The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS KELLY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This past weekend, I attended a dinner in honour of Mr. Noel Rideout who, for nearly thirty-five years, has been a volunteer member of the Gander Fire Department. Although November will mark his official thirty-five year anniversary with Gander Fire Rescue, he turned over his responsibility as Fire Chief on January 29 of this year.

Mr. Rideout plans to stay on with the fire station as a radio operator until he works his full thirty-five years, and then he plans to volunteer at the Cape Breton Burn Camp helping burned children.

The last of the original firefighters who joined when the town fire department was formed on November 18, 1968, Mr. Rideout's hard work and dedication has been outstanding. In 1986, he became Fire Chief at Gander Fire Department and over the years has held many positions within the department. Besides working many hours fighting fires, he was heavily involved in the Arrow Air Crash and worked hard to help stranded passengers after the 9-11 World Trade Centre attack.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to sincerely thank and congratulate Mr. Rideout on his thirty-five years of dedication and volunteer service to the Gander Fire Department, to the Town of Gander and surrounding communities. Without the help of volunteers like Noel, many services and events in communities around our Province just would not be possible.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon to note the passing in late February of Patrick Ryall, a long-time resident of Mount Pearl and a dedicated employee of Canada Post for thirty-seven years, until his retirement in November, 2002.

Patrick was a dedicated volunteer in the City of Mount Pearl where he served as a coach with the Mount Pearl Minor Baseball Association during the 1980s and for the past decade as the Association's official statistician. In the 1960s, Pat was a star baseball player with Holy Cross in the St. John's Senior Baseball League. Known as a baseball trivia expert, Pat's quick recollection of events provincially was only matched by his absolute devotion to and his knowledge of the New York Yankees.

On behalf of all baseball fans in Mount Pearl, and all those who worked with Pat Ryall at the Mount Pearl Post Office, I wish to offer condolences to his wife Caroline, his daughter Kelly, his son Patrick, and his mom Elizabeth. The City of Mount Pearl has lost a wonderful volunteer and baseball in Newfoundland and Labrador has lost a builder and a great former player.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, Port of Call Awards are a showcase of the best Newfoundland and Labrador oriented Web sites in the Province. AroundTheBay.ca received this award for its overall quality, ensuring visual and editorial content, and its general popularity with the Web viewing public. In short, it is an award of excellence.

This excellent Web site, Mr. Speaker, was developed here in this Province, in Conception Bay North. It provides a portal to various businesses and organizations along the Baccalieu Trail, and is designed specifically to attract tourists to the region.

Mr. Speaker, the world Web site is an astounding communications tool and is perhaps the most popular form of information sharing. In today's Web based society, it is important to use this incredible tool and to take advantage of the opportunities it creates. And, Mr. Speaker, that is just what Mariner Resource Opportunities Network has done.

On behalf of all members of this House, I congratulate them both on receiving the Port of Call Award, and for taking the initiative to promote tourism in the region.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer my sincere congratulations to Vicki Flood, a young woman in my district who was recently awarded the Margaret Davis Memorial Award for the Provincial Female Athlete of the Year. This award was presented at the Annual Provincial Sport Awards Banquet on March 22, 2003.

This award follows an extremely successful year of tennis play for Vicki. Remarkably, Vicki did not lose a set in the provincial tennis play during 2002 and she captured championships in Newfoundland and beyond. She won the Triple Crown at last summer's senior provincials, won the gold medal at the Atlantic Outdoor Championships, and placed first in the Atlantic Canadian Circuit. She also advanced to the fourth round in singles and to the quarter-finals in doubles at the Junior Nationals. I understand that she is presently out of the Province representing us at another tournament.

I would like the House to join with me today in offering congratulations to Vicki.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon to inform this hon. House about an exciting new initiative of the Department of Education which will present an enriched learning opportunity to students throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

The internationally acclaimed International Baccalaureate Diploma Program is offered exclusively at ten United World Colleges worldwide, and Lester B. Pearson Collegiate in British Columbia is one of these renown institutions. Since 1974, the Province has partnered with Lester B. Pearson Collegiate, in offering one scholarship annually to a student from this Province. Recipients of these scholarships have come from all regions of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, in 2000, Holy Heart of Mary High School in St. John's became one of 1,425 schools worldwide to offer the IB program to students, and has the distinction of being the only school in Newfoundland and Labrador to offer this program as a part of its curriculum. Students go through an application process, and must demonstrate a commitment to this advanced level of study. Currently, we have approximately twenty-five students participating in the IB program at Holy Heart, and last year all twenty-five students registered in the program graduated with marks well above the international average for the program.

The IB program is a demanding, pre-university course of study designed for highly motivated secondary students. The program offers a comprehensive, two-year international curriculum, and stresses critical thinking and inter-cultural understanding. Students study six subjects concurrently in the areas of: language; a second language; individuals and societies; experimental sciences; mathematics; and the arts.

Mr. Speaker, though intended for academically advanced students, the program is designed to develop well rounded students, and includes a strong emphasis on community involvement and volunteerism. With this in mind, participants are required to complete 150 hours of community work throughout the duration of the program.

The intent is to create a bond between the student and the community that will last much longer than the program. IB also introduces students to an international learning environment and graduating students are well prepared to enter university with advanced standing.

Until now, Mr. Speaker, only students residing within the St. John's metro area were able to avail of this challenging and dynamic program. However, I am pleased to announce today that the Department of Education will now provide two new scholarships for students living outside the St. John's metro area, for enrollment into this existing program.

The scholarships are valued at $10,000 each or $5,000 for each of the two years that they attend this program. These scholarships will allow students to attend school at Holy Heart of Mary and enjoy the educational cultural advantages inherent in this esteemed program. Additionally, the department will provide an allowance of $1,000, if required, to cover the expense of the students' travel to and from St. John's.

Mr. Speaker, this government has an agenda which includes student achievement levels that match and exceed the highest performers in all of Canada. Our IB graduates are already out-performing the highest achievers in Canada and the world, and I am delighted that we will provide this prestigious educational opportunity for two dedicated individuals in the coming school years.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I believe what the minister is saying today is an example, perhaps, as to how in education we have to continue to strive to find new education models, new curricular models, and be always mindful of innovation and creativity in new ideas and concepts as it relates to the education of the children of our Province.

I am particularly pleased on the announcement with respect to the International Baccalaureate because it is contained in a school within my own District of St. John's East, namely Holy Heart of Mary High School.

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the announcement, and I share with the minister the fact that this is good news in the sense that there will be the offering of scholarships for two new students outside the St. John's area to participate in the International Baccalaureate Diploma Program, but my question to the minister is - and perhaps the minister can share this with us at a later date - what is the application procedure, and what criteria will be used and would be afforded to these students who want to participate? Because I think it is important to know how individuals, indeed, from outside the metro area of St. John's, can participate in this very worthwhile program.

Due to the fact that the school is in my own district, Mr. Speaker, I can attest to the fact that it is a program which is very well received and truly appreciated by the faculty and staff, and the students and their parents who are engaged in this particular program at Holy Heart.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am certainly familiar with the International Baccalaureate Program at Holy Heart. It is an excellent program that provides an extra challenge to highly motivated young people. It is a great opportunity for young people to experience this program which is renown worldwide.

I do want to commend the minister in advancing this program and making it available to two more young people in the Province. I would urge the minister to consider other ways - outside of a scholarship program of attending Holy Heart - of expanding it so that young people throughout the Province will have an opportunity to get involved in this higher level of program, because there students who are not sufficiently challenged by high school, there are students who really have a lot to offer even at a very young age. This program is well known throughout the world and very well renown.

I want to express my appreciation to the minister in seeking to expand it and encourage him to find ways of expanding it even further.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions this afternoon are for the Premier.

Mr. Speaker, as indicated in Question Period yesterday, a member of Cabinet, the Member for Humber East, indicated publicly that there is a full range of options to privatize health care. There are many diverse and serious implications to the privatization of health care in this Province, from financial stability, viability and accountability, to control of services and provision of services, such as palliative care and Alzheimer's units, to amendments to legislation and the protection of employees and their benefits.

Mr. Speaker, could the Premier please provide the people of Newfoundland and Labrador with the proposed draft legislation, the contemplated language and privatization contracts to protect public service employees, and the financial and service preconditions to ensure that the residents of these privatized facilities will not become victims of financially insecure companies resulting in closure and interruption of services? In other words, Premier, where, once again, are the safeguards and guarantees for the people of this Province that seem to be missing in all of your negotiations?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I guess it is kind of difficult to get through to people who do not want to listen to the answers.

Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is this: the government is not embarking upon any manner of privatization of health care services, whatsoever. The health care services in the Corner Brook region, as in the rest of the Province, will be accessed through a public, common, assessment criteria system which is used in the Province today. There will be no additional separate charges by any operator of a facility. It will be fully funded by the people of the Province. The standards will be enforced by the government on behalf of the people who are in receipt of the long-term care.

There are no negotiations, Mr. Speaker. What the government announced in the Budget is that it will prepare within sixty days - which is now some forty-six or forty-seven days - a statement of an Expression of Interest and go out for a Request for Proposals. We are not negotiating with anybody, Mr. Speaker. We are going to have a public dialogue and a public Expression of Interest as to whether or not there is anyone out there that wants to participate in the provision of long-term care, publicly funded, guaranteed by the government in a public health care system for meeting the needs of the people in Corner Brook. We are not in any negotiations. There is nothing to disclose. There is no other party to be involved in a negotiation. It is the government trying to find a way to meet the long-term care needs of the people in Corner Brook, and we are trying to do that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, the Premier says that I am not listening, but it appears that a couple of his ministers are not listening either. The Minister of Environment has already confirmed that they are privatizing health care. Today, his Minister of Health indicated that they are privatizing health care. In a release today on Chancellor Park, the Minister of Health stated: This reinforces the view that the private sector can provide long-term care in this Province. These are his words in his release today.

Mr. Speaker, my question for the Premier: If his own ministers are confirming the privatizing of long-term health care in this Province, then why is he disagreeing with them? Are they right or are you right, Premier?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, let me say again, it is one of the weakest attempts that I have ever seen by anyone in the history of politics in the Province to try to link two completely unrelated issues.

Everyone in Newfoundland and Labrador who is paying attention does understand that there is one private health care facility in Newfoundland and Labrador today, right here in St. John's at Chancellor Park. Everyone understands that. It was built by the private sector. It was financed by the private sector. It is run by the private sector. There has been no admission to that particular facility through the common assessment process until the government decided to conduct a pilot project to see if, in fact, they could provide the same levels of service on a cost-efficient basis.

That has absolutely nothing to do and is in no way related with what we are talking about in Corner Brook where the government provides the service - always has and will continue to do so in Corner Brook - provide for it, pay for it and find out if, in fact, some private sector involvement, through building and/or operating a publicly funded and run facility, might create some efficiencies and save the taxpayers of the Province some money that can be reinvested in health care, while we are meeting the needs of the people in Corner Brook. I understand he is confused, but, Mr. Speaker, we will make (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, I am not confused. If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, then it is a duck.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: This government plans to privatize health care in this Province, and you can't deny it, Premier.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

I ask hon. members, when they are addressing the House, to address the Chair.

