The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Dicks): Order, please!

On behalf of hon. members, I would like to welcome to the public galleries a group of Grade IX students from MacDonald Drive Junior High, together with their teachers, Mr. Douglas Gosse and Mr. Scott Hewlett.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: At this time I would like to render a ruling on a matter raised by the hon. the Government House Leader last Wednesday, March 22, 1995, in which he proposed to the Chair that the Member for Bonavista South had stated that the hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations had misled the House, and that that remark by the hon. the Member for Bonavista South was therefore not in order.

In reviewing Hansard, it appears that the hon. the Member for Bonavista South said, and I quote: "Mr. Speaker, the minister said, and I think it can be found in Hansard, that there was no special committee of Cabinet. I have a press release here put out by the minister - I don't know if it was a typing error, or if the minister was misquoted, or if the minister misled the House."

It is clearly unparliamentary to accuse another member of lying or deliberately misleading the House; however, the precedents on whether the accusation of misleading the House is unparliamentary vary. Some Speakers consider that it is, others that it is not, while someone applying the wisdom of the Chair consider that it sometimes is and sometimes is not.

Maingot in Parliamentary Privilege in Canada, page 205, states: "To allege that a member has misled the House is a matter of order rather than privilege, and is not unparliamentary. To allege that a member has deliberately misled the House is indeed unparliamentary."

In my view, it is therefore the element of deliberateness that makes an allegation of misleading unparliamentary. To allege that statements are unintentionally or inadvertently misleading is, therefore, parliamentary.

If in context - and I say in context because the member need not use the term `deliberately' in making a statement, but, if in the context of all that the member says, the member either says or clearly infers that another is deliberately misleading the House, that member is out of order and must withdraw the remark.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: I am doing well so far, then.

If I may say, in getting to a conclusion here, in this case, when I have examined the context, I do not find that the Member for Bonavista South accused the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations of deliberately misleading the House. In the context he appears to be suggesting that there was an error of one sort or another that may have placed wrong information before the House.

In conclusion, the Chair would be happier if members refrained from using the term, `misleading' and drew upon the large number of english language synonyms available to express the same thought. However, if members choose to use the term they must do so in a manner which does not suggest that the other member was deliberately doing so.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On behalf of the Premier, who is away today attending the United Nations High Seas Conference, I am informing the House that an agreement has been reached between the Mushuwau Innu, representing the Band Council of Davis Inlet, and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in accordance with the RCMP's provincial policing contract for Newfoundland and Labrador.

The primary goal of the agreement is to establish an interim policing arrangement which will provide effective, efficient and culturally appropriate policing to the residents of the community of Davis Inlet. This interim arrangement results from several months of negotiations among the Innu, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and government officials in an initiative started last fall by my colleague, Mr. Roberts, the Government House Leader.

Mr. Speaker, this is an important agreement. It will provide the residents of Davis Inlet with the maintenance of peace and the provision of protection through crime prevention, community education and law enforcement. Through the appointment of community based Innu peacekeepers, it will permit a policing effort that is culturally sensitive to the needs of the people of Davis Inlet.

It allows for thorough community involvement by means of a Community Policing Committee comprised of members of the community who will have input into selecting Innu peacekeepers, monitoring the provision of policing services to the community, identifying community policing issues and concerns, working with the peacekeepers to seek solutions to these concerns, and developing policing strategies and programs which will aid in the overall healing process of the community.

Under this agreement, Mr. Speaker, the Innu peacekeepers will be appointed peace officers under the RCMP Act. They will have the authority to enforce any Summary Conviction offence within the community of Davis Inlet, and to work with the RCMP in the enforcement of offences which may fall outside the Summary Conviction category.

Provision is made in the agreement to ensure that any additional training required by the peacekeepers will be available, through the RCMP Recruit Field Training Program. Provision is also made, Mr. Speaker, for the RCMP to participate in training initiatives which will ensure culturally appropriate policing services.

We now therefore expect policing and Court functions in Davis Inlet will resume on a normal basis.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am not sure if he is acting Premier, acting Justice minister, or what he is going today, probably he is just acting as usual. Anyway the statement is by the hon. Minister of Finance, or acting Premier, I take it, in any event we welcome this announcement. It has been a long time coming, a long time in the making, and we trust it will lead to more positive things in the future. There are a number of questions that will no doubt arise from this brief statement because we do not have all the details. I only received the statement a minute or so before the House opened so I have not had a chance to go through it but there are questions like, what would make this system now better or different than other systems that are in place in certain parts of Canada, in other jurisdictions?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. SIMMS: Well, I am not asking the Government House Leader. I am speaking to the acting Premier. There are other questions I will ask the acting Premier. Are there plans, for example, to extend this type of policing to any other aboriginal communities or are any other aboriginal communities looking for it throughout the Province? Does this now address the Innu justice system question that we saw raised far and wide in the media, internationally as well as nationally? That in itself is an issue apart from the policing issue. I guess the most important question of all, aside from how much authority these new peace officers will have, will they be the same as RCMP officers, or just in part? Will there be RCMP officers in attendance, or in the community of Davis Inlet, as well as these peace officers? Finally, the most important question, I guess, when does the government intent to resume its land claim negotiations with the Innu? I guess that is the most important. We will pursue those in the days ahead.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. the Member for St. John's East have leave to address the House?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Yes.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I welcome the news that an agreement has been reached with the Innu with respect to policing in Davis Inlet. It provides some hope that there will be a more harmonious relationship. I think it has been a very long time coming and the government has failed to reach a speedy resolution because of problems of its own. I think it does provide some hope that a more culturally sensitive policing and involvement of the court in Davis Inlet with the co-operation of the Innu people leadership, and police, peace officers who will be appointed and I hope it does work. It remains to be seen, Mr. Speaker, whether it can work as well as it has in other parts of the country.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to advise hon. members of government's decision to designate the main line of the Province's railway corridor a Provincial Park under the Provincial Parks Act. Commonly referred to as the Newfoundland T'Railway, Mr. Speaker, the park will extend from St. John's to Port aux Basques.

Following extensive discussions and negotiations with the Government of Canada and a subsequent agreement reached in June of 1992, Crown Lands acquired the railbeds in this Province. Since that time, Mr. Speaker, government assessed the railbed's feasibility in becoming a Provincial Park and in December of 1994, the railbed was transferred to the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation. Further negotiations with CN regarding bridges and culverts were conducted and today we are in a position to designate the main line as a Provincial Park.

This Province-long corridor gives representation to the Island's inherent natural and scenic landscapes. The T'Railway will provide resident and non-resident tourists with year-round recreational and site-seeing opportunities.

The Newfoundland T'Railway was a recommendation put forward by a consortium of research and development companies under the direction of the Newfoundland and Labrador Rural Development Council. Most provinces in Canada have developed or are in the process of developing provincial-wide t'railways. This Newfoundland link will therefore, connect the east and west coasts of the whole country.

Mr. Speaker, considerable interest has been expressed by rural development and community groups in establishing a t'railway system. These groups, in consultation with the Parks and Natural Areas Division of Tourism, Culture and Recreation will work in partnership to develop and maintain the Newfoundland T'Railway.

The park will differ from other provincial parks in that communities and special interest groups will play an integral part in developing and maintaining and managing the T'Railway as a recreational and tourist resource. In addition, persons using the corridor will do so at their own risk. Snowmobiles and ATVs will be permitted in this provincial park. The Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation will however, address the issue of access to property rights on an individual basis.

This trans-Island link is a very important part of our heritage and government is proud to preserve its cultural and historic value for future generations. On June 29, 1898, the first passenger train travelled from St. John's to Port aux Basques; a journey that took some twenty-eight hours to complete. From that day, and until its decommission in September of 1988, many residents and tourists have travelled this route; a journey of adventure and natural beauty that has become a topic of Newfoundland writers and musicians.

Mr. Speaker, the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation is proud to take an active part in keeping this cultural link alive in our Province as a recreational t'railway. Thank you.

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

MR. WOODFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just a few words to sum up this statement by the minister. It is about time. It is good to see that the government finally got something together in conjunction with the federal government and got some jurisdiction, the Crown Lands got jurisdiction over the railbed, but I hope this is not done at the expense of other parks around the Province. We just witnessed last week or a couple of weeks ago the closing of twenty-nine provincial parks around the Province for a total saving of some $300,000 to the provincial government. I wonder now is the department going to put that money into the development of the railbed across the Province. If not, it should.

Another concern I have is that if the government couldn't afford to keep open the twenty-nine parks, what are they going to do in trying to develop the rail link across the Province, the railbeds across this Province? One example I have in my district - and the minister should take note of this, because every time he goes to the West Coast he sees it. I mentioned it to the Premier's office in Corner Brook a couple of months ago. Between Deer Lake and Corner Brook now the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation has the railbed taken over. He has it taken over. It saved him millions of dollars. I would say now that if anybody who travels there will have to go down on the shores of Deer Lake or else go to the left of the Trans-Canada and the southern by-pass in order to get back on the railbed.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WOODFORD: So, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member's time has expired.

MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Speaker, I say to the hon. minister that it is a good thing that they finally got it together. I hope that in conjunction with probably the department of development and other departments in government that this can be of some benefit to not only developmental organizations -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WOODFORD: - but to business around the Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

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

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Trans City (inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: The Member for St. John's Centre needn't worry about old Trans City, he will hear lots about that. But today, Mr. Speaker, I want to turn my attention to an issue that I raised last fall in the House, last November, in fact November 28. It is a question that I have for the Government House Leader who I understand still haunts the offices of the Department of Justice up there. He is, I understand, the minister responsible for the electoral boundaries gerrymandering and he nods his head in agreement.

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask him this question. He will recall, no doubt last fall in particular, when I flicked out amounts of money that we have been hearing have been spent on this process he dismissed our estimates of what this particular comedy of errors has cost the taxpayers. So I would like to ask him today, can he now tell us how much money has been spent on deciding, re-deciding and deciding again the electoral boundaries issue?

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. gentleman for the warm and cordial introduction he has given me. His flicks are pretty - well I won't say that, that may be on the verge of unparliamentary - I can get the information. I don't have it here today. It would be in the tabled estimates showing the amount actually spent last year under the sub-head to which the Electoral Boundaries Commission expenditures are accounted for. There have been no expenditures since last fall under that sub-head and the last expenditures would have been incurred for the period ending June 30, 1994, last year when the Electoral Boundaries Commission delivered its report to me.

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

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am a little surprised the minister, who has had some of his onerous responsibilities taken away from him lately, would not have had more time now perhaps to accurately get the numbers. Let me ask him this question then: would he be surprised if I told him that the cost and the amount of money that had been spent, taxpayers money spent on this ludicrous proposal and process is $369,200? Would he say that that is a fair and accurate number or would he be surprised by that?

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

MR. ROBERTS: In return for the onerous responsibilities I have had to give to other ministers I have assumed further onerous responsibilities, not the least of which is answering silly questions such as the one the member just asked. I would neither be surprised nor unsurprised. I have told him I don't know the answer. I can get the answer. There is nothing mysterious about it. The bills were incurred by the Commission. They were incurred from monies voted by the House of Assembly and they were incurred by the Commission in doing its work in the discharge of the mandate given to it by the House of Assembly.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, the Byrne secundus would be well advised not to speak until he is recognized by the Chair. Let me come back, Mr. Speaker, I shall say to the Leader of the Opposition if he needs or wants a detailed breakdown I will get him one. There is no mystery in it at all. All he has to do is ask but I don't pretend for a moment to have that kind of information on the tip of my tongue and I am not going to try to take any other position. I will get the information if he wants it but if he knows it cost $369,000 why is he asking silly questions at the start as to how much does it cost? All he is doing is wasting his time and the time of the House.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, the reason I asked him the question was because in the fall when I suggested $300,000 or $400,000 as a cost, you said to the Premier: no, no, no, that is not true. The fact of the matter is, it is true and now I want the breakdown which he indicated he would table in the House. If he could give us the breakdown of the total expenses we would appreciate that.

Now, Mr. Speaker, what we have had happen here is we have had an independent commission travel all over the Province, not once but twice because the government was not satisfied with the results of the Commission in the first place. Now we are told that the government has appointed a commissioner, according to the Throne Speech, who is none other, I understand, than a public employee, Mr. David Jones -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I would ask the hon. member to get to the question.

MR. SIMMS: - who will develop a third set of boundaries that is obviously more to the liking of the government. Will the Government House Leader table the criteria that Mr. Jones was given by the government in order to come up with a more Liberal set of forty-eight seats that we have been told about?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman's silliness has now descended into foolishness. He would have been further ahead if, instead of listening to tavern gossip, he had asked who the commissioner is. The commissioner is not Mr. Jones. The commissioner is Mr. Nathaniel Noel, for twenty years a judge of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador, now retired. Judge Noel or Mr. Noel as he now is - Judge Noel, as one would know him, accepted the commission -

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible).

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman from Burin - Placentia West -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, Mr. Justice Noel served for one term in this House as a member sitting on the Liberal side. If we were to disqualify everybody who ever sat as a Liberal we would disqualify about three-quarters of the people in this Province who have a contribution to make to the public life of the Province. He has served with distinction in the Supreme Court, or in the District Court and then the Supreme Court, for about twenty years, from memory, and is a most distinguished member of the bench who is now retired. He is doing some work for us as the commissioner of the regulatory reform process; he accepted a commission from the government.

The other answer to the hon. gentleman's second question is: I would be delighted to table the terms of reference and will arrange to do it at the earliest opportunity. But instead of these silly questions slandering Judge Noel and Mr. David Jones, why doesn't the hon. gentleman simply get up and say: Who is the commissioner?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, the reason I thought it might have been Mr. Jones is because we were told in the House last November 28 by the Premier - I was told - that in fact Mr. Jones was the person who developed three possible proposals and looked at developing the boundaries for it. In fact, it was Mr. Jones who was sent to our caucus meeting to give us the presentation. Now the minister is saying there is another commissioner, Judge Noel, and presumably that is being done at no cost, because there is nothing budgeted and he said there was no more money to be spent.

