May 3, 2005 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 19


The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: This afternoon we have members' statements as follows: the hon. the Member for the District of Grand Bank; the hon. the Member for the District of Burin-Placentia West; the hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue; the hon. the Member for the District of Lewisporte, with leave; the hon. the Member for the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair; and the hon. the Member for the District of Trinity North.

Will the House give leave to the hon. the Member for the District of Lewisporte?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

The Chair calls the hon. the Member for the District of Grand Bank.

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, today I recognize the congregation of the United Church in Grand Bank who will celebrate, this coming weekend, the one hundred and eighty-ninth anniversary of the founding of Methodism in Grand Bank and the fortieth anniversary of the present church building.

Plans for the weekend include a celebration with the young people of the congregation, a congregational banquet, and a special service of praise and thanksgiving on Sunday with Reverend Wayne Blackwood as the guest preacher. Reverend Blackwood served the congregation as minister from 1994-1997.

The history of Methodism and the United Church in Grand Bank has been compiled by Clara and William Tibbo and is available in book form.

The first Methodist preacher to arrive in Grand Bank was Reverend Richard Knight from England. He arrived on November 4, 1816 and was assigned to Fortune Bay with his headquarters in Grand Bank.

The first issue that Reverend Knight had to contend with was finding a suitable building in which to conduct services. Together with the parishioners he built a new church. The congregation continued to grow and in 1846 a new church was built to accommodate them, followed by another in 1876. The cornerstone for the present, and fourth, church was laid on October 18, 1964 and the official opening and dedication took place on May 9, 1965 by Reverend Ernest Marshall Howse, Moderator of General Council.

To date, sixty-four ministers have served the congregation in Grand Bank. The sixty-fifth minister to serve the congregation will be Reverend Lewis Crewe, who will begin his duties July 1, 2005.

As they celebrate this milestone, the congregation looks back at their rich history with pride and thanksgiving and remember: We are not alone; we live in God's world.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin-Placentia West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It gives me great pleasure to stand in this House today and bring congratulations and praise to a young gentleman from my district, Mr. Shannon Francis of Burin Bay Arm. Shannon is a fifteen year old who displays an exceptional talent in soccer, and at fifteen years of age Shannon has already several accomplishments under his belt. He has played on the Newfoundland and Labrador Canada Games team in Manchester, England, and is part of the pool of players to be selected to represent this Province.

Mr. Speaker, Shannon continues to improve his skills, and trains with national coaches in Halifax. This past week he was recognized for his accomplishments, being awarded the Premier's Award for his talent and efforts.

I would ask all members of this House to join me in offering congratulations to Shannon Francis.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate a talented student from my district who has been honoured for her skills in public speaking.

Mr. Speaker, Denika Cox, a Grade 11 student at St. Joseph's All Grade School in Terrenceville, has recently won a regional speak-off competition sponsored by the Province's Lions Clubs.

Mr. Speaker, Denika's speech, which covered a very important issue of the day, Video Lottery Terminal addictions, was good enough to take home first place and win an opportunity to compete in the Atlantic speak-off which is taking place May 14 in Halifax, Nova Scotia. Mr. Speaker, all who know Denika know of her tremendous skills and know she will be a tremendous competitor at this Atlantic competition.

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Denika on winning this regional speak-off, and ask all members of this hon. House to join with me in wishing her the best of luck at the Atlantic speak-off taking place next week.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, let me thank my colleagues on both sides of the House for leave to present the following statement.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Winter Games Lanes Men's Bowling League in Lewisporte who were crowned provincial champions at the Newfoundland and Labrador Classified Five-Pin Bowling Championship on April 10. This is the first time in approximately fifteen years that a team from Lewisporte area has been victorious at the provincial championship.

My congratulations are also extended to the women's team from the Lewisporte area who placed a formidable third in the same tournament.

The men's team consisted of Jamie Dawe, Newman Harris, Allan Miles, Chris Sceviour and Wally Squires. They will be representing the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador at the Canadian Championships in Calgary on May 28 and May 29.

On behalf of the residents of Lewisporte District, I extend congratulations to the men's team on their recent victory and wish them continued success at the upcoming Canadian Championships.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last week I attended a volunteer dinner in my district honouring the many people of the Labrador Straits who give their time and energy to keep the services in their communities running.

Mr. Speaker, the hospital auxiliary was one of those groups that were honoured for their service and fundraising efforts to the Forteau Health Centre and the new Labrador-Grenfell Authority. The group, through fundraising, assisted with the purchase of a Triage cardiac device reader, and also donated $5,000 to the Grenfell Foundation. Mr. Gary Newell and Mr. John Budgell from the Grenfell Hospital Board in St. Anthony were on hand to accept the contribution.

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the Women's Auxiliary, Mrs. Ursella Flynn and Mr. Cornelius Linstead and all the volunteers for the difference they are making in the lives of many individuals and families.

I also want to acknowledge and offer thanks to all the volunteers in the region for the valuable contributions they make.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Trinity North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On Saturday, April 30, I attended the Annual Awards Night of the Royal Canadian Legion Branch 27 in Clarenville.

Mr. Speaker, the Clarenville Branch of the Royal Canadian Legion has been serving veterans, their families, and the surrounding communities for fifty-four years now. During this special awards night, presentations were made to a number of Legion members, including Legionnaire of the Year to Mr. Jim Tilley, and an honourary life membership was bestowed upon Mr. John Barry. Mr. Barry has served the Royal Canadian Legion for a total of thirty-nine years and has been involved in all aspects of Legion activities. Mr. Don Pelley, the Branch President, described him as a true leader and a loyal and faithful Legionnaire who is very deserving of a life membership.

Mr. Speaker, as MHAs we all have the privilege of presenting many awards to special people in our districts. However, on Saturday night I was truly honoured to be part of a very special presentation to a Second World War veteran, Mr. Levi Stringer of Adeytown, who, due to an administrative error, did not receive the appropriate recognition for his contribution in the war.

Mr. Speaker, I was truly honoured to have read the following statement to a large gathering of comrades, family and friends. The statement reads: By virtue of your wartime service, you have been found eligible to receive awards as follows: 1939 to 1945 Star Award, and the Canadian Volunteer Service Medal and Clasp 1939 to 1945 War Medals. I take great pleasure in presenting you with these medals, along with the certificate of authority, number 9296, authorizing you to wear these ribbons and awards.

Mr. Speaker, these medals were pinned on by Mr. Stringer's oldest and youngest grandchildren, Kim Dimmer and Jason Stringer. This special moment was shared with his wife, Alma; his sons, Oswald and Wesley and their families.

Mr. Speaker, 2005 has been designated the Year of the Veteran. A very fitting time to publicly acknowledge Mr. Stringer's wartime service and send a strong message to him and other veterans that our generation will not forget the contribution they have made.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inform hon. members about a very important national campaign, Emergency Preparedness Week, which runs from May 1 to May 7. This annual event is dedicated to raising awareness among Canadians on the importance of preparing for potential emergencies.

Over the years we have personally seen the devastation from emergency situations. In 2001, we were impacted by the terrorist attacks in the United States and, as well, torrential rain from Hurricane Gabrielle caused extensive flooding in many areas of St. John's. In 2003, water and ice quickly engulfed one third of the Town of Badger. Also, in 2003, heavy rains caused extensive damage in Corner Brook and many West Coast municipalities. Other areas of our Province have also suffered from localized flooding or threat of flooding, most recently in Steady Brook last December and parts of the Burin Peninsula last month.

Mr. Speaker, emergency preparedness begins with the individual. Each and every one of us must be prepared in the event of an emergency situation. We are all responsible for emergency preparedness whether it is on a municipal, provincial or federal level. The effects of disaster, whether natural or human-caused, can greatly reduce and impact the basic necessitates of life. Access to communication, transportation, food, clean water, finances, education, health care, housing and employment can all be affected during a disaster situation.

Although we cannot always protect ourselves when an emergency situation arises, we can be better prepared for it. There are three simple steps we should all take to help us be prepared. First, we should all keep an emergency supply kit in our homes and cars. Second, we should also make a family emergency plan so that everyone will know what to do and how to contact each other in an emergency. Last, we should learn about past disasters that have happened where we live and work so that we can be ready if they happen again.

I would also encourage municipalities in Newfoundland and Labrador to ensure that their emergency plans are up to date. For those municipalities which do not yet have emergency plans, I would encourage them to develop their plans as soon as possible. We have seen how effective emergency plans can be from the recent EMCO fire in Mount Pearl.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage everyone to visit the Emergency Preparedness Web site at www.EPweek.ca to learn how you can be better prepared in the event of a disaster.

Knowing the risk you face is the first step to being prepared. It is up to each of us to learn about and prepare for potential emergencies. Prepare now! Learn now!

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the minister for an advanced copy of the statement. I well remember in 2001, Mr. Speaker, when we had the terrorist attack on the Twin Towers in New York City. Being Minister of Municipal Affairs at that time and the Minister Responsible for EMO, quickly we soon realized that in the City of St. John's and surrounding municipalities that the emergency plan that was in place soon kicked in and it was just astronomical the work that was done.

I can also remember, of course, right on the heels of that was Gabrielle here in St. John's, tremendous flooding. Then compounded on top of that, of course, was a major flood in Badger. All of these three gave us, the emergency groups in the Province along with government, a tremendous advantage in being able to prepare for those that would come in the future. I know there was a successful audit done at the end of the 2001 terrorist attack, and I am sure that it was done on Badger, and also done for Gabrielle as well.

I agree with the minister, the emergency begins with us, as individuals, but then after we are somewhat prepared, then it is incumbent upon the municipality, it is incumbent upon the Province and incumbent upon the country as a whole to put practice into place such that when these disasters occur, whether they are planned or natural, whatever the case might be, then we are well prepared for it. The last four words, I think, really sums it up very well: Prepare now! Learn how!

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

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advanced copy of his statement. I guess we can all agree that the most important thing to be able to respond to an emergency is to plan in the event of knowing what to do. These plans in our community should also be made public so that the public in the different communities around our Province would know how to respond and know what was going on in the event of something happening.

Mr. Speaker, I recall in 1982, January 18, in Labrador West, we had an emergency situation during a storm with a loss of power where temperatures went below minus 130, then the devices that were recording temperatures froze up. So we really do not know how cold it went to, but the Armed Forces were on alert to evacuate the entire community. The trailer court at the time, with more than 2,000 people, were moved down to the schools and the hospitals and other buildings in town that had heat. The lack of preparation at the time led to a bit of chaos.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

MR. COLLINS: By leave, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MR. COLLINS: The lack of preparedness at that time led to a bit of chaos for awhile. So it is important that plans are put in place, but it is equally as important that the public are aware of these plans and how they will be carried out.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers.

The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the North American Occupational Safety and Health Week, or NAOSH week as it is referred to internationally.

This is a week set aside every May in Canada, the United States and Mexico to promote awareness of the importance of safe and healthy workplaces.

Mr. Speaker, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians should all be particularly proud of this international celebration to promote workplace safety. What started out as a local, week-long initiative here in St. John's nearly twenty years ago has grown into the international event we know today.

The Canadian Society of Safety Engineers are the champions of NAOSH week and it was here with the local Chapter of this society that NAOSH week was born.

This is a testament to the outstanding contributions Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have made, and continue to make, in the field of workplace safety and in many other fields of expertise around the world.

This year, Mr. Speaker, the theme for NAOSH week is, "EQUIP, EDUCATE and EMPOWER".

This theme highlights the importance of using the proper tools for the task at hand, making sure workers have the right knowledge to do the task safely and that they have the commitment to work safely every day.

Mr. Speaker, initiatives such as NAOSH week allow us to reflect on our own workplace practices and to renew our commitment to working safely every day.

This week, across our Province and across North America, celebrations and activities will be occurring in workplaces large and small to promote safe work practices. I encourage everyone to use this week to do something special in their workplace to renew their resolve to improving workplace safety.

Together, government, employers and employees can make Newfoundland and Labrador a safe and a productive place to work.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for the advance copy of her statement.

We, too, the official Opposition, congratulate the local chapter of the Canadian Society for Safety Engineers for this great initiative. Again, as the minister said, this is a real testimony to the outstanding contributions of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, considering twenty years later that this event has become international in scope. I can only encourage the society to continue on with this great initiative and promote safety in our workplaces.

Already this week, unfortunately, has been marred. The Community of Carbonear has lost a native son, a twenty-five year old young man, in an industrial accident in Alberta. Mr. Shawn O'Keefe has succumbed to injuries in Leduc, Alberta. The whole community is grieving the loss of this young man. Unfortunately, it has marred NAOSH week for us but it also emphasizes the importance that this international initiative that was brought forward by the society of engineers here in Newfoundland and Labrador be continued and promoted, and I encourage everyone to participate and do more for occupational health and safety.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We, too, would like to congratulate the Canadian Society of Safety Engineers, particularly the local chapter in our Province, for their work in this area. It is important, Mr. Speaker, that occupational health and safety is a worldwide concern, not just provincially, nationally, or in North America.

Our fishing industry and our mining industry, for years, have seen more than their share of tragedies because of a lack of occupational health and safety measures being in place. It is important to acknowledge and note that we need to do more aggressive work on occupational health and safety on a national and international level, when we look at the mining operations in China where people are dying every day, in Siberia and places that do not have standards set that protect workers. We have seen our own in this country, Mr. Speaker, with Westray.

It is time that this issue of occupational health and safety is made an international concern and that we are in a position to take a leading role in that.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I am pleased to inform Members of the House of Assembly that on Friday past the provincial government officially signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the federal government to address climate change.

Climate change is a challenging environmental issue. It is an issue that this Province does not take lightly. We are committed to taking action on climate change and doing our part to create a cleaner, healthier environment and improve the quality of life for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

Mr. Speaker, government's commitment to address climate change was recently demonstrated in Budget 2005 when $300,000 was announced for climate change initiatives. Signing an MOU with the federal government is another important step forward that demonstrates our continued commitment to address climate change and to work with the federal government on this issue.

The MOU allows the provincial and federal governments to work co-operatively in developing effective solutions to address climate change, as well as identifying potential opportunities, such as the development of hydroelectricity and wind power. Both of these would have positive economic benefits for the Province.

Mr. Speaker, the MOU outlines general principles, areas of mutual concern, and co-operative initiatives to address climate change. Priority areas in the MOU include reviewing the Lower Churchill project as a potential contributor to achieving national and provincial climate change objectives, reducing greenhouse gas emissions through renewable and alternative energy development and energy management and efficiency in government facilities and operations, research and development on climate change impacts and adaptation strategies, as well as increasing public awareness and education on climate change.

Mr. Speaker, besides addressing climate change through the MOU, government is also committed to a provincial Climate Change Action Plan. We are currently finalizing our action plan, which will outline a path forward in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to the potential impacts of climate change.

Mr. Speaker, government is committed to making honest efforts toward meaningful improvement in our air quality and in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Safeguarding our environment is a priority for us. We will continue to take action to achieve a healthier environment through initiatives highlighted in the MOU as well as our own provincial Climate Change Action Plan.

Mr. Speaker, the MOU we have signed with the federal government is another clear demonstration that Newfoundland and Labrador is serious about addressing climate change, and we look forward to a productive working relationship with our federal colleagues on this important issue. Through the MOU, we will bring together innovative ideas to help create a cleaner environment while also helping to ensure a strong and sustainable economy.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the hon. minister for an advance copy of his statement.

What we see here today is much ado about nothing. A Memorandum of Understanding does not really mean very much. I am looking forward to the minister's memorandum of action, because this minister has created nothing within the department since he became the minister. I anticipated today, when he signed this agreement, that there would be an agreement that we would reduce the emissions at the Holyrood generating plant.

At the rate this government is going in Newfoundland and Labrador, we won't have to worry about the climate because there will be nobody here.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, I am glad we are hearing something from this government on climate change, but I would be a lot happier if he were tabling a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding to see what commitments have actually been made.

We have a terrible record in this Province on this issue. This government, when in Opposition, were not supportive of the Kyoto Accord which was ratified more than two years ago. Last December we got an F from the Canadian Energy Efficiency Alliance, which identified the Holyrood generating station as one of the top five polluters in Canada when it comes to CO2 emissions, so we have a long way to go, Mr. Speaker. They have been dragging their heels on this issue. We have not seen their Climate Change Action Plan, and we would like to see some specifics following up on any commitments that have been made. So we look forward to seeing that happen.

I will note that the new arrangement made for the federal Budget by the federal NDP sees some money available for a new program to provide energy efficiency for low-income housing. I hope this government adopts that as one of their plans and give Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro a mandate to start promoting conservation and using these programs to cut down on energy use in the Province and greenhouse gases that go with it.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers.

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we have a serious situation looming in Grand Falls-Windsor and indeed, all of Central Newfoundland, since Abitibi Consolidated made their recent announcement relating to its operations in this Province. They have stated their intention to close number seven paper machine in Grand Falls-Windsor. We know the Minister of Natural Resources met with the company on December 15, and we know that the Premier and the minister met with the company on April 16.

Mr. Speaker, given these recent meetings with the company, did the minister have any advance notice of this decision? If so, what action did the minister take to try to prevent this announcement last week?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

First of all - I will answer the member's question in a moment - we are extremely disappointed with the decision that Abitibi took. Not only did we meet with the company at various points over the last several years, the member knows, the community of Grand Falls-Windsor and surrounding areas know, the community of Stephenville knows, the unions associated with both paper companies know the position of government. In this House our position was laid out clearly.

First of all, the only advance notice that we had of the decision came 9:30 the night before, and that was a courtesy call provided to me by the Vice-President of the company, Mr. Paul Planet in advance of, and I guess releasing it the next day for the stock markets and security exchanges. Having said that, let me be very clear, and we were clear in this House, that with respect to Abitibi and its operations in Grand Falls, this government will enforce - make no mistake about that - this government will and intends to enforce the spirit and intention of Bill 27, which is simply this: If Abitibi moves to close down number seven paper machine, we will revoke the licences associated with Abitibi.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It appears that communications were one way.

Mr. Speaker, is this government going to accept this decision as just another business case and allow Abitibi to do whatever they want? Just like in Harbour Breton, the company depends on access to resources owned by the people of this Province. In this case, the provincial government has complete jurisdiction over access to the resource.

Mr. Speaker, this government is on record as saying they intend to enforce the provisions of Bill 27, brought in by the previous Liberal government, which gives government the power to link a two-machine operation to wood access. Will you now insist the company live up to this legislation and keep the profitable number seven paper machine - as indicated by the mill manager last week - in operation in Grand Falls-Windsor?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, we have been consistent. I answered them. I apologize for answering the second question that the member was going to ask in my first response.

Let's be clear on this, and everyone needs to understand it, this is a serious situation facing Central Newfoundland and Labrador, affecting about thirty-four communities that could potentially involve 220 people laid off. This is extremely serious, and I understand that the member knows how serious it is. Let there be no mistake about it, before Abitibi made their decision known to government and to the public, through this Legislature, privately to them, we have been on the record empathically saying that Bill 27, the penalty provisions associated with that bill - in other words, if Abitibi fails to live up to operating a two-machine operation near production levels for the previous three years, before that legislation came into effect, the moment they decide to close number seven will be the moment that we decide to revoke the licences which represent 60 per cent of Abitibi's wood supply. They will not get it directly through the front door and we will not create a situation to give it to them in the backdoor either, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, actually, if this goes ahead it will affect anywhere from thirty to forty-seven communities in Central Newfoundland.

Mr. Speaker, the decision related to the closure of number seven paper machine would mean the loss of up to 150 direct jobs in our mill in Grand Falls-Windsor and close to the same number in the woodland operations. These are jobs that are in rural Newfoundland. Mr. Speaker, you are talking about the loss of close to 300 jobs, not counting the indirect jobs in communities in Central Newfoundland. Is this going to be another example of this government washing its hands of rural areas of our Province? That is what I want your commitment on today, Mr. Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, we have been complimented by the local community leadership in Central Newfoundland for the stand that we have taken. The local unions associated with it, and the leadership of those unions, have supported the stand that we have taken.

I can assure the member, as I have privately, and I will do it again publicly today, that with respect to Bill 27 it is government's intention - it was, it is, and it will be government's intention - to enforce the law of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Government has set a precedent by overriding the responsibilities of the Western health board, exercising its authority in dismissing recommendations of the Hay report simply because, Mr. Speaker, it was in the best interest of political colleagues on that day.

The media editorial states: It is obvious that the government, the provincial government, and not the health authorities, are pulling the strings with respect to this report.

You cannot have it both ways, I say. I ask the minister today to do the same for the people on the Northern Peninsula, the people in Southern Labrador, and exercise your authority, throw out the controversial recommendations in the HayGroup report.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I was asked that question in the House, in Estimates, and I will answer it again here. We are going to work with the board. I spoke with the Chair of the Western board, and we worked with the Regional Integrated Health Authorities to move forward, in effect, the best practice and best service and most efficiently delivered for the people of the Labrador-Grenfell board, as we will with any board in the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, this government is setting a double standard as it relates to health care in this Province. Last week, the Member for St. George's-Stephenville East cited women's health as the reason to maintain full obstetrical services in her own district. The Mayor of St. Anthony is quoted in the media, saying that St. Anthony wants the same treatment. The minister knows that. She talked to him on the telephone last week. So, why isn't she pushing the envelope for the women of the Northern Peninsula, the women of Southern Labrador, and committing to maintaining full obstetrical and gynecology services at Dr. Charles S. Curtis Memorial Hospital in St. Anthony?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We are going to work with the boards to deliver service to all people of the Province regardless of gender. This year's Budget saw one of the largest infusions, $113 million extra, into health care in this Province. We saw the largest single infusion in the history of our Province in public health in this year's Budget, and we are going to deliver the health care services to the people regardless of gender. We are going to work to deal with any issues unique to gender. We will deal with the boards in carrying out and effecting the best practice and the best service for the people in our Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Perhaps, Mr. Speaker, I should be asking my questions to the Member for The Straits & White Bay North. Perhaps the member can tell me why he is accepting a double standard in his district as opposed to what is happening on the West Coast of Newfoundland.