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier formed a Cabinet Committee to specifically study the feasibility of privatizing a long term care facility in Corner Brook. On February 26, 2003 the Premier confirmed that Cabinet had received a report from this committee.

Mr. Speaker, will the Premier, today, table that report, so that we can see just what kind of a study was, in fact, conducted into this major issue? Will he show us the analysis that has been conducted for Cabinet to justify his decision to privatize long term health care in this Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition might have a record in the past of raising his voice with people, pointing at them in a threatening gesture and so on. He can do that if he likes, and suggesting that they might need another treatment in another location. I tell you one thing, it doesn't bother me. I deal with issues, not with people, and not with trying to operate by way of threat and innuendo.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is this - and he can raise his voice and he can turn red in the face all he likes, and talk about privatization - this government is not interested in privatizing health care in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This government is not interested in privatizing health care in Newfoundland and Labrador, this government is interested in finding high quality, top level service for the people who need it at the best value for the taxpayers on a timely basis. That is the process that we will go through, Mr. Speaker, undeterred by the tone of voice, the pointing, the threatening, the yelling and the screaming of the Leader of the Opposition. He can do what he likes, we are going to deal with the issue, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will speak a little softer for the Premier. Mr. Speaker, in order for private operators to undertake the construction and operation of private health care facilities, they have to make a profit or they simply will not do it.

Unlike government, in addition to making a profit, they have higher borrowing costs, they have income taxes, they have less purchasing power, and they have overhead and administration costs which cannot be spread over a large base like government. They do not have the same economies of scale and economies of scope.

Mr. Speaker, can the Premier please explain, if he plans to impose national standards on these privatized facilities, how can they possibly get it done at a lower cost than government, which has no profit, no taxes, and better borrowing and purchasing power? Surely, Premier, you cannot be managing health care in this Province that poorly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe I could give an example or two that the Leader of the Opposition might be more familiar with, because obviously he is not familiar at all with health care.

The fact of the matter is, in the Justice system, for example, we have had private sector interests built and maintained for us, court facilities. It does not mean that we have privatized the Justice system. It means that we have found a way to have that done, and good value for the taxpayers.

In the Level I and Level II personal care homes, Mr. Speaker, they are private enterprises in which the government provides subsidies to the residents in those facilities. They are financed, built, operated, staffed, by private operators, Mr. Speaker, but no one calls it private health care because it is funded in the end by the taxpayer. The access to it is controlled by access to the money of the people, the taxpayers' money, and that is exactly the circumstance here, Mr. Speaker.

He can try to describe it as he wants. This time, the fact of the matter is, he is dead wrong. He does not want to talk about the real issues in the Province today because he has been on the defensive politically for a couple of weeks, ever since the Budget. He does not want to talk about the real issues in the Province and he is trying to come up with -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer.

PREMIER GRIMES: - a red herring about something that does not even exist on the agenda of the government, which is privatization of health care.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the Premier now to take his seat.

PREMIER GRIMES: We do not even discuss it in our caucus and on this side of the House because it is not on the agenda.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, the Premier just said that health care for seniors is not a real issue in this Province. That is what he just implied by his statement. That is exactly what he said.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. WILLIAMS: We are concerned about you gambling on privatization for the seniors of our Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, the original estimate for the long-term care facility was between $50 million and $55 million. Since government decided to privatize that facility, that cost estimate increased to $70 million in order to provide contractors with $20 million in profit.

Mr. Speaker, can the Premier explain to the people: How could this be a cheaper option if the estimate has gone up by $20 million?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, another pathetic attempt, I would suggest, by the Leader of the Opposition to try and twist my words into something that I did not say.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is this: Everybody in this Province does understand that first and foremost in this debate is providing the level of care that our seniors need in a facility that is appropriate to deliver it.

Maybe he has not had the same reaction in the meetings in Corner Brook, in his own district, where he is overly sensitive about a neighbouring Member of the House of Assembly who understands issues very well and meets with the people very, very regularly and knows their concerns, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, let me describe it as this: In my sessions with the committee and with the council, they have said our concern is this: We believe the level of care is the right and proper level of care. We believe that the people who are working in the system today are doing the very best in terms of taking care of these seniors.

What they are suggesting is this: The facility in which it is being done, the two facilities are inadequate and outdated and it is making the level of care deteriorate because of the fact they cannot get the proper lifts into the facility, they cannot use modern equipment to help get people in and out of baths because of physical structure problems.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer quickly.

PREMIER GRIMES: We are trying to fix a physical structure problem and improve the level of care. That is our commitment. That is what we are trying to do, and we are determined to make it happen as soon as we can on behalf of those seniors, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier said yesterday in the House: If the long-term care needs of the residents of Corner Brook cannot be provided, "...at lower than or equivalent cost to what the government would do it ourselves, there is no point in us doing it." Those are the exact words that the Premier said.

Mr. Speaker, could the Premier please answer this question: If privatization does not prove to be the more cost-effective option, will the people of Corner Brook get their long-term care facility that is built, owned and operated by government, and, if so, when?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The people of Corner Brook have already gotten a straight clear answer from the government, and they respect that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: They respect that, Mr. Speaker. They did not get an answer that one week said: I am not sure I can commit to this because I haven't seen the books yet and it will have to stack up with the rest of the priorities in the whole of the Province. The people of Corner Brook should not expect me to make political promises just for me to get elected in Corner Brook. I am more responsible than that.

That is his speech one day. Then, when the issue comes up and he thinks he can use it to political advantage, he turns around and says: We are going to build it anyway. I do not need to see the books. Never mind the books. Never mind due diligence. Trust me!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Trust me! I am going to build this facility, Mr. Speaker.

The people of the Province are a little smarter than that. I give them a lot more credit than to listen to that kind of nonsense. With us they know this: We are going to go through a legitimate process to provide the service that they need on a cost-effective basis, one way or the other, and in the next fifty days we are going to examine whether a private-public partnership, publicly funded health care through a private-public partnership can accomplish that so -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the Premier now to conclude his answer quickly.

PREMIER GRIMES: - they can have the service in the proper facilities sooner rather than later, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, (inaudible) people -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. WILLIAMS: If the cost comes in at a cost that is not lower, and they do not go the public-private route, will you build that facility, as a government, and, if so, when? That is what I need an answer to.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, again let me say this, maybe the Leader of the Opposition just forgot where he is. We are not in a courtroom. We are in a political debating arena, the House of Assembly, where each of us can ask the questions on our mind and give the answer that we choose to give. He cannot dictate the answer here or anywhere else.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Now, he may have been able to try to bully and intimidate people like that someplace else, but not in this democratic House, Mr. Speaker. It will not happen!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: It is not going to happen in Newfoundland and Labrador. The people are not going to stand for it, that someone come in and try to muzzle us and tell us what the limits of our answers are going to be.

Mr. Speaker, what we have found out is this -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER GRIMES: What we have found out, Mr. Speaker, is this, the Leader of the Opposition, who pretends, depending on the day and the issue, to be on someone's side because he thinks it might be politically advantageous -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer.

PREMIER GRIMES: - is now suggesting that he has to keep some goodies for the election. His words, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer.

PREMIER GRIMES: What is the goody for Corner Brook? What is the goody going to be for Clarenville? What is the goody going to be for Grand Falls?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, I asked the Premier twice to respond to the question.

I will repeat his statement from yesterday which says, "...the long-term care needs of these residents in Corner Brook at lower than or equivalent cost to what the government would do it ourselves, there is no point in us doing it." That implies that if it does not come in at a lower cost then they are not going to do it. The only other option is if the government does it themselves.

Mr. Speaker, the Member for Humber East, the Minister of Environment, indicated publicly yesterday -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WILLIAMS: - that borrowing by government to build a long-term health care facility could jeopardize its credit rating. In his own words he said that the ability -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary, I ask him to get to his question now.

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

- that the ability to go out and borrow the money by government was just not there. He said that you and your government, Premier, cannot do it. No privatization options. No option to borrow the money.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member now to get to his question.

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, could the Premier please advise, if the fact that Cabinet feels that we are in financial jeopardy and the ability to borrow it is just not there, then how does he intend to provide a long-term care facility to the people of Corner Brook?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the rehash of the same questions from yesterday and the day before. I guess there is nothing new that he wants to talk about.

Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter again is this, the same person in the Leader of the Opposition, in all of his public pronouncements would say: I can't make commitments to the people of the Province. I am too responsible to do it because I have not seen the state of the books. I will have to have time, you have to trust me. I need time to look at the books, go through some due diligence and see whether or not I can do any of these things.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER GRIMES: Now, Mr. Speaker, that is his standard answer. Members now are hanging their heads in embarrassment and shame because they have repeated that to their constituents in their districts saying: Don't expect me - the Member for Trinity North has said it, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer, quickly.

PREMIER GRIMES: He said: Don't expect me to make a commitment in Clarenville because we have to look at the books. But the Leader can say: I do not need to look at the books. I am going do Corner Brook because it became -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday, I raised the issue of a former Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development not returning government purchased, government owned office equipment which was purchased while he was in office, including: a computer; a fax machine; a desk; a VCR; a laptop computer; and a shredder. The Premier's answer was that he was not aware and he agreed to investigate the matter and report back to the House today.

I would like to ask the Premier: Can he inform the House, today, of the results of his investigation?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to address what was a most unfair and inaccurate accusation that was made yesterday against the former Premier and Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development.

Yesterday, the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's made a statement in this House that former Premier and Industry and Rural Development minister, Beaton Tulk, remains in possession of various government office equipment and has said that Mr. Tulk has refused to return this equipment. Mr. Speaker, this accusation is unfair and inaccurate. I want to take this opportunity to set the record straight.

When the former member served as a minister and Premier his home was equipped with modern office equipment to allow him to conduct the business of the Province, after regular office hours, in an efficient and effective manner from his residence. This equipment -

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

MS FOOTE: Do you want the answer?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair would remind hon. members that Points of Order during Question Period ought to be raised after the Question Period has ended. That has been a practice that we have been trying to follow here in the House. So, the Chair would like for the member to hold his Points of Order until afterwards.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I normally would but (inaudible) -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, I will ask the member if he can just hold on until after Question Period. That is the practice.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, it seems to me (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister now to conclude her answer, very quickly.

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, it will be my pleasure to table this response and I would have done it in Answers to Questions, but since the member opposite raised the matter.

The equipment replaced personal home office equipment that had been purchased by the former minister with his own money and that equipment was removed by government for temporary storage. When the former minister left office the intention was to substitute the government assets with Mr. Tulk's own personal assets and to recover any other government assets at the time. Mr. Tulk's own equipment has not been able to be traced through government -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude her answer, quickly.