I want to ask the minister this particular question if I might. According to the Throne Speech, the commissioner "...has been appointed to define and draw the boundaries of the electoral Districts by following guidelines developed from the recommendations of the Electoral Boundaries Commission." That is what it said in the Throne Speech. I want to ask the minister this. How can that be so when the Commission actually recommended amending the act to permit certain changes, notwithstanding the population of resulting districts? How can that be so? That was what the recommendation of the Commission was. It was not their recommendation to have forty-eight seats.

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, let me first of all say the Premier's answer last fall was correct then and correct now, and there is no inconsistency between the two answers. Mr. Jones developed some proposals, information was provided to hon. members opposite, and to the hon. Member for St. John's East, and that information stands on its own merits, and nothing more has been done by means of developing legislation.

The Commission's report is public, of course. It recommended two sets of boundaries. It said: If we follow the act, we recommend the House with forty-four seats, and they gave the boundaries of those seats. Then they went on to say: But in our opinion the act should be changed so as to allow a House of more than forty-four seats. The government's response is not to change the act. The act they are referring to is the electoral boundaries commission act, which is not the important one in this context. The important one is the House of Assembly act which actually sets the boundaries of the seats. There will be an amendment brought forth in due course to the House of Assembly act when we get the report of Judge Noel. Judge Noel's instructions are set out in the commission which I've already undertaken to table, and that reflects the means of carrying into effect the recommendations made by the Commission, with one important variation, and one we've stood by throughout, and the House has endorsed repeatedly.

The Commission's recommendations would have created seats far larger in variance from the norm than the 10 per cent factor set by the House. The instructions to Judge Noel are to stay within the 10 per cent norm and to proceed from there. But the instructions I think make it very clear. We will table them in the House. We are quite glad to do so.

MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We look forward to receiving that information and the criteria that have been developed. The thing that is difficult to understand here is Mr. Jones did develop boundaries, we were told he was going to be drawing up the boundaries, and now we are doing it again by another commissioner. I think that is where the confusion is and maybe we will have a chance when the minister tables the criteria to find out.

What I would like to ask the minister also is this. Back on November 28 in the debate here in the House with the Premier, or questions that I had for the Premier, the Premier told the House as well that the government had seen three possible proposals from Mr. Jones. One for forty-six seats, one for forty-seven seats, and one for forty-eight seats. He said: Anyone who looks at it would see very clearly what was the right course to follow. That was the Premier's quote. Of course, we have not seen it. I would like to ask the minister now, would he table those three proposals so that we can have a look at them for ourselves to see exactly what transpired?

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, the fact that the hon. gentleman has not seen those drafts is correct. That is one of the penalties he must pay for not being in the government. I would have to consult with my colleagues before I undertake to table them. These were matters that I am not even sure went to the full Cabinet. They were certainly seen by committees of the Cabinet and there are a number of variations. The ones that will count are Judge Noel's report and I give an undertaking on behalf of the government now quite willingly - it has not been asked for but let us get it all out. Judge Noel's report as we receive it, in whatever form it comes to us, will be tabled here in the House as soon as we get it, and in the form in which we get it, and that is the one that counts.

Mr. Jones developed a number of proposals, as the hon. gentleman says, with forty-six, forty-seven, or forty-eight seats. The forty-eight seat was the only one that met the publicly stated criteria of the 10 per cent variance, Mr. Speaker, and that is the one that -

MR. SIMMS: That the government has set.

MR. ROBERTS: - the one that the House of Assembly has twice set at the request of the government. It has twice set at the forty-eight seat proposal which was the one that has met the 10 per cent criteria which the House has twice endorsed at the request of the government.

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

MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, I just want to ask the Minister of Finance some questions relating to payments to a sinking fund to purchase the hospitals built by Trans City, the end of the thirty year lease period. The minister had one of his familiar lapses of memory yesterday afternoon and did not have the details available. Surely, now he has them after twenty-four hours and he may be planning to give us the answers in Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Would he tell us now, are the sinking fund payments being made to Confederation Life? Will the payments increase over thirty years, by how much, and what is the interest rate that is applying to those payments?

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

MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker, I believe that is the same question that the hon. gentleman asked very recently, yesterday, I believe, and I indicated I would endeavour to get the answers and inform the House.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.

MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, how long does it take the minister to get that information. Surely, that is available at a moment's notice from his staff. Surely, it is available from the files that the minister had in his hand when he went to Supreme Court last summer, because no doubt that information was all requested there as well. It cannot be something that is going to take a lot of research. I am surprised that the minister has not had it available.

Will the minister tell us if the sinking fund payments and accumulated interest cover the $16 million that is estimated government will have to pay to buy out the 60 per cent of the purchase price at the end of the thirty year contract? If not what kind of a lump sum payment? How much of a lump sum payment will government have to add in addition to the money paid to the sinking fund in order to purchase out these buildings at that time?

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

MR. BAKER: The government will have to make no payment in addition to the sinking fund payments that are set up.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.

MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, I think there may well be an additional amount, and if not there are two amounts, at least, that are being paid to Trans City. Certainly there is the amount that is being paid by way of lease payments, and these are escalating. Then there is the annual sinking fund payments, and I am led to believe that these in fact are escalating. When the minister answers the questions I have asked him yesterday and again today perhaps he will confirm that, that the lease payments and the sinking fund payments escalate at certain periods of time, Mr. Speaker.

Will the minister confirm that the total cost therefore will be $96 million for the lease and $16 million for the lump sum payments, a total of $112 million that they will pay for these three facilities?

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

MR. BAKER: No, Mr. Speaker, these numbers are not correct and I will table the correct numbers in the House. I would like to point out to the hon. member that the total cost over thirty years of the three hospitals will be slightly less than the cost of the Sprung greenhouse, and we will have three hospitals to show for it at the end of the time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance and the President of Treasury Board. Prior to releasing your Budget, announcing your Budget last week, did you do an analysis of your Budget in terms of what the impact of your Budget would be in terms of job losses to the Province as a whole? And can you tell the people of this Province how many jobs will be lost as a result of your Budget?

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

MR. BAKER: No, Mr. Speaker, I cannot. I indicated in the Budget, and was very straightforward about it, there will be some job losses over the period of time referred to. I don't know how many, because much of what has to be done has to be done in consultation with groups and individuals, and we are trying to find the most efficient way to do those things with the least impact. So I can tell the hon. gentleman that this is not an exercise where we get up and say that we are going to reduce the public service by a couple of thousand jobs. This is not what is happening here. We are trying to find the best way to provide the most efficient service, and we suspect there will be some job losses at the end of the day, but the numbers are not very high at all.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I suspect the minister knows full well what job losses there will be. I suspect full well that he has targets that he wants to meet in terms of the number of jobs that he wants to reduce.

The question is this, Mr. Speaker: Will the minister announce today, or will he make a commitment today, to release what his analysis was. How many jobs will be lost in this Province? And will he confirm that he is balancing the books on the workers of this Province?

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

MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated to the hon. gentleman, we did not set a target of job losses. Job losses do not enter into the equation at all. We have set targets for efficient delivery of services, and perhaps more efficient delivery of services, and I indicated that throughout this process there may indeed be some job losses, but they will not be very high. Mr. Speaker, what he is asking for simply does not exist. The member is simply out to lunch on this.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, it is not this member that is out to lunch, I can assure you.

Let me ask the Minister of Health: Can he stand up -

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible.)

MR. E. BYRNE: I say to the Member for Eagle River, I would sooner eat chicken any day than eat crow like this government has been doing for a year-and-a-half.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Let me ask the Minister of Health: Can he confirm to the people of this Province that there will be significant job losses in the Department of Health -

AN HON. MEMBER: Health care sector.

MR. E. BYRNE: In health care sector - I apologize. Can he confirm that there will be significant job losses in the health care sector, and how many jobs will be lost as a result of this government's Budget.

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

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The answer to the question has already basically been given to you by the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board. There is no definitive number tied to the Budget in terms of job losses. The expectation is that any adjustments in staffing should be taken care of through attrition, or retirements, or that sort of thing. There are not going to be significant job losses, as a result of the Budget, in the health care sector. We will work with the employees who may be affected, to ensure that they are treated in a fair, proper, humane and equitable way, and that will be in keeping, of course, with everything that this government has and will continue to do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Green Bay.

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Over the last number of years we have heard much to-do in the House of Assembly with regard to the Strategic Economic Plan, and much of the money, I think, associated with it can be attributed to public relations expenditures, but this year's Budget Speech makes reference to $10 million in connection with the Strategic Economic Plan. I wonder if the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology could enlighten us as to what this $10 million is all about.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology.

MR. FUREY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to. The Strategic Economic Plan has 134 separate action items. I just had the privilege of attending a conference at the Board of Trade, where a number of sectors were dealt with in breakout sessions. I can tell you, $500,000 will be dealt with in terms of service quality, putting the client first - that is to say the taxpayer - that will be flowed through the Public Service Commission. Five hundred thousand dollars will be spent on the mineral exploration assistance program. The hon. member would be interested in knowing that that grew by 10 per cent in '93, 40 per cent in '94, and a projected growth of 45 per cent this year.

Mr. Speaker, there will be $800,000 from the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation. They have a series of projects that they are going to pursue in line with the strategic plan. $3.5 million will flow through my department for the information technology sector, our on-line task force, new business market and product development, $1 million will go into Fisheries, Food and Aquaculture for the development of aquaculture, particularly, Mr. Speaker, mussels, scallops, Arctic char and steelhead trout. $100,000 will go into the Preventive Mediation Program through the Department of Employment and Labour Relations and understand, Mr. Speaker, that last year, you had something in the order of 370 requests which were used for mediation which helped prevent labour problems.

Mr. Speaker, further to that, another $10 million, 100 per cent dollars from the Province will go into the forestry sector. Essentially, Mr. Speaker, this money will flow through in line with the Strategic Economic Plan and will be aimed specifically at those initiatives that I just mentioned.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Green Bay; a supplementary.

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Would the minister care to indicate just how much of the $10 million is going to be spent in administration and how much is actually spent in the direct creation of jobs or the direct support of industry? Is there a clear breakdown as to what is administrative and what's in the direct support of economic development itself?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology.

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, I don't have the specific breakdowns but I will be happy to get them, but I was pleased to hear on the radio, thirty days ago, the hon. member say, that this minister ought to be out promoting the Province more, and that is essentially what I was doing in Asia over the eight days.

We had five countries, forty-six meetings and attended to incredible international press for this Province. I can tell the hon. member that we have announced because of that, the EDGE legislation, which is nearly ninety days old, two companies in January, I will announce two next week; the board is meeting on eight applications this afternoon, there are another seven waiting, there are twenty in discussions with the Province, there have been 1,000 calls to the 1-800 line; 5,000 packages have gone around the world and there have been two, major, promotional tours, one across Canada and the Eastern United States by the Premier. I just did Asia and the great, and cordial and wonderful personality of the Government House Leader will promote us in Europe this summer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. CAREEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Given the recent changes that have occurred as a result of our latest provincial Budget and its use of capital revenues from the south coast ferry service buyout as a current account item - and the south coast ferry service, as far as I am concerned has indeed come under question. Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation: Can he guarantee the people of the south coast, a service that is comparable or superior to the service now operated by Marine Atlantic?

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

MR. EFFORD: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. CAREEN: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, on March 8, a year to the date that I was sworn in, the minister said -

MR. DUMARESQUE: That was a mistake.

MR. CAREEN: No mistake. You found out what was a mistake when you ran up against us in Placentia.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CAREEN: Toeless Danny.

When the minster, Mr. Speaker, announced that the lump sum would take care of things in perpetuity, in other words, when parallel lines meet. Well, parallel lines obviously have met here. Anyway, Mr. Speaker, the minister made reference and I guess really, the end has come, because we see what has happened to the money.

Mr. Speaker, I now ask the minister: Can the people on the south coast be assured that the passenger fares and freight rates will be reduced given the fact that there is no funding avenue left, or will the people of the south coast actually see a reduced service at a higher cost to them?

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

MR. EFFORD: Yes, to the first part of his question, no to the second part of his question, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. Member for Placentia.

MR. CAREEN: Mr. Speaker, this minister went up and down the south coast on a couple of occasions making wild and empty promises and we see it here today coming home to roost, what that minister is. After his anniversary the other day, with a gospel sing-a-long, he deceived the fishermen a few years ago and the plant workers -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. CAREEN: - but I will tell you sir: The Lord is not to be deceived nor can he be deceived.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. CAREEN: No Sir, the people on the South Coast -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

It is unparliamentary to accuse another member of deceiving. So I take it under advisement but I caution the member not to use it again.

MR. CAREEN: Mr. Speaker, I did not mean to say he deceived. I said that the Lord cannot deceive nor be deceived. Now, there is a big difference in the minister and the Lord, thank God!

The ferry service, Mr. Speaker, has become a - there is a big difference, yes.

MR. SPEAKER: I would ask the hon. member to get to the question, as well.

MR. CAREEN: The ferry has indeed become a budgetary figure, subject to budget cuts like the rest of the services we see. Mr. Speaker, what plans does the minister have for the coming years when we no longer have any money to put into this service? Will there be further reductions, Sir? Has there been any long-term planning used in this budget at all, I ask the minister?

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

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, let me tell the hon. member and this House of Assembly that I am not ashamed of the people of Port de Grave district and their religion. Let me tell the hon. member, if the government of the day had listened to me three years ago, the Spanish would not be on the Grand Banks today. Let me also say, they are now using the same thing to cut the nets - I brought two people over from Iceland to tell them what to do.

As for the people on the South Coast, Mr. Speaker, they are going to have a better ferry service than they have ever had as long as they have lived there. Will the fares be cheaper? Yes, the minimum fare for the Marine Atlantic is $9.25. They will be substantially cheaper and they will be getting an improved service. We have not sold out the people on the South Coast like you sold out the railway.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's East Extern.

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

My question is to the Minister of Natural Resources. I ask the minister: Is there a plan or a study under way to combine the Registry of Deeds, Crown Lands Registry, the Municipal Assessment Division and possibly other divisions into one division and/or department?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

DR. GIBBONS: No, not as far as I know, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

Perhaps the minister doesn't know and I anticipate that he wouldn't. People working in these divisions and the general public are saying that the units will be combined and may be privatized. They are also saying if there is a GIS, a Geographic Information System steering committee in place, possibly under the Department of Finance - will the minister undertake to find out what is going on and report back to the House?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member is totally confused. I don't know what he is talking about at all.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte - White Bay.

