of safety and all the other reasons to put a street light there. Everybody is excited, very, very excited because there are major, corporate conglomerates from the mainland and from the States that are going to set up on Kenmount Road. There is nothing wrong with that whatsoever. I am not criticizing that at all. I mean, when you look at it - and this government will just look at it. They will look at this in terms of - the dominated Cabinet from St. John's will look at that and say: We need that overpass. We need that interchange. We will do it. It is a $50 million investment that is going on Kenmount Road. All these businesses are very rich businesses and they are putting on a big lobby to get this. Now, granted, these eight stores that are going on Kenmount Road will provide employment to people. Most of them will be out there making the minimum wage but the companies themselves will walk away from Newfoundland with pots full of money. Probably we should be saying to them that the overpass should be cost-shared with them. They should probably contribute some money towards it, and take some of the money from those corporations. And we are going to say to the fishermen and the fishing people in Placentia Bay - they come from all over Newfoundland to fish, a lot of them - that we cannot afford to spend $10,000 to $20,000 a year to grade and keep the road upgraded so that these people can truck their fish out? There is something wrong with this picture, in terms of the scheme of things.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. BARRETT: Yes, there is no doubt about it. It is the overpass syndrome. It is amazing that these fishermen will probably have to go to Argentia or Marystown to land their fish, and it may not become economically viable for them to fish at all. We are also talking about the quality of the fish, which is very, very important - to make sure that we land the fish and the quality of the fish is up to standard. Imagine the jobs that are created by all the fish that is trucked out of Placentia Bay. Not in Placentia Bay itself, but in Conception Bay, Trinity Bay and all the fish plants around. This will generate a lot of new dollars that can go and assist to build that overpass on Kenmount Road, but this government, for some reason, is out to resettle rural Newfoundland. There does not seem to be any kind of sensitivity towards what is happening in rural Newfoundland.

I was out on another road in my district this weekend, where there are thirteen people who live on a road, which used to be the old Burin Peninsula Highway. These thirteen people work at jobs in Come By Chance, very high paying people. They are saying to them that their road is not going to be plowed. I think it is absolutely ridiculous that this government is thinking that way, but it does not surprise me because the majority of the people, who sat over there and sat in the Cabinet, are from the greater St. John's area. So, I am pleading with the government that they take a second look at this and make sure that it does not happen, and that those millions of pounds of fish can be adequately trucked out of Placentia Bay and go into fish plants to provide jobs for people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

The other issue I would like to look at tonight is in the Budget. This government announced that they were going to cut the grants for two of our post-secondary institutions. It was going to cut the grants for the College of the North Atlantic and it was going to cut the grant for the university. Now we have had a policy of this government, for a number of years, of tuition freezes. Over the last period of time we just decreased the tuition fees by roughly 25 per cent to make post-secondary education in this Province much more accessible for our young people so they do not come out with a load of debt.

One of the areas in our post-secondary institutions, in terms of the College of the North Atlantic - I mean, the statistics are there. The students who graduate from that post-secondary institution come out of that institution with less loans and they are the students who pay back the loans. The attrition rate, in terms of the graduates from the College of the North Atlantic, their record is very, very good, Mr. Minister. I think it is an utter crime. You said today, in response to a question, that what we were doing was taking out some programs that were less subscribed, that they were no longer needed or there were not enough students in these particular programs to warrant. Well, that was a perfect opportunity, if the $2 million was left in the Budget, to access some new programs.

The college, over the last number of years, has become a leader in computer technology and really got on the bandwagon in terms of providing training for people involved in computer technology. My own son is one of these, and is very gainfully employed today and a graduate of the College of the North Atlantic. He received great training at that particular institution. But, the opportunity -

MR. WISEMAN: (Inaudible).

MR. BARRETT: Yes, the program - the Member for Trinity North is trying to interject again. I realize that the College of the North Atlantic has to be always under revision in terms of programing, but the thing about it is, any courses that become redundant or are under subscribed, then the resources that are made available because of that should be accessed into new areas. To prove my point, the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne, and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Education, on the weekend, was talking about the shortages in terms of skilled trading in this Province.

MR. REID: There is not enough training going on.

MR. BARRETT: Not enough training going on, in this Province. So, we have the minister who is cutting back the budget by $2 million and the person who sits on his back and carries his briefcase is saying we are going to have a shortage in terms of skilled training.

I do not agree with the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne very often, but this is one time that I agree with him. He has his finger on the pulse, because he knows what is happening. I have to compliment the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne, because he has a sense of what is happening in this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in terms of skilled training. I agree with him wholeheartedly, that we are going to have a lack of trained skilled workforce in this Province.

I do not know if anyone has gone around to the construction sites in this Province, gone to the Bull Arm construction site, gone to Marystown, gone to Labrador City and various other places. Most of the workers in this Province who are involved in the skilled trades are getting up in years. Most of the people are getting up in years. They are getting up in years because -

AN HON. MEMBER: They are getting older.

MR. BARRETT: They are getting older. That is why they are getting up in years, because they are getting older. We need to have a refocus on skilled training in this Province.

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MR. BARRETT: The hon. Government House Leader is over there asking some foolish questions, and I guess if you ask foolish questions you have to get foolish answers.

Most of the people, there is a shortage within the skilled workforce and we need to take some of that money that you took out of the College of the North Atlantic, that $2 million, and you need to put it back into the trades training that should be available at the College of the North Atlantic.

Some of those programs that you have taken out of St. Anthony and these other communities, you could put skilled training programs in these communities. We are pretty sure that, in terms of Voisey's Bay, there is going to be a great need for skilled training. With the great plans that the Minister of Natural Resources has for Bull Arm and Marystown, we could be ending up with a shortage of a workforce within this Province.

It is disheartening, really, when you look at the fact that this government does not place that great importance in terms of post-secondary education and is deciding now to cut the budget in the College of the North Atlantic by $2 million.

The College of the North Atlantic is a very efficient, very effective organization. As a matter of fact, the reorganization of the whole vocational and adult education system took place some time ago and reorganized. There was a time in Newfoundland and Labrador when we had five community colleges and three provincial institutes. I remember when I worked with Avalon Community College. I was part of the government that reorganized post-secondary education in this Province and, I can tell you, it was good job. It was a good job. We reorganized post-secondary education in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. BARRETT: I can tell you what was happening. The previous government, under Mr. Peckford, created three community colleges and three provincial institutes around this Province. I remember the times when I worked with the college here in St. John's, and there was the Marine Institute and the College of Trades and Technology. In those days there was great competition for contract training around St. John's. The Avalon Community College, one year, did $1.5 million in contract training. I would go to the table and try to negotiate contracts. I didn't mind going out and competing with the Keyin Technical colleges and all the other ones because I knew we were better than them, because we always got it on quality rather than quantity.

What was disheartening was that I was going out and bidding against the College of Trades and Technology and also the Marine Institute. So, you had three public institutions in this city that were out competing with each other. It was important that they be all brought together under one umbrella.

One of the reasons why the college has been so successful over the last number of years, is that right now if a college in Clarenville or in St. Anthony or one of the other communities ends up with a contract, it benefits the whole college. What we were doing before, you had the five community colleges and the three provincial institutes all out competing with each other. We did a whole consultation around the Province. We involved the stakeholders around the Province in this whole process, and we brought the colleges together under one umbrella. Today, as we speak, the College of the North Atlantic is conducting training overseas. It has become a world leader in post-secondary education in this country.

I am proud of what the previous government did in terms of the reorganization of post-secondary education in this Province. Now we are one of the leaders in this country, one of the leaders in the world, in terms of post-secondary education and the quality of the programs that are provided.

MR. GRIMES: All you have to do it look at Qatar.

MR. BARRETT: Yes, Qatar is the perfect example, which generates a lot of revenue, a lot of resources, and is bringing money back to the Province and reinvesting into the college system. What we did was brought the five community colleges and the three provincial institutes all under one board, under one administration, and greatly facilitated the whole operation of post-secondary education. Now where we need to go, the next step further, which we were looking at when we were a part of government, we need to refocus back. There was a time in our history -

MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. BARRETT: One minute just to clue up?

MADAM SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Yes.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. BARRETT: No, I just want to finish the sentence, that is all.

What we were doing was focusing on the skilled training, because back in the 1960s, and 1970s we overtrained in that particular area and what happened was that there was such a public reaction that we were training all these people who could not get jobs. Now we need to refocus our efforts back into more skilled training in this Province, and I agree with the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

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

It is interesting. I sat here and listened to the Member for Bellevue talk about the college system, and how they reorganized it, they said. It is interesting. My friend, the Member for Labrador West, caught the distinction in his language. They did not close anything down, he said. They reorganized it. Now, that is pretty interesting. I said to myself: That is very interesting, that this hon. gentleman stood in the House and said they did not close anything down; they reorganized it.

I know he was in the House. He was in the House when I was in the House, and he talked today - which I will deal with in a minute, because a number of members on the opposite side have made the allegation today that, as a result of the $2 million shortfall, for some reason, we have been here for six-and-a-half months and because of the $2 million, what we have asked for from the College of the North Atlantic, we are the problem. The thirty-three of us are the problem that there is a skill shortage in Newfoundland and Labrador, and we have caused that in six months. Now, that is the allegation but I am going to deal with that in a second. I want to deal with, first of all, to inform the member that I am going to let him judge for himself, did they shut anything down or did they reorganize it? That is the question that I would like answered today, truthfully.

When you were part of a government as Parliamentary Secretary to the Premier, the current Leader of the Opposition who was Minister of Education, did he reorganize the provincial college system to make it better or did he close anything down? Now, let me say to the member, because it is obvious to me and, I think, obvious to anybody who has a memory in communities - listen to this - 1996: Government has a serious financial problem.

AN HON. MEMBER: Go on!

MR. E. BYRNE: Yes. Guess how big, how serious it was in 1996? Here is how big it was. This was a Ministerial Statement by Minister Roger Grimes, Minister of Education in 1996. Ministerial Statement: Government has a serious financial problem for this year, nearly $290 million this year.

Just listen to that. Just think about that. I ask all hon. members to think about that statement. They had a serious financial situation in 1996, for this year, of $290 million. Now, what sort of situation did we face this year as a new government? Almost $1 billion. We took $240 million out of the system. The Minister of Finance stood in his place on Budget Day and still delivered one of the highest deficits in Newfoundland and Labrador's history, of $840 million.

Here is how they reorganized the college system to deal with that financial problem in 1996, Madam Speaker: The current college system offers programs through twenty-four campus sites.

I say to the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans: Listen up - talking about who did what to post-secondary education in the Province - each of these sites have administration, support, program and maintenance and security requirements in order to operate them. The number of campus sites in the 1996 Budget were reduced.

Does anyone know or remember how they reorganized in 1996? There were twenty-four sites, campuses, and they closed five of them. How much money did you save, I say to the member? You were newly elected in 1996. I did not hear the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans standing up and giving it to her colleague who used to sit there, the then Minister of Education, the now Leader of the Opposition, about how they gutted post-secondary education. Did anyone hear her then?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. E. BYRNE: You will not find a statement in Hansard. Not one statement in Hansard will you see about how they - they did not hurt the college system. All they did was reorganize it a little bit. Twenty-four campus sites down to nineteen. Guess what? Does anybody know? I know my colleagues on this side know, but does anyone remember? Maybe the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans, I would give her leave to stand up and tell me how much money, when she and her colleagues in 1996 closed five campus sites - some of them, I say to the member, in Central Newfoundland, programs cut in Grand Falls-Buchans.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No.

MR. E. BYRNE: Absolutely. The Leader of the Opposition knows. He is smirking. He knows all about it. He has his smirk on his face. He knows all about it. As a matter of fact, he went to Lewisporte and I think they locked him in there for ten or twelve hours, if I am not mistaken. He went to Bell Island and they would not let him back on the ferry, because they closed Bell Island, they closed Lewisporte. How much money, I ask the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans? I will sit down right now and you tell me how much money you saved by closing five campuses.