MS FOOTE: - records to date and officials are still in the process of tracking it down.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: Mr. Speaker, I have a hearing problem, but I think I have a really bad one here today. Mr. Speaker, did I just hear the minister say that they replaced personal equipment of the former Premier and the former Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development, replaced his personal office equipment at his home, with government equipment, that they removed his own equipment from his home to replace it and they lost that equipment?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: Please repeat your answer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development.

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I will now finish the answer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: Because, Mr. Speaker, they have not been able to track down the former Premier and minister's equipment and furniture, for this reason a decision was made by the Deputy Minister to leave Mr. Tulk with the furniture and equipment in his possession until his own could be returned to him. Regular contact was maintained with Mr. Tulk on this matter over time, and in early March of this year - Mr. Speaker, I am a little concerned here because of the aspersions that have been cast on a reputable member, former member of this House, and I think the onus is on the Opposition to at least give that member the benefit of the doubt.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude her answer, quickly.

MS FOOTE: Regular contact has been made with Mr. Tulk on this matter, and in early March of this year both the former minister and Premier discussed this and both wanted to bring a closure to it. In fact, notwithstanding the fact that we are still in the process of trying to find Mr. Tulk's furniture, to put the issue to rest Mr. Tulk has agreed to return all of the furniture within the two weeks when he returns to the Province, recognizing again -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister now to conclude her answer, quickly.

MS FOOTE: - that his furniture is still somewhere in the system.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude her answer, quickly.

MS FOOTE: This is an internal administrative matter. Clearly, anyone would know that it is not fair to cast aspersions on a former member of the House, which is exactly what the Member for St. Mary's tried to do yesterday. It is no reflection on that member, the fact that he had never (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Mines and Energy.

On March 24 I asked the minister about the adjacency principle work related to Voisey's Bay. At that time the minister seemed quite content to rely on the goodwill -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. COLLINS: I am sorry.

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

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on March 24, I asked the minister questions concerning the adjacency principle for work at Voisey's Bay and the minister responded by saying that they were relying on the goodwill of the company.

Mr. Speaker, I have received a list of people who were employed at Voisey's Bay and goodwill does not seem to exist. For instance, the only three surveyors employed at the project were from Ontario. The only three payroll clerks came from Quebec. The only two warehouse managers came from outside the Province. The health and safety inspector came from Vancouver, with several engineering and various managerial positions filled by people from outside the Province. Some of these people, I say to the minister, are scheduled to come back this year.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. COLLINS: I ask the minister: Does this list appear to have any goodwill towards Labradorians or other people in the Province? And, what part of the adjacency principle suggests that work should be given to people from Quebec to Vancouver?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

At no time, Mr. Speaker, did I say that the application of the adjacency principle depends on the goodwill of the company, of Voisey's Bay Nickel or of Inco. The fact is that we have a contract between the government of our Province and Inco for the development of the Voisey's Bay deposit. Part of that contract is a guarantee that the adjacency principle will be abided by, and that means that natives of Labrador, and Labradorians, get first preference for jobs up there. Now, that does not mean that there will not be anybody else from anywhere else in Canada get a job up there.

The reality is that there will be some people employed from other parts of the Province and other parts of the country. That will be necessary to get the job done properly, because there are not sufficient people in Labrador to do it.

The fact is, Mr. Speaker, that we have a legal agreement with the company that guarantees the adjacency principle will be applicable and we intend to see that is enforced.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the minister now to conclude his answer quickly.

MR. NOEL: Mr. Speaker, I spoke with the company yesterday about how their project is developing and was reassured again that they have every intention of abiding by the adjacency principle and that they have confidence -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the minister now to take his seat.

MR. NOEL: - that the unions involved will also abide by the adjacency principle, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question Period has ended.

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

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

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

I rose on a point of order earlier, which is unusual during Question Period although not necessarily out of order, and I agreed with the Speaker's request for me to raise it immediately following -

AN HON. MEMBER: Reluctantly.

MR. E. BYRNE: Reluctantly or not, I agreed with it.

The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, that what the minister did in her response today was, she read from a document which, more properly, procedurally, threw Question Period into a little bit of chaos, to be honest with you.

Secondly, it belongs more in two points on the Order Paper. What should have happened today, either it should have been read in Statements by Ministers, or in answers responding to questions yesterday. The minister chose to do none of that. The minister chose to stand up, Mr. Speaker, and read directly from a document.

Having said that, Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the minister read from the document which I see on her desk now, I wonder will she - not wonder, but she must table it upon request - table that with the Page now and send it over to myself as her critic?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. LUSH: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is clear where the Opposition is coming from on this issue. It is not the answer they are interested in; it is the spin they can put on the answers themselves.

Mr. Speaker, when a question is raised in Question Period on such an important issue as this, we acknowledge over on this side of the House that there are certain rules regarding Question Period and certain rules regarding the answer as well as the question, but this was an important question and the minister was keeping close to her notes, to her copious notes, to make sure that she was giving the right interpretation to the House, but obviously hon. members did not want that. I think the hon. minister indicated in her answer that she was willing to table the document, and she said that, so I do not think there is any reluctance there.

With respect to giving the answer at the appropriate place for Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given, we have not arrived there yet. We are not at that point yet in the proceedings. So, if hon. members wanted that procedure to be followed, they ought to have left the question alone and waited for the minister to have given the answer in the appropriate place in the House, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, there is no question about their motive. They were not interested in the answer. The minister has indicated that she is going to table the answers. What else do they want?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, let me response to the three points the minister said.

First of all, we are not really interested in putting a spin on it. The government obviously today was quite capable of doing that all by themselves.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: The second point, Mr. Speaker, is this: In the ten years that I have been here, I have never seen a minister stand up and read a prepared statement to a question. It should have been done during Ministerial Statements. Was it was not, I think, speaks for itself.

Thirdly, Mr. Speaker, it will be a very cold day in you-know-what place when we start taking advice from the Government House Leader on what type of question we should ask to what minister.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, the intensity of the heat will rise much higher before we capitulate to the hon. members opposite with respect to what answers we will give.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I suggest that the rules of the House were followed here, and that if the hon. members wanted the answer to be given in the appropriate place they should have waited for that particular point in the Orders of the Day.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

To the point of order, I believe there were two points that the hon. member raised. One is that he wanted the hon. the minister to table her notes, and I think she has done that. The other one is, a question was raised, the hon. minister was given an opportunity to answer it. The hon. minister can at any time choose to either take it under advisement and report to the House later, or can use her notes, or his notes, to reply to a question.

Often ministers do have notes and respond, and members also quote from documents on many occasions when answering questions, but if a question is taken under advisement then I guess we should leave that until we have reached that particular point in our Standing Orders when the ministers can reply.

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

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am not sure if this is quite a point of privilege or a point of order but I will raise it as a point of order, I guess.

I certainly do not think that I ever had a thin skin before I came here, nor gotten one after I came here, but I do think I had a character, and a good character and integrity, when I came into this House. I have not done anything since February 9,1999, to change that.

During the questioning of my colleague, the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development, the Leader of the Opposition said across the House, to myself, that I knew about the Mr. Tulk furniture incident. Mr. Speaker, I absolutely knew nothing about this incident until it was -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the minister.

MR. PARSONS: I knew absolutely nothing about this incident until yesterday, when the Member for Placentia raised it. I advised the media of that yesterday. That is the truth, and I do not think the comments of the Leader of the Opposition are fair and appropriate. I think it does impugn my character and credibility and integrity, and I think he should do the honourable thing and apologize for saying it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, I remind hon. members when the Chair is standing that members should be seated. This has happened on a number of occasions today, when the Chair has stood, that members continue to stand and speak.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

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

I believe the matter that the member has raised is more a point of order. There were no aspersions cast on anybody's character, including -

PREMIER GRIMES: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Well, let me say to the Premier, if you would like to hear my answer, I sat next to him and I am quite capable -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER GRIMES: He is sitting right there. He can say it himself (inaudible).

MR. WILLIAMS: I will now. I will now in a minute. You will hear me.

PREMIER GRIMES: He wants to get up. Let him get up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: I do not know about anyone else, Mr. Speaker, but I am not ashamed to let my leader up, let me tell you that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the Opposition House Leader now to get to the point of order.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair will call for order one more time and if order is not forthcoming then I shall recess this House until members are prepared to proceed.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, the leader is going to get up right after me. He will do that himself.

Just on the point raised by the Minister of Justice, first of all, it is a point of order. Secondly, there was no accusation made by the Leader of the Opposition indicating to the Minister of Justice that you knew, or anything like that. No such thing happened.

Mr. Speaker, I think that the record of Hansard will speak for itself. I believe that the point of order, when the record of Hansard speaks for itself, will demonstrate quite clearly that the Leader of the Opposition made no accusation across the House to the Minister of Justice.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, to the point of order.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: I heard the Minister of Justice in his interview last night and he indicated that he knew nothing about it. I did not say in this House today that he knew about it. You can take that to the bank. I certainly did not say it, and I did not cast any aspersion whatsoever on the character of the Minister of Justice. I stand here truthfully when I say that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Minister of Environment.

MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I am not sure whether this is a point of order or a point of privilege, but in his opening question to the House today the Member for Humber West did say - and I believe Hansard will verify that he did say - that I am on the record of advocating for private health care. Nothing can be further from the truth, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MERCER: I have not said that, and I will challenge the Member for Humber West to show where I have said that.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I ask the Member for Humber West, where in the record - whether it be in Hansard or on the outside of this House - I have said that? I will ask him to withdraw that statement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have seen this before, about a year-and-a-half ago when government got under heat. Every day they were rising on points of order and points of privilege trying to embarrass the Leader of the Opposition. It did not happen then, Mr. Speaker, and it is not going to happen now.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member now to get to his point.

MR. E. BYRNE: To the member's point exactly, and I can quote for him what was said and so will Hansard, directly. It was what he said on an Open Line program and the Leader of the Opposition was quoting the transcript when he said: Yesterday, a Member of Cabinet, the Member for Humber East, indicated publicly that there is a full range of options to privatize health care in the Province. That is what the member said. That is not paraphrasing by the Leader of the Opposition, that is your own words that happened.

Mr. Speaker, if anyone has a point of order it would be the Opposition to the members opposite wasting the House's time on trivial and insignificant matters.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: I find it absolutely strange, Mr. Speaker, that the only people who can raise valid points of order happen to be on that side of the House. Isn't that rather strange, Mr. Speaker? What a presumptuous attitude to have of oneself.

Mr. Speaker, hon. members know that it is not correct, that it is not appropriate in our Standing Orders, anywhere within Parliamentary Procedure, to misrepresent the facts expressed by another individual, by another member. Integrity begs that when we are talking about the speeches of another member, that we not misinterpret what they have said. Misinformation, Mr. Speaker, is not what we should be specializing in. So hon. members have to be very careful when they are talking about and attributing to what other members said. I would advise all hon. members to ensure that they are not misinterpreting or giving misinformation in terms of what some hon. member is supposed to have said.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I will hear one more point from the hon. Opposition House Leader.