Mr. Speaker, the HayGroup also recommended cutting physicians at the Forteau Health Centre and referring the 3,000 residents of the Labrador Straits to the Blanc Sablon Hospital in the Province of Quebec. This recommendation, Mr. Speaker, is in no way justified in improving health care in that particular area.

I ask the minister to tell the people of Southern Labrador today that the recommendation in the HayGroup report, which will force them to go to another province to seek health care, will be thrown out and he will make sure that it is done.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The member knows full well that the Hay report was commissioned on the Grenfell. Since that, the Regional Integrated Health Authorities take in the Labrador-Grenfell region. There is a new dynamic, and the new board in that area will work with the department to effect the best service. We are going to focus on the best outcomes and the best delivery of service for the people in Labrador, people on this Island here, regardless of where they live in this Province. That is what we are committed to, and we are going to focus on the quality of service that people are getting.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: .Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, over the weekend and again last night, government has been installing numerous security cameras both inside and outside the Confederation Building. There have been reports to our office that there have been cameras installed on the top of the flagpoles in the parking lot, and that fibre optic cables are streaming pictures directly to the offices of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary.

I ask the Minister of Transportation and Works: Can he confirm that these new security measures are in place, and if there are other new security measures that we may not yet be aware of?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works, and Minister Responsible for Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, what I can confirm is that there is a committee of officials that advise us on security matters related to public buildings, including this building. That committee has representation from my department, from the Department of Justice, and from security experts -

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes or no?

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I will answer the question in my own way. The member need not get hot under the collar.

I cannot confirm whether cameras have been installed on top of flagpoles or out in the parking lot, or anything of that nature. That part of the question I will take under advisement. Generally speaking, there have been some new security measures.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the undertaking to take it under advisement and get the answers for us.

Mr. Speaker, each of these new security devices - the extra Royal Newfoundland Constabulary officers being stationed constantly at the Confederation Building, and the overtime of security officials - surely must be a costly undertaking. I ask the minister: Could he please advise this House what the associated cost of these additional security features will be to the taxpayers of this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works, and Minister Responsible for Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, it is quite common in our regular budget process that we provide for overtime and additional help when it is needed during the course of the fiscal year. If we go beyond the present budgetary allocations then, of course, the House will be advised of that matter at the appropriate time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I suggest he had better start advising the House, because in the Estimates there were no allocations for additional security measures.

Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that this government seems to be caught up in a police state mentality and wants to secretly monitor the actions of innocent people who might never break the law. They should instead be addressing the real issue of production quotas so that these protests will no longer be necessary.

I ask the minister: Wouldn't it be a better and more acceptable and cost-effective solution if the government just removed the production quotas from the table until consultations with the fish harvesters take place, as was promised in writing by the government?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the two issues are unrelated. We have heard -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the minister.

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the issue of raw material sharing is an issue that the decision was made on earlier this year, after significant discussion internally in Cabinet and a significant evaluation of reports that government had been provided with over the past number of years.

Mr. Speaker, we had heard the fishermen's union say that they were interested in a compromise. I believe, and I think that everybody can see that the government made a significant offer on Friday past to move this back from a two-year pilot project to a one-year pilot project with a significant oversight committee that would deal with the management of the system during the season and make a determination as to where we go in 2005 and beyond. Mr. Speaker, that is what comprise is about, not capitulation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess there is not much credibility to any answer the minister is going to give, if he wants us to believe that all the security we see in this building today, and have for the last three weeks, has nothing to do with the production quotas, that it was planned anyway by the government.

Mr. Speaker, with respect directly to the crab fishery, there has been much said in the last two months, since the announcement on March 4. I believe we need to set the record straight, and I will ask the minister to answer a few questions to avoid any confusion.

I ask the Minister of Fisheries: Will he confirm that the Dunne report stated that government should have the support of 75 per cent of processors before implementing production quotas, yes or no?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The answer is no. The Dunne report said that government should proceed if there is 75 per cent, it didn't say we should not proceed if there is not.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am glad I wasn't recognized before, because I was laughing that hard I wouldn't be able to get my question out. You must have gotten a call from Houston, I would say, to suggest that answer.

Mr. Speaker, will the Minister of Fisheries now confirm and admit that there is no longer 75 per cent support amongst processors for this ill-advised scheme, yes or no?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that there probably is 75 per cent. We understand that Quinlan's have pulled out of ASP, we understand that Daley's have pulled out of ASP, and we also understand that they still support the concept of Raw Material Sharing, although maybe not exactly some of the requirements we would like to see under Raw Material Sharing, such as disclosure of invoices, for example.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is not getting any clearer, that I can see, but I will continue on.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Fisheries: Did the Dunne report recommend that there be consultation with fish harvesters before moving forward with any production quotas, yes or no?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Dunne report said that any proposal on Raw Material Sharing, the implementation of any Raw Material Sharing system, should deal with the legitimate and substantive and reasonable concerns of fish harvesters and plant workers. That, Mr. Speaker, on March 2, was what we were trying to do when we rolled out our plan, when we identified changes to the Fishing Industry Collective Bargaining Act, when we identified the requirement for disclosure of sales invoices, when we identified a freeze on permanent transfers of shares, when we identified a two-year pilot project to work out the remainder of the issues before moving to a permanent system, if a permanent system ever came into being, Mr. Speaker. That is what the Dunne report said. The Dunne report said that we should deal with those concerns. It did not say anything about seeking an agreement on all of this, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I did not use the word agreement. I asked if it said there should be consultation. I will give him the answer. Yes, it did say there should be consultation.

Let's see him try to deflect from this one. I ask the Minister of Fisheries, did he personally, in writing, promise on April 21, 2004 - some four months, almost, after they accepted the Dunne report - to consult with fish harvesters to lead the consultation before implementing any production quotas? Yes or no?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, I did. As I have indicated on many occasions before, I did say that. And, no, Mr. Speaker, we did not have the debate that we had indicated we would have in the fall of the year. We did not have the debate.

Mr. Speaker, when we looked at the situation this winter we determined that the best thing to do was make the decision on whether we were going to have raw material sharing or not. Then when we rolled it out on March 2, we indicated to all in the industry that we were prepared to take the time from then until the fishery opened to try and deal with the concerns that people might have in the implementation of the system and work with that as we move forward with the pilot project.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I ask the minister then, now that he has confirmed that he did not have the consultation that he promised, can he advise the House, and the people of the Province, what new information came to light to make him break his word in writing to the fish harvesters that he would consult with them?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, April 21 was when we were trying to get a crab fishery going. Mr. Speaker, I can tell you, as I said in a press conference on Friday, when we were trying to get the shrimp fishery straightened out last year we had an undertaking that we were trying to bring together the Gregory/Broderick Report. When that was not coming together we tried to put together an auction. When people got so opposed to that, that they wanted to go back to the Gregory/Broderick Report, we parked that. When people could not agree after there was a price settled in Final Offer Selection - when people could not agree on the opening of the fishery, Mr. Speaker, and it remained tied up for another three weeks, they came back to me and asked me if I would go back and implement the auction, which we subsequently tried to do and spent $100,000 developing it. Two days before we were ready to roll out the auction, both parties agreed to a collective agreement. Both parties agreed to the implementation of the Gregory/Broderick Report after they asked us to do something completely different.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So you can understand why he is not trusted this year. He duped them last year with a promise to consult and then changed his mind.

Mr. Speaker, does the Minister of Fisheries agree with former Progressive Conservation Cabinet Minister, Tom Hickey, now President of the Newfoundland and Labrador First Party, who has said publicly, and his advice to the government - that he supports, by the way: is that the production quota system should be taken off the table. Consultations should take place as promised in writing and then, and only then, after consultations take place should the government possibly try a new system next year. Does he agree with his supporter, Mr. Hickey, or not?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

No, Mr. Speaker, I do not agree with that. We made a move on Friday past and we figured it was a compromise, a move that will see - let's look at what we are talking about now - a three-month pilot project that essentially means, for the vast majority of the fish harvesters in this Province, eight to ten trips on crab this year; twenty to twenty-five days on the water under a raw material sharing system with a committee, with an independent Chair, agreed to by all parties, with representation from fishermen and plant workers, representation from processors and representation from government, to determine what should happen after the 2005 season and beyond.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Does the minister agree with former Progressive Conservation Fisheries Minister, Mr. Jim Morgan, who has said - he is currently, by the way, the President of the Newfoundland and Labrador Rural Rights and Boat Owners Association - that the solution now is: Take the production quota system off the table, do the consultations that were promised in writing, then and only then, try a system in the crab fishery. Does he agree with Mr. Morgan?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

No, Mr. Speaker, I do not agree with Mr. Morgan either, and before he gets a chance to ask, I do not agree with Mr. Efford. And I do not agree with the kind of suggestions that get made from the other side of the floor when they continually say: Stall, in the face of opposition, and shove it out to another study.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me ask one more question. Does the minister agree with his colleague sitting just to his right, the MHA for Placentia & St. Mary's, the former Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Education - he is not anymore - that the production quota system should be taken off the table, they should do the consultation as he promised in writing and then maybe try this system in the future? Yes or no?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: No, Mr. Speaker, I do not, but I will tell you who I do agree with. I do agree with Eddie Fillier, the Mayor of Englee, who is a strong supporter of that party, who thinks that the production quota should be tried. I do agree with Holly Reeves who thinks it should be tried. I agree with a good many people in Newfoundland and Labrador who believe that a three-month pilot project -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TAYLOR: - on raw material sharing, with an independent committee to determine what happens, is a very fair and reasonable compromise.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the government, the minister and the Premier have put a lot of faith in Mr. Dunne's report. I ask the minister: Will he call Mr. Dunne today and ask him what his recommendation would be to try to get the crab fishery started today's date, May 3, 2005? Will he call him today and ask him what he would recommend to the government at this very moment?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I do not mind calling Mr. Dunne and asking him for his suggestions. I can tell you, we have been talking to Mr. Dunne over the past couple of months trying to see if he could help facilitate the moving forward of this. Mr. Dunne, as I recall then, was tangled up in some other work for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TAYLOR: - and has no interest in this. So, Mr. Speaker, if he wants to talk to Mr. Dunne, he can talk to Mr. Dunne. We received his report on December 15. We took it under advisement. We made a determination on what should be done with it and on Friday past we offered a very suitable compromise, a very fair compromise on raw material sharing that will see the people in this Province, the harvesters of this Province, fish for eight to ten trips; eight to ten trips under a raw material sharing system lasting for about three months, from right now until the end of the season, and that is what we stand by.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

Mr. Speaker, is the minister now convinced, as a result of the demonstration by 5,000 people yesterday, that the fish harvesters of this Province are not supportive of his plans for raw material sharing or production plant quotas?

Secondly, why does he consider a compromise, to shove down their throats a totally unacceptable plan for one season instead of two seasons? If that his idea of a compromise, Mr. Speaker, it is no wonder this dispute is not resolved.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, in the absence of viable alternatives, of which none have come forward in the past number of years, there was one alternative that I put forward last year to raw material sharing when there was great opposition in the industry to implementing it in the shrimp fishery. I proposed that we implement an auction; an auction which, by the way, was recommended by David Vardy back in 1997-1998 when the Final Offer Selection study was done, which was never, ever implemented, never, ever acted upon.

We spent $150,000 last year in shrimp and crab, trying to implement an auction. There is no auction going in this industry thus far, Mr. Speaker. There were many meetings and there was a great deal of discussion and a great deal of facilitation to try to bring an auction to pass.

Mr. Speaker, in the absence of a viable alternative, we are standing by the raw material sharing system.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister should recall that an auction system was one of the systems that he said he was prepared to discuss and consult with fish harvesters on, in his letters last spring.

Mr. Speaker, will the minister not admit and acknowledge that his proposal cannot work and will not work without the co-operation of the fish harvesters of this Province? Will he not acknowledge that here today and try to find a solution that involves them, inside of shoving something down their throats?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, and after April 21 last spring, when I indicated that we were prepared to discuss raw material sharing and an auction and options such as that, Mr. Speaker, as I just said, we spent $150,000 trying to implement an auction in a shrimp fishery based on a recommendation of certain people in the industry. We spent $50,000 after that, Mr. Speaker, trying to develop it for the cod fishery in 3Ps, with consultation with the FFAW, processors working with the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and do we have an auction in place yet? No, Mr. Speaker, we do not.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is also for the Minister of Fisheries.

The minister just mentioned Englee. For two weeks I have been trying to get an answer from the minister if the plant in Englee will be open for crab this year, so I ask him: Will the plant in Englee be processing crab in this season?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am sure, if he has had any knowledge of what happened in Englee last year, when Occupational Health and Safety closed down the operation, he would probably know the condition of the plant - probably the same condition, or very similar to the condition that it was in when he was the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, when the FFAW or a certain representative of the FFAW tried to negotiate an agreement between St. Anthony and Ramea for the transfer of a crab licence that he subsequently denied.

Mr. Speaker, the situation in Englee is very much the same now as it was then. There is a footing that was poured at the time when he was minister, and nothing has happened with it since.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I take it the answer to that question is no.

Mr. Speaker, three years ago, when I attempted to transfer a crab licence from Ramea to St. Anthony, all the processors and the plant workers were vehemently opposed to it. In fact, they stood on the steps of Confederation Building, and amongst the crowd that assembled there were most of his colleagues at the time.

I ask the minister: What have you given the processors around this Province to buy their silence on the issuing of a crab licence to St. Anthony?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That does not even warrant a response, anything as low as that, anything that is as low, any comments that are as low as that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I will say this: The people of Englee and the Mayor of Englee, for example, support this just as I support it, because it is a lasting solution for the fishing industry in Newfoundland and Labrador if it works as we think it will, and not, Mr. Speaker, in the short term (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time for Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity North.

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, I want to table the report of the Social Services Committee.

Mr. Speaker, the Social Services Committee have considered the matters to them referred and have approved, without amendment, the following heads of expenditure: Education; Health and Community Services; Justice; Municipal and Provincial Affairs; Human Resources, Labour and Employment; and Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation.

MR. SPEAKER: When shall this report be received?

MR. E. BYRNE: Later today, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Later today.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

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

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

I have a couple of notices.

First of all, I want to give notice - and this is with the concurrence of the Opposition House Leader and I would hope the Leader of the NDP - that tomorrow's Private Members' Day we would be debating the resolution brought forward by the Member for Trinity North dealing with war veterans.

I believe that, on our next Private Members' Day, when we give notice, we will be dealing with the notice as brought forward by the Member for Gander dealing with the weather station.

A further notice, Mr. Speaker, that not on tomorrow but on Thursday - where tomorrow is Private Members' Day - in accordance with Standing Order 11, I will now serve notice that the House not close at 5:30 p.m. nor at 10:00 p.m.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motions.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

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

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition on behalf of the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador. This petition is against the actions of this government regarding what they are doing with the raw material sharing system of this Province, the imposition that they are making. These people are asking the government to stop, look at this, take off their hobnailed boots, and stop treating them like criminals because they are trying to protest and get their own views across.

Mr. Speaker, the people of this Province have a right to speak. They have a right to speak through us here on the floor, and I have been asked to present this petition and ask the government to stop.

The Premier had a chance on Friday, when he said that he was willing to take a year off his two-year plan. If he wanted to do that, and he wanted to be effective in that, he would have taken the first year off, if he wanted to do that. If he was acting in good faith, he would have gotten on open line with Bill Rowe on Friday afternoon and said: Look, I will hold out an olive branch here, if the fishermen will go back to work, go back to their boats, get the plant workers back in their plants, providing honest income for their families.

That is all these people are asking for. The Premier had that opportunity, but what did he do? He took the second year off. That is too ridiculous to talk about. If you are taking a year off, take the first year, allow some breathing space for the people to get consulted and to allow them to get their minds around what the Premier and the Minister of Fisheries are trying to do.

I would like to go back to say that it is the Premier - because the Minister of Fisheries, in his comments here today, in his answers, clearly does not know where he is going because he is dancing around. He is like a farmer out in the cow field in the nighttime, stepping so lightly and so carefully.

Mr. Speaker, the Dunne report that the minister speaks of, says, implement this with a minimum of 75 per cent of the processors.

With the withdrawal of Daley's on Friday afternoon, we are down now to about 50 per cent of the processors involved in this.

AN HON. MEMBER: And none of the harvesters.

MR. SWEENEY: And none of the harvesters. Not a harvester in this Province have I spoken with or heard from who has agreed to this. This is a pure draconian measure. I cannot believe it.

To make matters worse, when somebody stands up and says to the Premier: Mr. Premier, I think you are wrong, let's talk about this. No, sir, not a chance. What does he do? Locks up the building, brings out the police, all kinds of false accusations - spitting from the galleries and everything else. Well, I have sat here in this House and I have not been spit on, and I have not seen anybody over there spit on. It is totally ridiculous, trying to make criminals out of the honest, good, hard-working people of this Province.

AN HON. MEMBER: Fires an MHA because he dares speak out.

MR. SWEENEY: Fires an MHA from his own party because he dares speak out. Mr. Speaker, this stuff is barbaric. It goes back to the days -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) guts enough over there to speak up. Danny's puppets.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

MR. SWEENEY: By leave?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave to conclude?

AN HON. MEMBER: No.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been denied.

Further petitions?

The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, rise today to present a petition on behalf of the harvesters and the plant workers in this Province who are calling upon the government to withdraw this production quota plan from the table, allow them to go back to work on the water and in the fish plants around this Province, and only implement the quota system if and when the harvesters of this Province agree to it.

Mr. Speaker, I spoke here last week, wondering aloud, about why the Minister of Fisheries would try to impose a production quota upon the harvesters of this Province against their will. I couldn't believe that an individual who took great pride in the fact that he was a fisherman himself, in the fact that he was a member of the FFAW, that he was an employee of the FFAW, and he spoke so proudly about being a member of this organization, that yet he turned his back on the same people he so proudly worked for just a few short years ago.

Mr. Speaker, I have wondered and I have listened for the past three weeks and I have come to the realization that it is not the Minister of Fisheries, the former member of the FFAW, who is making this decision. It is the Premier of the Province who is making this decision, and he is telling the Minister of Fisheries, you carry out this decision or you take a hike, like he did to the Member representing St. Mary's.

Mr. Speaker, the problem we have, and the problem that is still on the table, is that the Premier doesn't know anything about the fishery. Absolutely nothing! Not only that, Mr. Speaker, but he has no respect - absolutely no respect! - for those involved in that industry. The Premier of this Province came out of a boardroom where he worked all his life and that is the kind of a province he wants to run, somewhere where he looks across the table from his employees and says: You do as I do, or there is the door. Mr. Speaker, he has no respect - absolutely no respect! - for the people of this Province who make a living using their hands, like the harvesters and the plant workers in this Province. He has no respect whatsoever for them because they don't wear a shirt and tie and they don't sit in a boardroom. The ones he has respect for in the fishery, I say to members opposite, are the processors, because you will find those in the boardrooms in St. John's and you will find them on the cocktail circuit with their shirts and ties and their suits.

Mr. Speaker, I say to the members opposite - in fact, I beg those, especially those who live in rural districts - that you take the lead from the Member who represents St. Mary's, take the lead and stand up to this Premier and say: Premier, I too have constituents who are involved in this fishery and they deserve the same respect as the people who hang out in the boardrooms of this Province. So, I beg you, to follow the lead of the Member for St. Mary's and do what is right so that the people of this Province - two months they have been fighting now against this production scheme and for two months you people have sat silently on the opposite side of the floor not speaking for a soul. I say do the right thing, remove it from the table and let the people go out and work!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

[Comments in the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I am asking the visitors in the gallery to respect the Chair and the House.

[Comments from the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair wishes to advise visitors to the gallery that they should not show approval or disapproval for anything that is said on the floor of the House. We certainly welcome you to visit our Chamber. We wish you to stay as long as you wish, however, we have to ask you for your co-operation. The Chair must assure that Parliament functions and it functions properly.

Further petitions.

The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I stand today, Mr. Speaker, to present yet another petition on behalf of the harvesters, the plant workers, and yes, now even the businesspeople in my district who are beginning to speak out because they are feeling the economic crunch that is coming due to the plans that are taking place with this production quota.

Mr. Speaker, I want to go back to comments that were made by the Premier last week in Hansard in reference to this position. He said, "We adopted a plan here. It is a plan that has been well thought out. It is a plan that is based on discussion. It is a plan that is based on the Dunne Report and the consultations that Mr. Dunne had. It is based on discussions that all our members, all our Caucus members have had throughout their districts with people in their districts and we have reached a rational decision." Mr. Speaker, that may be true, but I can guarantee you the Premier is not correct when he stood in his place and made those statements, that the members of his Caucus came back - if they brought back the message that they received from their constituents and from the fish harvesters and plant workers, I can guarantee you, Mr. Speaker, if he made a rational decision it was not based on the message that they were given to bring back.