She is not going to get up. I wonder why she will not get up. I wonder why. The fact of the matter is this. Listen to the nonsense and the bunk about how in six months we have destroyed post-secondary education in the Province, when that member sat over here - she did not make the same speech today that she made over here. She made no speech over here. They saved $8 million on the provincial college system alone. They closed five campus sites, laid off in excess of 180 people - just in the college system - and saved $8 million.

MR. J. BYRNE: What criteria was used?

MR. E. BYRNE: I have no idea what the criteria was. We could not get any answers like that, I say to my colleague for Cape St. Francis.

Here is the other spin today that really is puzzling for anybody who is being serious about the skills shortage in the construction trades, because there is one. There is one right across the country. The fact of the matter is this, you can offer any program you wish to offer at any community college in the public education system, at post-secondary level, anywhere, but unless students show up to participate in them, guess what? There are not going to be any programs.

I spent five years in post-secondary education and training with the construction industry. I would not say that I know it better than most, but I certainly know it a lot better than some. By some of the comments today, I would venture to say that I know it a lot better than some of the speakers today who talked about post-secondary education and training. I was responsible for about $4 million worth of purchased training throughout the community college structure in Province in the 1989-90 period, right up until 1993 when I got elected. As a matter of fact, I was responsible for it through a group called the Atlantic Laborers' Training Trust Fund for P.E.I., New Brunswick and Nova Scotia as well. The last year, Capital Coast zonal board - and members opposite know this. Either they conveniently forgot it or have purposely not entered it into the record. But there was a study done by the Capital Coast zonal board about two years ago. I met with them on it, and the former Minister of Education, and the former minister -

MR. REID: Your time is up.

MR. E. BYRNE: No, my time is not up yet. Don't you worry, I will sit down way before my time is up. I can say to the Member for Twillingate, it is not up yet.

That study concluded this, that in the high school system 85 per cent of the graduates who come out of high school, who intend on going to post-secondary education, 90 per cent of those, or almost 90 per cent of those, are choosing university as their post-secondary institution of choice. Ninety percent of the 85 per cent of graduates who want to go to a post-secondary institution, upon graduation from the high school system, choose a university education as their post-secondary institution of choice. So, what happens to carpenters, iron workers, welders, operating engineers, skilled construction labourers, plumbers and pipefitters?

MR. REID: (Inaudible) driven out of the Province.

MR. E. BYRNE: No, I say to the Member for Twillingate. If this is a place for serious debate, to say that in six months we have driven everyone out of the Province would be less than forthright or frank or honest. The fact of the matter is this, that what needs to be done on the skills training side right now is to start encouraging young people coming out of the high school system about how tremendous a career opportunity exists right now.

The average age of the workforce in the technical and construction trades in the Province is nearing fifty. It is the average work age, not only in this Province but right across the country. The problem is that the majority of graduates graduating from Newfoundland and Labrador high schools today who want to pursue a post-secondary education are choosing university. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but what it is leaving, for all of us the situation to deal with, is that the labour pool - in terms of skilled technical and construction trade labour pool - is shrinking right across the country, and puts a lot of power in that labour pool. It puts a lot of pull in that labour pool, in terms of projects, right across the country.

There are people from this Province, from Nova Scotia, from Alberta, from British Columbia, from Ontario, who travel site to site right across the country, because right across the country the pool of labour to be able to do that type of work - whether it is in oil and gas, whether it is in major industrial developments, whether it is major roadwork and building work, whether it is major housing developments in the country - is shrinking. So, what we need to do as a Province, in my view - and this is just my view - but I think what we need to do, all of us, is start at the high school education system about the advantages and what type of career opportunities that exist within the construction trades, that there are legitimate career opportunities, that you can make a significant and good living at it, that you can raise a family at it, that you do have the ability to do well within those areas. That is where we need to hit. But to suggest, Madam Speaker, for a moment, that we have taken or asked the College of the North Atlantic for $2 million additional -

AN HON. MEMBER: You did.

MR. E. BYRNE: I know we did. I never said we did not. I said to suggest that because we have done that, all of a sudden we have destroyed, in six months, the skilled labour pool in the Province. What a ridiculous notion! This is coming from -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Oh, so we have not done it now. She has changed her view. Now we are going to do it. We have gone from we have done it to we are going to do it. This is coming from the same person who, in 1996, supported a government that had a serious financial problem, and they did, of $290 million. Ours was almost three times worse this year as a government - that closed five campuses and saved $8 million. We have not closed any campuses. We have maintained the tuition freeze to try to encourage and understand - encourage students but, at that same time, understand what it means to pay significant tuition rates.

So, we have maintained. We have not closed a campus and we have not raised tuition. Yet, members opposite - in particular the Member for Bellevue, the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans - get up and, lo and behold, the sky is falling on everybody's head in Newfoundland and Labrador if you are a post-secondary institution student. That this government somehow - we have gutted skills training. There is no opportunity and no hope. This is coming from the same person who stood and supported, in 1996, the closure of five campuses, the stripping of $8 million and eliminating about 180 positions from the Province. They can say that with all face. My grandmother used to say: Some people got more nerve than a toothpick. Some of the members opposite have demonstrated that quite clearly to me today, Madam Speaker.

The fact of the matter is this, we intend to ensure that people understand, and young people understand at the high school level, that there are opportunities at the skill level. We cannot go in and say to forty graduates who may graduate in rural Newfoundland or in urban Newfoundland: You must go in to become a carpenter. You must go in to become an electrician. You must go into construction labour. You must become an operating engineer. Nobody has that power, and we do not have the right to do it, but we do have an obligation to ensure that students graduating from our high school system have the information that tells them: here is a variety of programs where there are shortages of people who are now in those careers. If you pursue this, and are successful at completing the requirements of that program, then in all likelihood you are going to do well. You will be on a career path and you will be at something that you will enjoy and earn a decent living for you and, potentially, your family from it. That is the obligation of government. That is the obligation we made. We are not going to be deterred by that, by the fearmongering and the sky is falling approach by members opposite, who have done far worse, and who have participated in the gutting of the public college system; far worse, by any measure or by any standard, than this government ever thought of.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I can carry on for a little while on the debate that is taking place here this evening. I would like to carry on with the theme that has been talked about by the past two speakers since we returned from break. That is on the trades training and the shortage of trades people in this Province and, indeed, across the country.

The Government House Leader talked about being part of the training program in the late 1980s and early 1990s. I have to say, I was part of the training program in the Province at the same time by being a member of the apprenticeship board for a five-year period during that time. I found it interesting, the Government House Leader's comments on 90 per cent of the 85 per cent of young people who leave high school chose university as their post-secondary education choice. That is alarming, Madam Speaker. I think we all bear responsibility for that, because when I questioned myself as to whose fault that may be, then I think that we are all part of the problem. The only people who are probably not at fault are the young people themselves who are following the advice that is being given to them by people who are studying the trend and trying to guess where the opportunities will lie in two to three years down the road.

I believe, Madam Speaker, that the people who have been advising young people for the past number of years, particularly around the mid-1990s have missed the boat in a lot of situations, because during that period of time a lot of our young people, upon graduation, were encouraged to go into the computer sector, into the IT sector. While that did provide good paying jobs for many people, it certainly did not have the market that was being expected by the educators and people who were suggesting to young people where they should go to get an education and in what field they should try and become educated in. I think that we set them up for a big disappointment because many are now finding, with the downturn in the IT sector, that they have a tremendous debt. They have a lot of education but the market is not there for them to find a job in that. Those who did find jobs in the late 1990s, many of them now - with downturns like we see happening in Ottawa and other areas, the companies have downsized. Many of these people now are out of work and either have to go back for retraining or try and start something along their own line, or work in a different occupation altogether from what they were trained for.

So, it is an important area, Madam Speaker, because a lot of the people who went into the trades sectors during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s made a very good livelihood for themselves and their families. Many times most of the people who went into the trades area for training achieved a greater earning power than many of the people who graduated from universities. So, it is not something that we should steer away from, or steer our young people away from, particularly with the emphasis now on a shortage in the trades area that has been identified as something that we should be encouraging our young people to get into.

I know that in Europe, Madam Speaker, trades are very valued. It is a very highly respected profession in Europe and it should be viewed in the same manner in this country and in this Province. Whereas over the years, and in the early years, we sort of looked down - trade school, as it used to be called, or the trades, was something that people who probably were identified not to make the cut in university, that was something for these people to do. That is the wrong approach. It is the wrong mentality, and we should get our thinking caps on and focus on what makes the most sense for the most people.

When we talk about employment opportunities in this Province and the lack in this Budget of any employment initiatives - as a matter of fact, it is quite the opposite, because with a layoff anticipated of 4,000 workers, employment opportunities are going to be even harder to come by. That would be in the public sector, but the trickling effect that will have, even into the private sector, will deny many young people of this Province employment opportunities that probably would otherwise be available.

A couple of the other things that I take issue with as well, is this government made a big deal on Budget Day about lowering taxes for lower income families. What they did and did not say at the same time, or did not tie the two together - they did lower taxes, but, Madam Speaker, at the same time there are five full pages of fee increases and increase of fees for services that every single one of these people, along with the rest of us, will have to pay for now in order to use. So, it is not a tax break here in this Budget for anyone, least of all people who are on low income, because now they are going to have to pay for all of the things that they did not have to pay for before, and the things that they had to pay prior to this Budget will now be increased. So, if you put the two of them together, I am very much afraid that you will find that the people who were intended to be helped in this Budget will, indeed, be worse off financially than they were prior to this Budget coming into place.

Madam Speaker, it also concerns me, as well, when we talk about the travel from the Labrador portion of our Province to the Island portion for our young people or athletes or school children who like to travel, need to travel, want to travel, to the Island portion of the Province in order to take part in provincial games, whether it be volleyball, whether it be hockey, soccer, or any of these sports that are included in the high school federation. This $10,000 cut is going to do more than deny them an opportunity to participate. It is going to drive the wedge of alienation much deeper between the Labrador portion of the Province and the Island portion of our Province. Indeed it is now cheaper, in many cases, for athletes, particular in my area of Labrador that I represent, to participate with other provinces rather than participate in their own Province where they would like to be doing it. It has become a cost factor. That cost factor is a reality, and now they are being forced to compete in hockey tournaments by driving down to Nova Scotia or New Brunswick or parts of Quebec to participate, strictly because the infrastructure for cost is not there by this Province and it has been reduced this year by $10,000 further that will make that impractical for a lot of other students to interact with each other in their own Province.

Madam Speaker, during the discussion and debate that took place on Bill 18, An Act For The Resumption And Continuation Of Public Services in our Province, during the final hours of debate we heard government member after government member after government member get up and talk about how they felt that what they were doing was right and proper, that there was no choice, and they were doing it for the youth, for the future generation of our children and grandchildren. While that may be a noble thing to do, and while it may be needed to some degree, I would ask them the question: What about the now generation? What is being done now for the people who suffer from Alzheimer's, who had a drug approved for treatment that would slow down the progress of that disease? What, I ask the members opposite, are they going to tell their grandchildren, why probably their grandmother is not around to meet or their grandfather is not around to meet, because they took action that eliminated a drug that could have slowed down the progress used to treat that disease? That is very serious issue, Madam Speaker. I think, if I were a government member who made that decision, it is not one that I would stand up and be proud of and say I am doing this to you so that our grandchildren can have a brighter future. I do not buy that argument, Madam Speaker. Anyone who has any family member suffering from Alzheimer's in this Province, I am sure they do not take a lot of comfort in the argument that is being put forward by government members as a means to reduce the deficit on the backs of people who really need help in purchasing these drugs.