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

We look forward to you making a quick and expeditious ruling on the points of order that have been raised today. I will say this, the protestations of the members opposite I think have more to do today with diverting attention from the Member for Cape St. Mary's & Placentia's questions of yesterday than they do with anything else.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Environment.

MR. MERCER: Mr. Speaker, I reiterate my request through you. I would ask you to view Hansard to see whether or not, at any time in this House, I have ever made the statements attributed to me or - I know it is outside your purview, but even outside of this House.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair will take the points of order raised by the hon. members under advisement and report back to the House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

If members care to continue with this discussion I ask that they do it outside the Chamber. This is interrupting our proceedings here and it cannot be tolerated.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand today to speak to a resolution which was introduced by me yesterday. To begin speaking on that resolution, I will read it into Hansard and for the benefit of those who are listening. The resolution reads:

WHEREAS the residents and visitors to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador rely and depend heavily on our road system for transportation, business, health care, tourism and for basic quality of life; and

WHEREAS provincial roads and highways are in a serious state of disrepair in virtually every region of the Province; and

WHEREAS the condition of the Province's roads and highways are a significant competitive disadvantage for Newfoundland and Labrador companies that market products in Canada and the United States; and

WHEREAS there are over 900 kilometres of dirt roads and some 1,500 kilometres of twenty-five year old paved roads in the Province; and

WHEREAS over $300 million is immediately required for provincial roads; and

WHEREAS there is only $23 million budgeted in this year's Budget for provincial roads which is completely insufficient; and

WHEREAS the Roads for Rail Agreement is coming to an end;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the government negotiate a new cost-sharing agreement with the Government of Canada for road repair and construction that will bring the quality of the Province's roads and highways up to North American standards and contribute to the Province's overall productivity and competitiveness.

Mr. Speaker, this resolution has certainly been introduced or the spirit of this resolution is not uncommon here to this Legislature. Similar resolutions have been put forward in earlier times and the conditions of our roads in the Province have not changed a whole lot from the time that those resolutions were presented upon until today.

Mr. Speaker, repetitively, day after day, members, at least on this side of the House, especially members representing rural districts, stand and present petitions day after day, including myself, on the condition of roads in their district, the conditions of the lack of road maintenance in their district because it is a reflection of what those members are hearing from their constituents and from the people they represent here in this Legislature.

We have been in Confederation with the Dominion of Canada for some fifty-four years now, 1949, and we still have over 900 kilometres of dirt road, over 1,500 kilometres of worn-out pavement. In fact, it is not uncommon for me to get a call asking if the Department of Works, Services and Transportation would come and take up certain sections of pavement because it has deteriorated so bad that they would rather drive over a dirt road. They would rather go back to having a dirt road than drive over the condition that some of the pavement in this Province the way it exists today.

Mr. Speaker, it is not uncommon to drive - and this problem is not unique to Bonavista South. It is not unique to members' districts that are represented by the Progressive Conservative Party here or the New Democratic Party. It is reflective of roads that are represented by pretty well all members in this Legislature.

Mr. Speaker, 1,500 kilometres of worn-out pavement, and this year we see the Budget brought forward and again, we see $23 million brought forward for road reconstruction and repair. It is not uncommon in years gone by, and I am not talking about a lot of years gone by, where there would be a fair amount of money in the road maintenance budget where each depot would be able to go out and do some paving; probably lay six, seven kilometres of pavement. That has been common in years gone by, where the Department of Works, Services and Transportation would have a road budget that they would be able to respond to some of the needs without doing it through capital cost. It was always a situation where the Department of Works, Services and Transportation would have enough money in their budget that they could go out and put crushed stone on the shoulders of the road and protect the pavement in that kind of a way. Today, Mr. Speaker, we even see money taken away from road maintenance as well as capital cost.

Mr. Speaker, back in 1989, if you would check the budget you will find out that there was in excess of $40 million for road maintenance and repair. Today, we are seeing that cut in half, where we have seen the amount of kilometres of road increased. In fact, there is something like 900,000 kilometres of road work in this Province now that the Department of Works, Services and Transportation are responsible for.

Go back into the communities and look at what they put on the sides, on the shoulders of the road. In fact, I have had calls, and I know they do not only come to my phone or my office, Mr. Speaker, but I have had calls from residents in communities, especially seniors, who say they cannot even go out for a walk anymore because what they use on the shoulders of the road today is not crushed stone. It is not washed stone. It is what they call pit rock. They go into a gravel pit with a front end loader, they scoop up the earth as it exists there, pick out the boulders, and that is what is put on the shoulders of the road. That is what is put in the areas of the shoulders of the road in order to fill out where the pavement has deteriorated. That is what people are driving on today.

Mr. Speaker, we are trying to build an economy in this Province today, and one of the places that we are looking at, or two of the places that we are looking at, Mr. Speaker, are to increase the manufacturing effort in this Province, to cater to the manufacturing and the processing industries in this Province, and, Mr. Speaker, to build on the tourism industry. How are we ever going to build on the tourism industry, and how are we ever going to increase economic activity in rural Newfoundland and Labrador if we do not maintain and replace the basic infrastructure of maintaining our roads?

It was only a short time ago, Mr. Speaker, less than a year ago, I think it was, that I heard the President of Terra Nova Shoes out in Harbour Grace, who saw fit that he had to take up this challenge and speak out on the conditions of the roads in this Province because of what it was costing his company in order to get their product to market. The President of Terra Nova Shoes, a success story in Harbour Grace, who saw fit to come out and challenge the government on the condition of the roads in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, it is not uncommon to talk to truckers who continually travel this Province and ask them how our roads compare with other roads that they travel over. They would tell you very quickly, Mr. Speaker, that the roads in this Province are second to none when it comes to bad conditions that they have to drive over.

Mr. Speaker, all the commodities - we saw the railway disappear back in 1988, and at that particular time there was something like $800 million that was brought forward; that we agreed to let go our railway to see $800 million returned to this Province in a Roads for Rail Agreement. Mr. Speaker, at that particular time there was something like $60 million that was given to the Town of Bishop's Falls and the Town of Port aux Basque, and there was $740 million designated for the Trans-Canada Highway and the trunk roads in this Province.

I am going to speak about the Bonavista highway, because this agreement came into effect in 1988. At that particular time Route 230, which is the main highway leading to Bonavista, there was $13 million identified in the Roads for Rail Agreement to upgrade the main road leading to Bonavista, and so it should be, because the Town of Bonavista and Trinity and Princeton and Port Union gave up their railway. Now all the goods that go down over the Bonavista Peninsula, all the goods that service this Province, are done by a mode of transportation that use our highways. There is not a lot of product, Mr. Speaker, that travels in the marine way anymore. It is evident in Labrador but certainly not around the Province. I would suggest that probably 99.9 per cent of all commodities and products that are produced and consumed here in this Province are done by roadway, and the amount of traffic that is on our roadways today compared to prior 1988 has certainly increased a thousandfold. Anybody who drives the highways would know that today.

Mr. Speaker, the government, in their wisdom, decided not to spend any of that $13 million on the Bonavista highway. The first phase of construction, if I recall, was carried out probably not up until 1994-1995, at that particular time, and the $13 million that was identified and designated was certainly worth a lot less than it would have been at that time if they decided to go forward and attend to the need.

Mr. Speaker, I understand that there is - in fact, I have to say that there was more interest expressed on this side of the House in our caucus this morning than most other resolutions that were brought forward, because everybody wanted to get up and speak on this particular resolution and talk about their problems in their district, and talk about the needs of transportation and the shortcomings of this Province when it comes to dealing with road conditions. So, Mr. Speaker, I will allow other people to stand and speak, and talk about some of the needs that they have put forward and they have seen and were made known to them.

I say to the ministers opposite, we are not fearmongering when we talk about the bad road conditions. You see it for yourselves as well. What we have asked here, Mr. Speaker, is for this government to go and approach their federal cousins in Ottawa and immediately negotiate an agreement, because this Province cannot look after the maintenance and upgrading of the Trans-Canada Highway and all of the trunk roads. It is impossible to do alone. I know that, and people opposite know that, when we have so many other needs.

We should reach out to the Government of Canada, and the government of this Province should be more proactive in reaching out and including the Members of Parliament - which is not being done, Mr. Speaker - so we might negotiate an agreement that would see our roads brought up to standards that are acceptable in 2003.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. WALSH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In terms of making the private member's resolution today with respect to the roads in the Province and indeed what we are seeing across the Province this time of year with the dirt roads, for me to stand here and say we do not have problems out there, I could not do that.

I am fully aware of the problems we are having with the dirt roads, especially this time of year when you have the frost leaving and the highways heaving. That is happening not only on dirt roads, but is also happening with respect to pavement as well.

Mr. Speaker, government this year decided to put some $23 million into roads in our Province. It is $1 million more than last year. It is $1 million more in what we have to look upon ourselves as tough economic times, and yet we were able to do that.

Mr. Speaker, we had to make choices as well. When I look at the requests that have come from all sides of the House of Assembly, from all forty-eight districts - I have had representation in terms of what they need and what they require - $50 million would not go near it; nay, $100 million would not go near it. Yet, this year we were able to find some $23 million for provincial roads.

Mr. Speaker, the decisions were basic. Choices had to be made. We made those choices. Would I have taken, as the Minister Responsible for Works, Services and Transportation, some of the $71.6 million that was given to health care? No, I would not, because that is probably not enough for that portfolio in terms of an increase either.

Would I have taken the half-million dollars set aside for the Kids Eat Smart program? No, I would not, because those funds are needed as well.

Would I have taken the $11.5 million set aside for the home repair program? Some 2,000 homes will be repaired in this fiscal year. Would I have taken that money? No, they need to be able to look forward to something for them as well. Nor would I have taken the $1 million that we set aside for library books.

There is no doubt, when you are looking at a province the size of Newfoundland and Labrador, some 500,000 people in an area that has some 10,000 kilometres of coastline, not even counting what we have in highways and infrastructure, there is no doubt that more money could be spent and there is no doubt that we probably could have made different choices.

Mr. Speaker, you cannot stand in the House of Assembly every day and say: You are spending too much, you are borrowing too much, you have asked for a deficit in the neighbourhood of $300 million, it should not be that size, it should not be larger, and at the same time expect to be able to do everything the government would like to do.

Twenty-three million dollars is $1 million more than last year. We will spread that money throughout the Province as evenly as we possibly can, meeting the most crucial needs across the Province. The question was asked, of how much more than last year. One million dollars more than last year.

Mr. Speaker, to stand and defend the number, I wish it was larger; however, when you cut the cloth to try to fit the budgets that you are working with, again I make no apologizes for not taking the money from health, for not taking the money from the Kids Eat Smart Program, for not taking the money from the home repair program, and for not taking it out of the libraries.