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a question for the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations.

As we know, the story continues to unfold about the emergency job creation program, and of course, the deadline is drawing near. The latest report I heard was in Ramea where sixty weeks were approved, now only twenty-six of those weeks can be used. Of course, the story goes on and on in my district. I don't have the final report on that. Can the minister tell us, with the weeks that are not being used, what will happen to that money that is coming back into government? Is it going to change something in the criteria, where these people who desperately need these jobs - for example, the people in Ramea and the people in my district and all over the Province - can avail of this stingy $5 million that was put out in the first place, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me say to the hon. member that we don't have the program completed yet. There will be, obviously, some slippage but let me say to the hon. member that we will have more people involved in the Employment Creation Program this year for a lot less than we had in other years with a lot more. So there will be well in excess of 2,000 Newfoundlanders who will have taken advantage of the program. I think the criteria proves something and I will be happy to report to the hon. member when the program is completed. The funding for this particular program, as the member should know from his colleagues, that funding in the fiscal year of 1994-'95 will end on March 31. Now, there are some discussions going on between myself and the Minister of Finance, but I don't see how we can extend that period, I say to the hon. member.

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

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

MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the Annual Report, 1994, of the Newfoundland Liquor Corporation.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to table six copies of two Orders In Council to meet the requirement of the Financial Administration Act. These are pre-commitments, in Tourism, Culture and Recreation in terms of advertising, and in Education in terms of school textbooks.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to also tables copies of a Special Warrant to meet the requirements of the Financial Administration Act. This Special Warrant has to do with additional funds respecting this year's Budget requirements for the SRDA agreement.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to table six copies of special warrants, also to meet the requirements of the Financial Administration Act. These involve special warrants issued to provide additional funds this year to cover the property acquisitions for the capital roads program, increased cash flow expenditures, which are 100 per cent federal under the Newfoundland Transportation Initiative, and about $27 million to provide additional funds in respect of items under the Department of Social Services.

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, we are about to get into the enthralling debate on Interim Supply. Before we do, would you first please call Motion 4; that is a first reading.

Motion, the hon. the Premier to introduce a bill, "An Act Respecting The Revision And Consolidation Of Subordinate Legislation," carried. (Bill No. 7).

On motion, Bill No. 7 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, would you be good enough to call Motion 3, which is the Committee of the Whole on Supply, the Interim Supply bill.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board.

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

MR. SPEAKER: The message from His Honour, the Lieutenant-Governor, is dated March 16, 1995. It is directed to the hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, and reads as follows:

I, the Lieutenant-Governor of the Province of Newfoundland, transmit estimates of sums required for the Public Service of the Province for the year ending March 31, 1996. By way of Interim Supply, and in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution Act, 1867, I recommend these estimates to the House of Assembly.

Sgd.:________________________________

Frederick W. Russell, Lieutenant-Governor

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

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

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

MR. CHAIRMAN (Snow): Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board.

MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a fairly routine matter, the matter of Interim Supply. Government routinely gets Interim Supply to tide it over until the Budget Debate is finished, essentially. The real debate on the financial details comes in the Budget Speech. It is covering all departments and it is $1,054,155,600 of Interim Supply. I would ask hon. members of the House, after some debate, hopefully to quickly pass this bill today so that we can get on to the more important debate, the Budget Debate. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

That it is expedient to introduce a measure to provide for the granting to Her Majesty for defraying certain expenses of the public service for the financial year ending March 31, 1996, the sum of $l,054,155,600.

On motion, resolution carried.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.

MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Chairman, I just quickly want to have a look at these Special Warrants here. It is a good opportunity for me to ask the minister for a little more explanation here. The authority is the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation - $500,000. This is advertising, this is placing the advertising for...? Is that pre-commitment of advertising in trade magazines, that sort of thing?

MR. GRIMES: (Inaudible).

MR. WINDSOR: How does that compare with last year's amounts? is that comparable?

MR. GRIMES: About the same. (Inaudible).

MR. WINDSOR: About the same.

AN HON. MEMBER: Almost identical.

MR. WINDSOR: The Department of Education and Training: distribution of school textbooks to be delivered in 1995-1996, in the amount of $6.5 million; public examinations, related materials, $70,800. Is this comparable to last year, as well?

MR. BAKER: It was to meet the need, Mr. Speaker, books that were planned to be purchased, and simply the commitment had to be made ahead of time to have them ready for the school year. So it is to meet the need for the next school year. That amount varies from year to year, depending on how many new texts are coming in and so on.

MR. WINDSOR: Getting into these Special Warrants then, Mr. Chairman: $1.8 million for Works, Services and Transportation. Would the minister like to tell us what this $1.8 million is for? Highways, transportation - Is this the one as the minister said, they are 100 per cent federal? Are these all 100 per cent federal?

MR. BAKER: These are all under the Newfoundland transportation initiative, the Trans-Canada Highway. They just got a bit more work done than they thought they would. It is 100 per cent federal money. We simply pay it and then recover from the Federal Government, so it is no expense to us.

MR. WINDSOR: Could the minister tell us which areas these were expended in? Obviously, these are extensions on some (inaudible).

MR. BAKER: I have no idea, Mr. Chairman. There was a lot of work going on last year, so it is some of the work that has been ongoing.

MR. WINDSOR: Getting into the next section, Mr. Chairman - where is the next one? The Clerk has given me three copies of all of these. It takes awhile to get through them. I think I have five copies. I think you gave me the wrong stack here, these are all the same. I will wait until the Clerk gives me the copies.

Mr. Chairman, let me ask the - we have $2.5 million for Works, Services and Transportation, Land Acquisition, Property and Furnishings. Would you like to give us some more details on that one, tell us exactly what that one is about? Do you have some details on that?

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

MR. BAKER: I could check the exact details, Mr. Chairman, with Works, Services and Transportation. I believe it was property acquisition having to do with a number of proposed roads, The Outer Ring Road, I believe the Goulds Access Road and so on, buying properties and perhaps some land in the Corner Brook area as well, to purchase these properties for Trans-Canada Highway construction and construction under the Newfoundland Transportation initiative.

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

MR. WINDSOR: Okay. Emergency Response Program, is this the program that was announced by the minister during the summer? Is this the same one that we kept saying that the government is going to need and should have had in the Budget, and every year refuses to put it in the Budget and every year it comes in with a special warrant later on, finally admitting that we were right, that they knew they should have created that program in the first place?

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

MR. BAKER: Yes, it is the same program, Mr. Chairman, that we have done for a number of years and hon. members opposite, when they were in government and had a 20 per cent unemployment rate, they didn't do it. It is the same program, yes.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Mount Pearl.

MR. WINDSOR: I advise the minister, Mr. Chairman, that once again he is incorrect. We had far better programs and created far more jobs than this government has ever produced. This is the government that wanted to eliminate them altogether and now, finally, starting to realize that you cannot eliminate make-work programs as much as none of us likes to see them. As much as we dislike them and as much as they tend to contribute to the way of life I talked about yesterday, where it is destroying the work ethic of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians; unfortunately today, that there are no alternatives available to Newfoundlanders who find themselves without work and government has a responsibility to create, in the short term, until they get off their collective rear ends and create some full-time employment in this Province.

Now maybe, the minister would like to tell us therefore, this $27,300,000 for the Department of Social Services, a result also of their lack of action in stimulating the economy of this Province. Could he tell us, is there a breakdown for this, for the sorts of things, allowances and assistance, $19 million, home support services, I mean, these are tremendous amounts so could the minister tell us why he was not able to more accurately predict in his Budget the amounts that were going to be required here, and did we not tell him, during the Budget debate last year, that he had been overly optimistic, that he had overestimated the performance of the economy, that the social services rolls were going to grow and that he had underestimated the amount of money that he had in the social services department, simply to make his Budget look good? Would he like to tell us that?

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

MR. BAKER: Mr. Chairman, this amount of $27,300,000 is to provide additional funds in the Department of Social Services in the areas that the hon. member outlined.

I would like to say to him that certainly this is an amount that was underestimated in the Budget and certainly, the hon. gentlemen in his Budget response last year, indicated that we would need more money in social services and I agreed and said that, yes, if in that eventuality, we would provide it with a special warrant. The hon. member went on to say that because of all this we were not going to meet our target of only a $25 million deficit, we are going to have a $200 million deficit, Mr. Chairman, and he was absolutely certain of it. I ask the hon. member: is he so absolutely certain today?

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

MR. WINDSOR: I am absolutely certain, Mr. Chairman, that the minister didn't have a $25 million surplus, that he has jimmied the books again to try to make it look as if he did, and if we could look deeper we will find that he didn't even get the $25 million deficit that he had projected last year. If he hadn't given away the ferries or taken on the ferries, but taking away the responsibility from the federal government to provide ferry service in Newfoundland in perpetuity, if he hadn't taken $20 million from the sinking fund last year to put into his current account, the money that was put aside to pay debt that he has taken back to put into current account, Mr. Chairman, to pay daily expenses then he certainly would have had a deficit this year as he had predicted, Mr. Chairman. We weren't so far off the mark.

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

MR. BAKER: Yes, Mr. Chairman, they are the same kinds of comments the hon. gentleman has made year after year. He has, for the last three years, got up and said exactly the same thing, his response to the Budget this year, I could have gone back and read the last two years and then I would not have to sit in the House and suffer through what he had to say. It was exactly the same thing, that we are going to have increased deficits, that we are going deeper into debt, and all that kind of thing.

Mr. Chairman, Nesbitt Burns - Newfoundland has been at the forefront in Canada. It is the only Province to have recorded a decline in the deficit for four consecutive years. Obviously, we have fooled the financial markets, we have fooled all of these people, like Nesbitt Burns, and Scotia McLeod, we have fooled the rating agencies, and we have fooled everybody else except the hon. gentleman opposite, or is he the only one that is in step? Is that what he is saying, that all the rest of us are out of step and he is the only one in step?

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

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Thank you, very much, Mr. Chairman.

I notice the acting Premier and the acting Minister of Justice, the minister who does more acting than Broadway, acting, testy today over there. I can understand the Minister of Finance being testy because the Member for Mount Pearl over the last two days has exposed this minister on his handling of the Trans-City deal. He has exposed the Minister of Finance, the head honcho on the Cabinet committee that we all know about. He has exposed him, two payments, two schemes, but it will cost $116 million by the time they purchase those three hospital facilities, a total of $116 million that this minister and this government is going to cost the taxpayers of the Province.

The Minister of Finance really thought that the people of the Province would not find out the real cost to the taxpayers. They thought they could cover up. The Premier tried to cover up. Day after day, after day, in this House he would not stand in his place, he would nod, you do it Winston. You answer it Winston. He tried to stay away from it and now we have finally found out why the Premier is down in the United Nations, down in New York. He refused to take the Member for Eagle River because he got his travel budget blown apart.

I wonder how much money they are asking for in the Interim Supply Bill here. They are asking for a little better than $1 billion. I wonder how much is included here for travel? Under Tourism, Culture and Recreation they are looking for just about $14 million. I wonder how much is in there for the minister to globe trot down in Japan again?

MR. GRIMES: Most of that.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, the minister is honest, most of that.

We all know why the government needs Interim Supply. They need to pay the bills after March 31. There is a payday, I believe, on April 5, and they need to pay the bills. That is why they are asking the House to approve this Interim Supply Bill of a little better than $1 billion.

Then today we see the tabling of special warrants, some surprises. Once we get a chance to look at some of this, I say, we will need a little more probing and it will raise some interest in the House, I am sure, but outside as well, once we get a chance to look at those warrants and see what they are really all about. It will be quite interesting to see this time next year, I say to my colleague for Mount Pearl, how many more special warrants we will have, how many more special warrants will the minister stand in his place next year and table at this time?

The Minister of Employment and Labour Relations is looking kind of strange over there.

MR. MURPHY: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Well, it did not look like you were looking at me, I say to the minister. I was not quite sure where you were looking. You looked like you were cross-eyed. My point to the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations is that we will not have many special warrants tabled, I am sure, for employment generation programs. The fuss we had to kick up this year to try to get you to spend a few measly dollars, and then you went and doctored the program, then you get up today and brag about the number of people who are employed under the program, when you limited the number of work weeks to six and most people could not qualify.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Mr. Chairman, another minister testy today. What is going on with the ministry? They are gone mad over there. Why does the minister get all jittery and shaky when the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes mentions some of his buddies and his political friends? Why does he get jittery and shouting and bawling across the House? Why does he? What is wrong with the minister?

You see, this is the kind of thing, the kind of behaviour by ministers of the government that just could cause us not to give the government interim supply. This kind of behaviour by the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board and the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations, and others. We just might dig in and you just might not get interim supply Friday. We might be back here Saturday and Sunday.

DR. KITCHEN: Pigs might fly.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Sorry? What was it the Member for St. John's Centre said? Pigs might fly? Is that what he said? We could be, I say to the member, if the government doesn't come clean, particularly on this Trans City issue. If the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board doesn't come clean and admit to the people, the taxpayers of this Province, just what it is costing them. The Member for St. John's Centre was just about to pound his desk when I said that then. He was so happy that I brought it up, because he wants to know as well what has gone on with this Trans City scandal and how much it is costing the taxpayers in the Province. We just might not grant interim supply if the government doesn't come clean.