We can talk also, Madam Speaker, about persons who suffer from MS. People in this Province, today, are going without drugs that they need, Madam Speaker, in order to provide the essentials, the basic essentials, for their families. They are going without, themselves, in order to do that. I think it is shameful and a disgrace, Madam Speaker, that we are the only jurisdiction in this country that does not provide any type of relief for hard-working people who suffer from MS, or people in their families who suffer from MS.

Madam Speaker, if you are on income support, the drug is provided for you. I am not arguing against that; that is exactly the way it should be. If you are a millionaire, of course, you really are not concerned about that either, because you have the ability and the wherewithal to take care of yourself; but, Madam Speaker, if you are person who gets up each morning and goes to work, and you or your family members suffer from MS, you have to reduce yourself to income support levels. Then this government will help out.

This makes it even worse, Madam Speaker, and I want people to understand this. It is not that this government will not help out people who suffer from MS. It is what they require a person to do to themselves and their families financially before they will. Because, after you ruin yourself, after you ruin your family's financial well-being and you spend any RRSPs that you may have saved, you spend any money that you may have put aside for your children's education, you spend any savings that you may have accumulated for your retirement, and use the rest of your disposable income towards purchasing that drug, and you reduce yourself to a certain level, then government will step in and help out. Well, that is too little too late, Madam Speaker. I think that the people of this Province can expect more from their government than to be treated in this manner. This is not something that started six months ago when this government took office. This has been going on, Madam Speaker, in this Province for far, far too long, and it does not reflect well on us that we are the only jurisdiction in the country which does not provide health to their people when they are in need with areas such as this.

Madam Speaker, we have also talked about the College of the North Atlantic, and education costs. I have argued many times, when I took part in the different debates in this House over the last five years or so, and talked about the other costs that are associated with education for people who live in the rural areas of this Province, and they are much more than tuition. I can tell you that any persons from the rural areas of this Province, and particularly in the Labrador region, can tell you that because they know what it costs for their students to travel. They know what it costs for an apartment in town. They know what the food costs, and the phone calls, and tuition is probably the lower of the other costs combined. So, people who live in the rural areas of this Province certainly are at a great disadvantage financially as compared to people who live within the St. John's area or in close proximity in other areas of the Province where they can obtain their education while, at the same time, stay at home and live at home.

There are ways we can overcome that, and I am hoping that it will happen, where we can receive more money from our offshore resources, where we can receive more money from our onshore resources in terms of mining, electrical development and other naturals resources in which we are abundant. We have more natural resources in this Province than almost any country in the world - not other provinces. We have more resources than most countries could ever dream about, but still and for all it seems that in spite of whatever may or may not be developed, we are not the better off for it at the end. I think that is something that needs to be changed and has to be changed before we can really be in a position where we can do a lot of the things that we need to do.

In the meantime, that does not excuse any government, of any given day, to reduce spending to the degree that this government has done so, that inflicts a lot of financial hardships on the people of this Province and cuts a lot of the services that people need and expect to have in the Twenty-First Century.

Madam Speaker, there are areas where we can do it. Along with our offshore resources, land-based resources, there is the thing called the corporate tax. We are the lowest in the country, the lowest in the country. Last week, in the news, it was reported that corporate profits in this Province increased by over 20 per cent. Still and for all - and we can talk about the payroll tax. We can talk about all these things, but the bottom line is that we do not receive enough in the form of royalties or corporate income taxes from the large corporations in particular. We are not talking about the corner stores down the street. We are not talking about the small-time operator of a business in the Province. We are talking about the multi-national and the large corporations that work in this Province reaping mostly our natural resources and, with the exception of employment, giving very little in return.

These are some of the things, Madam Speaker, that we have to focus on, in order to create a better place or us and a better place for our children and grandchildren, that has been referred to by government members so often during last week's debate. I can only hope that it will happen. I want to say to government members - and I want to stress this - don't be so focused on future generations that you are forgetting the generation that is here today, because that is not being fair to the people of this Province who depend upon policies of government, who depend upon good decisions from government, to be able to provide us with the things - not that we want, in many cases, Madam Speaker - that we need, like good health care facilities, like having the opportunity to have health care facilities located in close proximity throughout the Province so that people do not have to spend a fortune in order to get there.

There has been a recent study conducted through MUN and through the Health Sciences about cancer patients in this Province. The study was only released last week. I do not know if the Minister of Health and Community Services had a chance to see it yet. It is a brief study. It talks about the extra cost that cancer patients - and that is the study that was conducted, that identified cancer patients with the four most common types of cancer in this Province, and the cost that people from outside the St. John's area have to access in order to get treatments for their cancer.

Some of the things there are very alarming, Madam Speaker. There are things in that report that was done - they sampled a huge number of people - that suggested that people are cutting back on their dosage of medication simply because they cannot afford to take the regular dose as recommended by their doctors, at the rate that it is recommended to be taken. People who come into this area and have to spend days and weeks, sometimes, at hotels, with no family or friends for support. There are not too many people in this Province, Madam Speaker, who have the financial ability to do that. I certainly do not know a great number of people who would be able to pack up and move to a city like St. John's and have to stay here. You can talk about the hostel. That is not cheap. That is no gift. You are paying $50 a day there, plus your meals, and the subsidies that are in place in this Province for medical travel have not been reviewed for many, many, many years. They are certainly not adequate. They certainly do not reflect the actual cost of obtaining medical services today compared to back in the 1970s when the non-emergency medical relief fund was brought in.

The other amazing thing about the study, Madam Speaker, is that very few people even knew that the subsidy, as it is, while it may need improvement, even exists. They do not know, Madam Speaker, and I think that it should be a responsibility of government to make sure that people do know. Make sure that it is in the different hospitals around the Province. Make sure that doctors have it in their office, the pamphlet, explaining the benefits that people are entitled to. We can fight for improvements to the plan, Madam Speaker, but whatever the plan contains, whatever benefit is there for people, should have the ability to make people aware that there is such a thing and that they will be entitled to some refund of the money that they spend, regardless of whether it is adequate or not. We can work on that later, but at least people should know that the plan is there for them to access.

These are just some of the thoughts, Madam Speaker, that I have, that I just wanted to get out here tonight. Thank you for providing me with the opportunity. As the days progress, I am sure we will have other opportunities to talk about other things that are equally important to the people of this Province. By trying to attack and bring down a deficit that was built up over many, many, years and try to reduce that to a balanced budget in a couple or three years. I do not think it is realistic. I think there are gentler, kinder ways of achieving the same result. There are gentler, kinder ways that will inflict less misery on people, but you can accomplish the same thing by doing it over a longer period of time with the same bottom line in mind.

With that, Madam Speaker, I will conclude my remarks and look forward to taking part in further debate as the days and weeks unfold.

Thank you.

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

It is certainly a privilege to stand tonight and speak on the Budget, but in particular to the sub-amendment put forward by my colleague, the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

Madam Speaker, I want to speak this evening on the lack of commitment in a Budget. I want to speak on the people I represent in the big land of Labrador. Madam Speaker, the first thing I see missing from the Budget is a commitment to the young people. Madam Speaker, it is news to everyone in this Province. There is no question that the young people in my riding face many problems and our communities have to deal with very serious social problems.

Under the previous government we gave this Province a Child and Youth Advocate, under former Judge Lloyd Wicks. If this government does not give an office in Labrador to deal with the serious problems, especially in the Aboriginal communities, and if they do not locate that office right on the North Coast of Labrador where the majority of the problems arise, then this government will do the biggest injustice to the Aboriginal people and children in Labrador than any government has ever done.

In the Budget we heard of the closing of the Trans-Labrador Highway, a road that was just recently opened. I know how much it meant to my colleague, the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair. This summer I had an opportunity to drive over the road at the official opening. I seen the elders and the young people, and to see the joy it brought to them as to what this road meant. Now, come fall, the road is going to be closed. These people will not be able to travel to see their relatives and friends on a regular basis, let alone during the Christmas and Easter holidays.

Madam Speaker, I wonder, what would the members on the Island portion of the Province feel if we got an excavator and tore the road up out around Clarenville and divided the Avalon Peninsula from the rest of Newfoundland and told the people to carry on the best way they could? It would be the biggest uprising that this Province has ever seen, and rightly so, because people do not deserve that. For this government to turn around and say that they are not going to do any winter maintenance or snow clearing for the next six years, instead of going up there and trying to address the problem and find the solution, that they are going to run and hide and say to the people on the South Coast of Labrador, that we are going to divide you again. Divide and conquer.

Madam Speaker, there was no commitment to the auditorium to be built in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. Even though ministers on the other side, as late as February, were still telling the town council and people in Labrador and Happy Valley-Goose Bay that the funds were there, that they were committed.

Children from all over Labrador travel to Happy Valley-Goose Bay for the Arts and Culture festivals, the music festivals. To them, Madam Speaker, it is very important, and for this government to turn around and not honour that commitment to the young people in Labrador, again, I think, shows a lot of respect, a lack of concern. Again, another injustice done to whom? The children in Labrador.

Madam Speaker, we seen this government in the Budget announce how they are going to do away with the Aboriginal policing on the North Coast of Labrador. There is no question that they are going to increase the number of RCMP in each community, in Rigolet and Makkovik, from one officer to two, but, as we speak, there are no accommodations presently being done or any plans to find accommodations to accommodate the extra RCMP officers. There is no question that people in government should know about the lack of housing on the North Coast of Labrador.

Madam Speaker, we heard in the Budget about laying off teachers. There is no question that rural Newfoundland is going to suffer and hurt the most. There is no talk of recruitment and retention to try and attract professionals into these isolated communities in Newfoundland and Labrador, something that the previous government did. Even though we brought in extra bonuses, and signing bonuses, we still had great difficulty in finding recruitments to fill these positions. As a matter of fact, as we speak today, many of these positions have not been filled for quite some time.

We heard the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board again talk of health services within driving range of a person's home. Again, as I said before, the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board certainly did not have the people on the North Coast of Labrador in mind when he made that commitment.

Madam Speaker, I had the opportunity to attend the graduation of the College of the North Atlantic in Happy Valley-Goose Bay this past week. Almost 80 per cent of those who graduated at the College of the North Atlantic this year were Aboriginal people from the North Coast of Labrador, the upper Lake Melville area. We even had eight students there from Nunavut. The graduation itself was overshadowed because that same day, or the day before, there were five or six instructors at the College of the North Atlantic in Labrador West who had received their layoffs. This took away from the graduation and what the College of the North Atlantic has done in Labrador.

Madam Speaker, no mention in the Budget of affordable housing, after a deal was done last year by the previous government and the federal government; a chance where this government had to get fifty-cent dollars, where they could reach out in certain parts of this Province and build affordable housing for people in need.

The marine service; well, I had a meeting in Happy Valley-Goose Bay about a week-and-a-half ago where the stakeholders came together. Again, we are all saying now that it is going to cost the Province an extra $2 million a year to run the service out of Lewisporte. The only thing I can say to the Minister of Transportation and Works, and Aboriginal Affairs is that I think it is time we got together as a community of Labrador with you and to certainly sit down and discuss our figures and where they differ.

Madam Speaker, I heard members across the way talk of Bill 18 and what it meant for their children and grandchildren, and that they had no other choice but to vote for it. Well, I can say that there are many things members across the way already have and, in their communities, they take for granted. There are many communities in rural Newfoundland and Labrador that do not enjoy the luxury of many of the things that these people have. I am sure many of the members, like myself, are not asking that we have everything the urban ridings have for their children but give us the necessities that we need to make our children's way of life improve and give them some stability in their communities.

Madam Speaker, given the right to services in education, health and transportation, regardless of where people live, I think is a given for any government, but I can say with great certainty - I can certainly say in this Budget that I can foresee a lot of problems for the people in different ridings.