Mr. Speaker, I asked hon. members, after the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's stood in his place and outside of this House and stood up for his constituents - there were three members who came on, on this issue, and stated very clearly that they themselves have been pressured by their constituents. They stated very clearly that they brought the position of their constituents back to their caucus table. If that is correct, Mr. Speaker, this is not correct. I challenge them, if they cannot get up on their side of the House and say that my constituents - the three of them, half a dozen, if they cannot get up and say that my constituents are totally against this. Maybe they are forbidden to say that but I challenge them to stand in their places, Mr. Speaker, and get up and say that I support the Premier. It is one of two things, Mr. Speaker. This is a very serious issue. We are coming to the crunch with the crab fishery and the people around this Province - I mean the Member for Trinity-Bay de Verde, I have yet to hear him speak on this issue and I know the Member for Burin-Placentia West, they have had petitions given to them. We are receiving petitions. They all live in fishing communities. I understand it is difficult to get up if you are on the government side but you have to put your people first.

I attended a meeting in Harbour Main-Whitbourne with 250 to 300 people there, and the message was loud and clear. They showed their hands that they were against this. If that was brought back to the - I have no reason to doubt that the member did not bring it back but if he brought it back - the Premier said they did this after consultation, a rational decision. Mr. Speaker, I challenge all members opposite, if you cannot get up and present the petitions and the wishes of your people, get up and say that I stand with the Premier on this. Let the people out there know where you do stand.

[Applause from the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, I appeal to the visitors in the gallery and ask them to respect the traditions of our House. We do not wish to have the galleries cleared, however, the Chair may be left with no choice. Therefore, I appeal to you, to let the function of the House, in a parliamentary process, continue as it should.

The hon. the Member for Grand Bank on a petition.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition on behalf of the people who use the health care facility in Grand Bank. I am speaking here on behalf of about 1,000 people who signed the petition calling on the government to live up to a promise that the Premier made during the election.

When I hear the petitions about promises that were made to the fish harvesters, those who are involved in the crab fishery, than I am sure that the people in Grand Bank and surrounding area can relate to the fact that that promise has not been lived up to either.

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about a facility in Grand Bank that is in such bad condition - particularly the clinic down there. When you talk about truth and telling the truth, it is in short supply when I listen to members opposite, certainly when I listen to the Member for Burin-Placentia West who continuously refers to the health care facility as a hospital. It is not. It is a replacement facility. It is a clinic with holding beds only.

This morning I heard the Minister of Finance, the Acting Minister of Health, refer to it as a hospital. It is not. Let me repeat, it is clinic. It has holding beds only, but it is seventy years old and the condition of that facility is such that it really is not safe for anyone to go there if they are looking to receive quality health care.

When I talk about - what the Member for Burin-Placentia West talks about is a regional approach, the same thing the acting minister did this morning. Well, how can they suggest that not to continue with the services we have in Grand Bank would be somehow harmful to a regional approach? What we are talking about here is a clinic, a place where people, if they have a heart attack, can go to get stabilized before being transferred to Burin; a place where people can go if they have high blood pressure. If they get sick and they do not know where to turn, they can go to a clinic and see a doctor or a nurse, not have to travel for an hour to Burin.

Mr. Speaker, when you are having a heart attack - and there are members opposite who know how important it is to have access to services right away, so that you can be stabilized in terms of being able to really save your life. That is what the people in the Grand Bank area are asking the government to do, to replace the clinic that is there; to replace the seniors' home that is now thirty years old that was built to care for people who required Levels I and II care, not acute care. Today they are caring for patients there who require Levels III and IV acute care. It is not a suitable facility for that.

We have people who are trying to carry out their work, do their jobs in a facility that was not intended to do the work that they are being asked to do. We have patients who are not receiving the quality of health care that they need, and we have a Premier who promised, on three occasions during the election, when he was looking to win the district that I represent, that he would complete that facility. Three point five million dollars has been spent. We have the largest gazebo in North America. We have steel standing down there. All the groundwork has been done, and we have a Minister of Health, an Acting Minister of Health, saying: No, we are going to look at a regional approach - forgetting how important it is that every person in this Province have access to quality health care.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions.

The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition on behalf of the youth of Labrador, on the lack of the auditorium by this government.

Mr. Speaker, I think it is a sad day in the Province when the ordinary people are not listened to by this government. Shortly after the election, I referred to the present government as a Water Street government. When we look around at the heritage of Labrador, and the future, to know that it looks very bleak because of the attitude of this government, I have to wonder as to why the government came to their decision. As I said before, unfortunately, I think it is because of where they live.

When you look around the Province, and look at the state of affairs happening in our Province today, I wonder what the quiet side of people really is. I hear the men and women who go out in the fishing boats speak very loudly of their concerns, and know the blood, sweat and tears that they put into the industry, but I wonder, when they are alone, by themselves, as they face a bleak future, what their thoughts are of their families, their boats, just as much as the children in Labrador are wondering what will happen to the arts.

Mr. Speaker, a week after school closes, this government is going to open a door to The Rooms, where they paid over $40 million, paid the mortgage off before they even opened the door, and they turned around and said to the children in Labrador: Sorry, boys and girls, but you people don't cut it and you don't deserve an auditorium.

Mr. Speaker, I wonder, I just wonder, what do the ordinary people have to do to get their voice heard? I wonder, what do the children in Labrador have to do to promote a way of life that they want to play a part in? It seems the only people who are against them are the government of the day, who have said: No, we are going to pay the $45 million off on The Rooms. Because that is in St. John's, it is far more important. You people who live in Labrador, you are going to have to wait.

Mr. Speaker, they cannot even give an answer as to when they might expect an auditorium. School soon closes this year, Mr. Speaker, so they can be guaranteed that it is going to be at least two years before they get their auditorium. Mr. Speaker, I think that is a shame, I think that is a crime, and I call upon the government of the day to sit down and to consider, just as much as they should sit down with the fisher persons of this Province, and say: We have a problem here, and we want to sit down with you and resolve it.

Mr. Speaker, the government should give the children in Labrador some hope; because I, and every person in Labrador, including the member who sits on that side of the House from Labrador, as well as my colleague here, and the Member for Labrador West, we deserve that. The children in Labrador are equal to anyone else, and they deserve an auditorium.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions.

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

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a petition here, and I will read the prayer of it:

WHEREAS the South Coast community of Harbour Breton is currently trying to cope with an economic disaster caused by FPI closure of the fish plant in the community; and

WHEREAS 348 employees are now unemployed because of the plant closure and many of these people have exhausted their EI benefits; and

WHEREAS the future of our rural community is now depending on immediate government support and assistance;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to prevent FPI from taking the portion of its fish quota that has been traditionally processed in Harbour Breton out of the community.

Mr. Speaker, I visited Harbour Breton on the weekend and had an opportunity to meet with the action group.

[Comments from the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

[Disturbance in the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

This House is in recess until the galleries can be cleared.

Recess

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Prior to the recess, the Chair had recognized the hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune who had made some introductory comments on a petition. We ask him to continue to present his petition now.

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Before the House adjourned I did read the prayer of the petition, but I will just read the WHEREUPON.

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to prevent FPI from taking the portion of its fish quota, that has been traditionally processed in Harbour Breton, out of the community.

AND as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

As I was saying earlier, Mr. Speaker, before the adjournment, we have a community that is in crisis in Harbour Breton. Really, I could probably go so far as to say the comment that was made on Open Line yesterday morning by the retired principal of the school, who says that we have an economic disaster in Harbour Breton. When we have some disasters, like a physical disaster, you will have the media, you will have government groups, and you will have the population in general who focuses in on the centre. But here, Mr. Speaker, because of the nature of the disaster, it is not on the radar screen. A television camera cannot catch the frustration, the worry, the uncertainty, the mental torture that goes through in a community or that Harbour Breton is now experiencing. We have been in this crisis for about four months now and for the people of the community, there is very little tangible evidence that things have changed.

We have talked about here in the House, in the last couple of days, about Abitibi Consolidated in Grand Falls laying off 100-plus, up to 150 people in the mill and up to 150 of its woodworkers in thirty-four communities across Central Newfoundland. Here, Mr. Speaker, we have 350 people in one small community, a community of 2,500.

When I was in Harbour Breton this weekend and had an opportunity, as I said, to meet with the action group - and that is why these people are so upset. They gave me, for example, the 2004 annual report of FPI. They also gave me the notice of the annual meeting of shareholders to be held. I just want to read a couple of things that makes these people irritated. FPI would give the impression to the people in this Province that its primary production plants in Harbour Breton and in Fortune and in Marystown are not profitable, that they are somehow being subsidized by the other portions of the company. I will just read it. It is on page 2. It says here that in 2004, in the primary section of the company, the profits for FPI during 2004 was $18.7 million. They gave the impression that they have to pull out of a community like Harbour Breton and pull out of a community like Fortune because it is not profitable. I know why it is not profitable. I have read through, very quickly, some of the comments made in the report. This one is very telling, too, Mr. Speaker. It says: Our challenge is to manage complex issues with all stakeholders for the long-term benefit of the company and its shareholders. I do not see anything about its shareholders in a community.

I want to say this before I conclude, Mr. Speaker, and I will have a chance to talk about it later. Fifty-two people from Harbour Breton have already left the community, gone across the country to Yellowknife, Iqaluit and Alberta, looking for work. It is seasonal this time, but do you know what? If they find work it will mean fifty-two families less in Harbour Breton unless we find a remedy, a solution, to this disaster which is in the community of Harbour Breton.

MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

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

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

I move that we now move to the Concurrence Debate on the Estimates dealing with the Social Services Committee.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved that the House approve the Estimates of the Social Services Committee.

The hon. the Member for Trinity North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Earlier in today's session, I tabled a report of the Social Services Committee, and our Committee dealt with the Estimates for the Departments of Education; Justice; Municipal and Provincial Affairs; Health and Community Services; Human Resources, Labour and Employment; Newfoundland and Labrador Housing; together with the Women's Policy Section of the Executive Council Budget Estimates.

It was a real pleasure doing the Estimates with these departments, because we had an opportunity to sit with each of the respective ministers and their senior staff to review their programs and services, and talk about their next year's plan. Mr. Speaker, there are a couple of things and a couple of themes that went through each of them, that I think are very important, that I want to highlight before I get into some comments about each of them.

One of the themes that was surfacing and was consistent in each one that we did was strategic investment. Each department talked about their future, talked about strategically thinking about where they needed to be, and looked at the Budget document itself and were able to identify areas where there were some key strategic investments made - not necessarily budgetary items that were going to increase the ongoing operational cost of their respective departments, but key investment strategies - investment strategies that would do two things: one, make a major improvement in the overall delivery of the programs and services of their respective departments; secondly, strategically investing money today to ensure that we have sustainable programs, sustainable services to address the needs of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. That was a theme that was consistent throughout.

Just to look at some of the highlights, I would like to take some of them department by department and first talk about the Department of Education. As the minister very appropriately pointed out, as an expenditure area of government, the Department of Education is the second-largest expenditure area of government. We talk about it in the Budget. We talk about it in the Budget Estimates as an expenditure, and we talk about how we are spending our money.

Mr. Speaker, one of the critical things that the minister pointed out, inasmuch as the focus of the Budget Estimates talks about the expenditures of money, the minister very successfully pointed out that what we spend today in education, the money that we are allocating in the Budget today in education, is a strategic investment in the future of Newfoundland and Labrador, the continued investment in the future of Newfoundland and Labrador.

As he starts talking about investment, a couple of key things come to mind. The minister pointed out one of the challenges that we are facing in this Province. He pointed out that, as a Province, we are experiencing some real shifts, some real declines in enrolments in our schools. He is a minister who has a responsibility for a department that is providing services today to some 79,000 students but forecasting ahead to six and seven and eight years' time where the forecast is suggesting we will only have some 60,000 students.

Normally, I say, Mr. Speaker, normally, with the current teacher allocation formula, we would have seen a significant reduction in teacher allocations in this year, but the minister, strategically thinking about the education system of the future, thinking about the kinds of commitments we made as a party when we ran in 2003, saw significant reinvestment. A reinvestment of additional teaching units this year to ensure that we had a maximum class size in our K to 1 system, or Grades K to 1 in our primary system, but also a significant investment in culture.

The minister, this year, had some reinvestment of some additional teaching units to be able to deal with another seventy-five units, I believe. Ordinarily, as I said a moment ago, we would have had a reduction of some 220, but the minister was able to strategically position some 52 teaching units to deal with the primary class sizes, reinvest twenty-three teaching units to deal with and support cultural initiatives, support music education in our program and be able to support - which was going to form a part of and support - a comprehensive fine arts strategy. Again a key investment, and the minister described it as just that, a key investment.

Post-secondary education: Once again this year, Mr. Speaker, we made a commitment to our post-secondary students of this year and future years, a freeze in tuition at Memorial University and the College of the North Atlantic. Again, a key strategic investment. Right now it brings the total, as a Province today, in this Budget, our proposal is to invest some $174.4 million in annual grants to Memorial University of Newfoundland. The College of the North Atlantic, it brings our investment in grants to the College of the North Atlantic this year to some $65.5 million, I say, Mr. Speaker. Again, a key strategic investment, a strategic investment in our future, our children and our youth, and I commend the minister for that kind of strategic thinking and to be able to share with us, as a Committee, the kind of forward thought that he has in supporting a quality education system.

Another key initiative that the minister talked about was a reinvestment in the education system to allow us to improve the fleet of buses. Student transportation is a critical issue. We frequently talk about the challenges of a vast geography in Newfoundland and Labrador, and indeed it is. No one would know that better than the Minister of Education, who has a responsibility to ensure that, on a daily basis, we are able to transport our children to our schools, our K to 12 system, in a safe manner, to be able to ride in buses where the children can feel comfortable and safe - and a reinvestment this year, I say, Mr. Speaker, a considerable reinvestment in school bus acquisition, to be able to increase and improve on the number of buses we have in the system that are new, rather than the older fleet that might have been in existence many years ago.

Another key area, I say, Mr. Speaker, and an area that, when we talk about social programs, may not consume a big part of our annual budget as a Province, but a key area in terms of the benefit to a population. We met with the Minister of Justice who reviewed some of the key initiatives in his portfolio this year. When we talk about the delivery of social programs, as I said a moment ago, we think about education, we think about health, we think about HRLE, but justice is an area that, when we think about it, is not always one of those departments that come to mind when we talk about social programs.

I really want to commend the minister, and I think everybody in Newfoundland and Labrador should be commending the minister this year, for bringing in one of the key budgetary items he talked about: the $255,000 that is going to be invested this year as a means to create a Victims Services Program for Children. The minister was talking about the history of children under the age of sixteen who have not had the real benefit of a Victims Services Program. I say, Mr. Speaker, the minister again strategically thinking about an investment in our future, an investment in our youth.

We heard a lot, Mr. Speaker, in recent years about children who have become the targets and victims of violence and aggression. All of those years went by, we read about it and heard about it in the media, but all of those years went by and those children did not have the real benefit of a service program like the Victims Services Program that the minister has now introduced this year. The Committee, Minister, commends you for that tremendous initiative.

Again, the advent of technology has made a significant improvement in our justice system. The minister shared with us the strategic thinking that is going on in his department as we now advance the use of technology to connect our court systems, to be able to make access to the justice system more readily available to many more people and a much faster access from more remote areas, which has a big impact on two things. It has a big impact on individuals' access to the court system but it also has a major impact as he strategically plans for the future structure of court systems in the Province.

This year he announced, in his Budget, a provision for some planning money to go into a new court reconfiguration in the community of Corner Brook, but also, Mr. Speaker, the department now is engaged in developing a strategy for the court system for the entire Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, again strategically thinking about the future, strategically talking about investment in the future.

Then, Mr. Speaker, we met with the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. This is a major department which has major capital investment in some critical areas. The minister talked about strategically investing in community infrastructure. If we are to grow the economy of Newfoundland and Labrador, if the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development is to be successful in ensuring that we have a prosperous rural economy able to stimulate the growth of economic development throughout rural Newfoundland and Labrador, one of the key ingredients of that will be municipal infrastructure. We need to have strong, financially vibrant, financially sound communities in this Province where people enjoy living, people can have a prosperous way of life, a quality life, and the communities can grow and prosper. The only way we are going to be able to do that is if the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs continues to think strategically in the fashion he is now doing and making decisions to strategically invest in infrastructure in communities throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

There are two good examples, I say, Mr. Speaker, in my own district. In my own district this year there is work taking place in the community of Trinity, one of the major tourist destinations for the entire Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, together with the federal government, is partnering this year with the community of Trinity in expanding their water and sewer infrastructure to support the major tourism investment in that region of the Province, I say, Mr. Speaker, again strategically thinking about the future of Newfoundland and Labrador and how we can build community infrastructure to support the ongoing economic activities and the quality of life in the communities throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, one of the other areas we looked at was the Department of Health and Community Services. The Department of Health and Community Services is the department that expends the greatest amount of money in any department of government. Again this year, as the acting Minister of Health and Community Services spoke to the Social Services Committee about the budget for that department for this year, he talked about strategically investing in the future. I say, Mr. Speaker, we had two sessions. This department generated such an extensive discussion, it was necessary for the committee to get together the second time with the minister and his staff. If there was one phrase, one statement, one comment, that I think captured the essence and the thrust of the debates and discussion around the Budget Estimates for the Department of Health and Community Services, it was the Member for Labrador West. When the Member for Labrador West appeared with the committee and asked questions of the minister, after the discussion, after he posed his questions, he made a statement, that this Budget in this year brought down by this government, with respect to the Department of Health and Community Services, was the best Budget for his district in the thirty-two years since he has been involved with that community. I think, Mr. Speaker, that speaks volumes.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: The Member for Labrador West, in that one simple statement, spoke volumes about the benefits of this Budget in this year. When any member can stand in this House and say, in his recollection, that this Budget did more for his district than in thirty-two years, that is a significant endorsement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: When I hear members from Labrador get up and criticize what this government is doing in Labrador, I think that is finally -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Trinity North.

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for that protection.

I say, Mr. Speaker, again, that speaks volumes for what this government is doing in Labrador, when the Member for Labrador West can stand in his place and make that statement, as did the member today. The Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair acknowledged that this Budget had some major benefits for her district and for Labrador as a whole, acknowledged -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: She went on to indicate she would have liked to have more, and, as always, every Budget would like to do more. She did acknowledge that this Budget made tremendous strides in improving the lot of health care, of health services, and particularly transportation in Labrador; again, Mr. Speaker, two strong commendations for this year's Budget coming from two different parties opposite, from two different members opposite. I say, Mr. Speaker, a great commendation.

There are a number of things in this year's Budget that we talk about from a health perspective that, I think, talk about the strategic thinking, a major investment in new technologies to improve wait services. We have new MRIs for St. John's, for example. One of the things, I think, I would like to comment on -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is having great difficulty hearing the hon. Member for Trinity North who has been duly recognized. I ask members to show respect to the person who has been identified by the Chair and allow him to speak in silence.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WISEMAN: I really appreciate the second time that you have had to stand and try to give me some element of protection, because obviously the members opposite are either so excited about this great Budget and so excited about the highlights that I am bringing forward that came out in the Social Services Committee, either that, Mr. Speaker, or they are recognizing for the first time what a great job this government is doing; one or the other.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Again, as we talk about strategic investment, we talk about strategic investment in this department as well. For the first time in the history of this Province the largest single amount ever to be invested in health promotion and wellness strategy is included in this year's Budget, Mr. Speaker; a significant move and new trend. I think, Mr. Speaker, if we look at what is happening in health care across this country, one of the big fundamental changes that is occurring is that the governments across this country are looking at their total health system and talking about a shift, a shift from curing people who are not well and ill to a focus on prevention, wellness and new wellness initiatives. For the first time in this Province's history our government is making a major investment. Some $23 million in this year will be invested in new health promotion strategies, again, Mr. Speaker, reinforcing that view of strategic investment.

MR. BARRETT: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WISEMAN: The Member for Bellevue, obviously, is not interested in what is happening in health care in this Province nor interested in health care for his own district. If so, I think, Mr. Speaker, he would give me the courtesy of acknowledging the great things that we are doing. One of the great initiatives this year, Mr. Speaker, of this government is a new long-term care facility in Clarenville which will benefit the people of the Bellevue district, but yet the Member for Bellevue will stand in this House-

MR. BARRETT: It is not there yet. It is not there yet.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is reluctant to identify members -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is reluctant to identify members who are continually shouting back and forth across the House. I ask members once again to show respect to the hon. Member for Trinity North who has been recognized by the Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: I can accept the lack of respect for myself from the Member for Bellevue, but I think it is a real shame when the Member for Bellevue does not respect the position of the Chair of this House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: I think, Mr. Speaker, one of the things, again, in strategically investing money -

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

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

MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, I have been in this House for sixteen years and have sat in the Chair that you occupy. I can assure the Member for Trinity North, that the member who is presently sitting in the chair, the position that he holds I have great respect for, in terms of Speaker of this House, but I have just as much respect for the hon. member who occupies the chair, the Member for Bonavista South, but I cannot say the same thing about the Member for Trinity North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I say to the Member for Bellevue, he must show greater respect to all members of this House. There are forty-eight members here and if we continue to make those remarks back and forth across the floor, then we are going to have a decorum here that is going to be less than acceptable. I ask the member if he would withdraw those statements and allow the Member for Trinity North to continue.