When the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board stood up and talked about warrants I wondered what kind of warrants he was talking about. I would say there will soon be warrants coming into the House, Mr. Chairman. There will soon be warrants from the sheriff I would say for some of them over there if they don't smarten up, clean up their act. Soon be warrants from the sheriff's office for some of them over there, I would say, if they soon don't smarten up.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Don't talk about them, said the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations. Who is the sheriff, anyway? Who shot the sheriff? I thought I shot the sheriff in 1982 but I guess he came back. The sheriff rebounded, he came back. Who shot the sheriff. I thought I took care of him in 1982, but they tell me he is back now with a horse and everything, just like Dennis Weaver. He is more expensive than Dennis Weaver, I would say I hear.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Taking care of Roger Simmons? Boy, I tell you one thing, you have to be pretty good to take care of Roger Simmons, I would say to the member. The member knows him better than I do. He is pretty cagey.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: What? Getting cold feet against Roger, yes. But you never know. If the federal government keeps up using the whipper snippers and whatnot, there might be a chance on the South Coast. If that great powerful federal government with all its commitment, with its great commitment to stopping foreign overfishing, if it keeps using the whipper snippers, you never know what the political chances might be on the South Coast.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: What? Fill them up, fill up the nets, we don't mind, fill up the nets full of juvenile turbot and other species of fish, fill them chock to the brim, and then we will go along and cut the nets. Down goes the net with all the juvenile fish to the bottom, and we cry victory. What a great victory. Thousands of pounds of juvenile fish gone to the bottom in the Spanish net and we rant and roar: What a victory for Canada, Mr. Chairman.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Oh yes, in the name of conservation. My colleague for Humber Valley says: How true. How can hon. members be serious about applauding it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Sorry? Either way you cut it, I say to the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations, the Spanish are still overfishing, catching juvenile fish. Not a lot better, whichever way you cut it. They are doing today what they did when John Crosbie was Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, when Ross Reid was Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. They are doing today what they are doing now that Brian Tobin is the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. I say to the minister, whatever is happening is inadequate, I say to the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations.

For us to go off down to New York now with the big song-and-dance again, with the net and everything else -

MR. DUMARESQUE: Or do nothing like you fellows did for years.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I say to the Member for Eagle River who last week was so proud to be a Canadian and a Liberal -

MR. DUMARESQUE: And I'm still proud this week.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I say you should be wearing the whipper snippers on the back of your jacket. Put on a promo for whipper snippers. You knocked off one with the whipper snipper, and the other nineteen keep fishing. Then the one you cut off puts on another net and you still have twenty fishing; and when you cut the net all the juvenile fish go to the bottom of the sea, so that doesn't regenerate, so big victory. So the inconvenience is, for the Spanish crew, that they have to put on another trawl.

Then you have the Spanish Government, who is supporting it with two military vessels now, and who has obviously agreed to financially support the fishing industry for any losses of nets and other things, who couldn't care less. You cut their net, they go outside and put on a new net and come back in and drag up the fish again, and every time they cut a warp - well, they cut one now, in how many days since they came back in and started fishing?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Ten days since they came back to fish again? We cut one net. We haven't stopped them from catching any fish. How much fish have these twenty trawlers taken, I say to the Member for Eagle River, in those ten days? And we go off down to New York with a net, and we get into a little sparring match down there with the European Community.

AN HON. MEMBER: And we're winning.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Oh, there's no doubt, I say; yes, we are winning. What a victory! There are only twenty out there today dragging it up - what a victory, I say to the Member for Eagle River. There is no harm to say that you would sing and dance to whatever they do.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: God in Heaven, I say to the Member for Eagle River.

MR. DUMARESQUE: There were eighty out there last year.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, there were never eighty out there, I say to the Member for Eagle River - in his imagination. Now there were eighty out there when John Crosbie was minister.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Eighty out there last year.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Oh, yes, in the member's mind, and the night the government changed the numbers were cut in half in the member's mind.

MR. DUMARESQUE: You don't see either one of them (inaudible), and you won't see them from Spain in a year from now.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Why would that be, I say to the member? You know why, I say to the Member for Eagle River? Because there would be no point in dragging a net that -

MR. DUMARESQUE: There was never a Tory had any (inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I was going to tell the member that I agree with him; they won't be out there in a year, because there will be no reason to come over in a year. They would just have cold, Atlantic water flowing through a net with a liner in it, not catching a fish, won't be able to pay for the fuel or the crew, so they won't come over. They have to use a liner now to make it viable - the member knows that - that is why they are using the liner. Well, let them overfish for another period of time and the liner won't be any good, so they won't come over, because all they will be doing is pulling the net with cold, Atlantic water flowing through it, no fish, so the stock will be extinct.

So I say to the Member for Eagle River, we should not applaud that they will not be there in a year, because the reason they won't be there is that there will be no fish there in a year - and a great victory that will be, I say to the Member for Eagle River, won't it, a great victory - no Spanish out there overfishing now because there are no fish to catch. The stock is going to be wiped out, I say to the member. None of us are proud of what is happening out there, and I wish, in the name of God, there was some way to get at the problem, but we are back, I say to the member, to where we were three or four years ago.

MR. DUMARESQUE: For the first time in our history we are doing something instead of putting our heads in the sand, refusing to do it because of politics.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: What are we doing?

MR. DUMARESQUE: What are we doing?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Watching the Spanish overfish.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Arresting vessels (inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: One.

MR. DUMARESQUE: No.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: One.

MR. DUMARESQUE: No.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Canadian vessels. Before we arrested a Canadian vessel, I say to the Member for Eagle River. Our own boat we arrested before, our own boat. What an admission of -

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible) nets cuts. You never saw (inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Mr. Chairman, you know when you have the Member for Eagle River because that is the behaviour he demonstrates when you have him. When his only defense of his buddies in Ottawa is to sit in his seat and scream and shout across the House, and try to talk over whoever has been recognized by the Chair, that is when you know you really have him.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, a whippersnapper who supports the use of the whipper snipper.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Nothing wrong with it.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: And, of course, the Premier knows, because the Premier refused to take him down to New York.

AN HON. MEMBER: He's not mature enough.

MR. WOODFORD: The Premier is down in New York and can't sit down because (inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, he went up to the Premier, begged and whined and wanted him to take him down there, and the Premier said, `Danny, how many more times do I have to tell you? You're as juvenile as the turbot they are catching on the Grand Banks.' That's the reason he gave him for not putting him in Cabinet.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. W. MATTHEWS: `You're as juvenile as the turbot, and you know, Daniel, how I feel about juvenile turbot. I will tell them in New York.' What were the words he used, the adjectives he used down in the United Nations yesterday? I read them somewhere today.

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, there were three words. I forget them - I can't remember now. I wish I could remember. But he is down there doing his best. I applaud the Premier for being in New York.

AN HON. MEMBER: That is more than you've ever done.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, no doubt, and more than I'll ever do, but I would have done it if I could have the taxpayers of the Province sending me out of the Province for ninety to a hundred days a year, I think I might be in New York today. I think I just might be in the Big Apple today. I think I might be, I say to the member. I might be down in New York today if the taxpayers were bank rolling me down there.

The poor old member, it is a shame you know - but I tell you, I will make the member a promise, if he can get a commitment from the Premier -

MR. WOODFORD: To let him go into Cabinet.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, not that! God, we would never want him to be a minister! But if the Premier will promise the House that he will take his parliamentary assistant on the trips for the duration of the fiscal year, of which this billion dollars will help pay for, if he will get a commitment that the Premier will take him with him, I think I can convince my colleagues that we will pass the Interim Supply Bill by Friday. Now, you go out and get on the phone to New York -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) today, then we can get on with the Budget.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Oh no, we want a commitment from the Premier. Go and call the Premier in New York. I am sure you can get to him just like that.

MR. TOBIN: I must say, the Premier looked good yesterday sitting next to Brian Tobin.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Well, it was good yesterday, I must say. The Member for Burin - Placentia West reminded me of something: watch the television. Mr. Tobin, in his usual eloquent way, was there - that is the federal Mr. Tobin - and he asked: `Where is that paper?'... and as quick as a wink the Premier went down the pile and he picked it up - his shoes left - and he flicks over the paper to the federal minister. Doesn't that tell it all, I said? Doesn't that say it all?

AN HON. MEMBER: Brian's parliamentary assistant.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: He looked so good. There is a message in that for the members opposite, those who are encouraging the hon. Brian Tobin to come back to seek the leadership of the Liberal Party. For those who are encouraging him to do that, I tell you, there is a message in what you saw yesterday, `Don't waste your time asking me to come back with you, boys, I've got it too good here. When I can have your Premier up here passing me my papers, why do I want to come back and be your leader and your Premier? Why would I seriously think about it?' Just think about it.

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible) Humber East.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I'm sorry? The Member for Humber East, what?

MR. DUMARESQUE: Wait until you have to pass papers to Lynn Verge.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Well, if that is what it takes, I say to the Member for Eagle River, I will pass the papers.

MR. MURPHY: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I say to the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations, I liked that. Yes, I would need a telescopic arm, I would need to keep pulling it out - pass the papers up. It is a good rebuttal. But it told me everything when I watched the Premier out there yesterday passing papers to the federal minister. It put everything in order when it comes to this Province and this country and who runs - and who has power and who doesn't and who is beholden to him.

MR. TOBIN: They wouldn't let you go with the Premier.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: It is too bad, the member would have liked it in New York. I have seen how much he enjoys Ottawa. I have been in Ottawa and I have seen how much he enjoys Ottawa. Can you imagine how much he would enjoy New York?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

MR. W. MATTHEWS: By leave?

MR. CHAIRMAN: We didn't record your time, but it seems like ten minutes to me.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I have only been about five minutes. I watched the clock. I have been about five minutes.

MR. CHAIRMAN: We didn't record the time so it seemed like ten minutes to me, but -

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Well, I am sure it does, Mr. Chairman, with all due respect. I would be surprised if it doesn't seem like five days, if you want me to conclude, I will. So you are asking me to conclude?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, you can get up again afterwards.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Oh, yes.

MR. CHAIRMAN: We will start it off right now and time from now on.

AN HON. MEMBER: Ten minutes?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Ten minutes, yes.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am happy to rise on the bill here today, Interim Supply, but it didn't sound like my colleague, the Member for Grand Bank was speaking for ten minutes; I think he was cut short. It was such an enjoyable debate and exchange across the House, that I think everybody was happy with it, Mr. Chairman, and everybody was enlightened to hear the Member for Grand Bank speaking; it shows great knowledge of the fishery and what was happening out there, and take on the Member for Eagle River, the person who tries to make everybody believe that he is a representative of the people and a great orator for Labrador.

It was only the other day I saw him on one of the television shows, I think it was Here and Now; and he took the side view looking out over the ice floes. It reminded me of Nanook, looking out over the ice floes of his native land. Mr. Chairman, the Member for Eagle River, comes in, stands here in the House and talks about the wonderful things that are happening up in Ottawa; his mentor up in Ottawa, the wonderful things he is doing out there like cutting nets and bringing in draggers. Mr. Chairman, the Member for Port de Grave brought all that forward years ago. Where were you then, you didn't believe in it.

MR. DUMARESQUE: I did.

MR. FITZGERALD: No, you didn't. You didn't stand up and be counted, you didn't believe in it because you were after another job, that was the reason. He had no support from his caucus over there, other than that, the problem would have been solved today; other than that, the Member for Port de Grave would have solved the problem and you wouldn't have been in the embarrassing situation that you are in today - going down on the waterfront and seeing a charade when they brought in one dragger and left another thirty-eight out there raking the bottom, and you get up and you say, `I believe in Brian Tobin and I am proud to be a Liberal, I am proud to be a Canadian.'

MR. DUMARESQUE: Absolutely.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Chairman, shame, on the Member for Eagle River. At least your other colleagues, Mr. Chairman, know who brought the technology forward, know the man, the man right there sitting on the front benches, that is the man who went over and had the initiative to bring in the people from Iceland, that is the man who is responsible for going out there and cutting the nets, but you never hear his name mentioned anymore, and that is a shame. There is nothing worse or nothing lower than somebody going and taking somebody else's idea and saying, `It was mine, it was mine.' Shame! Shame! There is the member right there who deserves the credit, and I hope it comes back to him. So give him some credit.

AN HON. MEMBER: Is he supporting you for leader?

MR. EFFORD: He is trying to get a few miles of road done.

MR. FITZGERALD: I am trying to get some road done, that's right.

Anyway, Mr. Chairman, I had my say about that a couple of days ago when we debated the resolution as put forward by the Member for Grand Bank. I said what I had to say about that at that time.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to refer back to a couple of days ago when the Speech from the Throne was read. The former Environment minister, the Member for Conception Bay South, got up and I think she seconded the motion if I am correct. My response to -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: That's right. Mr. Chairman, she got up and talked about the wonderful things that were happening in her district, and she said, the two biggest concerns she now has - and I think I can recall correctly - the two biggest concerns she has, are: sidewalks and I don't know if she said traffic lights or pedestrian lights.

Now, Mr. Chairman, how out of touch with rural Newfoundland and Labrador - or what a wonderful place it is, that she lives in! What a wonderful place she lives in, is Conception Bay South! I have to drive through there some day and see it, or else I have to take the minister out and show her what rural Newfoundland is all about - take her out and show her Bonavista, show her Plate Cove East and Plate Cove West and Duntara and see where people don't even have a suitable supply of drinking water. There is no suitable supply of drinking water, Mr. Chairman, seniors, living in their houses without home care. It is shameful! Hospital beds closed, senior citizens' homes built and ten beds put forward, and don't have the funding to open them - don't have the funding to open the ten beds! But a few miles away in an acute care facility, chronic people occupying acute care beds, costing us three times as much money, but we can't take them and move them down to Bonavista in the chronic care home because it was not specified in the Budget that we can do that. We don't mind spending money as long as it is directed in a certain way.

It is shameful, Mr. Chairman! When I think that same member was part of the Cabinet, part of the decision-making process, it causes me to shudder. I tremble knowing that we are in the hands of those people so uncaring, lacking the knowledge about rural Newfoundland. It's shameful!

The Minister of Finance and Treasury Board brought forward a balanced Budget, but at what price? There is no problem in bringing forward a balanced budget, whether it is a balanced budget for the Province or a budget for somebody's home, if you do away with spending, if you don't accept your responsibilities. There is no trouble bringing forward a balanced budget. But when you go out and see the number of people who are out there today unemployed, you see the number of people who are hurting - I wonder how many people took pride when the minister got up and said: Today, I'm proud to stand and deliver a balanced budget.

If people were working, if there were no need out there, and if the needs were being responded to, then I would be the first one to give the minister a good hand and a good rap on the desk.

MR. BAKER: That is not true!

MR. FITZGERALD: Sure, it is true, Mr. Chairman, and the minister knows that. The Minister of Employment and Labour Relations shakes his head. What a farce of an employment program that the minister introduced! He was shamed into it by people on this side of the House. The hon. the Member for Baie Verte - White Bay here, he got laryngitis after talking that much in trying to represent his district and represent his constituents in presenting petitions here in this House. He was continually up. And finally, the minister convinced some people in Cabinet that there was a need out there. He responded to it.