Again, I do not speak very often, but I want to say to the government on the other side, especially the Cabinet ministers, that I will stand in this House, I will go on the Open Line - I will question them on the Open Line show and anywhere, because the people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador deserve a right to services which this government did not include in the Budget. On behalf of the people of the North Coast of Labrador I will stand day in and day out, and I will challenge any minister in this government to provide the services to the people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador and, particularly, in my riding. One thing that we enjoy is the Freedom of Speech and, certainly, I will take that opportunity to speak for my riding and ask all services and things from different Cabinet ministers. Because of the lack of commitment to Labrador in the Budget is one reason why I cannot support this Budget, and I will certainly vote against it.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Is the House ready for the question?

Shall the sub-amendment carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: The sub-amendment is defeated.

On motion, sub-amendment defeated.

MR. SPEAKER: Shall the amendment carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think this sub-amendment is - we are calling on a vote of non-confidence in this government and I will be certainly speaking to that one, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I listened very attentively to my colleague, the Government House Leader and the member from the Goulds. He happens to be a half-decent friend of mine. He spoke for twenty minutes here just a little while ago; twenty minutes. He was supposed to be standing and speaking to this year's Budget, the one that the Minister of Finance, the Member for Ferryland was so proud to be able to get up and deliver here about a month ago. The Member for Kilbride spoke for twenty minutes and never once did he mention this year's Budget. All he talked about was the past. Here they are, a brand new government, seven months into power, a brand new minister, he is the Government House Leader, the Minister Responsible for Mines and Energy, Forestry and Agriculture, the Minister of Resources, and not once did he mention this year's Budget. So, I must say that he, unlike the Finance Minister, is not as proud of the Budget as the Premier is. Just imagine now, a brand new government, a brand new minister, and all he wants to talk about is the past. What I will talk about tonight is - I will talk to this Budget because it is the first one of this government, a terrible Budget. I will also talk about the present and what the future entails with a government led by this Premier and by this Cabinet.

I notice that the Minister of Health, for the first time in a month, is smiling at me tonight. She is not apt to smiling in recent days but she is smiling tonight. Like my colleague from the Bay of Islands says, she will not go to Fogo Island. I doubt very much if she will ever go, even though I think she has been invited to attend the grand opening of the new health care facility there in the next month or so.

Well, Mr. Speaker, like I said, there are a few things that I would like to talk about in this Budget. I think it is the worst one that has been delivered here, certainly in the nine years that I have been a member of the House. I will get to the member from Deer Lake in a few minutes because she, as well, is smiling over there.

First of all, I would like to talk about health care. I would like to talk to some of the comments that my colleague, the Minister of Education made when the Minister of Finance brought down the Budget. He talked about what a surperlative education system and how they were going to revitalize that education system. How they were going to do that was by eliminating six school boards in the Province, where we have already reduced a number of school boards from twenty-seven to eleven. He was going to take six more of those out and he was going to revitalize an already superlative education system. Then, following right behind that, he talked about enhancing the education system in the Province by laying off 475 teachers from around the Province, most of which will come from rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Yet, that is going to revitalize the education system. So, they speak in paradoxes, I guess, because they say one thing but, in actual fact, the results of what they are saying will have a tremendous, negative impact on the education system in our Province.

The Minister of Education, in saying that he was going to eliminate six school boards, talked about how it was good for the Province. Mr. Speaker, it was only back in January when he visited the West Coast and was asked by a reporter whether or not he was going to cut the number of boards in the Province, his response was: No, I would not dream about it. Just prior to the election I happen to know that he met with the Newfoundland and Labrador School Boards Association and was asked that very same question. I think his Parliamentary Secretary, the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne, was also in attendance at that meeting and when asked by the School Boards Association what they were going to do with the school boards, he said: You have no worries. A PC government, if elected, will not cut school boards.

He probably said the same thing down in your district when he visited the school board down there, because I know just one week before the Budget came down back - I think it was March 31 you brought the Budget down - the Minister of Education was at the school board office in Gander and met with the school boards, some fifteen or twenty people, educated volunteers from the central region. When asked the question of whether or not he was going to downsize the number of school boards in the Province this year, he said no, again. Now, I happen to know the Minister of Education for the past nine years, a lot longer than I knew his Premier - whom I have only gotten to know, unfortunately, in the last couple of years - but I think the Minister of Education is an honourable individual. I do not believe for one minute that when he stood in an office in Gander and told them he was not going to eliminate the school boards - I think, Mr. Speaker, he spoke the truth at that meeting, just one week before the Budget came down. I honestly believe that he told those individuals the truth because I have never known him but to do that in any conversation that I have had with him, but unfortunately, I think the minister was left out of the loop with the Minister of Finance and the Premier. I would also hazard to guess that the Deputy Minister of Treasury Board was in on that, because I happen to know that she used to be the Minister of Education when we brought in elected school boards in the Province, and I know that she never wanted elected school boards. So, I guess she got her way at the end of the day, influenced the Finance Minister and the Premier into slashing six of the eleven school boards.

Mr. Speaker, I told the minister at the time, when he eliminated six of the eleven school boards, that he was going to have a problem. I noticed since then that he came out with a press release saying that he was going to leave, I think, the other six satellite school boards in the Province. In other words, he is going to leave all the offices that are currently open in the Province open after he eliminates six boards. By doing so, he and his Finance Minister claim that they are going to save between $6 million and $7 million. Well, I am at a loss to understand how the minister can achieve that amount of savings if, in fact, he is going to leave all these building open around the Province. I guess we will have to see what is going to happen there. Again, I think that is a result of the minister being told on Budget Day that he has to lose six boards. It took him almost a month to react. It took him almost a month after to react to the fact that he had lost them. What is he going to do and how is he going to achieve these savings? How is he going to deliver an education program to the youth of our Province? So, I guess that is the reason.

Mr. Speaker, he also talked about cuts to the number of teachers in the Province. Last year, just one year ago, the minister stood there, the Member for Harbour Main stood right behind him, and they condemned me for taking a number of teachers out. I might add, Mr. Speaker, it was probably about one-quarter or one-third of what he took out this year. He said, at the time, that if we eliminated one teaching position in the Province it was one too many, but then he stands this year and says that by eliminating 475 teaching positions in the next two years is going to enhance an already superlative education system.

So, I do not know what happened to him, like I said, from the time he left the floor over here and walked across to over there, except that, I guess he got in contact with a new Premier and a new Minister of Finance who did not want to have him in the loop and just told him what they wanted him to do. He has to be the messenger. He has to be the one to get out there and try and sell it, even though he believes in his own heart that what he is doing is not right and that it is going to have a major, negative impact on the students of our Province, because if you eliminate 475 teaching positions - you know, because you represent a rural district - it will impact the students in your district. You cannot take living, teaching bodies from a classroom and not have an impact on the students who are left behind. You can try distance education all you want, but the fact of the matter is, a computer monitor in Change Islands or one in Northern Bay or one on the Northern Peninsula is going to be able to do the job that you would do with a teacher standing in front of them. Besides having to replace teachers with computer monitors, we are also going to have enormous classes in the urban areas, enormous sizes. That was one of the criticisms he levelled at me last year, about the size of the numbers that were going to be in the classrooms in the larger urban areas.

I noticed, just this weekend, the Director of the Avalon East School Board said that the classrooms in the city and in the Avalon East School Board will go from about twenty-two to thirty-five. Again, another individual, I think, who might be out of touch with the actual board that he is running because there are currently, even before these cuts were made, classes in the Avalon East School Board with far more than thirty-five. I guess he is not going to buck the system, and neither is anyone who works for a school board in the Province today going to buck the government and tell them what they do not want to hear because they have all been given their pink slips and now they are all applying for the few jobs that are left over. I guess if you are applying for a job to the Minister of Education, or a board that he has selected to pick a director of education, than you are not going to criticize those who you are going to look for, for a job in the coming weeks.

Mr. Speaker, in listening to the members opposite for the past month - even though very few of them spoke to the Budget, and when they actually spoke to the Budget they did not speak to it. In actual fact, most of them over there made their maiden speech because it is their first time sitting in the House of Assembly, but they made some interesting and telling comments, because what they said was not what the veterans from the other side said. There is no trouble to know those who have been around for ten years, like yourself, Mr. Speaker, because you did not get up and proudly say, like the Member for Mount Pearl did: I am delighted to stand in the House tonight and vote on a bill that is going to force civil servants back to work while stripping their contracts. Because that is what the Member for Mount Pearl said, that he was delighted. I noticed you, in your speech, Mr. Speaker, that at least you understood the impact this was going to have on the civil service. You also understood that these civil servants are your constituents, like they are mine and others in the Legislature, and you have been around long enough to know that you do not stand in the House of Assembly and say you are delighted to be able to vote for a bill that is going to strip contracts from your employees.

Mr. Speaker, I also noted with great interest, the maiden speech of the MHA for Trinity-Bay de Verde, I think it is called - or is it Trinity South?

MR. GRIMES: Trinity-Bay de Verde.

MR. REID: Trinity-Bay de Verde - when she talked about how proud she was to be a Tory because it was the Tory government that brought her back to Newfoundland and Labrador. The Liberals, she said, sent her out of the Province and it was the Tories who brought her home. How proud she was of that! Well, Mr. Speaker, I hope she also feels very proud this year when the 400 graduates from the Faculty of Education graduate in May, this month, from Memorial University and are out looking for teaching positions. I hope she is so proud that when they knock on her door in the coming months that she will be able to just give them the same answer that she gave here. She is very proud to be a part of the Tory government because the Tories brought her home. Unfortunately, she will not be able to say to these young, educated individuals that there is no hope for them and they should leave and go elsewhere in the country, as they are apt to do, Mr. Speaker.

I also listened intently to the Minister of Fisheries when he talked about education. He talked about: We have too many schools. We have too many schools in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. That is the first time - I have to hand it to him - I have ever heard that in the House of Assembly or anywhere else. I have never heard an MHA in this Province get up and say that he had too many schools in his district and that some of them should close. I think his actual words were, Mr. Speaker: that bricks and mortar don't make schools and neither do bricks and mortar make hospitals. What he said there was a school in his district, or two - a couple of schools in his district, he said, should not exist because they are too small, too isolated and they should close them down. I guess what he is saying is, in essence, they should also close down those towns. That is what he is saying, because if you talk to any rural community in this Province - the mayors, the councillors, and all the people in the community will tell you that if you close the school in the community it is another death nail in the coffin of that community.

Mr. Speaker, I was rather surprised to hear the Minister of Fisheries say it because in talking about veterans - I am sure, Mr. Speaker, you would not have said it. I do not think the Member for Kilbride would have gotten up and said: It is time to close the school in my district. I do not think the Minister of Education would say it. I do not think the member who represents Placentia -Argentia would get up and say it is time to close the school in my district. I can guarantee you, Mr. Speaker, I would never say it, and I do not think the constitutes of the Minister of Fisheries are going to be very happy when they hear what he said. So, I guess the next thing he will be saying is that they should also close the hospital in St. Anthony because bricks and mortar do not make a hospital. That is the second shoe that is about to fall. That is the -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. REID: No, I know. It does not bother the Member for Kilbride to lose schools in rural Newfoundland, I am sure it does not. That is probably the reason why he is grinning.

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. E. BYRNE: The Member for Twillingate & Fogo just referenced me, he said that it does not bother me that schools close down in rural Newfoundland and that is why I was grinning. I want to say to the Member for Twillingate that is because - I was not grinning at anything related to that. Myself and the Leader of the Opposition had a private exchange, or just a light moment. It happens from time to time in the House. I do want to put on the record that the remark which was just made by the Member for Twillingate certainly has no basis, in fact. If there was somebody else who might have been, sir, but it was not me, I say to the Member for Twillingate.

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order. It is a point of clarification.