MR. BARRETT: I apologize to Your Honour, to the Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will continue my comments, I will pick up where I left off. I was commenting about the new long-term care facility for Clarenville and I think all members who represent districts in and around the Trinity North District, whether it is yours, Your Honour, or whether it is Member for Terra Nova or the Member for Bellevue, I think all of us will agree, that all of the people who live in that entire region will be well served by that new long-term care facility. I want to commend this government in this year's Budget for finally allocating the necessary funding to get this project started. I think it will be a real asset to the health services in that region.

MR. SPEAKER: I remind the hon. Member for Trinity North that his time has lapsed.

MR. WISEMAN: I thank you very much.

By leave, just to make a concluding comment?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The member, by leave.

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There is one department that I had not gotten to yet. The fact that it is the last one I mention does not take away from its significance. That is the Department of Human Resources, Labour and Employment. There is one issue that I wanted to highlight that is not a big budgetary item, but a significant issue for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. There is a $200,000 figure in this year's Budget for that department to invest in development of a new strategy to deal with poverty in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: If there is one initiative, I say, Mr. Speaker, in that department's vast programs and services and the significant issues that we talked about, there is one significant point that I do want to emphasize. I commend the minister and her staff for bringing forward that request to have $200,000 approved in her budget to develop a strategy to deal with poverty, a comprehensive strategy, not piecemeal, but do it in a comprehensive fashion to serve the people of Newfoundland and Labrador well into the future. As a Committee Chair, I want to commend the minister for asking us, as a Committee, to approve that line item in her budget this year.

Mr. Speaker, these are some of the things that we talked about in the Estimates. Not all inclusive by any means. If I have not mentioned some initiative of any particular department, it is not to suggest that it was not important. These are some of the things that I heard as I sat as a Chair and I listened to members ask questions about, and the minister commented and provided information. I want to thank each and every minister who appeared before our Committee and their staff for the great work that they did and the tremendous preparation. They were able to come to our Committee meetings and provide tremendous insight to the questions that were posed, and I thank them for that. To my colleagues on both sides of the House, as members of the Committee, thank you for the manner in which you questioned the minister and her staff, and for the thoughtfulness and courtesy you showed them as we talked about the programs and services that they provide.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I must say, I appreciate an opportunity to speak. Just for clarification, I would like to check with the Chair and the Table as to the time allocation and confirm that if I get so inspired I might be able to speak for an hour.

MR. SPEAKER: Yes, the Leader of the Opposition and the Premier each has one hour. Every other member has twenty minutes.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I doubt - if I speak for an hour it will not be out of inspiration, I can tell you that, with respect to this Budget or the report of this particular Committee in dealing with Education, Health Care, Justice, Human Resources and Employment, and Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

Just to give one example. As the Chair, the Member for Trinity North obviously did not read any of the press with respect to the Budget in his own area, in The Packet, because they were scratching their heads in terms of the shell game that they described for the Budget. Even in his own district, let me give an example directly from Education with respect to what was on the evening news last night where teacher reductions are occurring. He talked about the teachers, the teacher reductions occurring. The perfect example - no better example exists, Mr. Speaker, with respect to a shell game that was played by the government in this Budget in trying to say to one group that they are doing something when, in fact, they are doing the exact opposite.

The Member for Trinity North talked about the extra teachers going into the system when, in fact, the reality is this: From the time that school closed a year ago in June until the time that it opens again next September after Labour Day, there will be 401 fewer teachers in the classrooms of Newfoundland and Labrador serving the needs and interests of our youth with respect to education K to 12. He stands as Chair of the Committee and says what a great Budget we introduced because we put some teachers back in the system. Make no wonder that people are finding it increasingly difficult day by day by day to find anything believable about anything that this government spins out there. They have great spin doctors but they are really not married or committed to the truth in any serious, significant fashion.

Let me point out last night, the meeting that was reported on in Port Rexton, because I can tell you, the Member for Trinity North was there and they were met by a gauntlet of students. They had to walk the gauntlet of students who were disappointed and upset that in their school they are going to lose two-and-a-half teacher units. The member for the area just stood up and talked about extra teachers going into the system. He managed to get the brand new, freshly minted Minister of Education to come out for a meeting to talk to the concerned parents and the school council about the teachers they were losing. He is back here today in the Legislature talking about the extra teachers going into the system. Well, I can tell you, there are no extra teachers going into Port Rexton. Their reaction or response to the meeting - the Member for Trinity North was not reacting or responding, the freshly, right out of the box, brand new Minister of Education, proud as a peacock. He had better hang on to his job before the Member for Gander gets anywhere close to him, I can tell you that.

The brand new minister turns around and comes out and says: We had a wonderful meeting. He must have been in a different place. What did the parents say? The parents came out and said: Oh, he talked and yakked and mouthed off for twenty minutes, but we understand one thing: not a thing is going to change. Not one thing is going to change. We are still going to lose two-and-a-half teachers.

Now the member for the area did not respond in the media afterwards because he will not talk out in Port Rexton, just like he will not talk about the crab fishery. He will not talk about teachers and program losses in Port Rexton. He will come to the Legislature and take the little script that he was given, probably from the eighth floor, probably right from the Premier's Office, probably one from one of the PR people saying: Stand up and read this, Mr. Member. Here is what you have to say because if you do not say it, guess what? You have $25,000 too, that you might lose. You happen to be a Parliamentary Secretary, too, and if you are found out in the public saying anything other than what you are told to say, you had better watch out, because just like the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's, one whack up the side of the head, a zip across the ‘lipper', a bang in the wallet and put him in his place so that the rest of them obediently today - what is he doing today, the good, obedient, well-behaved Parliamentary Secretary for Health? He is sticking to the script. He is betraying his own people in his own District in Port Rexton who thought he was seriously coming out to help them get a couple of teachers, to maybe get our teachers back. They thought that was what the meeting was about.

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

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

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible) point out to the Leader of the Opposition and to the House, and to ask you to rule on it. It is fine that the Leader of the Opposition can say that government has betrayed people on policy matters and we can debate that all day but he cannot impute motives on another member in this House and say that a particular member betrayed somebody, his own people or anyone else in this House. That is not parliamentary. It is unparliamentary. It imputes motives on a member and it causes disruption in the House. Clearly, Mr. Speaker, that language is unparliamentary and I ask you to rule on it or ask, before you do it, the Leader of the Opposition to do the right thing and withdraw.

MR. SPEAKER: The word betrayal, as the Government House Leader points out, when you direct it towards an individual is clearly unparliamentary, and taking into consideration the tone that the Leader of the Opposition put forward, the Chair rules that it is out of order and I ask the hon. Leader of the Opposition if he would kindly withdraw that remark.

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

I will withdraw that remark, and I thank the Government House Leader for his instruction as to how I can get the message across. The government betrayed the parents and the students in Port Rexton and the member supports it fully, Mr. Speaker. That is what I can tell you and that is a fact. He supports it fully!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Is the hon. Member for Trinity North on a point of order?

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

MR. SPEAKER: Okay, the hon. the Member for Trinity North.

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the members of this House, and particularly to the member opposite and the Leader of the Opposition party, under no circumstance and at no time - I have been in this House a very short period of time relevant to some of my colleagues, five years, in fact, and I have sat on both sides of this House. In fact, this is my second time sitting on this side of the House and I say each and every time that I have ever spoken in this House or sat in a caucus room, I have always represented the issues important to my district. I have yet, I say to the member opposite, and I will never - I have yet to read from a script given to me by anyone in this House.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I say to the hon. Member for Trinity North, I ask if he would be kind enough to get to his point of order, please.

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My point exactly is: If the member opposite, or any members opposite, want to stand in this House or go on Open Line shows and suggest that I have said something or that I think something or I plan to do something in a certain way, then I suggest they have that discussion with me in advance; because I say, Mr. Speaker, when I speak on behalf of the people in my district, I speak with clarity, I speak with conviction, and I speak with their best interests at heart, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the member to get to his point of order.

MR. WISEMAN: At no time am I a puppet for anybody else.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WISEMAN: I ask the member opposite to respect that when he stands and speaks in this House.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

I have to refer back again to the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

I say to the Leader of the Opposition that words are important. When he expresses himself - and he is good with words, I must admit that, but when he expresses his words toward the government and then deflects them right back on another member, that is certainly doing through the back door what he should not do through the front door.

I ask the Leader of the Opposition if he would kindly apologize to the House and retract the words that he had indicated, and the aspersion that he cast on the hon. member.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I take your ruling and your instruction, and will do exactly as you said. Whichever word you want to use, apologize or withdraw, I will gladly do it.

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me talk again just for a minute, because the Chair of the Committee, the Member for Trinity North, one of the things he talked about in his twenty minutes was the additional teachers - the point I am trying to make. Meanwhile, in his own district, all over the media, everybody in Newfoundland and Labrador who watches the news knows that there were no additional teachers in his district, in Port Rexton. The very fact that he is up bragging about this government and saying one of the reasons that I am proud to Chair this Committee, one of the reasons that I am going to vote for this Budget, is because of what they did with teachers, therefore he is supporting the loss of two-and-a-half teachers in Port Rexton, in his own district, Mr. Speaker. That cannot be twisted any other way than that, no matter how good anybody is with words. Those are the facts.

He talked about - very defensive, some of these Parliamentary Secretaries, these days, very defensive, and I suggest they should be. The lesson learned, if not anything else, is that they had better be very careful with their words. Words are very important for a Parliamentary Secretary, more so than anybody else, and the Parliamentary Secretary for Health and Community Services, the Member for Trinity North, the Chair of this Committee, was very careful with his words today. I guess he thought about them in great detail before he uttered a single word. Let me quote, to use an example as to why he would be very careful. He might be saying what came out of his mouth, and he is suggesting he wants to be given credit for thinking all by himself as to what he said, but let me give a couple of quotes from the paper where the former Parliamentary Secretary for Education was removed from his position. The Premier of the Province said, speaking publicly, "Very clearly, I removed him," - the Premier told reporters outside the Legislature. I indicated that his behaviour was unacceptable.

What was it that was unacceptable? Because they asked the former Parliamentary Secretary for Education, the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's: What did you do? What did you say that was found to be unacceptable? Here is the answer: The Member for Placentia & St. Mary's "...said he has simply suggested government rethink its approach - perhaps put the pilot project off for a year and consult further with the union..." - as they had promised in writing, before trying to find a new solution in the future.

That sounds pretty reasonable to me; but, because a Parliamentary Secretary said that, the Premier of the Province said: I removed him because that was unacceptable.

That was not acceptable, and I would suggest to you that if the Member for Trinity North, the Chair of this Social Services Committee, wanted to make a stand today, like he pretended he was doing out in Port Rexton, on behalf of the parents, the students, the school council and the community, to save programming in the schools, to save the teachers, he would have stood up today and said: I support the general budget policy of the government but I cannot condone the loss of two-and-a-half teaching units in my district in Port Rexton because I know it is going to have a detrimental impact and effect on the educational opportunity for the young people in that area.

What did he do? Here is the other part of it. What did he do? He went out there with the fresh, brand new, minted Minister of Education, and here were the opening words - the Minister of Education, on television, going in, walking through the people, saying: Why is everybody so glum?

What did he expect them to do? Smile and say: Oh, we are so happy to see you, Mr. Minister. You are taking away two-and-a-half of our teachers. We think you are the best Education Minister we ever saw. Oh, welcome to our community! Oh, welcome to our school! We are very happy. We are so delighted with this Budget.

Oh, yes, that is what he expected, I guess, because I will tell you what. If it was one of those Parliamentary Secretaries, or one of those Cabinet ministers, or one of those other members on that side, that is what they would have said. They would have said: This is a great Budget, this is wonderful for rural Newfoundland and Labrador, this is great for Port Rexton. Don't you people understand that education is going to be better here next year with two-and-a-half teaching units gone? It has to be better. Don't you see the logic of it? You people must not understand how the plan of this government is making things so much better in the rural communities. What is it you do not understand?

I am sure if the Parliamentary Secretary for Health and Community Services - he was there, by the way, he got in through the door first because he would have been embarrassed by: Why is everyone so glum? Well, I will tell you about a glum group. I saw them here on the government side today when they had to sit in the House of Assembly again realizing that this crab dispute and impasse is only getting worse, and that there is no apparent solution because the minister does not have one. The Premier, who might have one, thinks it is by priority more important to be in Houston at the oil show. A good place to be, except for one thing, the Premier from Nova Scotia is not down there. He is speaking at functions with Nova Scotia representatives for oil and gas and representatives for oil and gas from Alberta. The Premier from Alberta is not down there, the minister is there. The minister is there from Nova Scotia. Our Premier, with two months of chaos with respect to a crab dispute, finds the priority to be at the oil and gas show instead of sending a minister.

There is no huge crab dispute in Nova Scotia, so that Premier could have gone, I guess, if he wanted to, because there isn't a crisis in Nova Scotia, but even that Premier decided there are more important things to do right in Nova Scotia. It is not important, you see, for the Premier to be here to try to get a resolution to the crab dispute, because he does not want to be in this Legislature, I can tell you that. He spent the last several weeks trying to bar down this whole place, trying to shut down access to the whole premises, let alone this Legislature.

The rules are changing every day. I came in again this morning and I was told by the security on the front desk: Mr. Grimes, they said, you have to put your badge on your lapel again today. I said: Oh, is that so? I said: Very good. Glad to see you. I scanned the machine and went on in. I guess I will be called up to the eighth floor to the Premier's Office and told that I am not following the new rules, brand new again today, because those rules were in a day, out a day, in this day, out that day. They are out there now, as we understand it, putting fiberoptic cables all over the properties, cameras going everywhere. Every single angle inside and outside the building is being scanned so that if one Newfoundlander and Labradorian - it might even be a visitor. It might be somebody that fell off that rocket with the debris. It might be someone traveling on that who fell off the rocket and might have strayed onto this hill. If you stray on the premise of Confederation Hill now, you are on tape, so you better watch it. I suggest to a few of the members here and a few of the staff, you better make sure you are not smoking within thirty-five feet of the building because you are on camera. You better watch what you are doing when you are parking your car twenty-four hours a day because you are on camera. We have the police-state mentality well entrenched, Mr. Speaker, right here, right now.

The Minister of Fisheries today; guess what he tried to make us believe? Guess what he tried to make us believe today? All of these new security measures - my good friends in the gallery - I am not allowed to address them. I apologize, Mr. Speaker. My good friends, the undercover Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Officers, have a great, continuing, abiding interest in listening to our speeches, so much so that they are here day and night. Many times there is not another soul in the gallery, not a soul. I tell you, they have some interest, brother. They have some interest in what is going on in this Parliament. If I looked up I might even spot a couple of them up there now, but I am not allow to talk about that. There is not a crab fisherman in the building, not a crab fisherman on the hill, not a crab harvester or plant worker anywhere in the environs of Confederation Hill that I am aware of. The police are so interested in what is going on in the Legislature that they do not want to be out looking at a rash of break-ins and thefts and robberies that are happening in St. John's and the metropolitan area as we speak. They want to hear what is going on in these debates.

By the way, the Minister of Fisheries today wanted us to believe that was going to happen anyway. No connection, he said, no relationship between that and the crab despite. In other words, the government and the Speaker, Your Honour as the Speaker, have deemed that even if there was no crab despite this year, we would like to have five or six plain clothes police officers come to the public gallery every day because that is the best way they can do their jobs; that is the best task that the Chief of Police can find to assign to those officers.

One thing they did brag about, by the way, last year in the Budget, which was the right thing to do, was that they were going to fund twenty additional RNC Officers because they were needed. They were needed in Corner Brook, they were needed in Labrador West, they were needed in St. John's and the metropolitan area of Mount Pearl. Remember, the issue at the time, of course, was the OxyContin Task Force, all of the break-ins related to people out there supporting their drug habits. This was one of the things they needed. They needed extra capability. We stood up and said: We did not like the Budget last year, but we supported that initiative. Guess what they are doing, six and eight and ten at a time now? They are not out there protecting the community, they are sitting in the gallery. The Fisheries Minister today said: They are sitting here because those are the normal security provisions that the government wanted to put in place in any event. We asked the questions in the Justice Estimates which was reported by this committee. Here is a government that the Minister of Finance said, we don't have one precious penny to waste, so we asked the Justice Minister: What about overtime and so on for RNC officers? Oh, yes, there might be some needed, because there are, again, a rash of break-ins, armed robberies, and thefts from private homes. We need these extra officers and sometimes we will even need to pay them overtime, because we have to bring this under control. I guess the overtime bill is going to double and quadruple and triple and everything else. It should be double, triple and quadruple, I guess, in order, and then some, because if the officers are going to spend their daytimes here and if they are needed in the nighttime, it has got to be overtime. There are labour laws that suggest how many hours you can work straight without getting overtime or otherwise.

The priority from this government, in the Justice Department and with Transportation and Works, is to say: You go up at all costs and sit in that gallery. Whether there is a living, breathing soul up there other than yourselves or not, don't worry about it. You go sit in that gallery. We don't want you out protecting the citizens of the capital city region. You have to be there.

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader, on a point of order.

MR. E. BYRNE: I enjoy the tale being told by the Leader of the Opposition, but just for the sake of introducing some fact into his story, he knows, as every member knows, that the Minister of Justice and the Department of Transportation and Works had nothing to do with any security provisions in the precincts of this House. That was decided by the Speaker of the House, not by the Minister of Transportation and Works and not by the Minister of Justice. For the sake of introducing some fact into the tale being told by the Leader of the Opposition, and for the sake of those who may be watching, it is important to note that the needs of security within the precincts of the House are defined by you, Mr. Speaker, and nobody else.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order, a point of clarification.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I understand, again, every time that happens it is because they are getting a little bit sensitive because they don't want the story told, Mr. Speaker. The fact of the matter is, no matter who suggests that they are here, the Minister of Finance wants the people of the Province to believe that we don't have a penny to waste. That is why he is having the Minister of Education and the Parliamentary Secretary for Health and Community Services, the Member for Trinity North, explain to the people in Port Rexton why they have to lose two-and-a-half teachers. They have to lose two-and-a-half teachers because we don't have a penny to waste. I guess they are going to suggest now that it is not a waste to have six, eight, ten, twelve, sometimes - as a matter of fact, yesterday morning, not a soul in the building. I could not get in. I could not get in the building yesterday, but I will tell you who was in the building, Mr. Speaker; fifty members of the riot squad of the RNC. Now, if they were inside this building yesterday, they were not protecting me or anybody else because there was nobody in here. You could not get in. It was locked up like Fort Knox. RCMP Officers, as well, that we pay for, by the way, the people of this Province pay for, and the Minister of Transportation and Works in charge of security ordering them to be in the building. There are those in the gallery, and there is a group outside by the front desk today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: There is a group out by the front desk today, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: There is a group out by the front today, Mr. Speaker, and there are extra cameras in the environs of Confederation Hill, and the minister undertook to tell us where they were, and I am sure he will tell us where they are.

MR. RIDEOUT: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: There are cables running all over Confederation Hill that never existed before. Mr. Speaker. I am sure he will tell us where they are.

MR. RIDEOUT: I am not going to tell you. No, I am not going to. (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the Minister of Transportation and Works if we would kindly withdraw the statement that he just shouted across the House.

MR. RIDEOUT: What was that? I am sorry, Mr. Speaker. I will, but I have to ask what it is. Frankly, I said a few things, I was excited. I do not know what it is, but if I said something that was unparliamentary, I certainly withdraw it.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair distinctly heard the hon. Minister of Transportation and Works make an unparliamentary remark and if would withdraw that unparliamentary remark, then that would satisfy the Chair.

MR. RIDEOUT: I withdraw, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is always good and refreshing when we get the excitable Minister of Transportation and Works whose father told him: There is only thing you do, Tom. You heave it out of you. Heave it out you whatever way you can. He heaved it out of him again and blurted out something unparliamentary. I guess it just slipped out, and I appreciate that at least he has enough respect for the rules to make it slip back in, swallow his own words so to speak.

Mr. Speaker, outside in this building, I am telling you, there is a clear police state mentality that has gripped the government. I would say, if you were over to Holiday Inn - good advertisement for Holiday Inn - if I was over to the Holiday Inn somewhere trying to have a pizza at Eastside Marios, I would probably be on camera from the Confederation Building. I would say there are students down there now walking around the campus of the university who can probably be picked up on the cameras, they are so high and so pervasive in terms of their view of the property around here.

Of course, the issue, Mr. Speaker, is that the government, stubborn, pigheaded - remember the song at the convention: I will not back down. Boy, were they so proud of that: I will not back down. Now it is fine, because nobody in Newfoundland and Labrador wanted anyone to back down from a Prime Minister who made a clear promise. Did we? Of course we did not. Now do we want a Premier and a Fisheries Minister to back down from a promise they made? Oh, that is okay. Now it is okay to back down. Now it is quite all right to back down. You have the members on the other side going around supporting that saying: Oh, yes. I am all for that. They go out to their district and get told one thing, and the Minister of Finance goes on television and says, I always present the views of my constituents to the Caucus and the Cabinet, trying to make them believe, in other words, because everybody who showed up at the meeting told him: Go in and tell your Premier that this is wrong and we do not want it.