I believe the minister was sincere, but I think, being a new minister, he probably couldn't get the rest of caucus to come on side. I can imagine the minister trying to convince the House Leader of the need in rural Newfoundland to create emergency employment. I can imagine the trouble he had. In fact, the Premier got up one day and he looked behind at the minister and said the minister couldn't have been awake. When the minister had made a response to a Morning Show program, the minister's comments were - because it was out of sync, what he believed in. He said: The minister must have been asleep.

The minister wasn't asleep, the minister was concerned. He was showing some concern. I honestly believe that, Minister, I honestly believe you were concerned. But I believe that the Cabinet wasn't concerned. I don't know why you are so hesitant about naming the people who were part of that special committee that put together the criteria. I don't know why you would hide them and you take the blame yourself. Don't do that, because they wouldn't do it for you. You see what is happening to the member sitting next to you now. You see the way they are hoodwinking him, taking all his credit, taking all his glory. They will do the same thing with you, I can assure you.

The Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs - we met this morning and brought forward some concerns. And it was a good session - it lasted about three hours, three hours-and-a-half. I brought it to the minister's attention that I don't know why anybody in this Province today would want to go out in rural Newfoundland and become a councillor, become part of a town council, a municipal government, become part of a forum of municipal government. I don't know why they would. Because here is what would happen.

In the past, there was always some funding there, some encouragement for people to form these local district associations. I am not saying go out and borrow and borrow, no, I am not. I didn't say that. It is shameful when this government today comes out and says, `There will be no tax increases right here. We are bringing in a balanced Budget without any tax increases.' But, Mr. Chairman, there are tax increases, and they are being filtered down to the municipalities by the government of the day, shedding their responsibility to the people, and it is being passed on to the community councils and the town councils in rural Newfoundland.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

The hon. the Member for Eagle River.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to start this debate by reading this: `It may be as faint as a fog-bound morning in Bonavista but there is a new light in Newfoundland.' On Monday, the Globe and Mail headline was, `A Practical Spirit in Newfoundland'. It says, `the government realized that early and responded aggressively.' `In its provincial outlook,' Nesbitt Byrne says, `Newfoundland has been at the forefront of fiscal restraint in Canada. It is the only Province to have recorded a decline in the deficit for four consecutive years.' It says, the Budget isn't all, either, that is hopeful on the rock these days. Premier Clyde Wells has proposed changes to hidebound areas of social and economic policy that have always been sacrosanct, collectively. They represent a sea change, a milestone. A fundamental change in public policy is happening in Newfoundland, leading the country, Mr. Chairman, in fiscal restraint, in social policy, and in economic development.

This is not the record of the tired old Tory ways. This is the record of a strong Liberal Government with imagination, and with aggressive courage. It is not going to hide behind maybe something in the wind that might fall bad for the political fortunes of their party. They are looking at what is in the best interest of the people. We went to the people nearly two years ago and said: `We are not coming offering you a bag of goodies, a Sprung greenhouse here, a Sprung greenhouse there. We are not going to offer you millions here and millions there, a pickle factory here and a pickle factory there. We are not going to offer you that. We are going to offer you the straight goods, we are going to tell you the truth, we are going to give you some imagination, some political will and some vision. We are going to give you what you deserve, and that is good government.'

The people of the day, nearly two years ago, came back and said: `Yes, yes, stay in there, stay for four more years because you have done a better job than the other crowd did. I know the mess you have in there.' I heard it all, and hon. members also heard it. Every door we went to we heard it time and time again. Are we going to even think about giving it back to the tired old Tories? Are we now going to give it back now to the Member for Humber East, the one who was in there in the tired, old Peckford days and the short-lived Rideout days? Are we going to pass it back over to the Member for Humber East? There is nothing over there. There is not a stir out there in Newfoundland today caused by that party over there.

As the Globe and Mail concludes, `It is this practical spirit that will bring Newfoundland out of economic stagnation. It will be the Liberal Government that will say to the people, `Have not is no more.' It will be the Liberal Government who will deliver on that statement, and not the tired, old Tory ways, Mr. Chairman, there is no doubt.

I can't help but listen, and actually smile, when listening to the Crosbie puppets over there now saying we are not going far enough: `You haven't gone and taken over the world, you still haven't gone over to Africa, you still haven't solved the problem over in Iceland, you still haven't fixed everything else that is wrong in the world.' We have done, Mr. Chairman, what no Minister of Fisheries, what no government in Ottawa, what no government here in Newfoundland ever did when it came to foreign overfishing, what they ever did when it was dealing with the seal population.

How many times have members opposite stood up and said: We should do this. But there was no political courage in Ottawa, there was no political support in Ottawa, there was no backbone in the prime minister of Canada who was a Tory for the last time, and obviously, Mr. Chairman, that is why there are no Tories in Ottawa today. Because the people in Canada lost total confidence in that party. It had no vision, it had nothing to offer, it had no people there who were willing to work and put the interest of the people before their political stripe. That is recorded in history and it will be recorded again the next time we go back to the polls in this Province.

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

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West on a point of order.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, more a point of clarification. The member I know obviously is not in Cabinet, and when he refers to "we" he is referring to himself and some other people. I wonder would he clarify who the other people besides himself are.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Eagle River.

MR. DUMARESQUE: I would be happy to, Mr. Chairman. We are Liberals on this side of the House, we are progressive people, we are visionaries, we are action people. We are people who stand up and fight for what is right for the people's interest, not the interest of the political party that we represent. We are proud to be that. We are proud to stand over here and stand behind our record. For anybody else who would have sat in this House and for the first time since 1949 be able to stand behind our Minister of Finance and Treasury Board and say that we are for the first time in our history delivering a balanced budget in this Province at this point in time, with no increases in taxes and no new taxes.

I don't know how we haven't seen the people come up and take him out of the House of Assembly and march him around this Province. Because he has to be a miracle worker. He has to be somebody who has a vision, and obviously supported by a government that has the guts to do what is right. Any other day, any other government, any other place in this world who would see the kind of performance for the last four years, and particularly the last couple of years by this minister, would have to be bringing accolades to this House, would have to be standing up and congratulating him.

But no! They are not concerned about the future generations of this Province. They are not concerned about whether we have a debt that we can get some control over. They are not concerned about whether we have any money to develop our economy. They are not concerned about whether we can continue to provide quality education and social services and health care. They are not concerned about anything else, only now to try to find a leader that they can try to find a parade then to try to take them out of the political wilderness.

It is not going to work. The people of this Province know that they want good government, they know when they are getting good government, and they will know where to mark their x the next time around because they have seen good government. They have seen it enunciated, most recently in our Budget Speech. An historic day, a watershed day, a day that should be recorded and will be recorded in history as a day when we turned our back on fiscal recklessness, on total irresponsibility when it comes to dealing with our finances, and a day when we put the people of this Province first and the future generations will be number one on our priority.

We should be hearing more people on the other side of the House. Because they are not going to get the credibility. That is why they haven't anybody running for leader. That is why when the Leader of the Opposition resigned there just before Christmas, he said: Look out, the doors are going to be blown off here, I've got seven already who are going to go, and I know there are four or five others out there in the wings. Oh yes, there is a lawyer downtown, there is a Danny, Dougie, Buddy, all the people, Sailor White and people like that. They were going to blow the doors off her trying to get into the Newfoundland Hotel to get hold of that mantle.

But slowly but surely they marched up to the microphone: Well, I'm not going to run, I'm going to chicken out, there is not much over there, is there? I mean, how many times did we hear it? What about if I did win? I almost had a nightmare, one fellow said. I woke up in the middle of the night and said: Oh my, if I did win, what would I have? A rag-tag of a political party, visionless, no courage, being seen as Crosbie puppets in their best days, nothing to offer the people of this Province, not a thing.

We had all kinds of people -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DUMARESQUE: Yes, and the best they could come up with, Mr. Chairman, was a candidate supported by Bill Barry and the right-wing side of the Tory party, the Preston Manning of the Tory party in Newfoundland.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who?

MR. DUMARESQUE: Bill Barry. And the Carl Sullivan, the Con Sullivan. But there is no con going to be delivered to the people of this Province, I can tell you that. Because what we know is the truth. That Bill Barry's policies are not going to take over the fisheries policies, as much as the Member for Ferryland is in favour of them.

I have some confidence in the Member for Grand Bank. I am sure he is not going to allow the Bill Barry vision of the future to overtake what is left of that political party. I am sure that he won't put up with it. I am sure that he will stand up against it, and I am sure that the Member for Ferryland is going to show us how many dollars, how many tens of thousands of dollars, does Bill Barry and the Sullivans and that vision of the fishery put into his campaign?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Member for Baie Verte - White Bay.

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am glad to rise to say a few words on the bill on Interim Supply.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: A new suit, no problem now to get a new suit now; the wife gave me that.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Chairman, what a pitiful, pitiful relation to The Globe and Mail. They are so desperate to look for something positive to say about the party, they go to The Globe and Mail; imagine. Ask all the Newfoundlanders around the Province what they think of the Budget in the last four or five years, but no way; the Member for Eagle River goes to The Globe and Mail and holds it all up. That's who is going to elect us the next election, The Globe and Mail, the same Globe and Mail that called us the barbarians of the seal industry, the same Globe and Mail that said, you are all lazy and looking for government hand-outs. That's the same Globe and Mail - I think it is - the same Globe and Mail. That's what they are looking for, as you are reading. Well, my God, how pitiful have they gotten? How low have they gotten?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

MR. SHELLEY: How low can you go? They are looking for the approval of The Globe and Mail. Now I have heard it all. The Globe and Mail is their newest poll. How desperate have they gotten?

You go around this Province and go up to Southern Labrador, where I visited a little while ago, and I would be concerned a little bit if I were the Member for Eagle River - a blinding snowstorm, five or six communities are all that could come to the meeting anyway, 220 out on skidoos and four-wheel drives, and another 100 in Forteau who couldn't get there.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) sub sandwiches (inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Chairman, no sub sandwiches, no chicken, nothing in Labrador, no, sir, not a thing. All it was was good, solid Tories coming out to say that we are going to support a leader - five and six - that's what it was.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Chairman, I am going to tell you another thing; none of the rent-a-cars came from Quebec that came up to that meeting.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: Not one of them; they all came on their own skidoos, their own gas from Labrador. As a matter of fact, a lot of people from the Blanc Sablon area wanted to come up to the leadership delegation meeting. Even the people from across the border wanted to come up and take part in the meeting, it was that exciting - 220 people out in L'Anse-au-Loup for a PC delegate selection meeting - 220 people, another 100 stuck on a bus in Forteau who were really upset that they couldn't make it up there, and then we had calls from Blanc Sablon, wondering if they could come up and vote in Newfoundland for our next leader. That is where the excitement is. I will tell you where else the excitement is about the leadership, 800 people out in the District of Kilbride for a delegate selection meeting.

AN HON. MEMBER: So what?

MR. SHELLEY: Are you telling me there is no end to the other interest? Out of fifty-eight meetings, we had two controversies with some chicken and pizza, and all of a sudden everybody blows it up. We had a couple of feeds... I would say before the leadership is through there in the not too near future, it won't be chicken and pizza, it will be steaks and chateaubriand. That's what it will be, steaks and chateaubriand, you just wait. If you think you have a taste of it now, you wait until you taste the chateaubriand from the leadership that is coming over there in the next little while.

Mr. Chairman, I am sure that the member, when he goes back to his region, and back to his district, and talks to the few excited people who were there who are coming to this leadership on April 28, I wonder how many he will get out for their leadership they will be having in the near future.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) because it is closed membership.

MR. SHELLEY: Oh, that is right; it is closed membership. You have to have a membership card and all this (inaudible).

Mr. Chairman, I couldn't believe it, to see the member, especially this member, who talked about the seal industry, stand up so proud of The Globe and Mail. My God, right out of Toronto, the barbarians, the Newfoundlanders, the same people who said we were the lazy people who look for government hand-outs, are now approving of the Government of Newfoundland. Well, big deal! Who cares what The Globe and Mail says. I said that since day one. I am not going to change it anytime. The last paper I want to rate me is The Globe and Mail.

AN HON. MEMBER: A few weeks ago they (inaudible) downgraded Trepassey.

MR. SHELLEY: Yes, The Globe and Mail last week, with the downgrading of Trepassey, and talking about the Trepassey people, and Newfoundlanders in general, they weren't too excited about The Globe and Mail then.

AN HON. MEMBER: It is the mark of desperate people - they will do desperate things.

MR. SHELLEY: Desperation calls for desperate things.

Mr. Chairman, I wanted to say a few words - and I brought up the question today and I will go back to that now that we have finished with the leadership - about job creation, the $5 million that was spit out to this Province and administered in probably the worst way that any money could be administered, except for the $10 million that was administered for Hydro, of course, but the $5 million that was sent out to administer in this Province for job creation, what an insult that was. Every day that goes by and the more stories I hear - and I know the minister heard them too, I know the Member from Burgeo - Bay d'Espoir has heard them, I know the Member for Eagle River heard them, all the same stories and the minister has heard them. What a gross misconduct of administering money in this Province. It is unbelievable, when a person can sit there - a husband who wanted to get on this project - a husband who was receiving $200 a week -

AN HON. MEMBER: Out passing out the chicken coupons.

MR. SHELLEY: I didn't pass out any chicken coupons. The husband –

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: And job creation - a true story for the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations, I know you have heard them but I will give you the one story that was so gross that the criteria I said, had to be looked at again. Mr. Chairman, the one man who was receiving somewhere between $200 and $210 a week on unemployment, four children in the house, his wife needed six stamps but because he was receiving the $190 a week or more, of course this poor lady who needed two more weeks could not get on the project.

AN HON. MEMBER: It's your fault.