The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I do not know what you would call it but I call it an interruption. I have yet to stand in this House of Assembly in the past month-and-a-half to make a speech but the Government House Leader has stood on a point of order and interrupted me. I do not think that he appreciates.... Now he is winking at me. I think the last time that he stood up -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. REID: I think this is the eighty-sixth point of order that member has made while members on this side of the floor have been trying to make a speech. Now, I know that he did not have anything positive to say about the Budget tonight because he spoke for twenty minutes, or fifteen to be exact. I had better make it right because he will stand on another point of order. In his fifteen minutes that he stood tonight, speaking to the Budget, not once did he mention this year's Budget.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, I was talking about the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. Maybe that is why the Government House Leader got a bit confused and thought I was talking about aquaculture, because he is the minister responsible for that but we have not heard him mention it in the past month-and-a-half. We will get to that tomorrow or the next day, when we do the Estimates for his department.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, I was saying that the Member for Trinity-Bay de Verde was delighted to be a Tory because she has brought home.... I would like to know what is going to happen to the youth in Northern Bay and Western Bay and Lower Island Cove and all of those towns that she has on the South Shore of Trinity Bay and the North Shore of Conception Bay - are going to say to her when they are looking for a job this year.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. REID: The Minister of Fisheries is down there yapping, as he is so apt to do, Mr. Speaker. He talks a lot but says nothing.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. REID: Maybe he should be in New Ferolle tonight. Maybe the Minister of Fisheries should be in New Ferolle tonight, addressing the 250 people who have not gone to work yet. Maybe that is where you should be tonight, rather than sitting here doing nothing.

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and Minister Responsible for Labrador Affairs.

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

The member knows what is going on in New Ferolle. If his government had dealt with it when they were in power, the $2 million that is owing by the company that runs the facility in New Ferolle, when he was in Cabinet, they had an opportunity to deal with the problem up there. They let the facility operate last year without a licence, Mr. Speaker. If he had dealt with it, I would not have to be dealing with it today, as with many other issues that this government has to face, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. REID: The crowd opposite, I must say, now that the Premier has gone to Berlin - a good place for him to be, by the way - now that the Premier has gone to Berlin, all of these people, the people they have been calling on, on Open Line, for the past month to open their mouth, and calling them puppets, all of a sudden they have a voice, now that the Premier has gone out of the Province for a week. So, I guess we will hear lots from them.

As for the response that the Minister of Fisheries just made, today, in the paper, he said that the individual in New Ferolle who owed $700,000, that is gone to $2 million tonight, and no, Mr. Speaker, I had absolutely nothing to do with the plant in New Ferolle. I had nothing to do with the loan guarantee. I had nothing to do with the loans that are outstanding, according to the minister. If the minister would start to live in the present rather than in the past, we would not have the problem on the Northern Peninsula that his colleague, the Member for St. Barbe, is dealing with tonight because he does not have the intestinal fortitude to go up there and address the people.

Mr. Speaker, now he is trying to bankrupt the plant in New Ferolle so that he can move the licence to St. Anthony, and he had the audacity to say here in the House of Assembly this afternoon, oh, no, he could not do that because he has this independent licensing board. What a joke, Mr. Speaker. An independent licensing board which is going to be, I might add, appointed by the Minister of Fisheries, himself, and then, when that appointed board makes a decision, the minister can still say, no, I do not agree with this decision, and it is not binding.

Mr. Speaker, do not talk to me about independent licensing boards. If they are independent licensing boards, is just like the independent, elected or appointed school boards that the Minister of Education just appointed, where he put his political hacks from around the Province to head up the boards so that they could do to the education system in this Province, exactly what they have been trying to do for years.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I would like to know as well, how much the political hacks are getting paid to take -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the member to take his seat for a minute. There is far too much bantering and shouting back and forth the House. The member has twenty minutes to speak. I ask that we give the member his twenty minutes. If somebody else wants to speak after, then they have every right to take part as the debate proceeds.

The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the fact that you intervened on my behalf.

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

MR. REID: Here he goes again with a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Trinity North.

MR. REID: I wonder, would they be kind enough to grant me the time that they are taking from me?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. Member for Trinity North.

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just want to make a point.

The member opposite, and several other members opposite, stood today and talked about, in reference to the Minister of Education, appointing trustees. I guess the Leader of the Opposition will recall when he initially removed the denominations from the education system of this Province several years ago when he was the minister. He, too, appointed a transition board. In fact, I was one of the members of that transition board. The minister - the current Leader of the Opposition -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the member to make his point of order so that the Chair can rule on the point of order and get on with debate in the House.

MR. WISEMAN: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

The point I was trying to make, Mr. Speaker, is that the current Leader of the Opposition, when he was the Minister of Education, he, too, appointed a transition board, because I was a member of that transition board and he was the individual who made that appointment. So, this transitional process is a very natural process, I say, Mr. Speaker. The member opposite, from Twillingate & Fogo, if he wants to reference transition boards, he needs to reference his own -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the member to take his seat. There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo, one minute to finish up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe what is happening here in this House tonight. That is three points of order, seven minutes of my twenty wasted, and the member for Clarenville talks about trust. Well, Mr. Speaker, I can say that I trusted him once when I spent my Easter vacation campaigning for him when he ran for the Liberals two years ago, but he cannot talk to me about trust anymore because I do not believe him.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, back to some of the individuals opposite. We had the Member for Humber Valley, the lady from Deer Lake, up speaking right after the Minister of Fisheries the other night -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. REID: - and she was applauding the Minister of Education for eliminating school boards and laying off 475 teachers in the system, because I think that she actually believed that any savings in the education system was going to be reinvested back into our youth in our Province, into the classrooms, into our students. Then, Mr. Speaker. while she was actually on her feet talking to this, the Minister of Education was out by the door saying that any savings from the elimination of 475 teaching positions, any savings from the elimination of six school boards and all the employees contained therein, was not going to be put back into the education of our youth, but it was going to be put back into the deficit so that the Premier can give tax breaks to his rich buddies that they were talking about in the paper this weekend.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the Member for Twillingate & Fogo that his time has expired.

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, just one minute to clue up?

The reason my time has expired -

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: No.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I believe we have now gotten beyond the sub-amendment to the Budget amendment which was about the fantasy and the mythology and the inaccuracies in the Budget, and we are now on the amendment to the Budget motion which is the non-confidence motion. I have yet to speak on the non-confidence motion but I do want to say out the outset that I will be voting for the non-confidence motion, against any confidence in this government and its budgetary policy. There are some very good reasons why I am doing that, and if hon. members opposite listen to these reasons I think I may, in fact, be able to persuade one or two of you to join me in voting non-confidence in this government and its budgetary policies.

The first one, Mr. Speaker, has to do with the kind of confidence that the Premier and his government instilled in the voters last fall when they talked about a pretty tricky issue. You will remember, those of you who ran under the Blue Book, that the Blue Book talked - I think it was page fifty-six or fifty-seven - about the prospect of being able to eliminate up to 25 per cent of the public service. It was there in black and white, even though it was a Blue Book, and everybody who actually read the book from cover to cover saw it, and those who saw it pointed it out to other people. They would phone Open Line and they would say: Bill, I see that the Blue Book is talking about laying off up to 25 per cent of the public service.

Mr. Speaker, it got to be a bit of a theme. Opposition candidates in opposing parties, parties other than the Tory Party, actually started talking about it. The New Democrats talked about: Hey, these Tories want to eliminate up to 25 per cent of the public service. It got to be a bit of a problem for the Tories seeking government, but then came an opportunity for the now Premier, the then Leader of the Opposition, to clarify matters. He was on an Open Line program, on Bill Rowe's program, VOCM, on the morning of October 17, 2003. Now that was, coincidentally, four days before the election, and the current Premier was the last of the three leaders to do this interview on the Open Line. We were down to the wire because the Premier had to rush off to the airport. There was a plane waiting for him, all revved up, waiting to take him out to Corner Brook, and the very last caller - the very last caller for the very last party leader on Open Line - was a gentleman by the name of Leo Puddister.

AN HON. MEMBER: I heard (inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: I heard it as well. I actually have a transcript as well. I heard it personally and I was a bit shocked, I have to say. I was a bit shocked, but I know that the current Premier did, apparently, according to this transcript and according to what I heard, instilled a fair degree of confidence in Mr. Leo Puddister, because he was asked directly a question and I am going to go to the question now. It says: If I read correctly what you are saying in your Blue Book, that you are going to downsize the public service through attrition, well, that means that 600 does not go up to 720; it goes down to around 500 - this is talking about the number of social workers we need. This public service cannot operate without enough people to do it, so what kind of a commitment are you going to make to the members that I represent? So, the President of NAPE: What kind of commitment are you going to make to the members that I represent?

Here is the answer, and I would encourage members opposite to listen because I think I may persuade some of you that this non-confidence motion is something that you should seriously consider. The Premier said: Well you know, the first thing, and I am glad you asked this Leo, I meant the first thing that I have said to your members right now is that they have job security.

That is what the Premier said to Leo Puddister on October 17. The next sentence is: We do not stand for layoffs. Now, we hear speeches since then: We do not stand for layoffs. We are just doing them. In fact, Leo Puddister gave a speech last week in front of the Confederation Building where he says - and we will find out this week whether it turns out to be prophetic or not - that up to 1,500 people are going to receive layoff slips this week.

The Government House Leader shakes his head, so it will not be 1,500 - maybe it will be 1,492 - because you have to watch it with those folks over there. You have to watch it, you know. They learned the phrase from the former Premier. The former Premier stood over there and he would talk about a book, a book they used to teach in high school and university, when we were at university: Words are important.

So, when you accuse this government of laying off 1,500 people, they say: No, no, no, that is a lie. That is not true. It is really only 1,493. So, the member is misleading the public. Well, these are the kinds of words we have here. We do not stand for layoffs. That is what the Premier said. We do not stand for what your union went through back in the early 1990s. Then he goes on to say: I do not stand for layoffs and cuts in the public service. I do not stand for layoffs and cuts in the public service.

Here is another thing: Nothing is further from the truth, I can tell you right now. The point that we made in the Blue Book was that an observation was made that over the course of the next four or five years there would be a 25 per cent turnover in the public service and that some people would be leaving voluntarily, and there will be some opportunities.... There may be, there may be - he says it twice, so there may be, there may be - some opportunity for some positions that are no longer necessary, and that is a very, very, very, small percentage.

Now, three very's and two may be's. We have a may be, may be, and then a very, very, very small percentage. So, this was the way it was put to Leo Puddister and everybody else who was listening to VOCM Open Line that morning, and I understand it has a very wide listenership, that, particularly during the pre-election period, people were paying attention to what was being said because there was a lot of confusion. There was a lot of confusion. Then he said: Another thing. While I got you, I might mention to you, you know, you may be able to show me, as a union leader, where you can actually effect some savings in government by contracting in. You know, there may be things that government are doing now that they are contracting out that you and your union might be able to do cheaper. If you are able to do that, well, then, there are more savings being achieved, because you and I have to work in partnership - that is a good one- over the next few years.

This is what was said to Leo Puddister. Did that instill confidence - we are talking about the non-confidence motion - in Mr. Puddister and in the membership of NAPE? He says: Well, what you said now, Mr. Williams, is a bit different from your books, though I will take you at your word. I will take you at your word. He goes on to say, we would like to have a meeting after you are elected. If you are elected, we will arrange a meeting with NAPE executive and talk about these issues further - because, you have to remember, NAPE is non-partisan. NAPE is non-partisan in this election. We are a public sector union by and large. Our constitution says we have to be non-partisan. Thank you very much, and I am satisfied with your answer.

So, item number one on the confidence metre is assurances given by the Premier to Leo Puddister which instilled confidence in him and, in fact, even though NAPE was non-partisan, as Mr. Puddister pointed out, Mr. Puddister did confess, over the last month or so, he made a public confession, to say: Yes, boy, I voted for the Premier. I voted PC. I supported him.

I suspect, Mr. Speaker, that he supported him in many respects based on what was said in this transcript, in this VOCM Open Line show, and what was repeated in writing and signed by the Premier in advertisements that were printed in newspapers across the Province in the few days after October 17 and before October 21.