It is one of two things. Either he came back and told the Premier and the Caucus and the Cabinet that, my constituents think is wrong and they do not want it but I am going to support it anyway, or he came back and said, I went to a meeting, do not mind them, a few rabble-rousers, boy, do not worry about them. it is all right. Now which one he did, I do not know because I was not in the meeting, but old conflict of interest, Mr. Speaker, was in the meeting.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I again call on the Leader of the Opposition to be careful with the language he is using, it is unparliamentary. I ask him if he would withdraw the statement that was clearly unparliamentary, where he just made reference to the Minister of Finance. I ask him if he would withdraw that statement.

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, you will have to instruct me, because in the absence of knowing what I said that was unparliamentary, I cannot withdraw it. In my own view, I did not say anything unparliamentary. You will have to tell me.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair distinctly heard the Leader of the Opposition refer to the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board as old conflict of interest himself. That is unparliamentary and I ask the member and the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw this statement.

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, I would suggest that you seek some authority and seek some precedent because I am not aware of any record anywhere -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Chair. That is not right.

MR. GRIMES: It is right and it is perfectly allowed. There has to be a precedent to suggest that conflict of interest is an unparliamentary comment. I have never heard of it before in fifteen years in this Legislature.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair heard the member, the Leader of the Opposition, refer to the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board as old conflict of interest. I say to the Leader of the Opposition, that members of this House should be referred to by the position they hold on the executive or by the district that they represent, and I ask the Leader of the Opposition to kindly withdraw those remarks.

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, again, I have great difficulty with the ruling and I ask for a minute just to clarify. I did say, and I think the record will show if you need to recess, I did address him as the Minister of Finance. I gave him his right and proper title. Then, by way of a comment in debate, I said the old conflict of interest himself, which, in my understanding, that phrase has never ever, ever been ruled unparliamentary.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Words are not always written on what words are unparliamentary and what words are acceptable here in this Chamber. The Chair deems the reference made to the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board, the nature in which they were said and the tone in which they were used, was strictly unparliamentary, and the Chair appeals again to the Opposition Leader to withdraw that remark.

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, again, with all due respect, that is not a comment that I feel needs any clarification or withdrawal. Mr. Speaker, I have full respect for the Chair but I cannot withdraw that remark which everybody here knows was clearly said in jest. The minister himself was smiling and laughing at it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

AN HON. MEMBER: I did it, didn't I? You asked me to and I did it. (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I appeal again to the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the comment he made in reference to the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board by referring to him as old conflict of interest himself. I appeal to the Leader of the Opposition and ask him if he would be kind enough to withdraw that statement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the Leader of the Opposition, for the final time, if he would withdraw the unparliamentary remark that he made by referring to the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board as old conflict of interest himself. For the final time, I appeal to the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, because of the fact that you are suggesting, and therefore the precedent would suggest forever and a day afterwards that would become an unparliamentary remark if ruled by a Chair and upheld, I cannot do it, because it has never been ruled - conflict of interest has never, ever, ever, in this Parliament or any other parliament, been ruled as an unparliamentary comment. I cannot allow it to be established, by precedent of your ruling in this House, to be unparliamentary just because I uttered it today in referencing my good friend, the Minister of Finance. It cannot be done.

MR. SPEAKER: My dear colleagues, I must express profound regret as your Speaker, that I will have to resort to naming the hon. Member for Exploits. One last time, I will appeal to the hon. member to respect the authority of the Chair and withdraw his accusation.

MR. GRIMES: With full and due respect, Mr. Speaker, I cannot do that.

MR. SPEAKER: I must name you, Roger Grimes, for disregarding the authority of the Chair. Pursuant to the authority invested in me, under Standing Order 22, I order you to withdraw from the House for the remainder of the sitting day.

[Mr. Grimes leaves the Chamber]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to have some comments under this Social Services Committee of the House. In fact, in the Budget -

MR. ANDERSEN: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: The member across, from Torngat, is shouting and yelling. I am having difficulty in hearing, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: It is a budget that his colleague, the Member for Labrador West, called one of the best budgets that he has seen for Labrador in his lifetime. He has indicated that in the Estimates Committee, in which he probably sat on the committee.

I want to talk about some of the good things that are under health care during this committee. I had an opportunity -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair has recognized the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board. I ask all members to show respect to the person who has been identified by the Chair and show him the respect of allowing him his time in debate to be heard in silence.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

One of the fundamental aspects in dealing with the First Ministers -

MR. JOYCE: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: The Member for Bay of Islands is not in his seat and he is shouting. He is not permitted to be out of his seat, number one, and shout and take part. He is annoying and causing problems, Mr. Speaker. I ask that I be allowed to speak in silence.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

If the shouting continues back and forth the House, the Chair will have no other choice but recess the House until members show more respect and allow people to be heard in silence in this Chamber.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, it is one of the best budgets for health care for Labrador. The Member for Labrador West indicated that here in session. I think he firmly believes it. The Opposition Health critic said, in Estimates this morning, there were a lot of positive things in this Budget. She said on the public record here in the House this morning in the Estimates committee. Now they get in the House here, in front of the full Province and try to tell you something different.

Here are some of the positive things in this Budget, Mr. Speaker. The Budget -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I again call on members to show respect to the person who has been identified by the Chair. I ask the Member for Bay of Islands if he would be kind enough to allow the member to speak in silence.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

At the First Ministers' Meeting last September 13 to 15 there were five priority areas identified to deal with. Those five areas - we are trying to improve and reduce waiting lists in this country, and in particular, in this Province - waiting lists for heart surgery. Some of the initiatives we took this year would reduce the heart surgery waiting list by - 184 more people would get heart surgery as a result of this Budget we brought forth. It would result in 30 per cent more surgeries to deal with people suffering from cancer so they can get more surgeries to deal with their problems.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, it would deal with 43,344 more procedures that would help people who are waiting for CAT scans, laparoscopy, for numerous ultrasounds, CTs, MRIs, and all of these particular areas here that are waiting on opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, $2.6 million toward a third MRI here in this Province, which is a very positive announcement to allow - 2,500 new MRI exams will be delivered because of that. That is very positive.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace on a point of order.

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

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace on a point of privilege.

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, just for clarification. I want to notify all the members here in this House that we are here in the confines of this House this afternoon and the exit doors from these chambers are barred with two-by-four. What is the ruling of this House? Are we being held at our own peril here? In case there is a fire or something, shouldn't we be notified that these doors are blocked?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious issue.

MR. RIDEOUT: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SWEENEY: The confines of this House are blocked with two-by-four. I just tried to leave. I say to the Minister of Transportation and Works, I just tried to go out through a door here, outside, and there is a two-by-four, a piece that long, across the door in through the handles. Mr. Speaker, in this day and age of safety - the Minister of Government Services just announced that we are going to celebrate workplace safety this week, NAOSH, and here we are trapped. In the event of a fire or a predicament here in this House, we have no access. If anybody were to go out through those exit doors right now, they are barred, Mr. Speaker. They are barred.

Mr. Speaker, I want to know why we were not advised, as private members, that our exits were blocked. I want to know that. I want to know who authorized it, and I want to know: Is there an alternate plan, for fire safety, to get out of here? I want to know that.

Mr. Speaker, I feel, as a private member, that my rights and my privileges are being infringed upon here today, to be here in this House under this kind of rule, a police state where your doors are barred. It is a police state.

Mr. Speaker, I want this clarified for my own safety, and I wish that you would adjourn the House and get this straightened out. We are expected to be back here tonight, in the cover of darkness, again, for another session. If these are barred, if the lights fail, or anything else, we would not be able to escape.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader, to that point of privilege.

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

I do not know what exits he is talking about, but let me try to -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: I just listened to the member, and I appeal to the Member for Bay of Islands to let me respond. I listened intently, because the member is making a serious charge.

I just went out through the doors that we always go out through. If the member is talking about the ceremonial doors right there, they have always been locked. They are always locked.

MR. RIDEOUT: Since the House was built.

MR. E. BYRNE: Since the House was built in 1990, when we moved in here.

Colleagues, all of my colleagues, must understand -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: I say to my colleagues, let me deal with this in the absence of anything else. Those are ceremonial doors. They are always locked, I say to the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace, all the time. You know that.

If you tried to go out through those doors right now, it must have been the first time you tried; because, since this House has been open, you could never get out through them. They are always locked. The exits that are in place - one right here, one right there - are the ones that we have always come back and forth in.

It seems to me that it is not a point of privilege so much, Mr. Speaker, but a point of grandstanding, as if we are trying to create something not created. The fact of the matter is, those doors are always locked. Members cannot go through them at any time, so the point that he is making, really, Mr. Speaker, is not a point whatsoever.

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

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, there is a clear difference between a door being barred and a door being impeded with a piece of two-by-four. There are blocks of two-by-four across those doors. The doors do not operate as they are. They are blocked with two-by-four. If there was a fire right there in that corner, there is no way to leave these Chambers.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace raises a very serious issue, and we are hearing conflicting views from both sides.

The Chair would ask that the House temporarily recess and ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to check the entrances and the exits to this House to make sure that people can disperse, in case of an emergency, in a way that is acceptable to the forty-eight members of this House.

This House will stand in recess until the Sergeant-at-Arms has a chance to report back to the Speaker.

This House is now in recess.

Recess

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

The Chair has had an opportunity to confer with the Sergeant-at-Arms on the situation as brought forward to the House by the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace, and it is the Chair's understanding that the doors that the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace has referred to are not used in the ordinary entering and exiting of this House. By the same token, the Chair felt it was not right for them to be barred with two-by-four as well. The Sergeant-at-Arms put the piece of wood between the door handles, and the Sergeant-at-Arms has removed the wood from those doors.

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

MR. PARSONS: Just to comment in regard to what you just advised the House, I took advantage of the break as well, and the recess, and saw the two-by-four, because it is very unclear to a lot of people in this Province who controls or is responsible for the security in what areas.

Now, the Government House Leader stood up here no more than twenty minutes ago and said that the security within the confines of the precincts of the House rests with the Speaker. I just suggested - this is serious. Who is in charge of what area? The Minister of Transportation and Works was over there saying: They are always barred. They are always barred.

Well, maybe they are always locked. The point is, they can always be unlocked. Never before has there been a piece of two-by-four put across them.

MR. RIDEOUT: We did not order it.

MR. PARSONS: Well, regardless of who did or did not order it, the point is - and the Speaker himself acknowledged, because he was there when I observed it, and the Leader of the Opposition observed it, and the Speaker said he did not know anything about it. That is what has been raised several days here in this House, and for the past couple of weeks. We are dealing in this House here, the people's House, in the last couple of weeks, with a bunker mentality. You have police officers crawling all over the place. You have cameras going everywhere. You have two-by-four being stuck in doors. You have galleries being cleared, and there hasn't been an iota, an incident, of any kind of physical harm to anyone. Not that anybody would want that to happen; but, again, the people who are in charge of the security, so that we do not have unnecessary tension by anyone, should get it clear who is in charge of what.

With all due respect to the Sergeant-at-Arms, I take it the Sergeant-at-Arms takes her authority from the Speaker. I would suggest somebody - if those types of things are happening, so that we do not cast negative and improper aspersions onto government, that the Speaker should get it straight. Anything that is being done in the precincts of this House, the Speaker should know about it or else it should not be done, and it should be sanctioned by the Speaker.

We are seeing different rules in different areas at different times, with different people in different positions exercising different levels of authority. That is absolutely confusing and unnecessary. I think it is important that somebody clear the air and make it clear here who can do what. It is not a frivolous point that was raised by the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace. It was a very important and legitimate point, because never before have those doors been jammed shut, in the six years that I have been here, with a piece of two-by-four.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader, to that point of order.

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

What happens inside the confines of this House is up to the Speaker. With respect to the issue raised by the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace, that is an issue that you said you would deal with. You recessed the House, and you dealt with it. You have indicated that the Sergeant-at-Arms put it there. I want to be absolutely and abundantly clear that the government had absolutely nothing to do with that. When the member raised it we were all as shocked as he was, but raised and pointed out the fact that in the normal course of events in a running day those doors are always locked.

The point that I made was with respect to what the member said: What happens if there is a fire here? We will never get out of here. That was, in my view, Mr. Speaker, grossly over exaggerated because there are exits which we go through all the time which were not blocked. While the member was making his point, I was referring to that.

With respect to the House, and what occurred then, that is up to - and you have indicated the Sergeant-at-Arms had made a decision. If the Sergeant-at-Arms and the Speaker, I would assume, would have a relationship that is here -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: I want to make it abundantly clear, we had no knowledge of it. Government had nothing to do with it. Within the precincts of the House, what security is here or what security is not here is up to the Speaker of the House and not up to the members of government. We have not interfered, tried to dictate, or even been involved with any of those decisions. As a matter of fact, the Opposition House Leader knows that, on times when he has been consulted, I have been consulted the same time as him.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

 

 

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order?

MR. SWEENEY: To my point of privilege that seems to be downplayed here.

Fire does not pick which door it takes place at. There is one exit right there, and that is the exit that we have used.

The closest -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SWEENEY: I say to the minister, you can run which way you want, but if there is a fire in this building I am going to the closest exit and that is right there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SWEENEY: On a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair has identified the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace. He is raising a very serious point, and I ask members on both sides to allow the Chair to hear the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

The Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, I have great objection to the language just used on me, the reference that the Minister of Transportation and Works just made to me, that I am cracked. Mr. Speaker, I am not cracked and there are people in this Province who would take great exception to being referred to as cracked.

Mr. Speaker, there is nothing to be made light of because if the members opposite had nothing to do with this ruling, with the piece of two-by-four in the door, then they should be as concerned as I am about it. They should be as genuinely concerned as I am about it.

Mr. Speaker, that is why I am standing right now to my point of privilege, because of the frivolousness in which I am being treated here, to be referred to as being cracked by the Minister of Transportation and Works. I have never said a word in my life to downgrade him. For me to stand here on an issue as important as this and be referred to as cracked, well I take great exception to that, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair didn't hear any remark from the Minister of Transportation and Works, but I will leave it to the minister, that if he did make an unparliamentary remark, that he withdraw that remark.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, a great old White Bay saying, that your are cracked, doesn't mean that you are mentally ill or anything like that. It was in that context I said it, but if that offended the member I withdraw it.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Is the hon. Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace finished with his point of privilege?

The Chair takes the advise of the Opposition House Leader and the Chair will confer with the Speaker of the House. The Chair has already made it known here how the piece of two-by-four got there. The Chair listened to the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace when he talked about it being unsafe or that the wood should not be there, and the Chair has removed it. The Chair has asked the Sergeant-at-Arms to remove the piece of wood. The piece of wood is removed and it is the Chair's understanding that the exit and entrance to this Chamber now exists the same as it always has been.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I was talking about the single biggest investment in public health in the history of our Province in this year's Budget, an extra $113 million. Even though First Ministers' health money used this year only amounted to $59.5 million, we went way beyond that and put in $113 million.

I just want to mention for the benefit of members and the benefit of the public some of the initiatives we are taking this year to enhance the health care of people in our Province. There was $2.6 million towards an MRI. That procedure will allow 2,500 new exams a year. There was $2 million to replace existing CT scanners with new multislice CT scanners at the Health Science Centre and St. Clare's. That will deliver 4,000 more CTs a year, which would certainly help people who are on waiting lists to receive these services. There is $1.3 million for new ultrasound equipment in Carbonear, in Corner, in St. John's and in Labrador City. Ultrasound: There will 16,050 more exams in these areas with this new equipment.

There is $2.6 million we put in this year's Budget for nuclear medicine gamma cameras. They are used for bone and thyroid scans and also for certain cardiac procedures, Mr. Speaker. They will deliver 2,900 new exams a year in those specific areas. There is $2.5 million dollars for new mammography units here in St. John's, in Gander and Grand Falls-Windsor. There will be 10,700 more exams a year in these areas for diagnosis and important concerns, particularly with the women in our Province. There is $1 million dollars for a new endoscopy unit in Corner Brook and for an enhanced unit in Gander. This will shorten wait times for endoscopy by 40 per cent and it will deliver 3,400 new exams a year in the specific area. There is $75,000 for new laparoscopic equipment in Corner Brook. This will shorten wait times by 30 per cent and we will see 350 new procedures a year in this area.

We put $1.2 million this year into cardiac surgery. That will enable 184 more people, who are on a waiting list, to get cardiac surgery this year over the previous year. Overall, in echocardiograms, 900 more exams in this specific area. We have $350,000 for Visudyne. That is a new photo-dynamic therapy that is used to treat age related macular degeneration. Up to 200 people a year now will get relief because of this new investment in our Budget. Two and a half million dollars surgical capacity for people that are waiting for joint replacements, hip and knee replacements, et cetera. They will end up getting 340 more surgeries this year for joint replacements which will enable people to get relief from pain on a much quicker basis. That is improved quality of health care.

There is $520,000 that will support dialysis services in Gander and Carbonear, allowing up to thirty patients more to receive services closer to home, people who have to commute. I spoke with some people at the opening in Carbonear. There were three people there undergoing dialysis. Some had to get up 4:30 in the morning, they told me, and drive from the Trinity-Bay de Verde District and drive from Carbonear-Harbour Grace, come in to St. John's and then get back home. That enables them to have a different quality of life now, and only be in the hospital short periods and cut down on their travel.

We have $225,000 to extent the hours of operation for the cancer treatment foundation.

MS FOOTE: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: The Member for Grand Bank is singing out and trying to disturb my limited time of twenty minutes. I do not appreciate it, because I can only speak once on this. Mr. Speaker, you will never cite all the positive announcements in twenty minutes that we put in this health care budget.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: There is extra time allowed for people to get extra treatment for radiation and chemotherapy beyond their regular hours. We have invested $225,000 in that area. We invested $3.5 million to increase surgical capacity for cancer patients this year. There will be 740 additional surgeries for people with cancer. That is a 30 per cent reduction in wait times.

MS FOOTE: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: The Member for Grand Bank is continuing to shout. It is kind of annoying, but I will just have to continue.

Sixty thousand dollars to extend the hours of operation to include weekend coverage for mammography and endoscopy in Grand Falls-Windsor, and there will be an extra 780 exams as a result of that. There is $100,000 to enhance cardiac perfusion tests and bone scans at Gander. There will be 300 more tests in that area. Mr. Speaker, there are numerous specific areas.

I just want to touch on a few other areas, particularly with reference to - this year we put twenty-five new drugs on the formulary to be made available for people with various degrees of illness. Last year there was just one added. Gleevec was added last year, Mr. Speaker, for people who have cancer. For treatment this year, we added twenty-five more.

For example, among the new additions are Remicade and Enbrel. They are drugs belonging to a new class called biological response modifiers used to treat rheumatoid arthritis and Crohn's disease. Some others: Plavix is added to the list, that is a drug used to treat patients with a history of certain cardiac problems; Xeloda, one used for colorectal cancer or breast cancer, when standard treatment has failed; Spiriva to treat lung diseases that reduce air flow, such as emphysema; Eligard, one used in the treatment of prostate cancer; Valcyte to treat viruses and patients infected with HIV due to low immunity levels that affects their vision; Tracleer is treatment of a life-threatening lung disorder.

We have added Rilutek for Lou Gehrig's disease, used in treatment; Avodart for enlarged prostate treatment; Aerochamber Max, a device used to assist patients in getting greater benefit from their metered dose inhalers; of course Pegetrol; Redipen; and Pegasys RBV which treats patients with chronic hepatitis. There is a whole array of drugs added to this list based upon medical advice and based on recommendations by professionals, that would help people who are suffering from various diseases. There are dozens and dozens of others out there, Mr. Speaker. We could not add everything to the list but we went a long, long way in adding some of these ones that are of specific importance, I might add. This year, for example, we added another $1 million to carry out recommendations in the OxyContin Task Force, to move forward with methadone treatment for people who are suffering from addictions.

Overall, Mr. Speaker, we have taken great strides to look at all aspects. One million dollars more into mental health on recommendations that came from a task force. We are working to increase all facets of health: public health, a record amount; and for mental health. To deal with health boards this year, we put an extra $20 million in to allow them to be able to balance their budgets. We gave another $11 million to the boards, for inflation. This year, on April 1, they got notice on how much money would be in their budgets. I have seen, in the past, where it was October and November and they still did not know what they were going to have for the year and the year is almost over. This year, they have a number starting off on day one. We are allowing boards to be able to plan and to look at giving the best quality of services to the people of our Province.

We saw, last year, an increase in physicians in our Province. There are about sixty new physicians since 2002 who have come into our Province. An increase in the number of salaried physicians and fee-for-service physicians to allow more people to get access to physicians. While in some areas we would hope to have more, but we are up in the 1,000 range now of physicians in our Province.

We have seen tremendous strides in improving health care in our Province over the past two years. This year was probably one of the single biggest infusions. Over the next six years, for the First Ministers' Meetings, that our Premier fought to get - and he was instrumental, I might add. I was at those meetings. He was instrumental in getting extra money into health care for people in our Province. We came back here with $284 million more to put in over the next six years to improve the lives of people in our Province. The Premier fought for that and he fought for equalization. Eighty-eight million new dollars came into our coffers because of the fight that took place last September to enhance the opportunity to get revenues.