MR. SHELLEY: My fault the criteria is like it is? Okay, very good. Well if it is my fault give me the power to change it and we will change it real fast. We will have the rest of the money out and change the criteria tomorrow morning.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: No problem, if you think it is my fault. The minister knows and this minister knows, it was a gross administration of money, the funding. Do you know what was missing? It was common sense, plain simple common sense. The measly money that was put out there, Mr. Chairman, I say to the minister in all sincerity, should have been given to the districts - like he did, he started out on the right track and split up the money evenly, I will give him credit for that - then let the people in the districts, through development associations or independent groups, decide who the most needy people are and let them go to work on the projects.

Now, Mr. Chairman - the best example was the one I just read. The most recent report I just heard was Ramea, sixty weeks they were given down in Ramea. Do you know what they were doing for those other six weeks they needed? They were apple picking in Nova Scotia. They were getting sixty weeks down there and they are sending them back twenty-six weeks. They couldn't use it: no boy, we're all okay down here, the work is fine, we are all fine. We are sending back twenty-six weeks. We don't need that. We don't need your measly $100,000. I mean it is so ridiculous it is almost not worth the comment. The simple fact is minister, is that the criteria for this is out to lunch. It just does not relate. Why wasn't it polled and let the people in the different areas, the Ramea groups, the Baie Verte Peninsula, the Southern Labrador and everywhere else, why didn't you let them administer money to the people who needed it most? It is a simple, simple request and with a little bit of common sense would have solved a lot of the problems.

I mean the irony of the situation when you got twenty jobs available at a council office, you have 100 people lining up for them and only ten can get on because the 100 cannot qualify because they are saying: no, you are too well off. What are you saying to these people: No boy, you are too well off. You are making too much money. Like this poor man whose wife could not get on because he was making $200 a week. I am going to tell you, I visited that house during Christmas and it was unbelievable to see it first hand. You talk about the code of starvation, Mr. Chairman, that man opened his fridge and he told me to tell the Premier and this House - and I can tell him now too, I will tell that man I did say it in this House - he said: you can tell the Premier we are not starving but we are next to it. When we use the starving quotation which you figure I blew up through the sublime there and went to hell with it. The truth is that these people are in a desperate state and the criteria set in this - it was bad enough, Mr. Chairman, that the amount of money that went out was $5 million but the truth was they did not want to send out anything so they put this criteria in place so that we would not even use that much. So that next week they can run around saying: well, we put out the job creation program.

Mr. Chairman, what this government should start considering and what any government of the day should consider, is that we are going to find ourselves in that situation every year. Let's face the reality of that. We are going to find ourselves in that situation again next year, I say to the minister. So why not do a little bit of foresight and preplanning? Why don't we do something that is sensible? Why don't we say now at this time instead of putting it out into projects. I will agree, Mr. Chairman -

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Member for LaPoile.

MR. RAMSAY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RAMSAY: It gives one a lot of pleasure to hear the Opposition so intent on wanting people to think that times are bad, that things are terrible, that life is over, that there is no hope, that things are just terrible in this Province of ours, that we are all ready to close the door, and as it is often said in my district, Mr. Chairman, you would only wish for your political future that the last person to leave Newfoundland, turn off the lights when they close the doors on the boat at Port aux Basques. Well, such is not the case, Mr. Chairman, such is not the case, Mr. Chairman!

There is a new enthusiasm growing in this Province to see that this government has managed to balance the books of the Province and that you just do not like it; it is very obvious to be able to manage the finances of this Province in spite of the difficulties that we face, in spite of the harsh situation created by the closure of the fishery; in spite of the fact that the Opposition would put forward that we are terrible managers of the provincial economy. The fact of the matter is we cannot manage an economy, Mr. Chairman. The fact of the matter is, that we, as a government, can only create a climate in which the private sector can be the engine of growth for the economy, and we are doing that in spades.

It is the Opposition who would have us hold the line and also would have us believe that things are so terrible that despair is the way of the future, that for people to navel gaze as they often say, to look down, to feel badly about themselves, perpetuate the myth of the downtrodden Newfoundlander, make us all permanent victims of the terrible situation and the terrible circumstance in which we find ourselves. That, Mr. Chairman, is the Tory way, and for us to believe what they put forward with their leaders, Mr. Chairman, we would have to think that Newfoundland has no future. Well, Newfoundland has a very bright future.

The people of Newfoundland and Labrador, will -

AN HON. MEMBER: They will have to change governments.

MR. RAMSAY: They will have to change what? No, no. The only change will be in the Leadership of the Opposition and then again, after the next provincial election, the people will realize that the vision put forward by this government, one of an enterprising culture, one of a people who take the ingenuity and the long-standing dedication to pursuing a livelihood in spite of the odds, that these people here, in this fine Province of ours, will persevere and will do well. The people in this Province will do well; there is an enterprising culture being built right from the kindergarten grades in schools on up through. People are coming to us in many, many ways, they are phoning, they are coming to visit their members and I am sure hon. members opposite do have visits from people who want to take part in the new economy, who want to be a part of the technological revolution that this Province wants to be a part of and these people want to be sure that they are not left behind.

The people in this Province, it takes but a small percentage of change for us to compound that into good growth for the future of our Province, for the future of our children. We want our children, I don't know about you, but I would like my children to stay in Newfoundland; I would like my children to have no opportunity better anywhere else than they can have here at home, and I hope to be able to, in my own little way, as a member of this government and as a representative of the people of my area, to offer them some vision; to offer them leadership and not to put forward the type of view that the members of the opposition do, that everything is terrible, that we do everything wrong in this government, that we are just terrible managers of money.

This balanced Budget is nothing but a lark. If we listen to the Finance critic opposite then suddenly all of the figures we are putting forward this year are total fluff, they do not exist. This is all false. One would have the public of this Province think that everything we have done has been corrupt, everything we have done is a terrible view of the world, and that there is no way this government could actually balance its books. And the Auditor General, of course, would at some stage probably go along, that we have done nothing but spend our money unwisely and we have never managed to meet the task at hand of reporting on things properly.

Well, I would think, as was said the other day, that the board members of the various boards in question, all know for what reason they are sitting as board members. The hon. members opposite would have you believe that there is nothing but graft and corruption over here. Well, such is not the case and the public of the Province, it is obvious with their view of the political leadership in this Province, certainly do feel that this government is doing a good job, that this government is leading the way for the whole of the country.

This government is doing what is right. It is getting out of the support of business in putting forward grants. This government is doing it by loan only. The government is supporting the different industrial sectors, it is supporting the strategic side of computer technology through the on-line program, the opportunities in Newfoundland and Labrador in the new economy, through a report which will be made to Cabinet in about six months time. That report will give us a strategy that we will follow in our efforts to diversify Newfoundland into the new economy.

We are going from the fishing net to the inter-net. We are not going to dispose of the fishing net but we are going to build on the fishing net and move our economy to the inter-net.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. RAMSAY: The Opposition does not want to hear this. The choice and the vision for the people of this Province is not to have chicken or to have chinese food. The choice of the people of this Province is whether they want sound, good government, or just have someone there who wants to be Premier. I submit that the people of this Province would return this government again today, tomorrow, and in the future, because of the sound fiscal management that the people of this Province have seen over the last number of years.

We look forward to more future balanced budgets. We will balance the Budget in spite of the fiscal difficulty, and the reason why we will balance the Budget is because we have to balance the Budget and that will show good stewardship on behalf of the taxpayers of the Province, Mr. Chairman.

In conclusion I would submit that the Opposition are wallowing about in a terrible despair. The members of the PC party that they would have hoped would come forward realized that there was no rationale, there was no justification for offering themselves for the leadership of a Tory party that will be in opposition for many, many years to come, and based on that I can see why they are in such despair. I can see why we have to show the leadership, show them the way, show them how we are so interested in building up this Province and not in having people look down and feel bad about themselves, and feel terrible about the Province.

Let us all get on the same bandwagon and support the enthusiasm that is necessary to move this Province, to make this Province one that moves ahead of all other provinces. We are now at the pinnacle of small business job creation in this Province and let us continue to do that. Let us continue to make Newfoundland and Labrador the place in all of North America where it is best to invest your money. Maybe the hon. member there from Labrador will be interested in investing some of his money back here in the Province again, as he has in the past. Perhaps he would invest further making Newfoundland the place for him to put his money so that he does not have to buy mutual funds and stocks and bonds in downtown Toronto. Maybe Newfoundland is the place.

Maybe the hon. members opposite will be able to invest their RRSPs and their mutual funds and everything they have any dealings with here in this Province because this will be the best return for all these investments that hon. members have. Probably those hon. members who were here in the past when the Tory opposition was in government would certainly have a bit more money to invest because there was a lot more money flowing around at that time, but possibly even these hon. members, who have a good solid background, would be interested in investing here in the Province.

That is what we want, to be able to attract new business investment. Maybe Chuck Furey won't have to go any further than to the Opposition caucus room to get new business investment. Maybe that is where he has to go. Maybe he doesn't have to travel. You maintain that he shouldn't be travelling. Then maybe that is where he will go. Who knows, Mr. Chairman. Maybe that is the new strategy.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Member for Menihek.

AN HON. MEMBER: How much would you bet now on the leadership?

MR. A. SNOW: I have bet enough. But I'm willing to wager though that when the time comes to select a new leader on that side of the House -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. A. SNOW: Oh yes. You can see it. Last night. Did you see it last night on television when Brian was there in all his glory and he had his deputy minister on one side and then he had his advisor or his PR man on the other side? Did you see that? Whatever. The Premier was there, alright? He said: I need those papers, where are those paper? He turned, and instead of turning to his deputy minister he turned to the Premier, and here was the Premier going through the files trying to find Brian the paper, passing it along. I heard somebody on the other side talking about how he shouldn't be treating the Premier like that, you know, like an assistant or something. He just said: Get me those papers.

I heard a fellow on the other - I won't say who it is, because I don't want to embarrass my friends on the other side. I don't want to embarrass them, I won't point them out. This person said: My God, it's not hard to tell now he won't be around long when he is just looking for the papers for the federal Cabinet minister.

AN HON. MEMBER: Name him.

MR. A. SNOW: No, I don't want to do that because that wouldn't be fair. Why should I announce his candidacy already? I wouldn't want to steal his thunder. He wants to be able to call a press conference to announce....

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. A. SNOW: We all know there is going to be a leadership race on the other side. It will be good for the party. You will go through the same process we are going through, which is a building of the party and attracting –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. A. SNOW: Yes. It will be good for the party, it will be good for your party. Because by doing this you will end up breaking off into little groups and supporting different groups. So you won't have this single person just leading you along and you blindly followed. There were only one or two of you who had the backbone to stand up to the leadership of the party and say that they were against the policy of the privatization of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. Then after, when the public opinion built, then you changed. You knew then, and so did the Premier know, that it was time to go. When he couldn't put his will on the people in the party.

Now you are going to be going through a process. It will help your party to have a new leader. Because it is good for the political process and it will be good for your party, as it has been good for our party to go through the leadership that we are going through today.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. A. SNOW: No, it hasn't been good for my checking account, I will agree with that. Because we all must contribute to the process.

Mr. Chairman, it was with interest that I listened to the Member for LaPoile talking about the creation of the enterprise culture, as if to say that by sitting here in the House and passing one piece of legislation you can all of a sudden change the whole history and the culture of this Province - one piece of legislation - the EDGE legislation. Well, it's a little more complicated than that. By passing one piece of legislation - yes, I agree, I voted in favour, I thought it was a good piece of legislation - the EDGE legislation - but that does not create an enterprise culture. This government is going to have to do other things. They are going to have to do other things to create an enterprise culture. Some of those things I have been asking them to do since I have been elected, for the last six or seven years, and they haven't paid any attention whatsoever.

We know that a tax regime is important for anybody to function in, whether it's the government attempting to set up a tax regime such as we have seen here in this Province, and businesses should have, and they need, a level playing field to compete with other businesses.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) your business?

MR. A. SNOW: No, I am not promoting my business, but I will promote the idea that in my district, and in the district of the hon. Member for Eagle River, these districts have to be treated with regard to taxes so that the business people in these communities have the opportunity of competing on a level playing field with their competitors in their neighbouring province.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. A. SNOW: Now, the hon. Member for Eagle River suggested that we are beating them. Well, maybe the car rental agencies are winning in Quebec, and the tobacco sellers are winning in Quebec, but -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. A. SNOW: Anyway, Mr. Chairman, I won't get involved in the debate with the Member for Eagle River. He will have an opportunity to speak about the merits of buying cars in Quebec, and how it creates a better economy here because you buy a car in Quebec and you remit your sales tax in this Province. I won't get into that debate.

All I am saying is that I believe that in border situations we have to copy other provinces that have changed, and they have zones that permit the businesses to compete against their competitors in another province so they can have the same taxes.

In Eagle River, as an example, I don't know how many people recognize it, there isn't a sales tax on rooms at a hotel. That is to allow hotels in this Province to compete with the hotels in the Province of Quebec, over in Blanc Sablon; so that was good. Yet, this government wouldn't change the regulations to allow the same opportunity for Western Labrador. It's the same problem. Again, they wouldn't allow the businesses in Western Labrador to forego the taxes on rooms in the hotels, to allow the hotel in Western Labrador to compete with the one in Quebec.

The same thing applies with tobacco taxes. This government agreed in principle with the tobacco tax rebate system to allow the merchant in Western Labrador, and in Southern Labrador, to compete with the Quebec businesses, because of the lowering of the tobacco tax in that province. Yet, when the tobacco tax was drastically reduced by the federal government to counter the smuggling into the country last February, what happened then was that the prices changed drastically, especially in the Province of Quebec, because that province matched and increased the tobacco tax decrease in that province. This Province, then, wouldn't increase their rebate, so out the window went their principles, for some reason or another. So one hand touts that they are in favour of business, that they agree with the enterprise culture, yet, when the opportunity arises and they can do things to promote more business in this Province, they don't do it.

Mr. Chairman, the Member for LaPoile, and the Member for Eagle River, talked a lot about The Globe and Mail heaping praises on this government for their Budget, because it's supposed to be a balanced Budget. Now, I find it passing strange - albeit I support the idea of a government passing a balanced budget - I find it passing strange that Liberals, Liberals are now using The Globe and Mail, this conservative, central Canadian newspaper as their new, red book.

AN HON. MEMBER: Well leave it to the Tories to get it right once in a while.