What do we have since then? Can we say that Mr. Puddister and the 20,000 people in NAPE and CUPE, who were just on strike for thirty days over twelve days of sick leave, that they have confidence in this government, that they continue to have the kind of confidence that was instilled in them by the Premier to the point that some 70 per cent or 80 per cent of NAPE members, according to the NAPE leadership, actually voted for this government?

That is the kind of circumstance that we are in today, Mr. Speaker, because members opposite were asked to stay up until 2:30 a.m. a couple of nights ago, given speeches to read out in the House one by one.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) both ways.

MR. HARRIS: Well, boy, you cannot have it both ways. You either stand up and walk the plank - people have PR people writing speeches for you. You might add a few words of your own, but, Mr. Speaker -

AN HON. MEMBER: When you don't get up (inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: I never complained about people not getting up. I encouraged members to speak. There may have been complaints from some quarters. I know the public was concerned, but I was never concerned about the - I like to hear members speak. I want you to get up and speak. I am not going to criticize you for not speaking, but I know that you all got up and spoke last week until 2:30 in the morning saying the exact opposite of what the Premier said back in October, leading up to the election. That is item number one on the confidence metre.

Item number two, I have to say - and to some of you it may be a minor point but to me it was a big thing because we were very concerned about this issue ourselves. I have a news release. It is dated October, 1999. I guess the question is: Who said this? This is a "who said this?" question. So-and-so, blank, blank, blank, is calling on the Province to allocate a minimum 5 per cent of total lottery profits to help those people victimized by gambling addictions. Now, who said that? That is the question. Who said that? Who said that? Now, that is a very important question because there were a number of us who happened to sit on this side of the House at the time, who were very concerned about the fact that this Province was earning millions and millions upon millions upon millions of dollars from gambling that was established by the Liberal government when they were in power, so, you know, I am prepared to spread the blame around, but, Mr. Speaker, when this party was in Opposition, a significant player in the current government said that they wanted to spend more money on helping those victimized by gambling addictions.

The Member for Ferryland, Sullivan, said: The provincial government raked in $87 million in 1998-1999 through lottery revenues but coughed up only a miserable $150,000 to help people with gambling addictions. A miserable $150,000 to help people with gambling addictions. The beverage industry provided a similar amount for rehabilitation programs.

That is a total of $300,000, and the current Minister of Finance - those of you who did not know who I was talking about, you now know - the current Minister of Finance, the Member for Ferryland, he is the one who issued this press release. He said that his amount, the 5 per cent - the $9 million amounts to twice the 5 per cent the Opposition PC Party - not just the minister, not just the current minister, but the PC Party - has stated it would allocate from the total revenues from gambling addiction services. This Province could do an awful lot of rehabilitation work with the $4 million which represents 5 per cent of the total lottery revenues in 1998-1999.

Now we get to his last sentence. He talks about the moral obligation of the Province - if they want to participate in lotteries - the moral obligation to help those who become addicted to such things as video lottery terminals and other games of chance. Here is a quote: 5 per cent of total lottery revenues for rehabilitation services is not asking very much, considering the dilemma many families are confronted with through gambling.

Every member in this House, I would submit, Mr. Speaker, knows of families who have been devastated by gambling addiction, people whose children have suffered from gambling addiction. There have been suicides reported, a number of suicides reported, Mr. Speaker, related to gambling addiction. A couple in Corner Brook recently talked about their daughter committing suicide as a result of gambling addiction. We do have a very significant and serious problem, and I would venture to say that a very large number of suicides are a result of that. I know the Province of Quebec recently issued some statistics on that.

So, what did we get in the Budget, Mr. Speaker? What did we get in the Budget? Based on the current government estimates for this year, the government estimates to take in, in lottery revenues, $110 million.

I was looking forward, Mr. Speaker, to the first Budget coming out, because I was very encouraged by the statement of the Minister of Finance, when he was in Opposition, that the PC Party was committed to 5 per cent to go into rehabilitation services. It would have been a very big and important step forward.

What do we hear, Mr. Speaker? Based on the revenues of $110 million, I was expecting to have $5.5 million available for rehabilitation services, and God knows it is needed because we do have a lot of people who are addicted to these VLTs in particular but other forms of gambling as well. What do we have, Mr. Speaker? Budget Highlights 2004, under the heading - and get this - Help for Those Who Need it Most, what we have is an additional $100,000 to address gambling addiction. So the Province's contribution will go from $150,000 to $250,000, and this is from a Finance Minister and from a party who, in Opposition, said we should devote 10 per cent of our revenues to rehabilitation services.

It is far cry, Mr. Speaker, from $250,000 to $.5.5 million for something that every member opposite knows, and every member on this side knows, is a travesty and a tragedy for far too many families and individuals in this Province. That is where this government has let down their moral guard and no longer has the confidence - and should no longer have the confidence - of the people of this Province for that kind of thing.

Mr. Speaker, I only have twenty minutes so I cannot talk about everything at once, but item number three has to do with their approach to taxation. They have told everybody something that they already knew, by the way, because the Minister of Finance was talking about it since last May. You wouldn't know but he invented accrual accounting.

AN HON. MEMBER: Cruel.

MR. HARRIS: It was certainly crude and it was probably pretty cruel when we finally found out what the numbers were, but when the government was talking about a deficit on a cash basis the Minister of Finance used to day: Oh, no, no, it is really $666 million. He started saying that last spring - 666 - the mark of the beast. That was the kind of numbers that the Minister of Finance was talking about, and these were the numbers that they turned out to be at the end of the day.

They used that back in January. The Premier used that to talk about a wage freeze for public sector workers starting in January. We were expecting that when the Budget came out we would see a lot of across-the-board sharing of the pain, sharing of a wholesale readjustment of financial figures. We thought that things that were going to be made tough were not just going to be made tough for those people who had already been told by the Premier that there was going to be wage freeze. We thought that the tax structure would change considerably. Well, it did, for certain people, and for certain people only. The tax structure in the form of fees for people getting a driver's licence, or using an ambulance, or going to a park to enjoy the outdoors, all of these fees changed - $25 million being raised - but not once was corporate taxes touched.

Mr. Speaker, I said, at the time of the Budget, that if we had raised corporate taxes in this Province to the same level as Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, we would have an additional $70 million. That was not done. That was not touched. What happened in Nova Scotia, even though they are already higher than us? Te Nova Scotia government did three things that we should have done. One, they rolled back a tax cut, an income tax cut that had been given as of January 1 to wealthy people. Second, they increased their corporate tax rate. Third, they actually added a new band of high income earners to their income tax system to collect more money from those who are wealthy, from those who have lots of money. We did not do any of that here. This government picked on public servants, said you are going to have a wage freeze, and you imposed, last week, wage increases over the next four years that amount to -

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MR. HARRIS: Just one minute to finish my sentence, Mr. Speaker? It would be nice to finish my sentence. By leave?

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MR. HARRIS: - imposed a wage increase that over the four years will amount to a 5 per cent wage increase when the inflation will be 8.5 per cent, so a 3.5 per cent wage cut over the next four years.

The pain was not spread, Mr. Speaker, and they did not attack anybody except those who have to pay fees, such as going to parks, getting their driver's licence renewed, and renewing their registration, and that is unfair. That is another reason why I lack confidence and that we should vote in favour of the non-confidence motion and against confidence in this government.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Are we ready for the motion?

AN HON. MEMBER: Ready, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: We are voting on the amendment put forward by the Opposition Leader, seconded by the Opposition House Leader, now being called the non-confidence motion.

All those in favour of the motion, signify by saying ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: Contra minded, ‘nay'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is defeated.

On motion, non-confidence motion defeated.

MR. SPEAKER: Debate continues on the main budgetary motion.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate having the final few words, I guess, as it were, on the Budget Speech issue. I had two earlier comments concerning grading this Administration so far into their mandate. They have one semester done, and I have alluded to some of the issues of why we graded them, the courses they took, the courses they flunked, and why I actually thought they failed the courses, and some courses they ought to take in the future.

In a more specific vein this evening, to close off the debate on this Budget, there are lots of reasons to dislike what we see in this Budget, and the people of this Province have great reason to fear, actually, what they have seen to date from this Administration.

In my final comments regarding the report card, shall we say, I may as well say right up front, without hesitation, and without fear of contradiction, actually - and I am sure the people of the Province would agree - this Administration ought to and does receive an F on its first semester report card. No question about it, it is definitely an F.

Just look at some of the reasons why. It is very confusing to the public when someone tells you one thing and does something else. I am sure there is a medical term for it when that happens to someone, and we have seen that from this Administration. I cannot understand why a government would say one thing constantly and always do something else. That is what we seem to have here. There is mass confusion in the public mind as to why someone would inflict this upon themselves and, more importantly, inflict it upon the populous.

For example: There shall be no layoffs. There are indeed layoffs. That is contradictory in anybody's eyes. Someone says: Well, why would you say that if you did not intend to do it? You certainly did not intend to do it and not tell us, because that would be misleading, so we have a problem with that.

No school boards will be amalgamated. The minister himself was in Gander saying that to school boards a week before it actually happened. We will reduce the number of school boards from eleven to six. So you get a credibility issue here.

The number of teachers - we get members opposite, like the Member for Whitbourne over there who last year stood up and ranted and raved because we are taking one teacher out of the system. We cannot use the Williams' formula to remove teachers because you have to look at every particular circumstance. Yet, this year, we get 475 teachers ripped out of the educational system. Four hundred and seventy-five.

Fee increases - as I alluded to earlier today, 153 different fees in this Province have been increased by this Administration. The first whack in the kitchen, the first opportunity to put pen to paper, and 153 fees. Everything from what you get when you are born, your birth certificate, to your death certificate, they get you. One time they used to say the only thing that can get you is death and taxes. There is a third thing now, and that is this government. Death, taxes, and the PC government, guaranteed to get you, from birth to death and everything in between. In fact, Mr. Speaker, if you get a divorce in this Province now - you get a certificate of the divorce - this crowd have even increased the fees on getting your divorce certificate, so nowhere are you safe.

I notice, too - and even some of their own converts have noticed this, for example, their candidate, a fine gentleman by the name of Mr. Mackenzie who ran against me in the last election back in October - a big article this week in The Sunday Independent: Dead or Alive. Ambulance operator says rules and regulations killing rural operators, maybe even patients.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who said that?

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Mackenzie, none other than the PC candidate in the last election.

Mr. Mackenzie goes on to talk about fee increases by this Administration. Just the point that even their own converts, as of five or six months ago, are now giving this Administration a failing grade. It is not only this member. It is not only the public. It is their own converts who put their names on their nomination papers and ran for them, who have lost complete faith in this Administration.

Another issue in the Budget, labour relations. As I said today, they never even took the foundation course, let alone the course in labour relations. They have no concept of what it is to deal with labour. You see words in the paper, and on media interviews, the Premier uses about the second shoe dropped. Well, we certainly know what he has done with the first shoe, or I should say the first boot, and NAPE and CUPE have the footprint to bear, from what he has done with his first shoe. So, no doubt, an F definitely on the labour relations issue.

The Labrador ferry service, that was a great one. We are going to have a new approach. We are not going to be political. We are going to do things for the right reasons and because they ought to be done. We do not care about political reasons. No, we will not cross that bridge. What do they do? Change the Labrador ferry service, contrary to all the commission report recommendations, notwithstanding that we are going to spend more money to do it, and, lo and behold, whose district benefits from it? The Minister of Transportation and Works. So, dare we say again that this is an example of an Administration that says one thing and does something else? It leaves one to wonder.

We do not see anything in this Budget - this is one thing that is not in the Budget that ought to have been in there - and that is funding for Aricept. We do not see that. We have only been here talking for two or three weeks about what is in the Budget. We talk about accrued accounting. We have cruel accounting right here, no question about it. There are a lot of things that are not in it, such as the Aricept funding. The Arts Procurement Program -

AN HON. MEMBER: Gone.