Along with the Atlantic Accord - significant, a $2 billion up-front payment. Hopefully, we will have it sooner rather than later.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: That is correct. It is over an eight year period. We would like to have it upfront. We would very much like to have it early. We have a letter in writing. We have asked that they have a separate piece of legislation to deal with it, but we cannot control the federal agenda. We will respect the rights of the House of Commons to deal with their business how they want to deal with it. I would like to see it done separate. I would have liked to see it passed in March, but the later it is the more it costs us. We budgeted $45 million on interest this year just on that alone. If we do not get it, that is that much less money we will have on that item. We certainly hope to get it as soon a possible and we would like to see it happen. We would have liked to see it happen in March when they moved a motion back through the House, but it did not happen. We cannot cry over spilled milk, but we are hopeful that it is going to move as quickly as possible.

There has been tremendous inroads. We have had significant improvements in our financial picture overall. In Labrador West, for example, the people in Labrador West, and in Labrador generally, have greater costs of getting medical services. There was an anomaly in Labrador West and the member raised it several times, I might add. This year we applied that fee to people in Labrador West - the $40 fee - and the rest then would be covered the same as other Labradorians. This year, because of the unique situation in Labrador, travel - most people in this Province want to get medical transportation assistance. They pay the first $500, then 50 per cent thereafter. For Labrador people who are faced with greater geography - it is tougher, it is more costly - government pays the first $500 and then they pay the balance. So, if $1,000 is spent, government pays $750 and the individual pays $250. Here on the Island, if $1,000 is spent, the individual pays $750 and the government, the taxpayers pays$250. That is 25 per cent as opposed to 75 per cent if - the $1,000 cost. Of course, as numbers go up the percentages change based on the higher amounts. So that is an example. If it costs just $500, it is paid 100 per cent. There are not too many trips really that costs as little as that when you have to get a plane from one part of Labrador to another, wherever it may be, or when you have to leave here and go to Ontario to get a procedure that we cannot do here, there are costs that are incurred.

We think it was positive. In light of projecting a $492 million deficit, we made a significant investment in health care above and beyond the monies that was (inaudible) from the federal government because my colleagues felt that health care is the number one priority for people in our Province. We all need it, or we are going to need it at some point in our lives, and there was a commitment from government to do that. We could not meet all the demands. As we brought down probably one of the best budgets in a long time in that area, we could not meet all demands. There is not enough money probably available to meet all requests, but we know by getting new diagnosis -

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

MR. SULLIVAN: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been requested.

Has leave been granted?

MS THISTLE: For one minute.

MR. SPEAKER: For one minute. The extension has been granted.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you.

I am limited to one minute by the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans. So I will try to wrap it up as much as possible in the restrictions she has placed on me.

Mr. Speaker, we gave considerable thought to this Budget in terms of delivering health care to the people in our Province; in delivering a Budget that dealt with our deficit on a serious basis and brought that to a reasonable level and still invested money into health care. We spent $196 million new dollars this year in, over and above, on a net basis - and health care has $113 million. We spent initiatives in this Budget, $35 million economic initiatives. We invested in the capital. We improved our capital expenditure net by 50 per cent this year so we can have new capital projects going on in our Province. This is overall.

It has been a very good Budget. Even members in the Opposition, at different times, have complimented even in the Estimates on aspects of our Budget there. I guess they do not want to say it too loud in public because they, deep down, do not want to admit that we have done something. We have put a significant investment into health care when they have been cutting the guts out of it for the past number of years.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am glad to stand here today and respond to the Budget, the second Budget for the new Tory government. I cannot help think back to when I heard the Premier on Open Line a couple of months ago saying he was returning from Labrador. He had a chance to sit down in his seat and look at the Budget that he brought forward this year. He said he liked it so well that he felt like patting his own self on the back. Now, I know he has a pretty long arm to be able to do that, but he said on the Open Line show: I feel like patting my own self on the back that the Budget was so good.

Well now, let's see how good the Budget is. I believe that there has been no plan announced by the Williams government for resettlement of rural Newfoundland and Labrador, but there is a plan for resettlement of rural Newfoundland and Labrador and it is very subtle. I will use my time this afternoon to point out that this government has a plan for resettlement of rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

I look back to a couple of hours ago when I saw the crab fisher persons demonstrating here in this gallery. They did not like what they heard and they just could not take it anymore. I think back to a popular song that was on the country hit charts several years back. It was a song entitled: What kind of no don't you understand? We have seen harvesters, plant workers and community people from all over rural Newfoundland and Labrador. They have blockaded Placentia Bay. They have blockaded St. John's Harbour. They had a mammoth march and a protest yesterday at Confederation Building, outside here. Some media are saying it was 5,000 people and one of the biggest demonstrations that has ever taken place in the history of our Province. They have been in the galleries. The crab fishery should have opened April 9. They have been in the galleries prior to that and every day since. They have hung on to every word the minister has said, every word that the Premier has said, listened to every Open Line show - now there are three a day. They tried to get the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture into a room and get him to debate with fisher people what he promised he would do several months ago. That is all they are asking.

The Premier thinks he did a wonderful thing by taking one year off the pilot plan. He did that without ever sitting down and talking to the people who are being affected by it. He made a promise - no, he did not make a promise, I must retract that. The Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture made a promise that he would engage in debate and consultation. He broke that promise. He relied solely on his own viewpoint and the viewpoint of the Premier. Whether Cabinet were involved, I do not know and I will never know. I am not a member of this government's Cabinet but what we do know, there is a great lot of dissension within this government now over this very issue and it is affecting the life and well-being of every part of Newfoundland and Labrador. There is nobody who can dispute that. We are in a period of being unsettled. Everybody feels it.

You know how sensitive things got here in this House today and the extraordinary measures that government and the Speaker of the House are taking in the name of security. People are getting very edgy because they are looking at the possibility of a collapse of a crab fishery worth half a billion dollars to the economy of this Province. Nobody will blink within government to have a meeting and try to iron out all of the glitches and problems connected to this pilot. Nobody will blink. They are prepared to stand on the policy, supposing it means losing $500 million to the economy of this Province. They will not back down, although the majority of people connected want the government to sit down and look at this very issue. No way, they are determined. They are not backing down.

That, in itself, shows an arrogance that we have never witnessed before. Any man or woman should be big enough to say that they were wrong. No man or woman elected by the public in this Province should ever get to the point where they feel that they have not made a mistake and they are not willing to second-guess any policy they have made in the interest of the general public of this Province; because, when we get to that point we are not effective. We are not effective politicians when we cannot look at objectivity from other people in this Province.

What has happened here now? The government has made a policy. They have a closed mind and they are going to run roughshod over whomever and whatever it takes to implement their policy because they made it. I can tell you, if you are going to protect the people of this Province, protect the economy, and look after people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, it is time to take a second look. What more can people do? They cannot come in on bended knee. They are begging you now. The fishery is moving on. We will soon be into soft shell and there is nothing started. What more can people do to ask you to have a second look? It is not working.

One member of your very own caucus, the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's, knew he could not go any longer without addressing the needs of his people. There are several other members of coastal communities in your caucus who feel exactly like the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's. You have three members of your caucus ostracized now. You have the Member for Lake Melville who will never go in Cabinet; you said that yourselves. You have the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's, who was almost eviscerated on the Open Line show a couple of nights ago, and you have the Member for Topsail, who has been swept back to the back benches. The talent in your caucus - you have three caucus members that the Premier has virtually declared as ineffective. He has no time for them or their opinions. How they continue to sit there, listen, and be part of it every day is beyond me. If I had a leader, or a Premier, who tore me to shreds on Open Line, the first thing I would do the next morning, I would be out of there as quick as I could be. I must commend the Member for Topsail. She had the integrity and the gumption to do it, to stand up to this Premier, and she did it. I must give her credit for that.

Anyway, there is more than the three that I have listed. There are other people over there, and they are hanging their heads; they cannot look up. They cannot stand on their feet and support the minister's policy, or the Premier's policy. They are just going to have to wallow in the decision of toeing the government line.

I want to talk about two other issues that are subtle in nature but they are big when you consider what is happening to rural Newfoundland and Labrador. On Saturday, I went to Buchans and they had, I think it was, the fifth annual dart tournament for fire departments in Central Newfoundland. That was a novel idea that was crafted by the Millertown Volunteer Fire Department. What they do is, the host community - they host a dart tournament for seven other communities in Central Newfoundland, all volunteer fire departments. They host a dart tournament, and any profit that is raised after the tournament is over goes to the host community. There will probably be a couple of thousand dollars that would have been realized as of Saturday from hosting this dart tournament, and that will go to the Town of Buchans for their volunteer fire activities and actually help toward running their fire department.

I have to commend these volunteers. Next year it will go to another community. They have decided, on their own, to improvise and provide firefighting capacity for people of their communities because they realize that they do not get adequate funding from the government and they need to make sure that their homes and the residents of each community are safe and they have modern equipment to respond to a fire if need be. They have taken that initiative on their own, to do this kind of a fundraiser, and I must commend them for it.

When I was driving up over the Buchans Highway after the winter, with the snow gone and so on, I could not believe the cracks in the side of the pavement. You know, that is an accident waiting to happen. Last year, and again this year, I wrote the Minister of Transportation and Works. It was urgent last year, but it is more urgent this year. We have a school bus that picks up children in Millertown and Buchans Junction. Now, if you have the side of asphalt gone off your highway, and the shoulders are very narrow, you are putting our young people at great risk.

I don't know if the Minister of Transportation and Works feels this is important. I never got any money last year, and it is highly unlikely that I will this year, but I want to draw to his attention that there are two other activities that he may not be aware of. Number one is that the Duck Pond Mine has already been announced, and construction is in full gear already. What does that mean? We have all kinds of large equipment going over that highway and heading up past Millertown. Now, is he prepared to let that pavement deteriorate even further? Probably so.

We have another issue. We have woods trucks hauling timber, pulpwood, to our mill in Grand Falls-Windsor. That is ripping up the pavement along the edges. I can tell you, while I was the member, in government, for Grand Falls-Buchans - I have now been in Opposition almost two years - there was never a year that there were not upgrades to that Buchans Highway.

The Minister of Transportation and Works is going to have to address that issue because, the next thing, there is going to be a fatality. There is going to be a fatality with large equipment, or a motorist travelling on that highway. There are 105 kilometres of nothing. There is no service station. There is nowhere to call. Most times you cannot get adequate cell coverage when you are travelling that 105 kilometres.

Unless you repair the highway, you are going to have to take full responsibility for safety issues that might occur on that long stretch of highway, so I urge the Minister of Transportation and Works, if you have any compassion, any heart, or any responsibility for safety measures throughout the Province, you will deal with this situation and make sure these upgrades are completed this year and every year, because this is an accident waiting to happen. I hope that he is paying attention to what I am saying over there right now.

I also want to talk about the subtle changes that this government is doing to rural Newfoundland and Labrador that is going to cause resettlement on its own, although you are not saying the words.

We have a brand new school in Buchans, that was built in 1997. Premier Brian Tobin was Premier at the time, and everybody said: Why would you put a new school in Buchans? For obvious reasons. The road situation is one. We have children who are living 105 kilometres off the main highway, and this particular school is a necessary essential school.

I will tell you what has happened to that school this year. The Minister of Education, in his wisdom, has decided to cut one point five teaching units. Now, that is one-and-a-half teachers. That does not sound like much, does it, one-and-a-half teachers? Then I looked back to the Blue Book that was put out by the Tories before they became the government and they said: A Progressive Conservative Government will reinvest savings from population decline into programs and services to ensure that all children have access to quality education. What did they do? Just the opposite. Any savings that they are getting through reorganization is going back into general revenues and it is not going back into schools. Several ministers, on the government side, have confirmed this very thing.

One thing they did say they were going to do, and they are doing, they said they are going to expand distance education offerings to broaden the curriculum. Now, I think this is despicable. I think this is despicable! What we have now in Buchans for our high school students; all social studies. Can you imagine, all social studies? That is Math 3204 Academic, Biology 3201, World Geography, and History. Do you know how our students in Buchans are going to get these courses? Just like the Tories said, they are going to expand distance education. Do you know what that means? Our students in Buchans are going to sit in front of a television screen, a computer screen, and they are going to look in that monitor for all those subjects. They will have no interaction with a teacher. This is what the Tory government calls expanding the distance education curriculum. By gosh, they are true to their word! Forget about the in person teacher in the classroom.

They have done something else. The Minister of Education was out bawling and blaring how they kept seventy-five extra teachers this year when, in fact, they took out 196 last year and 145 this year. Starting in September, 2005, there are 400 teachers gone. The seventy-five that he was bawling and blaring about, guess where he put the seventy-five this year, the extra teachers he so calls it? There are not extra teachers. Those seventy-five teachers did not go to rural Newfoundland and Labrador. That is shameful! Those teachers did not go to rural Newfoundland and Labrador. They went to the bigger centres around the Province. That is where those 75 teachers went.

In Buchans, a week ago, they decided they would do a demonstration around the town and let people become aware of their plight this year. They did that and they are organized, let me tell you. The student council in Buchans has held several meetings, and I have been privy to everything that has been going on. They are contacting student councils all over the Province and they are going to join up. They are going to make government aware of what they are doing and put pressure on government, which is rightly so. In very short order, I will be bringing petitions to this House of Assembly from Lakeside Academy in Buchans. I will be letting government know how they are trying to cut back services in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

This is a government that got elected under false pretenses. You do not have to mention the word resettlement, all you have to do is cut off services. You do not have to mention resettlement if you are a government, all you have to do is cut off services. The government stands on their high haunches and they say they did not cut any services. Let me tell you something. the government has cut out a lot of services.

Over in Stephenville, Government Services and Lands, it is ridiculous. In fact, it should never happen. Imagine, an employee of Government Services and Lands in Stephenville putting a sign on the door, gone fishing for three weeks, when people are looking for electrical permits for their business renovations and also for new housing and so on. To close up an office for Government Services and Lands for an electrical inspection, I mean where have you heard tell of it? If a private business did that they would be out of business.

Is government asking the people in rural Newfoundland to resettle? No way, but they are cutting off services. They have the teacher cuts, then they closed out the social assistance offices, social services. There have been all kinds of social services offices closed throughout our Province. If you have a problem and you are living in rural Newfoundland, too bad, you just pick up the phone and you dial 1-800 and you go through pressing all of the different categories, depending on your problem, and you wait on the phone, and you wait on the phone. They have done that. They have cut out road tests for a driver examiner. Too bad if you want to get your road test done in Harbour Breton somewhere. That is gone. They have done that. Now they are closing out the depots. There is probably going to be all kinds - we know there is, from looking at the Budget, the Estimates - there is going to be all kinds of contracting out in Transportation and Works this year. These are jobs that were out in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. This was maintenance that was done on equipment out in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. They are not going to have that equipment out there any more - okay? - so government is going to spend that money on contracting out.

They have closed out the weigh scales. The weigh scales are gone in various locations in Newfoundland, in Port aux Basques.

MR. SPEAKER: .Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

MS THISTLE: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been requested and leave has been granted.

MS THISTLE: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to have about twenty hours here instead of twenty minutes, because, I tell you, I could shape up and frame up what this government is doing to rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Mr. Speaker, time does not permit and I will have an opportunity in the next few days to resume my talk again. I thank you for the extra time.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am certainly delighted to get up and speak about education and to follow up on the Estimates Committee of which, of course, my department was a part.

I must say, in looking at the response that I got from the hon. members on both sides of the House, certainly we saw some very, very good things. Contrary to what we are hearing perhaps from the other side, there are certainly good initiatives that are contained in the Budget Estimates of the Department of Education for the upcoming fiscal year. It is important, Mr. Speaker, that we go down through some of those points because it is very easy, I suppose, to get up and talk about what should be and what should not be and so on and so forth, but when we look at the Budget Estimates, Mr. Speaker, those are real estimates and real dollars put forward in a strategic fashion to deal with the needs of our learners in Newfoundland and Labrador. That is what it is all about, Mr. Speaker, teaching and learning. Of course, the life long learning is a key concept that we must understand as we go forward.

This government certainly has made a commitment, a commitment to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, to move forward in education in a strategic fashion. I say to the hon. members here in this House, that we must go forward in a manner which is going to cater to the specific needs at a specific time. We, as a government, listened. As Education critic in my days in Opposition, I certainly did listen as people articulated to me and to my party as to where we should be going in education facing the reality that is before us. In the K to 12 system there is a reality, Mr. Speaker, and a reality that not only is this government dealing with, but the previous Administration had to deal with as well.

Mr. Speaker, when I graduated from high school back in 1971, we were, as a Province, looking at learners to the extend of probably 160,000 in the K to 12 system. That was in the very early 1970s. As we entered into the twenty-first Century, we found ourselves dealing, not with 160,000 but 80,000. That is a reality. Not only that, Mr. Speaker, but by 2010 we are going to be looking at another reality, which is talking about 60,000 students in the K to 12 system. On the other hand, it is nice to report that we are seeing an increase in the number of individuals from our Province who are engaging in post-secondary education. We see that this increase is helping us as we go forward, especially in our public post-secondary institutions of the College of the North Atlantic, as well as Memorial University of Newfoundland and Labrador.

So, we accept that reality, and we deal with the reality in putting forth a strategic plan that will address those particular needs that are brought on by declining populations and the ever increasing need to engage in education, because, like any government, we realize the importance of education and how important it is for us to provide learners, whether they are at the early childhood level, whether they are at the Kindergarten level, the Level III, post-secondary or beyond. We must ensure that we have some plans in place to allow these lifelong learners to continue their journey in a manner which is certainly befitting where they should be going.

Mr. Speaker, there has been some talk about the teacher allocations. Certainly, that is a concern as we try to resource the system of education that we have now in the K to 12 system. It is not an easy task, I say to you, because as we see the shift in population in the demographics in the negative as the numbers decrease in certain areas and, for the most part, too, we have to look at the increase in other areas because there is migration occurring within the Province as well as outside the Province. So, when it came to the teacher allocations, we certainly look at, I guess, the number of students who were in the system and allocate according to the numbers of the previous year and give that block of teachers then to our school boards and they allocate according to the projected enrollments of the following September. Hopefully, there will be, indeed, flexibility there to allow the boards to look at every individual school and to ensure that the allocation of teachers is there to put forth a program that best suits the needs of that particular school community.

It is not a new thing. To hear hon. members across the way talk about this as a new thing, it is something that the previous Administration had to deal with and that this current Administration deals with. Certainly, around this time of year as we see changes in our teacher workforce, there are going to be concerns raised, and, hopefully, those concerns will be addressed in consultation with the school boards and, indeed, in consultation with the government as well. This particular allocation formula was put in place by the previous Administration and since that allocation formula, they have abided by it and moved forward with it. They did not change it. They accepted it and, of course, we are looking at it in the same light. It was put together in 2000-2001 to address the changing landscape out there and we hope, Mr. Speaker, that again, in the allocations that come down through the boards, that we can truly address the needs of our school communities out there.

With that in mind as well, this government fulfilled a commitment or is in the process of fulfilling a commitment that we made regarding teacher allocations, and that was to continue to decrease the size of the classes in the primary grades. I say the primary grades, Mr. Speaker, because those are important grades as, of course, all grades are important, but most important are primary because our curriculum now is lending itself - especially in the primary grades - to more of a one-on-one situation where every individual child is looked at and their needs catered to as we do our assessments, as we do our programming and as we do our teaching. With that in mind, we were able to redeploy fifty-two teachers who would address that particular commitment that we made.

Of course, we made another commitment, Mr. Speaker, by looking at how we can further increase our fine arts instruction in (inaudible) and appreciation in the grades. To that we have dedicated $9 million over the next three years. Again, to ensure that we give our children every opportunity to understand where they are, who they are, and perhaps give them some sense of where they should be going. This cultural strategy was well received by the cultural communities. We look forward to engaging with these cultural communities to further enhance the delivery of this program into our schools over the next three years.

Perhaps one of the areas, Mr. Speaker, that certainly came out in discussions with various school communities and other stakeholders in education was our school infrastructure. Certainly, that was not lost on me, nor my government, realizing that we need to ensure that our students have a safe, secure environment, an environment that is conducive to good learning. Mr. Speaker, we know that the age of our schools are increasing. We have schools in this Province well beyond perhaps their intended shelf life and we need to address that. We are addressing it, again, in a strategic fashion; a fashion that clearly indicates that we need to go forward in a manner that will ensure that we do present the best possible learning environment for our students. With that in mind, we have committed $26 million to the school infrastructure; $16 million of it will be put aside for maintenance, renovations, upgrading and the like. Of course, the remainder to go towards our capital construction.

A third issue, Mr. Speaker, in the K to 12 system that again was brought to not only the attention of this government but previous governments as well is the transportation of our students. Mr. Speaker, we have something like close to 1,000 buses delivering perhaps 60,000 students in any given day throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. I cannot tell you, Mr. Speaker, how important it is for us to ensure that the people who operate those buses are well trained, that the buses are well maintained, and we do have a commitment of this government to ensure safety on school buses. With that in mind, we certainly again allocated $3 million to reduce the age of the school buses, to enhance the safety programs, and, of course, something to the effect of $1.5 million to try to reduce the ages of buses for our contractors, and $500,000 to assist boards in financing.