MR. A. SNOW: Well, the Tories are on this side, the Conservatives are on that side. That is exactly what it is and I am quite pleased to see that the Government House Leader recognized it, that the Conservatives are on that side but, Mr. Chairman, the people of my district and the people throughout the Province have been talking about this so-called balanced Budget. It is merely smoke and mirrors, I mean, it is like saying that you paid off your Visa with your Mastercard; that's about the extent of it.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. A. SNOW: By leave?

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

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

I would like to talk about a couple of things today in terms of the Department of Employment and Labour Relations.

Over the last couple of months, the minister has made several public statements on changing the labour code, he has put out a discussion paper I think some time the fall or just after he became minister, to all of the employers and employees association groups et cetera and he has also indicated that there will be some public forums or possibly some sort of consultation process that will take place. I don't know if he can enlighten us on that a bit or -

MR. MURPHY: By leave?

MR. E. BYRNE: Yes, sure.

MR. MURPHY: I thank the hon. member for leave and I thank him for the question.

The Exploring Options document has now been out for some four months. To date, we have received twelve, very large, complex and very good I might tell the member, submissions from the bigger players of course, who are out there in the labour relations field, both from management and the bargaining unit, and we have just hired a new director to correlate and catalogue and analyze all that material. When that is done we would hope that we would be able to send our officials to different parts of the Province to deal with those major players.

I have discussed with all of them that these documents now are considered by the department, to be open documents and continued dialogue and clarification in their presentations. That person is now on staff as director to correlate as I said to the member, all this information that is contained in the briefs that have been presented to the department. We would hopefully then ask the Department of Justice to put together a piece of draft legislation and of course, then ask the Committee of the House to move forward before we would finalize the legislation so we are very hopeful to have that in place by the fall, if at all possible, but it is very active I say to the member and we have had some great submissions and will continue. We know there are other groups coming so we are looking for about twenty-five to thirty briefs to come before us and we are about half-way home now.

MR. E. BYRNE: You are looking at a timeframe possibly for the fall in terms of a consultation process at that time or legislation coming to the House?

MR. MURPHY: A Review Committee.

MR. E. BYRNE: A Review Committee of the House would go across to, I guess, to absorb the information that we have already been given and give people another chance to have some input into the process before legislation actually comes to the House.

The second thing I would like to talk about, Mr. Chairman, is the reduction I guess or moratorium on capital works projects for '95 and '96. I noted with interest the Member for Conception Bay South saying, that in her district, in 1989 when this government had come to power, they decided that the priorities for funding projects would be based upon need, not upon politics or not upon which member had more power or whatever.

I can say today with certainty that in my district, that the need is great, far greater than many districts represented by members in this House. In many areas, especially in the Goulds, west of Ruby Line for example, I mean, raw sewerage runs in the streets, in parts of the streets in there. There is a tremendous and dramatic need and I think that the moratorium, for sure the moratorium on capital works money, will have a negative impact on my district in that sense. People who had been hoping since amalgamation, since this government forced amalgamation upon the people of that area. The government at the time told them that it would be good for them in four or five years' time but the evidence really has not been forthcoming to this point.

The second thing as well, road work, in terms of the District as a whole in Kilbride, in old Kilbride and the Goulds. The necessity for the roads to be done and upgraded in that area is tremendous, more tremendous than in St. John's Centre, St. John's South, Port de Grave even. The need is great, and again the freezing of capital works money or a moratorium on capital works projects for this year, will definitely impact negatively upon my district, the District of Kilbride.

Over the last four to five years we've depended upon the streets rehabilitation program, the program funded 60-40 by the Province and municipalities. We never got any money, Mr. Chairman, from that because it always came down to who the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs was, to dictate, to determine, to say who would get money, what part of the City of St. John's would get money. That was his or her right, whoever it was at that time. Since that time we have received as a district little money from the provincial government in terms of the streets rehabilitation program, or any capital works.

I would like to ask the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation a question dealing with the Goulds by-pass road. Will the Goulds by-pass road proceed this year?

MR. EFFORD: No.

MR. E. BYRNE: Is it still in environmental assessment?

MR. EFFORD: Yes.

MR. E. BYRNE: Two and a half years, Mr. Chairman, this project which is total, 100 per cent federal money, not one penny from the provincial coffers. This minister has held it up. The environmental process has been held up for two and half years, an extraordinary amount of time. At this time, and other times, the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation stands up here and says all he wants to see is people going to work. That is all he wants to see is people working on the highways, on the roads.

MR. EFFORD: Liberals!

MR. E. BYRNE: It is not happening in my district. The Goulds by-pass road, again, 100 per cent federal funded under the Roads for Rails Agreement, people still waiting for it. To take traffic off an area. The minister said to me one day that if there was a need for a by-pass road in this Province the need is greatest in the District of Kilbride. The question I have to the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation is: Why hasn't it proceeded? Don't offer the excuse that the environmental assessment is not done yet, because it should have been done. Forget Liberal-Tory. You know it is a Tory district as well as I do, and that is not the answer to the question that I'm going to get. The reality is, why isn't it beginning?

I understand that he has had meetings with city council officials, the ward councillor for the area, and he told him specifically that that project would not begin this year. The question is, why? There are many people in the district waiting to see what the minister will do. Will the project go ahead or will it not? People want to know. There are some people who would like to make submissions to the minister - haven't had the opportunity - to talk about re-routing the road in certain areas, but that opportunity has not been provided to them yet. Obviously the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation is not going to answer my questions, but maybe he will answer 100 or 200 constituents if they show up in his office someday. He will answer us then. We will save that for another day.

I would like to ask the Government House Leader a couple of points dealing with the electoral boundaries reform. Just to follow up on some of the questions the Leader of the Opposition asked today. Can he be more specific in terms of when that package will be tabled before the House? Does he know when for sure, generally speaking? Next month, in three weeks from now, can he inform the House of that?

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Chairman, with the hon. gentleman's leave, I will gladly answer his question. I do not know. We shall table it as soon as we get it from Mr. Noel. The Order in Council will reveal the date. I rather think it is the end of April we've given him as a - when I say a deadline, I mean, a mandamus doesn't lie, a target date. Judge Noel I believe will do a job quickly and will do it well. So as soon as we get it we will table it. We will see where we go from there.

MR. E. BYRNE: I appreciate the Government House Leader's immediate response, unlike the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation. More of a flippant response, but there it is.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: He had a flippant response, I said, to the former Minister of Employment and Labour Relations, who was much better than the present Minister of Employment and Labour Relations.

The next question I would like, Mr. Chairman, is to just raise a point to the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations dealing with the emergency response program. Is it possible, I say to the minister, will the program go on beyond March 31? Is that possible, if all the money is not spent? Maybe he can answer those questions at a later date. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am glad to have the opportunity to say a few words on Interim Supply. It is too bad the Member for Eagle River is not in the House now. He got up today -

AN HON. MEMBER: He is over there.

MR. MANNING: He changes so often. He is trying to figure out who has the best opportunity to be the next leader of the Liberal Party. So he is running around - he wants to be on all sides but that is nothing new for the Member for Eagle River. He was over waving the Globe and Mail, well maybe he should have a look at the Atlantic Progress Magazine and wave that around for awhile. Just to give him a couple of comments out of it. They did a ranking of our four Atlantic premiers as it relates to business investment in the provinces. It is a very interesting magazine, I say to the Member for Eagle River, he should take it. Our Premier is one of those four Atlantic premiers, he is in this book, he is ranked. As a matter of fact he was in a tie. Our Premier was in a tie. Was he in a tie for first place I say to the members opposite? No, Sir. Was he in a tie for second place I say to the members opposite? No, Sir. There are only four premiers so he had to be in a tie for third. He was in a tie for last place with the Premier of Nova Scotia, I say to the members opposite. He was in a tie with Premier Savage. Yes, the premiers report card. The Premier for New Brunswick, Frank McKenna, a B+. The new premier, Catherine Callbeck, Prince Edward Island, C+. John Savage, Nova Scotia and Clyde Wells tied for third place, C - grading the premier. How does your Premier rate in -

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible) you don't know how to read.

MR. MANNING: Oh I can read, I say to the Member for Eagle River and I read everything.

AN HON. MEMBER: It is not your reading it is your understanding.

MR. MANNING: Oh, another scholar coming in now, come on in. If our Premier would stay home and he would not be trying to get into the Guinness Book of Records for the most aeroplane points we might have a chance at getting some business brought into this Province, I say, instead of down being a little run around boy for Minister Brian Tobin. Grading the premiers: Clyde Wells is concerned with image and public perception but there is often no real substance beneath the veneer of the position or the program.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. MANNING: This is right in the magazine. I repeat for anybody who was not listening on the other side: Clyde Wells is concerned with image and public perception but there is often no real substance beneath the veneer of the position or the program.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: How often have you heard from this side of the House of Assembly, there is no substance on that side? How often do we have to tell you before you start to believe it?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: Oh, it would not be the first time. No, it wouldn't be the first time. I say I can back up - I say to the minister, I have nobody else doing my dirty work for me. Don't you forget about the briefcase. Now I say to the member, look you're forgetting about the briefcase because you had somebody else do your dirty work. I will sign my name when I put my name and I have no problem at all putting it there. Any time I speak I will back up what I say.

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: Yes, I tell the Member for Eagle River, you do what has to be done.

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: I say to the Member for Eagle River, you tried to get me on something last year and it failed, try again. You will have no problem with me. I rent my cars in Newfoundland. No problem whatsoever, I say to the Member for Eagle River.

I think I would be remiss if I did not say a few words and get back to what the Member for Eagle River was talking about earlier in relation to the fishery, and to the Member for Port de Grave. If the Member for Eagle River knew one tenth as much about the fishery as the Member for Port de Grave we would be a lot better off I say to the member.

AN HON. MEMBER: You would be a lot better off.

MR. MANNING: You sit down. Half what you are saying over there the Member for Port de Grave said. You are reading Hansard back a few years ago and getting up and repeating everything he said. Get some of your own ideas I say to the Member for Eagle River. You are afraid to go down to the waterfront like so many on that side of the House. When they had the rally down there you were afraid, I say to the Member for Eagle River. He was afraid because the Premier said: don't you go. He said there could be a riot down there. Newfoundlanders could rise up. Clyde told you not to go so you did not go. Was the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation afraid to go? No, he was down among the masses, among the thousands of people on the waterfront. He was not afraid of the Premier. Where is our Minister of Fisheries?

MR. EFFORD: He is out on the Grand Banks.

MR. MANNING: Oh, he is out on the Grand Banks. Well, it is about time I say to the Member for Port de Grave. The Member for Port de Grave was out there five years ago. It is about time the Minister of Fisheries started to realize that the Grand Banks are out there.

AN HON. MEMBER: Not the Minister of Fisheries, the Minister of FFA.

MR. MANNING: The Minister of Fish and Chips. I say it is about time he realized the Grand Banks are out there. The Premier must not have much faith in the Minister of Fish and Chips because he would not even take him to New York with him. He takes him nowhere, but he gets farther than where the Member for Eagle River is going to get.

Even though the fishery is the most important aspect in my district I have to get back to the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations. A long time no see I say to the minister. It is good to see you again I say. I say to the minister I am glad to be back. I had a touch of the flu for a few days. I am glad to see that there are still problems from your employment generation program. There are still lots of problems.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. MANNING: I am sorry, he is on the other side. We know where he stands. I got in on the end of Question Period and my hon. colleague for Baie Verte - White Bay was getting up still asking questions about their grandiose employment generation program. The shemozzle of the employment generation program I say to the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations, $170,000 sent into my district. A shemozzle of an employment generation program while hundreds of people in my district are still looking for work because you brought down a program and then you brought in criteria where the people could not go to work with it.

Myself and the Member for St. John's East Extern went over and sat down in your office and had a meeting if you remember.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. MANNING: Yes, we were no both sides of the camps, two different camps and we asked you for any comments. I have no problem with that. I say to the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations that we went over and had a meeting with you to discuss the criteria, but all of a sudden you forgot about the meeting. When VOCM went to after you forgot about the meeting. You started it I say to the minister. How could the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations remember what happened at the meeting when you could not remember where you lived? I say you remember what you said at the meeting but when you went back to the secret committee that you had - another fellow who has Alzheimer's.

I say to the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations, when you went back to your secret committee and they said, now, Tommy boy, you cannot go out and tell those fellows on the other side the House that we are going to rearrange the rules, so you had to say, no changes. Well, hundreds of people in my district were hoping for changes that you said were coming through I say to the minister. You said there would be changes to help out the poor people of this Province, the people who were looking for work. I say to the minister, you let the people down.

I would like to know how much of the $5 million was actually spent - that is what I would like to know - because there were certainly people who got work. People got work. Who got work, and where they got work, we will leave that for later on. There are a good many got it over in the department, I say to the minister, and this is not over yet.

I will go back for a few minutes, if I could, to the balanced Budget.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Carried? What does the hon. Government House Leader want to carry, I ask him? Every time someone gets up, he says, `carried'. I don't know what he is looking to carry.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible) moral support (inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Of course I need moral support from my colleague from Baie Verte. I need all the support I can get, I say to the Government House Leader - all the support I can get.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, you do, and I am glad that the Government House Leader can identify with those who need support, I say to him. Many a day I look over at the Government House Leader and I know how much he needs support over there, and how little support he really has over there from those to his right and his left, and those behind him. That is why I will not be surprised that the Government House Leader not throw his hat into the ring when the Premier leaves. He will not; he knows -

MR. ROBERTS: The hon. gentleman doesn't need to be surprised. I can tell you (inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I am not surprised, I say to him. We are agreeing with the Government House Leader that he will not be a candidate. We are agreeing that he will not be a candidate, I say to him. I know that. We agree quite often.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Oh, God, how long away - that is another two or three years.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Well, I heard the Government House Leader say that so many times that he has me almost convinced. The Government House Leader said it enough that he almost has me convinced that we are going to have an election.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Well, then, I will have to make up my mind rather quickly, I say to the Government House Leader. I have been known to do that before, make up my mind rather quickly.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Oh, I can tell him that I don't know. I can tell him, for the record today, that I really don't know.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, I don't know, to be very honest with you; it is a big commitment. You go through it between every election. Every election you go through that process: Will I run again? Will I not? Will I run? And you say: Well, no I won't.