MR. PARSONS: Gone, scrapped. Sorry. It might have been good for the cultural heritage of this Province, it might have been good for artists who wanted to give themselves a boost, but, sorry, ladies and gentlemen of the Province, you cannot have it any more. By the way, we can afford, and we will afford, to pay $350,000 - and I notice not 300 as was anticipated - to do a pre-feasibility study to see if we can build a tunnel that costs x billions of dollars, we suspect, across The Straits. So, we talk about wise use of money and you wonder why the public are saying: Does this crowd really know what they are all about?

Five Wing Goose Bay, great parties and ta-das and back slapping here a few weeks ago, about this great team approach. The Premier has gone off to Berlin with the Member for Lake Melville and a representative, and I am somewhat confused. Maybe someone on the other side can straighten me out, because I am sure that the Minister Responsible for Labrador Affairs said here today, in response to a question in Question Period, that the person who was gone with them was one Randy Ford, who was the head of the union.

Now, I am reading this week's copy of The Sunday Independent, dated May 9, 2004, again and it says, "The Sunday Independent has learned that six of the seven local executive members resigned on April 30, although details as to why they stepped down are closely guarded. ‘It's not open for discussion,' says Randy Ford, who resigned as president."

I am wondering, is this the same Mr. Ford who is now back - is he back with the union and gone with the Premier to Berlin to discuss this most important initiative of 5 Wing? Or is this the same Randy Ford who is being touted as the next PC candidate in the federal election for the District of Labrador? God forbid if that should be the case and he ends up being the PC candidate. Those kinds of confusing things of what you say and what you do, and claiming that you have a new approach, are somewhat bothersome to the people of this Province out there.

On that issue, as well, about 5 Wing Goose Bay, we talk about openness, accountability, team sports. The Premier is really into being a team. He likes to be the quarterback, and we know what the goal is and how we are going to get there. Lo and behold, the members of the team - Mr. Ford is no longer a member of the team, obviously. He gets to go to Berlin. The Member for Lake Melville is a member of the team. He goes along. The MP for Labrador, Mr. O'Brien, which this group on the other side for the last two years touted - touted, got in this House repeatedly and read copies of faxes and telegrams that Mr. O'Brien had said. The Premier was here two weeks ago talking about the great co-operative spirit with Mr. O'Brien, and, lo and behold, Mr. O'Brien does not get an invite to go.

AN HON. MEMBER: The mayor?

MR. PARSONS: The Mayor of Happy Valley-Goose Bay? Apparently not. In fact, what smacks of the greatest hypocrisy of all, the greatest hypocrisy of all, is that we stood in this House about three or four weeks ago and passed, unanimously, a motion here in support of 5 Wing Goose Bay, and we unanimously tacked on, by amendment, to that motion, that there would be an all-party committee of this House to deal with issues concerning 5 Wing. Did the Premier think, at any time, in terms of being non-political, in terms of doing what is right for 5 Wing, in terms of presenting to the federal government a fully unified face and front? Did the Premier think to ask the all-party committee of the Province to go with him? No. So, one questions as to saying one thing and doing something else. You cannot be taken as serious, you cannot be taken as sincere, when two or three weeks after making these motions here in this House you turn around and disregard what you, yourself, suggested as an amendment, voted for unanimously, and claim to be the best thing since sliced bread. Well, you obviously left a lot of the bread at home. You did not want it with you, for some reason, but far be it for us to consider what the motivations of this government might be in that regard.

Another issue we have in the Budget, HRE offices. We have been told, in this House, that HRE offices are going to be closing, about twenty of them in the Province apparently. Now I suspect, personally, according to some information that we have from certain sources, I would suggest that within twenty-four hours we will know in this Province which of the twenty offices are going to close. I might even go so far as to look into the crystal ball and say that it might even be known tomorrow in a Ministerial Statement. I am willing to predict that one of those places might even by Burgeo, in my district. I might even go so far as to predict that another one might be in Bay L'Argent and another might be in New-Wes-Valley.

Now, this is a government that is talking about a future, talking about doing things that we have to do, and this is tough medicine and tough pills. If that were the case about the Burgeo one, for example, which I have some familiarity with because I happen to represent the district, we have an office at the end of a 154 kilometre road that services about 2,200 people in the community of Burgeo, plus the south coastal communities of Ramea, Grey River and François. Now, God forbid if a place like, for example, Deer Lake, which is thirty-five minutes up the road from Corner Brook, should stay open when they are thirty-five minutes on a perfectly good highway -

AN HON. MEMBER: A double-lane highway.

MR. PARSONS: - a double-lane highway, whereas somebody 154 kilometres away is going to be closed. We will see all of that tomorrow if and when that unfolds, or maybe my information is not very good. Maybe that is only conjecture on somebody's part. There are three in Labrador, apparently, so we will see tomorrow if that is good information or not.

There is also a lack of planning here. The Minister of Natural Resources alluded earlier tonight, in his comments, about the lack of skilled workers, and the Parliamentary Secretary, I believe, to the Minister of Education, commented on it over the weekend, that we have a drastic skill shortage looming in the Province. There is no doubt on the history of that. It started back in 1963. The reason we got training was because it came under the occupational training act of 1963. God bless Mr. Diefenbaker, and thanks to him, when he put a whole bunch of money into capital funding and we ended up with twenty-one or twenty-two vocational schools in the Province. In addition to the capital, we also ended up with money for training, where people were actually paid to go. You did not pay tuition to go; you were paid to go train. That is why we had such a great thing back in 1963. As I say to the Minister of Municipal Affairs, God bless Mr. Diefenbaker for doing that.

AN HON. MEMBER: A Tory.

MR. PARSONS: A good Tory government, but lo and behold it was a good Tory government that took it away again in 1985, named Brian Mulroney. So, I say to the minister, that is why we have a problem today, I would suggest, because we got rid of the occupational training act.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. PARSONS: I really appreciate the comments of the members opposite, and just so the people in TV land can appreciate what they said, they made a comment which is quite true, that this member, at one time, was a supporter of the Tory Party, Brian Mulroney, involved in the association in the federal District of Burin-St. George's, and I will not get a chance tonight but there was a conversion that took place from Toryism to Liberalism. All I say for now is that there was a disease that I had, called Toryism, and I was cured of it, thank God. I do not have time to get into it tonight, but I assure the members opposite that I have a good twenty-minute speech lined up on the disease of Toryism and how to cure it, and we have the cure. We have the cure over here.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. PARSONS: I say to the Minister of Natural Resources again, the reason we had the problem on the skilled training is because we do not have, I would suggest, the occupational training act any longer, which paid people to go into training and it benefitted us, of course by providing all these trained people.

In terms of planning again, which this Budget seems to be a poorly devised plan, because of all of these inconsistencies that I have pointed out where you say one thing and you do something else, and you should do things that are not in here, such as Aricept, there is no plan as we see it. This is not new to this Administration. I gave at least twenty-five speeches around this Province two years ago, as the Minister of Industry, to Chambers of Commerce and high school graduates as to why a vocational education was going to be a good thing in the future because of the skill shortage. So, this is not new. The other Administration deal with it and were, in fact, trying through ITRD to get into some incentive programming so that we could have more students get into it. I would suggest that is a very good thing, that if it were budgeted, could go into this Budget so that we do not have that looming crisis take place.

The other thing is the health care - and I made this comment today - and that deals with the professionals we have in rural Newfoundland. Virtually everything I commented on here tonight is not the urban centres of St. John's and Corner Brook that are going to be impacted by the negativity of the Budget as much as rural Newfoundland. I commented today about trained, skilled professionals, particularly medical personnel.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. PARSONS: I refer to one young doctor in Port aux Basques. We talk about changes that might be coming in the health care system and with all of this amalgamation of boards and servicing and where services ought to be. We have to be very careful that we have skilled people, such as Dr. Wendy Graham, who spend their eight, nine years in university, go back to their community, establish their family and their practice and then, because you take the services out of a community - such as Dr. Charles L. LeGrow Health Centre - they do not have the skills available to practice anymore. Because they do not, they lose their skills and because they do, they have to move elsewhere. That is a very possible and obvious downside to integration and movement around of health care services. So, this is more than a money exercise, I say to the government. Be very careful to the particular of that happening. We downgrade places to the point where the professionals we have there, who we have been fortunate enough to recruit, will not be retained. They will have to go to other places, bigger centres, just to get their training. That is not only true of Port aux Basques, that is true of Stephenville and elsewhere. If you take all the surgeries, for example, out of Stephenville, those who are trained as surgeons will not keep their skills up and they will have to move of necessity. So, that is a very obvious downside if that happens.

In conclusion, in my grade of the report of this Administration at the end of first term, as I say, this teacher gives them an F. Under the column where you make some comments on your report card that you always send home to mom and dad, a few little comments. A few of the comments I would make are: Johnny shows a lack of social conscience.

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. PARSONS: We have seen a lot of the first prong of this government in their new approach. We have seen the slash and the burn. We have not seen much of the second approach, the second shoe. We hope he does not go in the same place the first boot went. The economic growth -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. PARSONS: - or even a plan for economic growth, we are still looking for that plan. The sense from the people, and there are people out here in TV land who watch these cameras and watch the people in here and hear what people say, who can sense the sincerity of whether the government means what it says and will do what it says and pays attention to somebody who might question what you are doing. The sense of the people in this Province right now is, we did not get what we bargained for. We are only early in the term, but we did not get what we bargained for. That is the common theme out there. We are seeing things being done for political reasons, not for the right reasons, which was not supposed to be part of the new approach. We see change without the proper planning. We see change for the sake of change, which is certainly not always good. I say that, particularly, in personnel. We see a lot of personnel being changed for the sake of change and not because of any rational plan. Too much, too quickly. That is a comment you hear a lot in the public. Heavy on figures, light on social justice. That is a comment you hear in the public.

I fear the worst, Mr. Speaker, for this Budget for rural Newfoundland because that is what this was supposed to be all about, this Province in total. It is no good to have strong urban areas anywhere -

MR. MANNING: (Inaudible).

MR. PARSONS: This Province. When I say this Province, I say to the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's, I am referring to all of this Province, including Labrador.

MR. MANNING: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. PARSONS: Your comment is too foolish to deserve comment, for the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

I fear the worst for rural Newfoundland, and I say rural Newfoundland in this here. I would take anything outside of the St. John's region, the Corner Brook region, and in Labrador and Happy Valley-Goose Bay region.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MR. PARSONS: In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, there are eight semesters. The first one is through. The first one you failed. We will be back for report two in semester two.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

Mr. Speaker, if I had a teacher like the Opposition House Leader going from Kindergarten to Grade 11, and all through university, I doubt I would have graduated out of first grade. You could hardly say that the member is unbiased when dealing with the current government. For example -

MR. JOYCE: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: I have twenty minutes on the main motion, too, I say to the Member for Bay of Islands. Thank you, very much. I would appreciate you giving me my twenty minutes.

Mr. Speaker, for example, we just heard all throughout the day, question and Question Period, about the one-man show. That is what the members opposite called the Premier of the Province. That he went to Berlin, and he invited nobody. He did not ask the MP for Labrador. He invited nobody! He took it upon himself to go to Berlin, took a couple of people with him that were his colleagues and that was it.

Now, it is not what the Opposition says so much that intrigues me, but it is what they do not say and what they should say because they know they should say it. For example, just let me read this: Premier Williams and government officials will travel to Europe this week to attend the international aerospace exhibition and conference in Berlin, Germany. The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador - now, here is the kicker - was invited by the Department of National Defence -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. E. BYRNE: They were invited. The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador was invited. So, it was not -

AN HON. MEMBER: That is why they had (inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Hold on now. The story is changing now, Mr. Speaker. Every time the Opposition is confronted with a particular truth or fact, change the story. Change the premise. Change the story.

Here is exactly what happened. The Department of National Defence for the Canadian Government invited the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to be part of their booth and trade show. Do you know why? The Premier will also meet with defence officials from other European countries in an effort to market the base to secure future users.