We will do the best we can with the $23 million that we have allocated, and we will reach out and try to deal with the areas of this Province that need that help most. I go on record now and say that some will be disappointed in many parts of the Province, in many districts, including my own, where I could probably spend $2 million and not even see the amount of work carried out. Areas of our Province will be disappointed, and I serve notice now and tell people that, but we will make the $23 million go as far as we can to meet the needs of as many regions as we possibly can. Hopefully, in future years, when we find ourselves in a much stronger and a much better economic situation, the $23 million this year could very well climb to the $40 million, $50 million or $60 million that we require.

Madam Speaker, I understand also that we have limited ourselves to time in order for other members to participate. I have agreed, along with other colleagues, that we would only take five minutes each and I am just now over that time.

I thank my hon. colleagues for giving me an opportunity to speak. I will give leave now, or give up whatever time I might have normally available, to allow other members to participate in the debate.

MADAM SPEAKER (M. Hodder): The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Madam Speaker, I just want to spend a few minutes to rise in support of this particular resolution. We do have a very serious problem with roads throughout our Province, both on the Island and in Labrador, where we need extensive funds to complete, in Labrador's case, the Trans-Labrador Highway. We need serious upgrading of the major Trans-Canada route across the Province and, as other members have said and will say about their own particular districts, significant upgrading of the road network throughout the Province.

One of the reasons why we are talking about this today, Madam Speaker, is that we had, as a part of one of the deals that we made since Confederation, which removed an obligation of the Government of Canada and replaced it with a short-term obligation, we had a long-term obligation from the Government of Canada with respect to the continuation of a railway. We have had a long-term obligation of the Government of Canada with respect to ferry service. We have had other long-term obligations that we have traded in for short-term cash. The short-term cash that I am talking about here today is the Roads for Rail Agreement; that the permanent constitutional obligation of the Government of Canada in perpetuity to continue a rail service across this Province and link it to a ferry service to North Sydney, that was traded for a sum of money, some $200 million, which has been spent over a fifteen year period and is now gone.

I remember in 1988, I was a Member of Parliament at the time, when this deal came down. It was considered by the government of the day here in this Province, the Peckford government, as being an excellent deal. This was some sort of a fabulous bonanza for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. Like many things that look good up front, this has proven to be something that we have given up - we have now given up in perpetuity any constitutional obligation for the Government of Canada to provide a transportation link from one end of the Island to the other by way of the rail bed.

Madam Speaker, we all know the history of the Newfoundland Railway. It practically bankrupted the country of Newfoundland, when we were a country. A lot of money was spent on it, as there was in Canada. The Canadian National Railway, the so-called national dream which built Canada, almost bankrupt Canada. There is no difference there. What happened to the people in the rest of Canada, Mr. Speaker? The Governments of Canada ensured that that railway continued, was upgraded, was changed, was modernized and continues to this day to be an important transportation link across the country, except for this Province. Perhaps that is one of the things that contributes, when people are talking about travelling from one side of the country to the other, they end that journey at Halifax because the train stops there or the train stops in North Sydney. We have given that up, Madam Speaker, in return for a short-term infusion of cash, which was a lot of cash back in 1988, but $200 million today is not considered to be a huge sum of money. In fact, our provincial deficit for this year is almost 50 per cent higher than that, approaching $300 million.

So, Madam Speaker, I support the resolution. We do need a new deal but what we really need, Madam Speaker, is a constitutional commitment, and a new commitment from the Government of Canada, on a permanent basis, that replaces the obligation that the Government of Canada had when they had an obligation, under the Terms of Union, to continue with the rail link across Newfoundland, from St. John's to Port aux Basques, that can be replaced with another ongoing permanent commitment. Perhaps that is something that the Royal Commission may deal with, but in terms of negotiating such a deal as is proposed here, I certainly think we should try to do that, but in doing that, we should emphasize that what was done in 1988 may have solved some cash flow problems for a number of years, but I would submit, Madam Speaker, we should not have given up any permanent obligation of the Government of Canada. We now have to seek a new permanent commitment from the Government of Canada to support road transportation in Newfoundland and Labrador so we can finish the Trans-Labrador Highway, so we can have roads in this Province that see a standard, that is a national standard across this country, that people in this Province are able to participate in.

So, I support the resolution, Madam Speaker. I think it is timely because the need is there, and I urge all hon. members to join in supporting it as well.

MADAM SPEAKER (M. Hodder): The hon. the Member for Bonavista North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARDING: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I am pleased, as well, to rise here today in this House and support the resolution put forward by my colleague from Bonavista South with respect to the conditions of roads in this Province.

Madam Speaker, I have to go no further than my own District of Bonavista North in verifying and confirming the concerns that my colleague mentioned in his resolution. The full $23 million put forward by government this year in their Budget could be spent in my district and would not do justice to upgrading and paving the roads that need to be done this year. Of the thirty communities in my district, there are only two that I could really point to and say have roads that are in a satisfactory condition. I hate to say this, but most of the roads that were paved twenty-five, thirty years ago are now in a worse condition than the good gravel roads that we had back at that time.

Madam Speaker, I would like to tell you about a situation this past week in the community of Noggin Cove in Bonavista North. At the end of the gravel road in Noggin Cove there is located the only grocery store in that town, and the roads in that community were so bad last week the vehicles could not get over it and go to the store. You know, Madam Speaker, one resident of that community took it upon himself to modify a farm tractor that he had. He put a blade on it and dragged it over that road back and forth until he had it leveled off enough to make it passable. That is shameful for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, in the year 2003. I have to say, that says an awful lot about care, concern and compassion for the people of this Province.

Madam Speaker, the roads not only in Noggin Cove, but also right through Frederickton and all of Gander Bay and other parts of my district, Bonavista North, are in the same kind of condition. They have been like it for years. It is nothing only total neglect and disrespect for the people who live and work in those communities.

The roads in this Province are in so bad a shape right now that they are costing hundreds of thousands of dollars extra in repairs to equipment that the government owns. With this high repair and maintenance cost to this old worn out equipment, in addition to that, the time in moving this equipment back and forth to Grand Falls, in our case, for repairs, certainly explains why we have so many delays in getting our work done in an efficient and timely manner.

I would like to take you now to the other end of my district - the end between Trinity and Gambo. That road, Route 320, is one of the most important secondary highways in this Province. Hundreds of tractor-trailers travel over it yearly. Thousands of visitors travel that road yearly. In fact, only last year 22,000 visitors motored over that road to visit the Barbour Living Heritage site in Newtown. In addition to that, we have all of the local people who use that road. A very, very busy road indeed.

The section of road between Indian Bay and Hare Bay was promised by this government to be done five or six years ago. It was promised when the people in Indian Bay to Trinity area agreed to close some of their schools and have their students bused to Hare Bay to go to school. In addition, guardrails were supposed to be erected in dangerous sections along that highway. As of today, most of that work has not been done.

Last year, as well, Madam Speaker, the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation went out to New-Wes-Valley and Indian Bay, Trinity area and told the people tenders would be called within seven or eight days to have some of that work done - the work between Indian Bay and Trinity and the work between Badger's Quay and Pool's Island. Tenders were not called until late August, too late for any work to be done this past year. These roads are out there now in the worst kind of condition. Over this past fall, winter and now the spring, it has cost the residents of those communities thousands of dollars in repairs to their vehicles.

Again, Madam Speaker, I have to say: Where is the care, concern and compassion of this government? Where is a commitment made, a commitment kept?

MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member his time is up.

MR. HARDING: May I have leave to finish, Madam Speaker?

MADAM SPEAKER: Does the member have a moment to conclude?

MR. HARDING: Road work in this Province has fallen behind drastically over recent years. Here we are now at the eleventh hour with no roads agreement signed with the federal government. Here we are with our backs to the wall trying to negotiate yet another federal-provincial agreement. Here we are again trying to negotiate in desperation from a corner. A very sad situation indeed.

Madam Speaker, in conclusion, unless we can negotiate a long-term meaningful roads agreement with the federal government we are in deep, deep trouble in this Province because we are not only talking about transportation per se in itself, we are also talking about tourism, the fishery, health care services and education. We are talking about something that affects just about every other aspect of living in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, I do not want to take on too many of the issues raised by the member who just spoke, the Member for Bonavista North, but a couple of comments need to be made. First of all, I want to say that having been the member for that district for some time, I felt very proud of the road work that I got in that particular district. The road to Greenspond, Madam Speaker. The road to Newtown. The road to Cape Freels from Gambo, which is a part from Gambo to just downside Lockyers Bay.

These were large projects, Madam Speaker, that we did. It started in 1989. I want to say to the member, that prior to that, from 1985-1989, he talked about compassion, there was not one inch of pavement that I could get from his government at that particular time for Bonavista North. It was only in 1989, and to demonstrate the compassion that his government had, for eight years I was the Member for Terra Nova, from 1975 up to 1983, that his government - by association he tried to suggest that we had no compassion. In that period in Terra Nova, when I was the member, not one inch of asphalt was laid in eight years. Madam Speaker, I do not think anybody else will find that anywhere else in any constituency, members on the other side, that not one inch of pavement was laid by the government of his political stripe in the eight years that I represented Terra Nova, not one inch.

Madam Speaker, I do not want to get into that, really, but the point had to be made. I want to say that we are not negotiating from a point of desperation. We are negotiating with confidence. We are negotiating from a point of confidence, and negotiating in sincerity for the people of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: Madam Speaker, I just want to say, to make this resolution a little more acceptable to members on this side of the House, I just want to talk about a couple of the WHEREAS that we do not necessarily agree with.

I certainly agree with the first WHEREAS. That is a motherhood situation, and we know how important the roads are to all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

"WHEREAS provincial roads and highways are in a serious state of disrepair in virtually every region of the Province...", we acknowledge that roads are bad; they are bad in every region, but certainly we wouldn't want to - we let that statement stand. We do believe that the roads are in worse condition than we would like to see, but we are doing our very best to see that they are improved.

"WHEREAS the condition of the Province's roads and highways are a significant competitive disadvantage for Newfoundland and Labrador companies that market products in Canada and the United States...", we take exception to that particular recital clause. We think that is rather negative and we do not particularly like that clause.

Madam Speaker, number six, if we could count them, is the second but last WHEREAS or recital clause, "WHEREAS there is only $23 million budgeted in this year's Budget for provincial roads which is completely insufficient...", that is cast in a rather negative, derogatory style. We are rather proud of the $23 million that we are spending.

The money that one spends on anything anywhere is relative to what you have. When you look at the situation where we are, in a deficit position, that is certainly a big contribution by this Province. Supposing the federal government, who has balanced books and a surplus, were making an equal contribution, what that would mean to this Province this year, and last year. So, Madam Speaker, in terms of the Province's ability to pay, we believe that the $23 million seen in that light is a rather large amount of money, and the government stretched its financial resources to put that $23 million into roads in this Province, but we did it because we realize how important it is.

Madam Speaker, I will be making an amendment to these two clauses in just a moment. The other amendment that I want to make is to the resolution itself.