On the K to 12 still, Mr. Speaker - because I know my time is winding down and it is very difficult to go down through everything - there is no doubt that we have listened to the people who see the need for healthy students in our schools, and how important it is to engage them in physical activity, good eating habits, and positive attitudes as they go forward into their adult lives, hopefully carrying with them the attitude of staying fit, staying healthy, eating healthy.

With that in mind, Mr. Speaker, with the introduction of courses that have been put into the high school for the required credits now for physical education, we have included $1 million to help equip the schools to address those new courses that are going in, but also to address the changing emphasis in physical education in our schools to one of personal habits, of trying to put themselves on a regiment that will encourage healthy eating, healthy exercise.

Our learning resources, again, I cannot say enough about having the adequate resources that are necessary so that we can implement the curriculum that has been put together. With that, we have put together $2.5 million to support the new curriculum; a total, I suppose, of $4 million to ensure that the resources that we have certainly are in line with our curriculum, and adding to it.

There is one other item, Mr. Speaker, that I would like to bring up, and that is the Innu education piece. Certainly, talking there, we need to address some of the issues that have come to our attention with regard to the Innu education. Half a million dollars is there, Mr. Speaker, in anticipation of the release of the Philpott report later in June, some of the recommendations. We feel that, putting aside the $500,000 in anticipation of that, we can partner with the Innu in moving forward on it.

The K to 12 system, Mr. Speaker, again, in finishing up on it, we are looking at moving forward in a strategic fashion, listening to the particular needs of the school communities that are out there, and moving forward in a positive way.

Mr. Speaker, looking at the clock, it is getting close to 5:30 p.m. Perhaps I could adjourn debate until 7:00 p.m.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): By agreement, I do believe that we have agreed to recess the House until 7:00 o'clock, so the House will now recess until 7:00 o'clock.

I do understand that the hon. the minister has about four-and-a-half minutes left to speak at 7:00 o'clock, if he wishes.

This House is now in recess until 7:00 o'clock.


May 3, 2005 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 19A


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

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

Prior to the recess, the hon. the Minister of Education was speaking. I understand he has four minutes left if he wishes to continue debate. If not, the debate resumes.

The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am rather disappointed that the Minister of Education did not take his extra four minutes. After all the pleas from the people in Labrador regarding the Budget, I thought he was going to save the last four minutes tonight, when all the students are home doing their studies, that he would do the appropriate thing and announce the auditorium for Happy Valley-Goose Bay and for all of Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ANDERSEN: So, Mr. Speaker, I am very disappointed.

Mr. Speaker, let there be no mistake, to the people of Labrador, this year's Budget - if there was one item that could have shown some confidence to the people in Labrador from this government, Mr. Speaker, was the auditorium that the moms and dads, the brothers and sisters, and, most important of all, the students in Labrador asked, not only asked but they begged of this government to build.

Mr. Speaker, almost every school on the North Coast of Labrador have sent in petitions, which I have read in the House and I have spoken on, going back well over a year ago. Yet, this government still stands firm not to give the children in Labrador an auditorium, that students in almost every other part of this Province take for granted. As we see this government unfold, we almost come to the conclusion that maybe the reason why the youth in Labrador were not granted their auditorium is because, and God forbid, of where they live. There are many students and many parents in Labrador today who are starting to ask that question to themselves. There are students and parents who have asked me the same question.

When I see a government that can go out there and pay off a $45 million mortgage on The Rooms - the doors have not even been open yet and they paid off $45 million and turned around and denied the youth in Labrador an auditorium where they could go and showcase their education, their talent and get together with other students in Labrador. I think this is one time that we can say to this government: shame on you for what you have done to the most important people in Labrador, the children.

Mr. Speaker, what is ironic with this government is that a week after the schools closed in Labrador, one week after the schools closed in Labrador, and the children walked away from their school knowing that there is no auditorium in sight, that they are going to have to go, at least, another year-and-a-half or two years before they get it; a week later this government is going to go down with a grand opening where they just paid off $45 million - paid off the mortgage before they opened the door. A week prior to that, before they had their big grand finale to open The Rooms, they were saying to the students as they left their schools in Labrador: Sorry, boys, we can't help you. Probably the Minister of Justice had the best advice to the students in Labrador when he said: Stay tuned - because they are waiting patiently from this government.

Mr. Speaker, one of the first interviews I did on CBC in Labrador after the 2003 election - I was asked by a reporter about this government. I made the comment that I believe we had a Water Street government.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. ANDERSEN: Good. I am glad I am hearing some groans over there, because I will say it again: a Water Street government.

Mr. Speaker, when we look at the problems that we are facing in rural Newfoundland and Labrador today, then one can only ask yourself the question - there are all kinds of dollars and monies for things inside the overpass, but there is very little for those outside.

Mr. Speaker, I can tell you that the students today are watching. Day by day - they are the future. They are our future. I can tell you again that they are very disappointed. I guess the priorities are straight from this government. We will pay off the $45 million on The Rooms. We will burn the mortgage. We will open it up and we will watch the students go out of here knowing they have to wait another eighteen months.

Mr. Speaker, in another six months this government is going to be halfway through their term. October 23 they will be two years through their term. With the short construction season in Labrador, it goes to show that it is going to be two years before they get it, if they get it then. I am glad to see the Minister Responsible for Labrador Affairs walk in because I do believe that he was sincere when he told the people he wanted to work with them to get the auditorium.

One thing hit me kind of funny, Mr. Speaker. They said they have to go to Ottawa. They have to go to Ottawa and ask Ottawa if they will help out.

MR. SHELLEY: What is wrong with that?

MR. ANDERSEN: What is wrong with that, I say to the Minister Responsible for Labrador Affairs? When you can turn around and pay $45 million on The Rooms and turn around and deny the children in Labrador an auditorium, I say there is a lot wrong with that, Minister. There is a lot wrong with that.

MR. SHELLEY: Who built The Rooms?

MR. ANDERSEN: Yes, who paid it off, $45 million, one lump sum and took away from the rest of the Province, especially Labrador, their auditorium? Who did it, Minister? Let me ask you the question.

MR. SHELLEY: Who built it?

MR. ANDERSEN: It is not a question of who built it, it is how your government went wrong. I am glad, Mr. Speaker, that the minister for Labrador made that statement here today because there are people watching.

MR. SHELLEY: That is good. I am glad they are.

MR. ANDERSEN: They are watching, Mr. Speaker, I can guarantee you. They know and certainly they will hear a lot more about that in days to come.

I guess it is a lot like the fishery, too, Mr. Speaker. It is a lot like the fishery. When we see what is happening with our crab fishermen and women today, who go out on the boats, that they are doing it to the poor people. The fishermen who go out there and invested their life savings into their boats. Through blood, sweat and tears are trying to provide for their family and today we see how the Premier and this government reacts toward these people. Don't talk to me boys, you are only fishermen. I am not going to back down from you people. We know what's right and wrong. I guess with that kind of attitude, then it is plain to see why the children in Labrador do not have their auditorium.

Mr. Speaker, we look at the Department of Transportation and Works closing down highway depots. We have asked the question many times, asked the minister in this House: Are you going to contract out work? We got no answer. We are going to have a whole bunch of depots with no one there. The question is raised: Who is going to do the work in between all of these depots when they are laying off people?

I know the minister said one time in Question Period that our government laid off workers. We did not lay off workers, but he said: You closed depots. Mr. Speaker, we did, but we did it in public consultation with the union and with the workers. Even though we closed down depots, not one person lost their job. When we look at rural Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, then I guess this government is slashing and cutting in rural Newfoundland and Labrador because I guess they do not meet the criteria to be a priority on their agenda.

Mr. Speaker, there are some things in the Budget that was helpful to Labrador. When we look at extra money in health, there is no question that these are good investments. When people can benefit from new health programs and initiatives, then certainly it is a God send to people who live in these rural communities.

Mr. Speaker, there are, I guess, a bunch of things that affects Labrador more so than ever before. Certainly, when we look at the Budget we see some money there that is put out for the Aboriginal women and I want to thank the minister for the initiative that she took. It took a trip to the North Coast of Labrador, with herself, the Premier and other ministers, and out of that came some good initiatives. I think more of that is needed. We need the ministers to travel to Labrador more often and certainly, if they took the time I think the auditorium would become a priority on their agenda.

We look at the Department of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs, Mr. Speaker, that was taken away from the people in Labrador. We look at the Department of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs that was taken out of the office in Goose Bay, taken away. Labrador had their own minister and they had their own assistant deputy minister. Mr. Speaker, I can say to this government, until you put a deputy minister in place in the office in Happy Valley-Goose Bay then you are going to find it very difficult to deal with the problems that face Labrador. There are many qualified people in Labrador who can fill many jobs, and certainly a disappointment to this government is that they have not been able to fill the deputy minister's position yet. Certainly, that is a key figurehead in Labrador. It is something that the people in Labrador had, was taken away from them, and hopefully this government will give it back.

Mr. Speaker, the voice of concern coming from all across Labrador, and particularly from the youth - we can never say enough. I could say it over and over and over, is that the auditorium is a must. We have people like Tim Borlase, who has spent over thirty years with the arts festival and now he is moving on. The people who are about to take over are very, very disappointed and discouraged that they do not have an auditorium. Imagine, Mr. Speaker! Where else in this Province would people be forced to go to an old hangar, with no heat, to try and enjoy an arts festival? Well, I tell you, it happens in Labrador. The only place in this Province where people have to go and wear their jackets to attend and take part in an arts festival or music festival because the government of the day did not see fit to provide money in this Budget for the auditorium.

Mr. Speaker, these are some of the concerns that have come out of this Budget. The concerns of Labrador are real. The people need to have a voice. This is the first government since Confederation that had a member sitting in their caucus where he did not become a minister. I guess knowing now what we know today, after what happened to the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's, that the Member for Labrador may have spoken out against the Premier prior to the election. I think that is a good reason as to why the Premier is holding him back from becoming a Cabinet minister. All we have to do is look at the Member for Topsail, who spoke out against the Premier, she is now sitting out in the back seats. Certainly, if a lot of the people over there spoke out and said what they wanted to say - because I honestly and seriously believe, when it comes down to the dispute that is facing the fisherpersons today, there are a lot of members over there who want to speak out, but I honestly believe they are scared to speak out.

Mr. Speaker, when we talk to fishermen from different ridings, when we talk to people from different ridings, they tell us -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. ANDERSEN: I guess time has changed, because many of the members over there who were over here, when we were faced with a tough decision, they said: Come on, stand in your place and speak for your people. Come on, stand up! Speak like a man, speak like a woman. There are many over there on the other side today who are silent. They are very silent.

Mr. Speaker, again, I guess it goes to show that some people are scared to voice their opinion. I guess the point about all of this is that I, too, worked under a Premier being a minister and being a backbencher and I can guarantee you, there were many times in Cabinet when I voiced my concerns in the caucus meetings, in Cabinet meetings and in ministers and the Premier's offices one on one. I can guarantee you one thing, many times I spoke out for concerns that faced the people I represented, but I can guarantee you one thing, I had nothing stripped from me. Most importantly of all, I could look at a Premier who sat down and listened to the concerns of what people in his caucus and his Cabinet had to say.

Mr. Speaker, I think when we look across the way today and see the way that the Premier rules with an iron fist, it is his way or the highway, then maybe we can understand why some of those people over there are scared to speak out. All you have to do is listen to the people in the galleries who come here quite often, and talk to the fishermen outside these Chambers, talk to them on the wharves. They will tell you that yes, we have gone to our members and we have asked them to speak out but the response they get is silence.

So, I look forward to a lot of minsters travelling, I guess, through Labrador this summer. There are many things up there that is going to change the Province around. There are a lot of mineral developments. I welcome the Member for Mount Pearl to come up as well. We have not chased anyone away. I can guarantee you, we will show you the true Newfoundland and Labrador if you come up, I say to the Member for Mount Pearl. As a matter of fact, you will probably want to take up residence up there.

MR. DENINE: What?

MR. ANDERSEN: Take up residence.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. ANDERSEN: See, Mr. Speaker, all I have to do is offer one invitation to one person over there and everybody else gets jealous, but I can understand that because Labrador is such a beautiful place.

Now, if only these people would join in unison with the Member for Lake Melville and say: Yes, boy, we are going to give the children of Labrador their auditorium. We are going to give them their auditorium because it is not the political thing to do, it is the right thing to do. What they have done is they have denied the children in Labrador the chance.

I know, Mr. Speaker, my time is up, so I will sit down. I will be back up again and have another debate on this Budget.

MR. SPEAKER: Continuing debate.

The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

It is a pleasure for me to rise in my place today to take part in this debate dealing with topics of health, education and justice which were dealt with by the Social Policy Committee of this House of Assembly. Of course, I should say initially it is always a pleasure to listen to the hon. Member for Torngat Mountains, but I would call upon him to correct some of the words he said tonight. I believe he made the comment that the Minister of Justice said to the children of Labrador, in response to their request for a new auditorium, to stay tuned. Obviously, the hon. member knows that I did not say that to the children of Labrador, and I, of course, would ask him if he would withdraw those remarks, or at least correct the remarks. I am sure he will do so in due course.

MR. ANDERSEN: Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains, is he rising on a point of order or responding to the -

MR. ANDERSEN: Responding to the Minister of Justice, Mr. Speaker.

I do believe what I said was the children in Labrador are waiting for their auditorium, but what they are doing is listening and probably going by what the Minister of Justice said, stay tuned, not saying that you were going to give them the gym minister, but I wish you would. If I offended you, Mr. Speaker, I withdraw.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order. There is a difference of opinion between two hon. members. It does not constitute a point of order, and I caution members about raising points of order in the guise of participating in debate.

The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. Member for Torngat Mountains for setting the record straight, and I want to tell him how much I enjoyed my latest trip to Labrador. Since taking on this portfolio of Justice and Attorney General, I have the pleasure to visit Labrador on three occasions and each trip is better than the one before. I certainly enjoyed it very much. I was there a few weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, and unfortunately missed a couple of interesting days in this House of Assembly, but we had the pleasure of opening up the new Supreme Court House in Labrador. I know the hon. Member for Torngat Mountains was there.

Yes, the previous government did do the planning of that court house and I am delighted that this government showed its concern for the people of Labrador by contributing the necessary money to have that facility completed and built in the beautiful City of Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I am also extremely pleased -

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. ANDERSEN: Mr. Speaker, I want to advise the Minister of Justice that the contract and the tender to build a courthouse was awarded and the process was already started months and months before you and your government took power and before you became the minister.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again I caution members about standing on points of order in order to engage in the debate and participate in the debate. There is no point of order, and I again invited the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to continue debate.

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

Once again, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to acknowledge and commend the previous government for having the foresight to take the steps to plan for a new courthouse in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, and, as a Member for Torngat Mountains just indicated, to award the contract, but I am even more pleased that this government continued to put the money in the Budget last year and this year in order to complete that much-needed facility.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: I am also pleased, Mr. Speaker, in talking about justice matters, with the fact that this government is very concerned with providing policing resources to people of rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, in 1995, there were 424 RCMP officers in this Province, but in that year, fifty-one RCMP officers were taken out of the system by the government of the day and that certainly did not help provide additional policing resources in this Province.

Between 1995 and the day that this government took over, there was a net loss of forty RCMP officers out of rural Newfoundland, forty out of the system in rural Newfoundland, and that is why I am extremely pleased that this government is recognizing the importance of the RCMP to people in rural Newfoundland and is recognizing how people in the rural parts of Newfoundland and Labrador are entitled to safe communities. We are pleased that we have put seventeen new RCMP officers back into the system in Newfoundland and Labrador in the last two years.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Last year, Mr. Speaker, eleven officers were put into the system; eleven officers in Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: This year, the Budget of 2005-2006 provided for four additional RCMP officers to be distributed amongst rural Newfoundland and Labrador as determined by the RCMP. In addition, the National Sex Offender Registry will be operationalized in the Province and an additional RCMP officer will be allocated to serve in that agency to offer additional protection for women and children in Labrador, Mr. Speaker. In addition, there will an RNC officer there, as well, and a public employee.

Mr. Speaker, I think the events of the past couple of days - and I think some comments that were made earlier on makes it worthwhile for us to mention the fact that, in terms of security within this Chamber and security in the building outside, it is important to note that the government does not control the House of Assembly. The Speaker is the head of the House of Assembly, and it is the Speaker who is responsible for security in the House of Assembly. I am one of those who believes that the House of Assembly should not be in this building. The House of Assembly, the Legislature of this Province, should be in a separate building. The courts, which are an independent branch of government, are in a separate building in most communities in this Province but not in the City of Corner Brook.

Mr. Speaker, outside the House of Assembly, outside the perimeters or the precincts of the House of Assembly, we are in a building that is owned by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and comes under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation and Works and the Minister of Transportation and Works. Outside the perimeter of this House, it is the minister of public works who has the responsibility for the security of public buildings. Mr. speaker, you, as the Speaker, and the Minister of Transportation and Works, as the minister responsible, will deal with the RNC and will deal will the RCMP in order to provide the necessary security both inside the House of Assembly and outside in the building and, indeed, in all public buildings throughout the Province. I think it is important for the people of Newfoundland to realize that.

Mr. Speaker, in addition to the RCMP, it is important that we recognize the contribution of this Province, of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. I think over the past number of days, the actions of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary are to be commended. They are to be congratulated for the maintaining of public order and they are to be commended for the manner in which they have carried out their duties. I know that yesterday was a difficult day and the RNC carried out their duties in a commendable way. The public order was maintained. Public safety was maintained. It is also important to note that no one was injured. There was no major damage done in government centres. I think the RNC are to be commended for that, and I do so here tonight. I think all members will join with me in offering that commendation to our police force in this part of the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, it is always important for us to remember, in times like yesterday and times like today, that we run our system in this democracy under the rule of law. We subscribe to what is known as the rule of law. We are a government of law, we are not a government of men and women. The laws are made in this Legislature, Mr. Speaker, not by despots and not by dictators and not by vigilante groups or people who call themselves citizens' committees who are elected by no one and who represent no one other than themselves. The laws in this Province are made by the men and women who put their name on the ballot and stand every four or five years in a general election and are elected by the people of this Province to come into this Assembly and to speak on behalf of their districts and to make laws in the best interest of the people of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: It is those people, Mr. Speaker, who have the right to speak in this Assembly and no other.

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, if people do not like the laws that their elected legislators have made, they have the right to peaceably protest, they have the right to lobby for the defeat of the government, they have the right to run themselves in an election, they have the right to campaign for or against people who agree or disagree with their points of view, but they do not have the right to speak in this House until they are elected. Those of us who are in this House, Mr. Speaker, we can be voted out of office. The people have the right to vote us out of office and we will leave when that happens. They can come in and drag us out of this House, but they have no right to come into this House and shout us down and try to intimidate us, because when they do that, Mr. Speaker, they are insulting us, they are insulting the people that we represent, the people who send us here, and that is the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: You are walking a fine line there, Minister.

MR. T. MARSHALL: The hon. the Opposition House Leader says I'm walking a fine line. I'm telling the truth, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, in addition, it is important to know that the government has put into place a system to make sure that we have adequate RNC officers for the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. A system was put in place with the Memorial University of Newfoundland and Labrador to provide us with seventy-five new RNC officers over the next three years. The first group of recruits consists of - there were originally thirty Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, and I think one dropped out. There is now a class of twenty-nine at Memorial - fifteen women and fourteen men. They will be deployed on the streets of St. John's, Corner Brook, and Labrador West this summer. That will be more recruits, new police officers, for Labrador West and rural Newfoundland.

Mr. Speaker, we anticipate, of course, that over the next few years there will be retirements as well. The net effect will be, with the six RNC officers that were hired last year to help form a drug squad, there will be eighty-one new RNC officers deployed in the system in the Northeast Avalon, in Corner, and in Labrador West over the next three years. That will enhance public safety in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, we are also expanding the RCMP telecommunications system in order to provide improved police response time and delivery of services to Central Newfoundland. This Budget provides $50,000 to prepare for implementation, while subsequent budgets will provide $635,000 on an annualized basis for ongoing equipment and operational costs. This initiative will build on the expansion we announced last year that benefits the Avalon, the Burin, and the Bonavista Peninsula. Next year hopefully, Mr. Speaker, this system, which is an officer safety issue, will be brought forward into Western Newfoundland as well. We are certainly looking forward to that.

Mr. Speaker, I am also pleased that this Budget will provide the expansion of court security outside the Northeast Avalon. It is my understanding that security officers were provided to the courts here in St. John's. I think it was in 1994 when court security deputy sheriffs were provided to the Supreme Court Trail Division in St. John's, the provincial courts in St. John's, and the Unified Family Court in St. John's. That security system does not exist outside the Northeast Avalon, and that is a shame. My understanding was it was the intent of the government of the day, in 1994, to bring that to Corner Brook, which was the area of the Province that had the most cases outside the City of St. John's, but for budgetary reasons it was not done. This government is extremely pleased that, in this Budget, provision has been made to provide for court security in the Supreme Court and the Provincial Court in the City of Corner Brook. That will provide four additional jobs, one full-time and three casual, in the City of Corner Brook, and it will provide two more additional jobs in the Provincial Court in Stephenville, in rural Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we have also indicated that $400,000 is in the Budget to plan and design a new combined supreme and provincial court facility in the City of Corner Brook. We are answering the call of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland Trial Division who called for the planning and the design of new courthouses to serve the courts of the future.