Now, when we first became the government we were talking about Goose Bay. The future looked bleak, immediately. Because of the efforts of this government, the efforts of the Premier, the efforts of the Member for Lake Melville, and in particular, the efforts of the people in and around Lake Melville and Goose Bay, what is happening with 5 Wing Goose Bay was extended up until 2006. Why was it extended up until 2006? It was extended to give the Province and the Department of National Defence the opportunity to develop a strategic plan - those are DND's words, not ours - a strategic plan for the future of 5 Wing Goose Bay, a two-year period.

The fact of the matter is this:-

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: If the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair would like to listen, I could provide the information for her.

The Memorandum of Understanding was supposed to go to 2006, and as members opposite know, and members in this House know, but more importantly the people in Goose Bay know, the Memorandum of Understanding was not going to be lived up to. It was because of the efforts of this government, the Member for Lake Melville, and the pressure put on by people in Goose Bay, the Citizens Coalition, with the help of their MP, Lawrence O'Brien, that it was extended to give time for this government, in conjunction with the Department of National Defence who, by the way, invited us to go to the show. It was not us taking it upon ourselves. We attended upon their invitation, I say to members opposite. So what we did, Mr. Speaker, we bought a very important region of this Province time. We bought time to develop a strategic plan.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: So, let's put that to rest. Let's put that in context. You wouldn't know as if the Premier went off on some Jolly Roger mission, one-man show, not inviting anybody, because that is the image that the hon. Official Opposition would like to paint of the Premier of the Province, who is trying to do the best he can for the people of the Province.

Secondly, let's ask this: Did we hear the Opposition talk about new initiatives in forestry? Did we hear them talk about what went on in Labrador, or went on in the Northern Peninsula, this year when we entered into an agreement with Corner Brook Pulp and Paper to take over the management of the hardwood stands in one region as a pilot project on the Northern Peninsula? Did anybody talk about that? No. Do you know why? They did not know about it. It is good news. What are the implications of what we did in that area? I was involved and participating to try to make that happen.

Number one, we take control back of a resource that a pulp and paper company in this Province had control over. Now we, as a pilot project for hardwood, particularly in birch, took over that area and managed it. We will manage it for future generations, but why did we do it? Why did we do it in rural Newfoundland and Labrador? We did it because of an operation up in Hawke's Bay that needed more resource in hardwood, to build floors, to build birch cupboards. What did it do? It added value in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. It added jobs to an existing operation in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Did we hear anybody, any of the fourteen members opposite, talk about that initiative as a pilot project, and how, with the potential success of that pilot project, that could be expanded -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. E. BYRNE: No, they are not going to listen to that. They are not going to listen to that at all.

- how, with the potential success of that pilot project, that could be expanded throughout other regions, forestry regions, the twenty-four of them in Newfoundland and Labrador? Did we hear them talk about that? No, we did not. We did not hear about that. We did not even hear a comment from the critic, saying this was a good initiative or a bad initiative. The fact of the matter is -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: What was that?

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

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: I understand what the minister is saying, but I did agree with it in Corner Brook when the announcement was made. What you are saying is that there are fourteen over here. That is not true, because myself, on behalf of this party, did say it was a good initiative, about two to two-and-a-half months ago.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

Continuing debate.

MR. E. BYRNE: I apologize if the critic indicated that, but he just stood and proved a point to me. I honestly thought that they did not know about it. I honestly thought that they did not say anything about it. The critic has just stood up and said, yes, they applauded it; it was a good initiative. We did not hear him speak about that initiative and what it is targeted to do in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and what that pilot initiative - the potential success of that pilot initiative - could mean to the value-added forestry industry in the Province on hardwood alone, what it could mean for jobs, and what it is meaning right now. The fact of the matter is, it is a good program. No one talked about it.

Did we listen to anybody in the Opposition, for example, talk about the $80,000 that we put into the Budget in Natural Resources to develop a strategic energy plan for the Province? No one talked about that. For fourteen years we were asking for it. For ten that I was there, I was asking for it. What will that plan develop? How will it develop? What would it involve? It will look at thermal energy. It will look at a policy on wind energy. It will look at and develop a policy related to hydroelectric development. It will look at, ultimately, the complete abolition of burning of Bunker C fuel in this Province, that will protect the environment for future generations. It will look at, how do we use natural gas? How do we use natural gas in this Province, whether it be through compressed natural gas, which is CNG technology, which is emerging by a tremendous company in this Province called Trans Ocean Gas, a tremendous company that is developing a technology that could have implications worldwide. Did anybody talk about that, and the support of this government for that initiative? Absolutely not.

Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is, I spent time in Opposition and I felt that we had a dual role. One of the roles that we had was holding government accountable. One of the roles that we had was holding government accountable on a policy front. Members opposite, particularly in the Official Opposition, have attempted to do that over the last number of weeks with respect to the Budget, but equally important, if not more important - and I believe it is one of the reasons we are here in the House today, and it takes a lot of work, a lot of spade work. It does not happen overnight. It does not happen overnight. It takes effort, it takes commitment, and it takes initiative, but equally, if not more important, one of the big roles or most important role of the Opposition is to be an alternative. What have we heard as an alternative to what we have put forward in the Budget or anything else from any one of the members? Absolutely nothing.

Have we listened to the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair talk about what she would do in restructuring health care so that more services get to more people each and every day over the next four years? No, we have not, because they do not have a record of it. They failed to live up to their responsibility as a government, and that is why they are there and that is why we are here.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Have we heard from any member opposite - let's talk about it. Have we heard, for example, the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace talk about what they would do with insurance reform? Several times this session he has asked the member and my colleague, the Minister of Government Services: When is the legislation coming? When is the legislation coming? Every time he has asked, he has gotten the answer. When? In this session, the legislation will be tabled and our plan will be put forward. Will everyone agree with it? Absolutely not. Can we expect an alternate one from them? I doubt it, Mr. Speaker. I sincerely doubt it.

Let's talk about, for example -

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, it is very true what the hon. member says, that I have asked on numerous occasions. There was a plan put in place by the PC government, by the NDP, and by the Liberals, last August. We put the insurance companies in this Province on notice that there was reform coming, whoever formed the government - all three parties. Well, I have been asking since last October, when are they going to put the plan in place that they promised last August?

MR. GRIMES: The answer to that is never.

MR. SWEENEY: The answer to that is never, Mr. Speaker. This is where honesty comes into all of this, when you promise the people one thing and you deliver something else.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, further to my point of order, I just listened -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The purpose of a point of order is to show that we have not followed some Standing Order or some procedure in the House. I ask the member, if he is going to get to his point of order, he should do it in the next ten to fifteen seconds.

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, if I could be allowed to be heard here, I would come to my point of order. I have sat here and listened to the hon. gentleman for the past ten minutes or so, talking about what we have not done or what we have not spoken to. I can assure you that nobody on that side has stood up yet and spoken about their Budget. Not a soul has spoken about their Budget, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SWEENEY: They are too ashamed of it, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order. The member is using a point of order to engage in debate.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: I do not need to say much because the member just stood and swallowed himself whole and proved my point anyway.

The fact of the matter is this - this is what he just said - no one on this side has spoken to the Budget. Let me inform him, twenty-eight hours the official Opposition have spoken to the Budget. Twenty-eight hours. Fourteen - one second now - fourteen of those hours -

MR. REID: (Inaudible) hours, you never mentioned the Budget.

MR. E. BYRNE: I am talking about you fellows - you, Gerry. I say to the Member for Twillingate, I am talking about what you spoke -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader should not refer to members of the House by their first names.

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

I say to the Member for Twillingate, I was speaking about how much the Official Opposition spoke. Fourteen hours and forty minutes of that twenty-eight was taken up by one single member. Now, if you want to do it by contrast, close to twenty hours the Official Opposition members - a little less than twenty hours, I am sorry - have spoken to the Budget. So, to say that we have not is absolutely factually incorrect.

Well, Mr. Speaker, let me get back to my point. Did we hear the Opposition talk about the initiatives that have taken place by government, some of which I have just outlined? Did we hear any of the Opposition members say to government: Look, the initiative -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: They do not want to hear it. Did we heard anybody speak, for example, about the initiatives in the Budget that were aimed directly at low-income families?

AN HON. MEMBER: No.

MR. E. BYRNE: No, we did not. Of course not. Do you know why we did not? The Member for Labrador West did. Yes, he did, but did any other Opposition members speak to that? Absolutely not. We heard Opposition members talk about us asking the College of the North Atlantic for $2 million, and how we are going to ruin post-secondary education in the Province, when the very same Opposition members in 1996 closed five campuses and hauled $8 million out of it. That is what people are seeing.

Mr. Speaker, I have no hesitation in saying that this was a very difficult process to go through for any new government, and members - all members who have sat in a Cabinet opposite, and all members who have sat in the government caucus - understand fully that, when it comes to the Budget process, it is a difficult process because it is all about making decisions and all about making choices.

We do not have the ability, as a Province - and all members understand this - to fund everything that comes in to us. We made difficult choices in this Budget, no question about it, but there were difficult choices that must and should have been made. It cannot be lost on anybody that on Budget Day when we announced the choices we made - it is very difficult for anyone to even believe that this is something that members opposite, or members here, took great joy in doing. It is absolutely ridiculous, but it cannot be lost on anybody that the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board, after making the decisions that we made this year, stood in his place and still delivered one of the highest recorded deficits in Newfoundland and Labrador's history at $840 million, Mr. Speaker.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I am going to sit down and we are going to vote on the main motion of this Budget and we are going to pass the motion as government members because we know that the track that we chose, while it is a difficult one, no question about it, difficult to make, especially when all of us as a group sat down to make them, it is one that we believe and have confidence in because it will pay dividends in the future for every Newfoundlander and Labradorian. That is why we will stand shoulder to shoulder and back to back to support the budgetary policy of this government.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Are we ready for the question on Motion 1, the Budget motion?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: Contra-minded, ‘nay'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is carried.

AN HON. MEMBER: Division.

MR. SPEAKER: Division has been called.

Call in the members.

Division

MR. SPEAKER: Are the members ready for the question?

All those in favour of the motion, please stand.

CLERK: Mr. Edward Byrne, Mr. Ottenheimer, Mr. Rideout, Mr. Taylor, Mr. Jack Byrne, Ms Elizabeth Marshall, Mr. Shelley, Mr. Fitzgerald, Ms Sheila Osborne, Mr. French, Ms Burke, Mr. Tom Osborne, Mr. Hedderson, Mr. Wiseman, Mr. Denine, Mr. Manning, Mr. Harding, Ms Johnson, Ms Goudie, Mr. Skinner, Mr. O'Brien.

MR. SPEAKER: Those against the motion, please rise.

CLERK: Mr. Grimes, Mr. Parsons, Mr. Butler, Mr. Barrett, Ms Jones, Ms Thistle, Mr. Reid, Mr. Andersen, Mr. Sweeney, Ms Foote, Mr. Joyce, Mr. Harris, Mr. Collins.

Mr. Speaker, twenty-one ayes and thirteen nays.

MR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion carried.

The hon. Government House Leader.

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

Before I put the motion to adjourn until 1:30 tomorrow, I would like to take the opportunity to inform members that tomorrow at 7:00 p.m., in the Chamber, the Resource Committee will review the Estimates of the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture and Labrador Affairs. Please note, just so everybody is aware, on the sheets that have been passed out, that evening meetings will be held in the House of Assembly and not in the Committee Room upstairs on the fifth floor.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I do put forward the adjournment motion, and we will be back here tomorrow at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion to adjourn has been made.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: Contra-minded, ‘nay'.

The motion is carried.

This House stands adjourned until tomorrow, May 11, at 1:30 p.m.

On motion, the House at its rising adjourned until tomorrow, Tuesday, at 1:30 p.m.