I have four under my belt now; I might go for five. I might go for the tally; I don't know. I might go for the tally; you never know. I might, or I might decide to give it all up, crawl home - go home out of it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Take my money and go home, you say? I don't have any money, although I would probably be better off out of here, I say to the Member for Eagle River. I would probably be better off out of here now.

AN HON. MEMBER: Get a new House leader.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Get a new House leader, new blood. It sounds like my retirement speech.

AN HON. MEMBER: Lynn Verge will do the job on you.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, she probably will, I say to the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, she probably will do the job on me, and if she does, sobeit. The Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs is trying to prompt me into saying something I don't want to say. He is trying to get me to say something now. He is trying to get me to react and say something flippant that will cost me.

AN HON. MEMBER: It will cost (inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, it could very well be, I say to the Government House Leader, but being mature in this game, like the Government House Leader, we all know the consequences of making decisions.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: It doesn't bother me. As long as there is room in the House for me with a comfortable seat, I am not really tore up over where it is any more, I say to the Government House Leader. I am feeling somewhat a bit comfortable, like the Government House Leader. Not quite as comfortable, now; I didn't say as comfortable, but I share some of the comfort. It's nice to get to that stage in life where you could be a little bit comfortable.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible) so old and (inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Well, it doesn't matter, you know, I think that is why I tolerate coming in here so much, that I look around me and identify with people like myself who are so ugly and -

AN HON. MEMBER: Find somebody uglier.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I mean, it is the only place, Mr. Chairman, as my colleague says, that I know I could come and find someone uglier; come to the House of Assembly. I am looking all over the place now so that no one gets a complex about this. I don't want anyone to think I am talking about them, I am talking about all hon. members. But I want to get back to some comment on the fishery situation. Someone wondered, where is the Minister of Fisheries, Food and Agriculture?

MR. GRIMES: He is out on patrol, boy, he is out on the Banks now.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Well, that is what I was led to believe. I was led to believe that the Minister of Fisheries, Food and Agriculture, was out over the Grand Banks, but I have heard a story since then that that is not where he really is. Do you know why the Minister of Fisheries, Food and Agriculture went to the Grand Banks?

AN HON. MEMBER: No. Tell us.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: He is looking for the Flemish Cap. He thought it was something he could wear on his head in the wintertime. He is out there looking for it. As a matter of fact, I have seen the minister walking from his office to way up here one day and I thought he had the Flemish Cap on his head, I thought it was the Flemish Cap, pulled down over. So that's where he is. He said: `Forget the Spanish vessels, I want to see the Flemish Cap.' Anyway, I hope that is where the Minister of Fisheries, Food and Agriculture is. I hope he is out having a look to see it but I doubt today though if he will see anything; I don't think he will actually see any vessels, because I am sure it is black thick fog out there today. But he will see the blips on the radar and the crew on the surveillance plane will be able to tell him what vessels they are, the names.

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I'm sorry?

MR. DUMARESQUE: If it wasn't foggy they would all be arrested.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: All I can say is, the Member for Eagle River would believe anything. He would believe the reason now that the Spanish are still fishing is because it is foggy. I can see why the Member for Eagle River would identify with it being foggy, but what a defence now of his dear colleague, his cousin, his federal cousin; he would have them all arrested but it is too foggy - too foggy. Can you imagine the Premier and the federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, down in New York saying: We would have them all into port but it is too foggy, too foggy. Can you imagine? it is too foggy. I have heard tell of it all; I think that says it all about the situation. What a sequence of events though, from the time the Prime Minister said, `There is a reduced number of them out there now so it is sort of alright. It is not as bad now. There is a reduced number.' Now that is how it all started, the Prime Minister said that to the country: `Nothing is wrong, there are only a few of them out there. There are only a few now, it is not as bad.' So that was the start of the watering down and the weakening and we have seen it since then - allowing them to fish now for ten days, net liners, destroying the stocks, and the Member for Eagle River says the reason they are out there fishing now is because it's foggy. Can you imagine, I say to the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation!

MR. HEWLETT: Some day the sun will shine and the Spanish will be no more?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I am not going to touch that, I say to the Member for Green Bay - let the sun shine and all that stuff. No, I gave that up.

AN HON. MEMBER: Were you talking to Charést lately?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Oh no, mon ami.

AN HON. MEMBER: Did you support Kim when (inaudible)?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I can assure you, when it comes to - no I am not going to say it. You almost goaded me into saying something then. I was going to say my record is consistent but I had better leave it alone. No, I can only say no, I did not support Kim Campbell. No, I did not.

AN HON. MEMBER: Your buddy did.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, he did not. Well, he might have because I know one time before - no I can't tell the story about it can I?

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible) you always back the losers.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Who me? Why? With all the wisdom that the Government House Leader possesses, I must ask him this question: Do you think I was a loser because I voted for John Charést and not for Kim Campbell? I have to ask you that question; now, answer it.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Very good, I say to the Government House Leader, that is very good. That was very quick.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. members time has elapsed.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I will get back at that one later on.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: By leave?

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

MR. W. MATTHEWS: That was very good, that was very quick. I am sure my colleague, the Member for Burin - Placentia West will remind me of something in the hon. member's past that I will be able to get back to him just as good.

MR. ROBERTS: I hope you (inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, he has a very good book on you.

MR. ROBERTS: Yes, he has been low down, I must say.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, no. Well, we have to remember the subject matter now, I say to the Government House Leader. We have to remember the subject matter that we are dealing with when he speaks about being low down.

MR. SHELLEY: He had to be low to get the book on him, `Bill'.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: But the Member for Burin - Placentia West does know a lot of stories about the Government House Leader.

MR. TOBIN: I have been a student of politics, I know about all politicians. But I tell you, the best member that was never in this House, in terms of opposition, is George Baker.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: The best member that was never -

MR. TOBIN: The best member that was never in this House was George Baker.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, I would have to say that.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, George Baker is a good member, a good man. In most families you will find one that really excels. You can't expect all of the family to excel, to be really good. You find families where brothers and sisters end up in the same profession, but some overachieve more so than others, they excel, they do well for themselves, right? Now, George Baker - I am not going to mention any relatives - but look how well George Baker has done, a very prominent, national figure. Consistent - that is one thing you can say about George Baker, he is consistent.

AN HON. MEMBER: And he has a good memory.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: And a very good memory.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. W. MATTHEWS: George Baker can remember that the Spanish are still overfishing, even though his government is now in charge in Ottawa. He can remember, George Baker, and he is consistent; he still doesn't like it. He still is not willing to tolerate it, George Baker is not.

MR. TOBIN: With what he is doing with Paul Martin's Budget, can you imagine what he would do with Baker's?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, there is one thing I must say, though. I don't want to be unkind to my good friend, the Minister of Finance.

AN HON. MEMBER: Why not?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: He controls the purse strings of the Province. You can't afford to be too unkind to the Minister of Finance. You have to learn in this racket, you know.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I have been here long enough to learn a little bit - not much.

My association with the Minister of Finance and his good brother goes back to about the same time. As a matter of fact, I would say we were probably at Bishop's College and your brother was across the way at Bishop Abraham, right? That is right, so we go back -

MR. TOBIN: His brother was where?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Teaching at Bishop Abraham.

MR. TOBIN: George?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, George - and the good Minister of Finance and myself were at Bishop's College, so we were part of the teaching fraternity.

MR. TOBIN: They are not consistent, the Bakers. He ran twice for the NDP, George ran for the PC's and the Liberals. That is not consistent.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: But there are some things he is consistent about. I don't know how many budgets the minister has brought in; how many?

MR. ROBERTS: Not as many as you, `Bill'.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, I am not suggesting that, either - three. In each Budget there have been lay-offs, so he has been consistent.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, he has been consistent with lay-offs. He has been very consistent, job losses every Budget. As well, I think he has been consistent in deficit reduction; I believe he has, I am not completely sure now.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I didn't say deficit elimination, reduction, I am not sure, am I correct on that?

AN HON. MEMBER: No.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No? Okay, he is not answering so the answer is no. He nods when he is so pleased when you are right about him.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Can't remember again, but he can remember good things, he just doesn't want to remember bad things in which he has been involved. Oh, there was one thing he was inconsistent about though. When he was in opposition he was so opposed to the spray, the budworm and all this stuff, remember? How bad it was, all those chemical, I remember him so well for that up in the old House of Assembly. He was totally against it. Oh, how he was against it. I used to remind him about his biology background; I used to say: you were a better biology teacher, you should have stayed teaching biology.

But, Mr. Chairman, in case you are about ready to call me to order, I do realize I am speaking to Bill 6, "An Act For Granting To Her Majesty Certain Sums Of Money -

AN HON. MEMBER: Pertinent information.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Pertinent information, the Interim Supply Bill.

Someone mentioned today, by the way, about health care facilities. I believe it was the Member for Bonavista South, something about nothing for money I believe for health care, because there is nothing in the Budget as well, I say to the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, with all this three or four years of studies done in Grand Bank, there is nothing in the Budget for anything down there at Blue Crest senior citizens home.

I think the minister remembers the situation where they were going to put a new clinic on the - I want the minister to listen now. The minister will remember, that government shut down the Grand Bank Cottage Hospital, I think it was in the first Budget I believe and the plan was to put a new clinic and do some renovations and modernization to Blue Crest Senior Citizens Interfaith Home, and then there was a little bit of a squabble between the council who didn't think there was room enough there and infrastructure costs and all of that, so things are pretty well ready now, everybody is on site with doing what government is proposing to do, from the health care board to the council, all this stuff, but there is no money this year, no money to start the new facility, I say to the minister. Would he make a note of that or would he want to get up and react to it?

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

MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Minister of Health, in the next while will be making announcements I suspect on what's going to be done in this years capital Budget, there is $17 million, $18 million or something in there. I forget what the number is now, but there is money in there and I guess he will be making announcements on it. I don't know, myself, the status of the Blue Crest home, but I am sure the Minister of Health does, and at some point in time can tell us. I know that the background that the Member for Grand Bank gave is accurate, and there were a lot of discussions held about location, and whether it should be a stand-alone structure, whether it should be built onto another structure and so on. He tells me that is all worked out, and if it is then I guess it will, at some point in time, be done. I don't know whether there is any money allocated this year for it. As I said, the Minister of Health will make those announcements in due time.

What I would like to take a couple of minutes on is simply to explain to hon. members, because a lot of them are relatively new in the House, that the debate on Interim Supply is a fairly standard kind of thing, a routine kind of thing, in the House, and that it is only to provide government with money for a couple of months until we get the Budget through. I would like to suggest to members opposite that perhaps today we could dispense with this rather routine Interim Supply so we could get started on Thursday on the Budget debate, which is where the meat really is. So I just want to make that suggestion to members opposite that perhaps, in a spirit of cooperation, we could finish off Interim Supply today and get started on the real Budget debate on Thursday.

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

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board. What a wonderful suggestion he has just made, that we would grant him this billion dollars today in Interim Supply. How nice the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board just became. He would like to have the billion dollars approved now this afternoon. He wants to get on to the Budget debate on Thursday. Can you imagine, a billion dollars -

MR. BAKER: Just one minute, now.

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

MR. BAKER: I would like to explain to the member opposite, one of the reasons I would like to get this over with in a hurry is so that I can then get the Budget through quickly. The Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation says there is only $14 million in here for him, and that's only enough to get him through the next few days, so I just wanted to hurry up and get the Budget debate over with.

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

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Yes, I understand the urgency, I say to the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, and the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation. I understand the urgency of getting this money approved, but you can't spend it anyway until April 1.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. GRIMES: We have plans. We have travel plans already made.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, but you can book your tickets, I say to the minister. Book your tickets and your hotel. They will take a Visa number or something. You don't need the money over there yet. You don't need a voucher from the Director of Administration to write you a cheque yet.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, I don't doubt that. I bet you've had to transfer money for him. I bet you've had, if the truth is known. But how much have you had to transfer the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology, if you've had to transfer money to the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation? Can you imagine what he is...What is budgeted for the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology this year for travel, I wonder. Does anyone know?

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible), and more to come.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Oh yes, because he has agreed now to let you go somewhere, I say to the Government House Leader. Now, you talk about a government that tries to make Newfoundlanders and Labradorians believe that they are trying to sell Newfoundland and Labrador and attract business to this Province?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, but seriously though. Just think about what I said. They preach that they are trying to sell Newfoundland and Labrador abroad. The Government House Leader is not listening. They preach that they are trying to sell Newfoundland and Labrador abroad throughout North America and the whole world and they want to attract business into our Province - and they are seriously considering sending the Government House Leader, Mr. Chairman. I can't believe it. They must be getting a new passport done with another picture and another name on it. They certainly are not going to send the Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SHELLEY: As long as they don't give him the money to come back.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: What?

MR. SHELLEY: As long as he doesn't get the money to come back.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: My colleague, the Member for Baie Verte - White Bay says they are only sending him away from the Province, they are not going to let him come back.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible) are you going to adjourn the debate?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, adjourn the debate, no. We are going all night. I want to say to the Minister of Health, in light of the response by the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, on the situation with Grand Bank - and I don't expect the minister to ask me now, because I know we are getting close to adjournment. But that situation with the Blue Crest Interfaith Home at Grand Bank and the shut-down of the clinic and all - I just don't want us to go over. Having said that -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes. Okay. If you want I will let the minister do it. Okay. Do you want to do it now? Will you do it - well, I ask you, will you do it perhaps on Thursday? Will you let me know what you are going to say today? Okay, or you can talk to me after, okay.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Health.

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Chairman?

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

MR. ROBERTS: I move that the Committee rise and report... I suppose it could be called progress, and ask leave to sit again.

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

MR. SPEAKER (Dicks): The hon. the Member for Trinity - Bay de Verde.

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

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

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding the widespread demand of the members who wish to sit tonight, I will move that the House at its rising adjourn until tomorrow, Wednesday, at 2:00 p.m. and of course, that will be Private Members' Day and we will carry on from there. On Thursday, we will be calling the Interim Supply Bill again. So members opposite can do something they haven't done today which is prepare their remarks in a sensible, intelligent and coherent fashion. I move the House do now adjourn.

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