The resolution says, "THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the government negotiate a new cost-sharing agreement...". Madam Speaker, again the suggestion almost is that we are not doing anything; that, as of this moment, the provincial government negotiate. What we want included in that resolution is the fact that we have been working towards this end for some time, Madam Speaker. Long before this day we have been trying to negotiate a new federal-provincial deal with the federal government for a roads program. We all know that the time is right for that, and this government started back some time knowing that the agreement that was negotiated by hon. members opposite, their provincial colleagues, is coming to an end. This government did not wait until this day to do that. We started that, so we want that reflected in the resolution.

Madam Speaker, the amendments that I will make, I move, seconded by the Member for -

I want to make sure that I have the right member here.

AN HON. MEMBER: Bonavista South.

MR. LUSH: Well, I am sure that he would probably go along with it, Madam Speaker.

Seconded by the Member for Gander. The motion is: That the Motion be amended by striking out the third and recital clauses.

These were the third and sixth recital clauses. These were the clauses to which I referred: That the Motion be amended in the Resolution Clause by striking out the words "the government negotiate" and by substituting the words "the government continue to negotiate".

The resolution would then read, Madam Speaker: THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the government continue to negotiate a new cost-sharing agreement with the Government of Canada for road repair and construction that will bring the quality of the Province's roads and highways up to North American standards and contribute to the Province's overall productivity and competitiveness.

There are no major changes, Madam Speaker, just those slight amendments to make it more acceptable to members on this side of the House.

I leave it to the Chair to decide whether the motions are in order.

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

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I would like to rise to take part in debate on this resolution today, that talks about the reliance on roads as the transportation system within our Province.

Madam Speaker, I would like to say that from representing Labrador West and travelling throughout Labrador, all we have to travel on are gravel roads. This leaves a lot to be desired at the best of times, and certainly leaves a lot to be desired at certain times of the year, such as the springtime that is fast approaching now, where we see the roads deteriorate to a point where it is unsafe to travel on them and where there is a lot of damage inflicted on vehicles. It can be a very costly trip to travel from Labrador West to Happy Valley-Goose Bay. That is why it is important that this Province, and the federal government, get together to negotiate a deal that will see Labrador put on par with most of the Island portion of the Province, even, and certainly in the rest of Canada, where we can have a paved road to drive over.

I want to say to the resolution, it talks about there are over 900 kilometres of dirt road in the Province. I do not think that is accurate, Madam Speaker, because in Labrador alone there are about 800 kilometres of gravel road.

MR. SHELLEY: (Inaudible) 900.

MR. COLLINS: It is definitely over 900. There is no question about that, I say to the Member for Baie Verte. It is definitely much more than 900, Madam Speaker, because there are over 800 in Labrador alone. The one thing that is missing from Labrador - we have a lot of the other modern conveniences that most people have, but we do not have any of that black stuff that you see out on the roads out here, that you call pavement. Even if there are holes in it, we do not have any of that either.

There is a great need for road improvements throughout Labrador. If you add that to what is in the remainder of the Province, the gravel highways that exist there, then we are probably talking in the neighbourhood of close to 2,000 kilometres of gravel roads within the entire Province.

Madam Speaker, I would say that the highway itself, at the present time, only goes from Labrador West to Happy Valley-Goose Bay and from Cartwright down to L'Anse au Clair, so there is this huge gap in the middle that needs to be completed. Under this government's program, and the plan that they have laid out, that will, at the best rate, take six years to complete. That is providing that there are no difficulties encountered with the Environmental Impact Study that is presently ongoing.

Madam Speaker, when we talk about roads and when we talk about a transportation system, it certainly is a topic that I have spoken on many times in this House and it is one that I will continue to speak on because of the need that we have to access a road system whereby we can travel within our own Province without having, as a necessity, to depend on air twelve months of the year or without having to travel down through Quebec, New Brunswick or Nova Scotia in order to get back within our own Province.

Madam Speaker, there is a need for this government to work closely with the federal government to bring forth a deal that not only addresses the 900 kilometres of dirt roads and the 1,500 kilometres of twenty-five year old paved roads on the Island portion of the Province - that is important, Madam Speaker, but I would say it is also important that Labrador has a road connection that we do not have at the present time, and the road system and network that we do have be brought up to a national standard that will give us the ability to be able to travel throughout the regions of Labrador, in the same manner and under the same circumstances as people in the rest of this country have the opportunity to do, without destroying their vehicle or leading to a major cause of accidents along the roadway.

In line with transportation, Madam Speaker, I would like to also note that today is the day that the tendering closes for providing communication phones, satellite phones, to be used along the Trans-Labrador Highway. That tendering should be open tomorrow morning. The successful tender should be known at that time and I encourage the minister to get with this immediately, do not delay it any longer. People need communication equipment along that road. We are fast approaching a time of the year when it is going to be hazardous at the best of times in traveling along that section of highway. I say to the minister, it is important that he not drag his feet on this, that the satellite phones be put in place as expeditiously as possible so that people have a degree of comfort, have the ability to call in an emergency that may save a life. I say to the minister to do that expeditiously, do not drag his heels, get on with it, fill the tender and provide the people with the tools that they need for their own safety and comfort when they are traveling that highway.

I close, Madam Speaker, by saying that we look forward to the day when our roads in Labrador are a national standard, where we can drive from point A to point B, where we can drive from Labrador West right down to the Coast of Labrador and cross over to the Island portion of the Province. We look forward to that day being in the near future rather than later, but I am very hesitant. With the program that is laid out and the number of years that is anticipated, that is going to take some time. The faster that happens the better for all concerned. I implore upon this government to do that at a faster rate then what they have currently planned because it is necessary, it is crucial to the economy and the development of Labrador, and it is also crucial to the needs of the people, to be able to travel on a road where they do not have to risk their lives while they are traveling.

So, with that, I will conclude. I know there are other speakers, Madam Speaker. I will conclude my remarks by saying that this is a topic that I am sure I will have many other opportunities to speak to in this House of Assembly when we come back after the Easter break.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. George's-Stephenville East.

MR. K. AYLWARD: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I just want to take a few minutes to speak on this bill and to say that we are in need of a deal to negotiate with the federal government on our highways in the Province, but you have to wonder where is the federal government today in this Province. I have to tell you, I am one who has been around here a little bit in the House of Assembly and I am poisoned with the federal government at this point. I am getting to the point where you have to wonder what the term, federal presence, means, because the airports are all given away and the seaports are given away, or trying to be dumped off to port authorities in this Province.

Right now, when we talk about transportation, we have Port Harmon in Stephenville, one of the most important ports in the Province right now, handed off to two individuals, handed off by a federal minister, with the objection of the people of the Province. The people of the Province, including the Government of the Province, have objected to David Collenette, the federal minister, transferring that port. Against every objection of all of the residents, he has gone ahead and done it and not listened to his federal minister from Newfoundland and Labrador, not bothered to listen to his MP. So one wonders, Madam Speaker, where is the federal government, because I am one who is coming to that conclusion.

I tell you, when you look at the federal presence of this Province, when it comes to transportation, it is probably nil or almost non-existent. Our government is trying and the new minister, the Minister of Transportation, is doing a good job of trying to get the federal government to listen. I think they should get the federal leadership over with pretty soon because the government has to start operating federally for the country, not just for Ontario and Quebec, because it is getting ridiculous as far as I am concerned.

Here we are, a provincial government now has to take the federal government to court because they did not follow their own government website for divesting ports. It is absolutely ridiculous! I expect we are going to win in the court, we hope so, but we have to go to court to get them to make common sense decisions. It is to the point the federal government has to get its act together when it comes to Newfoundland and Labrador, and they should do it soon, Madam Speaker, especially when it comes to roads in this Province, this great piece of geography that joined Confederation. You know, one wonders, these are the Terms of Union joining Newfoundland and Labrador with Confederation. One wonders anymore what they are worth, when you see the way we are being treated at this point by our federal colleagues.

Somebody said to me a little while ago, our federal cousins - I tell you what, I am looking up the family tree because I do not want them in my family tree if this is going to keep up in Ottawa, I guarantee you that, because Newfoundland and Labrador has to start getting treated better by the Government of Canada. That includes the politicians in the Government of Canada, and it is time that they recognized: What is the contribution of Newfoundland and Labrador? What is it that we bring to Canada? We bring a lot, Madam Speaker, and we are all doing our best.

This government has really tried hard and is trying hard to convince the federal ministers of the Crown and the House of Commons. But I tell you what, there were previous governments here too who had the same problems with the federal government that are up there of different stripes. We had the same problem, but it is getting to the point of utter contempt that is being shown to the taxpayers of Newfoundland and Labrador by the federal government -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. AYLWARD: - and it is time for our federal representatives to come to the table and get us a road deal that is worth us in this Province. It is not just seven seats. It is a lot more than seven seats. It is hundreds of millions of oil barrels. It is a lot of Churchill Falls' power. It is a lot of resources that this Province has brought into Confederation, and it is time for the Government of Canada to recognize the contribution.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. AYLWARD: This resolution here - we support the basics of the resolution to get a deal. I will just ask my federal colleagues in Ottawa, and I will be asking them a lot more directly in the next little while, to start treating this place with respect.

I am going to finish on this. Winston Churchill, one of the greatest parliamentarians and politicians ever, once said: We do not covet anything from any nation except their respect. I would say, Madam Speaker, it is time we got some respect from Ottawa.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I am pleased to rise today and speak to the private member's motion that has been put forward by my colleague from Bonavista South. I think that this is a good motion. I support the amendments that the Government House Leader has made, and I think it is important that if we put forward this particular resolution from the House today, that we do so united and under the terms and conditions that we can all live by. Because it is important that we not underestimate the meaning and the intention that this motion is providing to the Government of Canada, and providing for direction in this hon. House.

Madam Speaker, I live in a district in this Province that knows all too well what the importance of roads mean to the progression of communities, to the delivery of health care, to the delivery of education. It is unfortunate that it is only in the recent years that we have learned that full value and full appreciation.

Madam Speaker, Labrador's South Coast was long, long neglected. For many years, decades and generations, while other people in this Province went with highway infrastructure and roads, we went without. I can tell you, that it set back communities in that area. It set them back for quite a long time but we are playing catchup now, and we are doing so because of the generous support and the commitment to transportation infrastructure that this government has shown.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: Madam Speaker, I represent a district that, until a few years ago, we always say we had fifty kilometres of pavement in fifty years. I can tell you, that was not something that we praised. That was something we criticized. Now, I can proudly stand in this House, on any given day, and say that in the last four years we have built more than 250 kilometres of highway in Southern Labrador.

Madam Speaker, we have been able to connect communities from Red Bay right up to Cartwright. When we started to build highways back in 1998, it was the intention of the government then that we would only connect the communities of Lodge Bay, Mary's Harbour, Port Hope Simpson, Charlottetown and Cartwright but since then we have been able to lobby and have this government provide funds to build a road to the community of St. Lewis, which is now complete as well. Last year, we announced monies to build a road to the community of Pinsent Arm. That road got started last year. It is now under construction. This year we provided money in the Budget to start the environmental assessment and the routing for the construction of a road to the community of Williams Harbour.

Madam Speaker, I believe and I agree and I am firmly committed to ensure that all communities in our Province, wherever physically and geographically possible, should have road connections and road networks and they should have the best possible roads that we can provide.

Madam Speaker, I can honestly tell you that for many years the people of Labrador were held hostage because of transportation. They were held hostages in their own communities and in their own regions. We had a Marine Atlantic service, then we had a provincial marine service, and it was always considered good enough for the people of Labrador that we would have a boat that would leave Lewisporte and stop in every community on the way up, all the way to Nain. It was good enough, Madam Speaker; that was the philosophy. For years and years the people in Labrador's South Coast endured that kind of thought and that kind of perspective on transportation, but, Madam Speaker, those days are coming to an end. They are coming to an end, and I would say it's high time in this Province that they do. Because, Madam Speaker, not only over the past four years have we been able to construct roads into all of these communities along Labrador's South Coast, for the first time in their history opening up one of the last frontiers in Canada, for the first time in our lives seeing a tractor trailer drive through our communities, for the first time in our lives seeing us being able to ship fish out of our fish plants directly to the markets and being able to be a competitive player in the economy of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

We have seen all of that happen through these roads, Madam Speaker, but the other thing that we have seen happen is, we have seen an opportunity for the future for these communities; communities where for years people saw no gains in investing, no gains in choosing alternative transportation. Let the boat sail out of Lewisporte, Madam Speaker. Let them sail out of there, that is good enough. Well, it is not good enough and it is going to change, Madam Speaker, because we are going to ensure that marine services now for Labrador are for the people of Labrador, and that is the way that is should be.

We will start this year not only with the building and the opening up of the roads in Cartwright but we will also run the marine service as a ferry service from Cartwright to Goose Bay, Madam Speaker, because that is our road. That is our road, the same as the roads that connect all the other communities across this Province.

I was disappointed, very disappointed, with some of the members opposite when they took the perspective -

MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MS JONES: Already, Madam Speaker?

If I could just clue up for one minute, Madam Speaker, please?

MADAM SPEAKER: Does the member have a moment to conclude?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Yes.

MADAM SPEAKER: By leave.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS JONES: I say to the Member for Ferryland that I have few choice phrases for you, too, my dear, but they will wait until we get into the full debate because I do not have enough time today to really get into it.

Madam Speaker, to just conclude, I would like to say that it is time that the Government of Canada paid more attention to the importance of road networks in Newfoundland and Labrador, that it is time that they designate the Labrador highways as part of the Trans-Canada Highway system so it becomes part of the full national highway network, and that they need to be able to do partnerships with our Province to ensure that we do have good roads to service the people of this Province so that they can become competitive players in the Canadian economy.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. YOUNG: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I, too, would like to get up and have a few words to support a motion that was put forward by the Member for Bonavista South.

It is a very important issue in the District of St. Barbe. Roads had been an issue when I got involved, and long before I got involved. Certainly, in my political time here, roads have been an issue that has been ongoing.

I think the roads tell a story that is bigger, how government has gone out there and have governed places like the Northern Peninsula. I think there are two indicators. One is the past and how our roads ended up in the condition they are, and how they are a deterrent for us to move ahead into the future.

Many times I have spoken here and I have always gotten up and spoken about the impact that the trucking of unprocessed raw materials is having on the roads. We have had the shrimp industry, which came to be a great boost to the economy of this Province. It was adjacent to the shores of the Northern Peninsula, was landed and then trucked over our roads. In so doing, it had a very big impact on the destruction of our roads. We went out there and, naturally, tried to maintain the jobs in our neighbourhood as much as possible. We went out there and tried to force government to go out and put scales on the roads so that any of the trucking that was happening on the roads out there could be managed properly. At least they could abide by the law of the land.

Instead of that, we were unsuccessful in ever getting a scale put in place. As a result of that, we saw the scales - if you were trucking shrimp east from the Northern Peninsula - were as far away as Grand Falls. If a truck left St. Anthony with a full load of ice, by the time it got that far half of the ice had been melted and then was able to pass those scales. Because of that, I think our roads ended up deteriorating very fast. The damage that has been done in the last few years has been considerable. I think, with the extra added new traffic that we had, we ended up at the end of the life of the pavement. If we had been able to maintain it, take care of it and nurse it along, I think we may have been able to have a much better road today. I think because of the extra traffic that was overweight on a continuous basis day after day through the summer, and I might also add, in the early spring when the roads were not dried out and settled down, those were the impacts that had taken the highway we had there; which was a very good highway, deteriorating, no doubt, because of the age, but at a slower rate, has left us with a road now that is in very poor condition.

I think the other part of the story, as well, is the opportunities for the future. I think the opportunity for the Northern Peninsula after the cod moratorium was certainly the tourism. It was a good fit, everybody agreed. With the cluster of attractions that we have on the Northern Peninsula, it was an ideal place for tourism to work in this Province. It was said: If it could not work on the Northern Peninsula then tourism could not work anywhere in this Province; because of what we have to offer, from the clusters we have had with Gros Morne and L'Anse aux Meadows, Port aux Choix and Red Bay, all in a cluster there with many other attractions that we have developed since. Those are the (inaudible) attractions that was spread out through the Northern Peninsula. It has certainly given us a great opportunity for the future.

I guess the thing is now, the biggest question mark that we have is: Are people going to continue to come? We have gone out there. We have made massive investments as a government, and as private investment, into the hospitality industry and into those main attractions. Yet, we do not know if there is going to be a payback. There may be a day, very near, when they are going to say: We can't come and visit your sites anymore because it is not really accessible. The damage we are doing to our equipment to come there are not worth coming to your attractions. They are worth coming now. People are coming from all over the world. People are amazed at what we have to offer, but yet, the feedback we are getting is that something has to be done. You just cannot be inaccessible and hope to make a living from the tourism industry.

My background has been in the hospitality industry. I had an operator say to me at one point after I got elected, he said: I think you should have at least a standard seven years after you put up a bump sign that it would be worth repairing that particular bump. I think that should be a standard you should try to achieve. It was sort of in a joking way, but nonetheless, that operator from the time he had arrived had a warning sign posted at a particular spot that was still there seven years later. He did not think that was an acceptable means of managing your highway system.

I bring it up because tourism has been certainly a big part of where we want to go and we have agreed and bought into it. I have gone down that road ever so far, but like I said, it tells us a story. It is a bigger story. It is a bigger (inaudible) than that, that the roads were destroyed and taking out a resource, an opportunity for us to make a living and have a better standard of living. At the same time, stopping us from having an opportunity to move in a different direction, away from our resource of the fishery, which was ever so important, and it still is so important, but by having another industry to take the burden and replace the job load away from the fishery and the primary resource to a secondary industry like tourism, that kind of development, is very unfortunate.

MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member his time is up.

MR. YOUNG: Very good. Just to clue up for a second.

MADAM SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have time to -

MR. YOUNG: I would just like to point out, it is also the cost. I think that we can never forget - when you have a road that is in a deplorable condition like we do have in certain sections along the Northern Peninsula in the District of St. Barbe, is the cost of maintaining your machine. You go out there and you do damage and that cost is ever so considerable, and much more noticeable when you go out there and the opportunity to make a living is that much less by not having the job opportunities that a good highway would give you. That added burden by not having maybe the income that you should have and then having the extra cost of maintaining your vehicle is somewhat unfair.

Thank you.

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

MR. REID: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

MR. HUNTER: (Inaudible).

MR. REID: I am sorry, Madam Speaker. I will defer to him and I will speak after.

MADAM SPEAKER: I am sorry.

The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

It is a privilege today to get up and have a few words to say about this resolution. I would like to congratulate my colleague from Bonavista South for bringing forth this resolution today. It is time to recognize the problems that we do have in our transportation system, particularly our roads in the Province, Madam Speaker. Yes, it is true that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador do depend heavily on our road system, not only for transportation, but for businesses, our health care and tourism, and, as the resolution stated, the basic way of life in this Province. Because with our kids today travelling longer distances to schools on buses, we need to recognize that the roads have to be in very good shape so that they would have that safe environment in which to travel.

Also, Madam Speaker, our seniors today have to travel longer distances to avail of health care services and other services in the Province, so we have to recognize the importance of having a good road system. Our road system today is mostly over twenty-five years old, the paving part of it, and we recognize that it is going to take a lot of dollars.

In the resolution it says $300 million. Madam Speaker, I would say $300 million would only just barely bring it up to scratch, and every year we need to spend a considerable amount of money. The Budget this year allowed for $23 million to address our provincial roads system. Twenty-three million dollars is not going to do very much. The minister alluded to it, that it was $1 million more this year over last year. That $1 million is not going to be doing very much for the forty-eight districts in this Province. I doubt if it will even repair a few potholes in each district. We have to look at this issue and make sure that the 1,500 kilometres of twenty-five-year-old paved roads in this Province and 900 kilometres of dirt roads in this Province have to be addressed.

In my district, Route 380 and Route 381 and Route 390, the roads are over twenty-five years old. They need to be desperately done soon. These roads are getting into a deteriorated state where the people in the travelling public find themselves in dire need of repairs, very expensive repairs. The people of my district feel that they pay taxes on gas, licence fees and taxes in the community to get services from the government, and they feel that the taxes and service fees they pay should give them good roads that they need on which to travel.

I say, Madam Speaker, if we are serious about doing this, then we need - as the minister amended the resolution to say continue - we need a very forceful presentation. We need something more than just asking the federal government for a roads agreement. We need to demand from the federal government in this country, that we need more money from Ottawa. We need a good provincial-federal roads agreement to address these problems, not $23 million per year but a lot more.

Even the former minister, the Minister of Transportation, when he first became minister, said that in this next budget we have coming there will be more money, double. If I am there, he said, there will be a double amount of money in the budget for roads agreements. Madam Speaker, I do not think $23 million is double what it was a year or so ago.

The politicians in this Province are going to have to get more forceful. The ministers, the government, are going to have to get more forceful with our federal government and say to the federal government: We need this. We deserve it. We have paid into this country for many years. We tolerated the conditions of the roads. We tolerated the way the federal government has been treating this Province, but we are not going to tolerate it any more. We are going to pressure this government in Ottawa to make sure that this money is available to our Province.

The Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture alluded to the fact that people were hostages in our Province. Madam Speaker, that is so true. We are hostages in places where roads are that bad when people have to consider: Well, I do not think I am going to travel over this road because I am not sure it is going to be safe for me to go over the road.

That alone makes people in this Province hostages. I think that is a crime in this day and age, in this era of time when other things and services in the world are provided so easily, that we have to have people in this Province feeling that they are hostages in their own community. We should not accept this concept. Every member of this House, every member, every minister, should be lobbying our federal members, we should be putting pressure on our federal members, to make sure that Ottawa sits down with our minister, our government, and says we are going to treat you fairly. We are going to treat you equal to any other province in this country, and we are going to make sure that the people of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador do not feel like hostages in their communities.

We cannot afford to do that anymore, Madam Speaker, because our Province - as this resolution says, we need a good road system for the productivity and the competitiveness of the people in this Province to make sure that we are viable and to stay in this Province and our communities for a long time.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

It is certainly a pleasure for me today to rise and talk about transportation in our Province. Representing a district with thirty-nine communities on four islands, two of which are accessible by our ferry service, two different ferries, it is certainly an issue that is near and dear to my heart and the people I represent.

I listened to the members opposite when they all talked about the need for more money for roads. I would love - this government and everyone in it - to have more money for roads. The issue with the federal government is obviously a big one in that we continuously make the case for more money for roads in our Province; roads that we deserve, being part of the Canadian federation. It seems to have fallen on deaf ears, not just in recent years, Madam Speaker, but it seems to have been the case since 1949.

I hear my hon. members opposite sometimes talk about it was the Tory government in Ottawa that rebuilt our Trans-Canada Highway. I have to let them know, Madam Speaker, the Tory government in Ottawa did not rebuild our Trans-Canada Highway. The Tory government in Ottawa had an obligation to continue to subsidize the train system in this Province, and continue to do it in perpetuity. Unfortunately, when we sold the train to Ottawa, we only got one lump sum and that has been spent upgrading the highway. That highway will not last forever and we will eventually have to find the money to recap that road.

Madam Speaker, I would rather talk about my district, because when I went to teach on New World Island, which was in the District of Twillingate back in 1982 - and I would like for the hon. members opposite to note the dates - in 1982 there was one road paved in that district, Twillingate district, which encompassed Twillingate and New World Island. That was the main road across the Island, across New World Island to Twillingate Island. You have to remember, that was in 1982, ten years after the Tory government took power. The only road that was paved was one that Joey Smallwood had paved before he left power in 1972.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. REID: The Member for Windsor-Springdale, I listened to him speak, without heckling him, and I wish he would afford me the same opportunity.

That was in 1982, Madam Speaker, and in 1989 when the Tories left, guess what? The only paved road in that district, the District of Twillingate, was the one that Joey Smallwood had paved before he left in 1972. So, for seventeen years, Madam Speaker, seventeen years, the government of which they are so proud to say they are a part, the Tory government, never paved a road in that side of my district.

Now, in 1996 we combined that district with Fogo and Change Islands and it is now called Twillingate and Fogo. Guess what? The same thing happened over there. The Tories, when they were in government, never touched a road on Fogo Island and did not touch one on Change Islands, Madam Speaker, and they talk about what they would do.

I think that the people in my district realize what they would do if they were in power. The reason, Madam Speaker, that they did not pave the district is because the people in my district, Twillingate and Fogo, had the good sense to vote Liberal. Madam Speaker, since 1989 we appreciated the fact that they stayed Liberal. We appreciate the fact that they are going to stay Liberal.

Let me tell you what we have done since then, not because we wanted political patronage, not because we only wanted to pave roads in Liberal districts, but because, Madam Speaker, that district, the two combined districts, were totally, totally neglected for a period of seventeen years. We had a lot of catching up to do.

In 1989, the new government, the Liberal government took power, and let me tell you - let me list some of the roads that have been paved since 1989. I am not saying they are all paved. I am not saying that there is no need for more paving. I will get to that after I list the roads. But just listen to them, because some of those members opposite only represent one town when they get up and they complain about the road conditions and such. Some of them only represent one town or a part thereof. Let me tell you, we started on New World Island. We paved Virgin Arm, Chanceport, Bridgeport, Moreton's Harbour, Valley Pond, Tizzard's Harbour, Parkview, Fairbanks, Newville, Hillgrade, Indian Cove, Herring Neck, Toogood Arm, Pikes Arm, Cobbs Arm. That is on New World Island. Nineteen communities that never saw a bit of pavement under the rule of their colleagues over there, the Tory government, when they talk about what Joey Smallwood did and did not do, and they always condemn him for what he did. At least, when we took over Joey Smallwood had the decency to put the road, the only one that was paved in the district, to cross the district. That was on New World Island.

In Twillingate Island, we paved through Twillingate, Purcell's Harbour, Little Harbour, Kettle Cove, Crow Head, and Durrell. We have done all of those since 1989. Then we went to Fogo Island, and we did Tilting. We paved the road across the island, recapped the road across the island again. We paved Island Harbour, Deep Bay, Stagg Harbour. We did some in Tilting last year. We did some in Joe Batt's Arm. Madam Speaker, what I am saying is that because these people were neglected for seventeen years -

MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member his time is up.

MR. REID: Can I just have a minute to clue up, Madam Speaker?

MADAM SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have a minute to clue up?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MADAM SPEAKER: A minute to clue up.

MR. REID: All I am saying, Madam Speaker, it is good for the people of the district that they continue to vote Liberal and good for the people of the district that a Liberal government is in power because they would still have nothing.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I am delighted today to get up on this particular motion put forward by my colleague from Bonavista South because for years and years, and months and even up to the last number of days, we continue to stand in this House, on all sides of the House, and talk about the conditions and the state of the roads in this Province. Up to when the minister stood, there was a good debate going on in this House. Everybody was not talking about voting Liberal and Tory. They were talking about the reality of the day, which is the state of the roads in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: Even the minister stood up, Madam Speaker, about the state of the roads in this Province.

I am not going to talk about 1972, as the minister talked about. I was in Grade 6 in 1972. I want to talk about today, Madam Speaker. Today, in this Province, with the amount of gravel roads still left in the year 2003, when we are sending people to Mars and Jupiter, that we still have 900 kilometres of gravel road on the Island portion. As the Member for Labrador talked about - it was not included in this one - there were much more gravel roads in Labrador. That was not even included here.

The minister should have reminded everybody, that when he talks about 1972 - and the Member for Terra Nova talked about it earlier - pavement lasts somewhere in the area of about twenty to twenty-five years, especially in our particular climate. It is very difficult. So he is talking about roads that need to be replaced now, which is the point I would like to make today.

We have said it over and over in this House, and I have spoken many times about my district and the amount of gravel roads and the deplorable conditions in the area, but we have a major problem for the simple reason that it has not been addressed for such long time. Every year we tend to stand up in this House, on both sides of the House, and talk about conditions in our own areas, because it is simply like this, that every year we wait until April month, until the Budget comes out, and the amount of money that is spent there, so that every member goes scrambling to see who can put up the best argument to get the few crumbs - as it was put by one person in my district - about who is going to get the few crumbs that are going to be passed out. Year after year, if we continue to do that, we will never address the problem. Because what we need desperately in this Province is something that is really going to do some significant improvements to the highways in this Province, and that can never come - as the Member for St. George's-Stephenville announced earlier here today - until we have a federal program in place. The truth is, we are so far back now that pavement continues to get older and older, and, Madam Speaker, this is how bad of a state we are in today.

The Minister of Transportation met with a group from my area just a few days ago. They did not come to ask for pavement. They have seventeen kilometres of gravel road in their district. They did not come to ask for pavement. They are so tired of asking for it. They asked the minister: - and the minister himself was even shocked - Minister, at least put something on the roads so that the depot do not tell us they will not come over to grade it anymore because there is nothing on it to grade. We are down to bedrock. People at the depot on the Baie Verte Peninsula and the Green Bay area are telling the people they cannot come to the gravel roads anymore to grade it because there is nothing left to grade. That is where we are with this situation in this Province. Besides the fact that we have so much old pavement, twenty-five and thirty years old, that is worst than some of the gravel roads, we have a situation in the Province now where there is still 900 kilometres of gravel roads on the Island, plus what is in Labrador, and the people at the depots are saying the graders cannot handle it anymore because there is nothing left to grade. That is the circumstance we are finding ourselves in today in 2003. The fact is we have gone so far back now, as was said by somebody else earlier, that it is like a bad credit card out of control. We cannot catch up to it. It is a bankruptcy on the roads. The simple fact is that we have never had a long-term plan.

Yes, the Member for Stephenville makes a good point. We are going to have to have an agreement. That is the only way we will ever catch up now. At the same time, I say to the member - he says the government that is there now, the regime that is there now. It has been fourteen years of this particular administration. Where have you been getting with our colleagues, if we can call them that, in Ottawa? Where have we gotten? The only thing I ever remember seeing here was a former minister of transportation who said he made a presentation to his federal colleagues. What has been done since? What has been the response? What are they doing today?

As the Member for Terra Nova said, they are continuing. They are going to change the motion, that they are going to continue negotiations. Well, what has really been done? Madam Speaker, the truth is, every single member in this House has stood on different occasions and talked about the conditions throughout this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and the state that those roads are in.

The bottom line is we need an agreement, yes, but we also need a plan that is going to take us more than from April to April, a five-year plan and a ten-year plan, so that we can address the real picture we see in front of us today, and that is deteriorating roads that have been paved for over twenty-five years and 900 kilometres of gravel road where we are down to the bed rock, that graders will not even come to take care of anymore. That is the state we find ourselves in today.

We ask the government, on this particular motion, in the time they have left: What have they done in regards to the federal government in coming up with a new agreement and what is their plan to increase the roads program in this Province? When the minister talks about $1 million this year, yes, we would agree to any amount of money, we would agree to $1,000. But $1 million - the minister knows because we have spoken about it - means probably, if we are lucky, an extra ten kilometres in this Province this year. That is what $1 million works out to on the highways, approximately ten kilometres per $1 million.

When we talk about $23 million - and get this straight too - when everybody talks about the $23 million, it is not $23 million that will actually pave roads. By the time we talk about engineering and other members -

MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. SHELLEY: I will just clue up, Madam Speaker. I am the last speaker here today. I know my time is up, but to just make this point, to drive it home again, because day after day we continue with petitions in this House, in our own districts and right across the Province. We need more than a one-year plan. It has to be a longer term plan. It has to be addressed, not just alone, but with a federal-provincial agreement that is really going to give people in rural Newfoundland a chance at all of rejuvenation. Without a basic infrastructure of roads, we do not have a chance in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. If we are going to have that chance we have to have a good roads program in this Province.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER: There is a motion to the House for amendment. I have checked with the Table, the amendment is in order. The amendment reads: That the Motion be amended in the Resolution Clause by striking out the words "the government negotiate" and substituting the words "the government continue to negotiate".

The resolution shall read:

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the government continue to negotiate a new cost-sharing agreement with the Government of Canada for road repair and construction that will bring the quality of the Province's roads and highways up to North American standards and to contribute to the Province's overall productivity and competitiveness.

Also that the motion be amended by striking out the third and sixth recital clauses.

All in favour of the amendment?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MADAM SPEAKER: Carried.

All in favour of the motion, as amended?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MADAM SPEAKER: Against?

MADAM SPEAKER: Motion carried as amended.

This being Wednesday, this House will now adjourn until tomorrow, Thursday, at 1:30 p.m.