Mr. Speaker, a system was put in place. A Courts administration Advisory Board was established following a model that has been utilized in Manitoba, with one exception, the exception being that in this Province the Attorney General sits on the Committee with the Chief Judge of the Provincial Court and the Chief Justices of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court Trial Division. That Committee, in turn, has established a number of sub-committees to look at the needs of the courts, not only in Corner Brook but also in Stephenville and here in the City of St. John's. I am pleased to advise - and I know hon. members opposite will know - that the plans and designs for a Supreme Court building in Clarenville were prepared a number of years ago and that will be looked at as well.

Mr. Speaker, it is important to look at how the Budget has affected different parts of Newfoundland and Labrador. If I may, I would like to talk about how the health spending of the government has affected the great riding of Humber East. In Humber East, following upon the implementation of the new MRI machine at Western Memorial Regional Hospital, this will provide the highest quality, the state of the art health care service for the people of Western Newfoundland, for the people in Central Newfoundland, and indeed for the people of all Newfoundland and Labrador, who will have access to this much needed piece of equipment. There is also a nuclear medicine gamma camera at Western Memorial Regional Hospital that will be deployed at a cost of $800,000. There is $700,000 provided for a new endoscopy unit at Western Memorial Regional Hospital, and I know that a number of doctors have lobbied hard to have that much needed facility placed at Western Memorial as well.

There is $4 million allocated to expand the Pac system in Labrador and in Western. This system, which utilizes digital images to transfer x-rays, has been in existence in every part of Newfoundland and Labrador, every part of the Province, with the exception of the West Coast and the exception of Labrador. I am delighted, after much lobbying by Doctor Ed Mercer and the radiologist in Corner Brook, that the Minister of Health has put this $4 million into the Budget to deal with the needs of Labrador and the needs of Western Newfoundland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, in addition, the Budget provides $2.7 million for the detailed design and the initial site work for a long-term care facility for the seniors of Western Newfoundland, in particular the citizens of Corner Brook. Mr. Speaker, the SGE Acres were hired by the government to do a study of two sites, one site is at Sir Wilfred Grenfell College and the other site is on Wheeler's Road in the great District of Humber West. Both sites are suitable for the location of a long-term care facility and it is now up to the government, and we are looking forward to the Minister of Health in making the announcement of which site will be the final site selected for this much needed facility.

Mr. Speaker, the Wheeler's Road site has a potential for land use conflict with adjacent existing medium density residential housing. In fact, we have a zoning problem and it will be necessary for the land to be re-zoned to permit this much needed facility, and I am advised that this will involve public consultation. If this site is chosen, the actual construction will take over a year whereas the Grenfell College site, while part of the land will need to be re-zoned, the bulk of the site is available now so construction could start this fall and the initial site work could be done this fall if the contract is let. The Wheeler's Road site is a quiet residential neighbourhood, it is preferred by health care providers. The Sir Wilfred Grenfell site, on the other hand, is preferred by Sir Wilfred Grenfell College, it is preferred by the City of Corner Brook-

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I wish to advise the hon. the minister that his allotted time has expired.

MR. T. MARSHALL: By leave?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. minister requests leave.

AN HON. MEMBER: No.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been denied.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to take this opportunity this evening to rise and have a words on the debate that is taking place in the House of Assembly.

I want to refer to some of the Minister of Health's comments this afternoon when he was speaking, and the Member for Trinity North when he was speaking today on debate in the House of Assembly, in talking about comments that were made in committee meetings under the health care budget. I think the Minister of Health and the Minister of Finance talked about how both myself and my colleague, the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, made comments in the committee hearings.

MR. WISEMAN: It is in Hansard.

MR. COLLINS: I say to the Member for Trinity North, don't start reminding me where it can be found. Wait until I am finished, I am going to say it myself. He sort of indicated that we did not say it in a public forum, we waited until we were in committee, and I will address that in a minute, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to say first, I do not know what the Premier was thinking when he took the Minister of Finance and gave him the Health portfolio as well. The two, from my point of view, certainly do not mix. They contradict each other. One of those days, Mr. Speaker, someone is going to ask the Minister of Finance a question and get an answer in words instead of numbers. I do not know when that is going to happen, but I expect someday it may. I would hate to be working in a restaurant and the Minister of Finance come in and placed an order, because the poor waiter or waitress is certainly going to be questioned. If he orders a steak and she asks him how he wants it done, he is probably going to tell her how much it weighs, how much time it is going to take to cook, how much electricity will be used, and what percentage of her wages are being used to take the order. From that, she is going to have to figure out if he wants his steak well done, medium or rare. I think, one of those days somebody is going to have the ability to ask him a question and get an answer in English language instead of in math.

Mr. Speaker, under this Budget brought in a few weeks ago, under the health care aspects of this Budget, I can say, without any hesitation, as I said in the local media and the local papers and in my own district, that this Budget provided some very good things for the people in my District of Labrador West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. COLLINS: There is no question. I am not trying to hide behind that, Mr. Speaker, because the facts speak for themselves, and people in my district have certainly indicated their pleasure with the $40 subsidy that we can now avail of from Labrador West to Happy Valley-Goose Bay, return. Something that other people in Labrador took for granted for years, that we could not get access to, finally came our way, and we are very, very glad to see that.

We look at the improved travel subsidy to the Island portion of our Province: As the Minister indicated earlier, on a $1,000 trip now we get back $750, whereas in the past we would have only gotten back $250. That is a big benefit, it is an important change, and one that will help out people in my district, there is no question about that.

Our residents, Mr. Speaker, for years have faced financial hardship in accessing heath care, particularly when they had to travel outside the region of Labrador, mostly to the City of St. John's. Some people had to go around the community or have someone on their behalf do so to raise money from different organizations in the community, from the Lions Club, the Kinsmen Club, all these other organizations, in order to come up with the money to seek medical treatment for themselves or for some member of their family. This change certainly makes it easier. It may require more fine-tuning in the future, but it certainly makes it easier for these people now to be able to get to a major health care center and get the health care that they need.

Mr. Speaker, other people I know of, in the past went to a doctor and got a referral to come to St. John's. Rather than ask someone for help to raise money to send them out, they just took the referral, balled it up in their hands, threw it on the counter top, and that was as far as it went. They did not get the health care they should have received simply because they could not afford to do so, and that is a shame. That has been corrected now to some degree and we are very pleased to see that happen.

We are also pleased to see the echocardiogram that will be put into the Captain William Jackman Memorial Hospital, an additional piece of equipment that will have greater capabilities, that will reduce the need for people to travel, in some cases, and getting the proper medical testing done at home.

Also, Mr. Speaker, the $220,000 announced for a study for a new hospital for our area - many of us question the need for a study. A person can walk into the current hospital today - I do not think a study is required. That is what the committee in Labrador West indeed asked for it, and that is what they were given by way of this Budget, and we are convinced that the study itself will lead to the establishment and the creation of a new health care facility in Labrador West, because there is not an engineering firm in this world who will go in there, do a proper study, and come back and recommend that more money be put into that building that is about ready to fall down.

On the health care front, Mr. Speaker, along with the third MRI in the Province - wherever that is located it will greatly reduce the wait line for people needing MRI's. On the health care front, Mr. Speaker, this is indeed a Budget that has done more, in my opinion, for people in Labrador - Labrador West in particular - than any other budget, certainly since I have been a Member of this House of Assembly, and in my long-term memory of living in Labrador West, for the past thirty-three years.

Mr. Speaker, that is not to say that this Budget brings all of the things that we would have liked to have seen. I guess, Mr. Speaker, no budget will do that. There will always be some things we want that are not included. If we are going to stand and criticize the government, whoever they may be, for things that they are not doing, I think it is equally important, Mr. Speaker, to acknowledge things that are done, when they are done in a way that helps the people of this Province, and the people that you, as their member in this House of Assembly, represent. I think that is a fair comment, Mr. Speaker. That is the way I like to operate, to acknowledge things that are good when they are done and hold government to task for things that they have not done, either have not gone quite far enough with or have not done at all. I will get to some of these issues and items now, Mr. Speaker.

One of the things that I certainly would have liked to have seen in this recent Budget, Mr. Speaker, is greater coverage under the provincial prescription drug plan. For years and years now our Province has been the only province in this country that does not have some form of financial relief for their residents in purchasing prescription drugs, particularly those, Mr. Speaker, catastrophic drugs that people cannot buy, that are beyond a person's ability to pay for. I am thinking, Mr. Speaker, of drugs such as those used to treat MS, those used to treat persons with Alzheimer's, that this government did not include, by the way, in their recent expansion of the provincial drug program. I think that is a shame, Mr. Speaker.

There is enough evidence today, there has been enough research done, to prove that Aricept, one of the drugs that is used to treat Alzheimer's, is an effective drug and can make a difference in people's lives. Those people who suffer from MS and other diseases like that cannot afford to take the drugs that they require unless they are willing to reduce themselves and their families down to income support levels and then this government will help out; which brings me to the point, Mr. Speaker, that I do not understand. Government is saying that the cost prohibits them from having such a plan. Well, that is not exactly true, Mr. Speaker, because this government will, once a person ruins themselves and their families financially, help, but not before innocent and hard working people of this Province spend their entire savings, spend their entire RRSPs, spend any money they may have saved for their children's education, and spend any other monies they may have saved for other reasons. Once they spend all of that, take the majority of their paycheck, reduce themselves and their families to income support levels, then this government will pay. It is not a matter, Mr. Speaker, if this government can afford to or not, it is what they require individuals in this Province to do to themselves and their families before they will help. Once they have done that, then government will step in and provide financial relief for them.

I also want to talk, Mr. Speaker, about the Minister of Finance when he talked about adding all these new drugs to the provincial drug formulary. That may be true, Mr. Speaker, and I would suggest to him that is good, but he can add another hundred drugs and that will be okay for some seniors in the Province and people who are on income support, but it does not do a thing, not one thing, to help the people who get up each day, go to work, work hard, and come home in the evenings and have to wonder where they are going to come up with the money to purchase a drug that they or someone in their family needs. Over 33 per cent, Mr. Speaker, of the residents of this Province are without a drug prescription or a health care package, and that is a large number. Again, Mr. Speaker, we are the only Province in this country that does not provide any type of relief for their residents. I think that is a shame, Mr. Speaker, and something that this government has to address.

One of the other things I would like to talk about, Mr. Speaker, is the French Immersion program in Labrador, Labrador West in particular. I have asked the minister about this on a number of occasions. The teacher cuts that they have made to the educational system are having such a negative impact, Mr. Speaker, that program delivery is compromised, the quality of education is compromised, and now we see that same cut being responsible for a decision made by the Labrador School Board to not offer French Immersion in the school system in Labrador this year. Mr. Speaker, over 50 per cent enrolment in Labrador West is for French Immersion, and that is a very high demand. It does not have anything to do with a program that is not in demand that people want offered. Over 50 per cent enrolment is a high number, Mr. Speaker, a very high percentage, the highest in this Province.

Labrador West is unique in the sense that we are bordering on the Province of Quebec. There is a very large mine in the Province of Quebec, along with the one in Labrador City and Wabush mines. Many of the suppliers supply all three mines. Therefore, when they are looking for people to work for them, when they are advertising for jobs for employment opportunities, one of the conditions that they insist on is that a person be bilingual. If we do not have a French Immersion program in our area, it will prevent any of our young people who are graduating from school from finding employment with a lot of these employers whose first requirement will be that a person be bilingual. We will see jobs being filled from outside the Province simply because we are not meeting the educational needs of our own young people within our Province.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to speak about another issue that I would have liked to have seen this government pay more attention to. It is an issue that I have raised outside the House of Assembly and inside the House of Assembly on many, many occasions, and that is the video lottery machines that are in this Province. In this Budget, government allocated $750,000 towards treating persons with addictions and education. They have also said that they would freeze the number of VLTs with a view to reducing them by 15 per cent over the next five years. Mr. Speaker, while it may be welcome news that government is finally acknowledging that VLTs are causing a problem in our society, it falls far short of the moves that are needed in order to lessen the impact that these machines have on our society. We need a more aggressive approach, one similar to what was taken in Nova Scotia, where they are reducing the number of VLTs in their province by 30 per cent in six months. That is the type of approach that this Province should have taken, that is the type of approach that is needed, in order to lessen the impact that VLTs are having on the people of this Province. That again, Mr. Speaker, is not what this government has done. Indeed, they have taken a much less aggressive approach by reducing them by 15 per cent over the next five years and freezing the ones that are there.

Mr. Speaker, the Atlantic Lottery Corporation is already busy - and you will hear more about this from me during the next couple of days - in devising ways to lessen the impact that this will have on them, and they are finding ways already to circumvent what that 15 per cent reduction will mean.

Mr. Speaker, I also raised with the Minister of Justice the question of the cost of not having a resident judge in Labrador West, something that we used to have for years and years until it was disbanded. The judge retired, was not replaced, a number of years ago, and now we have a judge come to Labrador West once a month with his entourage, staying in hotels, airfares. Anything that the RNC require by way of a court, they have to travel, many times accompanied by a prisoner, again involving airfares, per diem, hotel costs, and overtime costs to replace them. I do not see, for the life of me, how that can be added up and equated to the same cost as having a provincial judge in place. I have asked the minister to provide me with the breakdown of the cost of this expense, and I am patiently and anxiously waiting to get a copy of that. I think it would be warranted to have a resident judge in the area for a whole lot of reasons, not only financial but other reasons as well.

I have also talked to him about the RNC. Mr. Speaker, the RNC detachment in Labrador West is understaffed. They certainly need additional members, and we are looking forward, I say to the minister, to some of the new officers who are being allocated to the Labrador West area. I want to say to the minister, as well, that I am equally pleased to see that the intake into the new RNC training program - I was happy to see the gender balance that was struck there. If you look at the police force in our Province, they are certainly not in line, gender wise, as to what they should be, when we look at the ratio of young men and women in this Province. I was very pleased to see the gender balance that was arrived at for these new officers when they were doing their training.

Mr. Speaker, I realize my time is up, and I certainly will have more to say in the coming days and weeks on this Budget. I want to thank you for the opportunity to have my time here this evening, to give a few of my views on the recent provincial Budget.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair notes that there are still two minutes left in the three hour debate.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

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

MR. REID: Talk for three minutes.

MR. E. BYRNE: I say to my colleague, the Member for Twillingate & Fogo, that if I talk for three then I am going to have to get leave for one, because the Speaker has told us that there are only two left.

Mr. Speaker, I know that there are only a couple of minutes left in debate, on the Concurrence Debate. I just want to wrap up by thanking all members on all sides of the House. The Estimates Committee process in an important part of the Budget debate. Right in the House, in the Committee room, members of all sides of the House, in particular government members who are not in the Cabinet, members opposite in the Official Opposition, and certainly members associated with the New Democratic Party Caucus, have the opportunity to sit down, to question the minister, to question the minister's senior executive, about any aspect of the Budget on any department. It is an important part of the Budget process, known as the Estimate Committee process, Mr. Speaker. I know the Social Services, the Department of Justice, the Department of Education, Municipal and Provincial Affairs, Human Resources, Labour and Employment, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing and the Department of Health were the departments that comprised that Committee.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I think two minutes are just about up. I wanted to thank all members for participating in that. We have just concluded the three hours known as the Concurrence Debate, which has asked all members, or at least the majority of members, Mr. Speaker, to concur with the Estimates and the motion put forward by my colleague, the Member for Trinity North, whom I want to thank personally, who Chaired the Committee process for us. I want to thank him for his leadership in that regard.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I do now put the motion.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that the House concurs with the report of the Social Services Estimates Committee.

Those in agreement?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is carried.

On motion, Report of Social Services Estimates Committee, carried.

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

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

Order 2. I move the House resolve itself into Committee of Supply to debate, I think, what has been tabled as Bill 4. It will certainly be on the Order Paper tomorrow, but it is Bill 4. I do now so move that, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that I do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into Committee of the Whole on Motion 4.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Motion carried.

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

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR: Order, please!

This is the Committee of Supply and the continuation of the debate on the Estimates. I recognize the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

An opportunity here to talk about the functions -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: What the hon. member thinks I am worth, I guess. We will have a tremendous surplus, I would say, here in the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: I would want to be worth an awful lot to wipe out the last fifteen years of piling up debt, one on top of the other, I might add.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: They have doubled the debt in the last decade here in our Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Billion dollar deficits here, spending the money of the children and grandchildren and great grandchildren long into the future, spending their money. That is what the previous government has done. That is what they have done. Here we are now trying to get this Province back on track, and they do not like it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: What?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: I will stand up. In fact, I have a meeting when I get out of here tonight, I might tell you. I met with 200 or 300 people, I say to the member, and anytime I am asked I have been there to a meeting.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: I have met with three-

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: The member across the way is getting kind of excited there.

CHAIR: Order, please!

AN HON. MEMBER: Tell the truth.

MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, I will tell the truth. I have had two meetings and I have the third one tonight and all of them are with fish harvesters, I can tell you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: I had 200 to 300 people at a meeting I attended, and I went -

AN HON. MEMBER: Did you bring their message back?

MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, I did. I always bring the message back, always, I might tell the member. I know what the Member for Port de Grave has been calling and telling people on the phone, because they called and told me you called and what you said. I know that, too.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: I know what you are up to. I know who is partly behind it, because you were the one who called fishermen, and I know who you called, I might tell him. If he wants to talk about what is going on behind the scenes, I can lay it on the table for him, I can tell you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: I never backed away from a challenge, I say to the member, and that is why we did not back away from the challenge to put this Province back on track, I might add.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: They passed over almost $11.5 billion in debt to us, and now we are going to try to turn that around. We have made progress. We have taken over $1 billion debt and we reduced it to a projected eight-forty and then brought it down to four hundred and seventy-three. The Member for Twillingate & Fogo can sing out all he likes over there. He is not even in his seat, and he is not even entitled to speak, Mr. Chair. He is not entitled to speak in the House when he is not in his seat.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: He is sitting in the seat of the Leader of the Opposition who got ousted from this House today. He got kicked out of this House today because he would not follow procedures.

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

CHAIR: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I say to the Minister of Finance, we might be under a police state here in this House of Assembly from time to time, but I will speak when the Speaker gives me permission to speak. I will not be asking for permission from you.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Well, now, ask members. Since I came into this House, I have seen that member, when he was not entitled to speak, yap back from his seat more often than anyone else in this House, that member there, when he is not even recognized by the Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: When he is not even recognized by the Speaker, he is yapping and yapping continuously. Now he gets back to the Leader of the Opposition's seat. He is trying to see if it is too warm. He wants to test it out for his future aspirations. He tried it first and it was too hard, then he tried it and it was too soft, and now it is just right and he wants to stay there. That is what he wants to do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

One thing I will say, though, the Opposition House Leader, sitting to his right, the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile, the two of them cannot sit in it the one time even though they are close together. They are going to have to decide who is going to sit in it or who is going to warm it up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: I even heard today, Mr. Chair, the name of the person sitting over there who is going to warm it up in the interim until they are ready. I heard that today.

MR. J. BYRNE: Who is it? Who?

MR. SULLIVAN: I am not sure. Should I name names here? I am not sure if I should. Maybe I should.

AN HON. MEMBER: Name him.

MR. SULLIVAN: Who said it is a him? Actually, it is a her.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: I will not name them. I will let them do that, that is their job. I do not want to intrude into the affairs of the Liberal Party. God help us, intruding in the affairs of the Liberal Party! That, in itself, is a task.

MR. REID: If you were on Fogo Island, you would have been Leader of the Opposition long before you were. If you were (inaudible) on Fogo Island, you would have been the leader a long longer than that, buddy.

CHAIR: Order, please!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Chair, it proves my point. The person who only speaks when he is recognized by the Speaker is yap yapping there in his seat that is not his own. He is not even entitled to sit there. His party hasn't given him that honour to sit in that seat, and he yap yaps from the seat of the Leader of the Opposition. Maybe he is getting used to it. Maybe it is not so comfortable after all. Maybe the seat is a little bit too hard and he is going to have to go back there, because the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile will take care of him even though he was trying to get executives formed to get some people in place, and so on, to give him a chance, but I do think that is going to work. I do not think that is going to work, no. When the battle comes, no, he will not do it. That will not happen, I can tell him. It is not going to happen behind the scenes. Nothing happens in this small Province of ours without people finding out about it.

We would like to get back to a more important event.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SULLIVAN: The Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair! She is going to run all right. She wanted to run to Ottawa. She wanted to desert the people in Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair. That is what she wanted to do. She wanted to give up on her people. The Member for Torngat wanted to give up on his district. The Member for Grand Bank wanted to give up on her district. They are all trying to get out. Three of them wanted to go; nine left. They are like the ten little Indians: And then there were none. That is what is happening.

MR. J. BYRNE: Three amigos..

MR. SULLIVAN: Three amigos.

I do not want to use up valuable time here talking about falling over each other over on that side of the House to see who leaves first. None of them can get to leave. Everything they tried they lost at. They cannot even get to leave. That is what they cannot do. You have to win to be able to leave. Mr. Chair, they have to win to be able to leave and they cannot get to win. Maybe they can stay here and lose. That might be the easy way to get out of here, but they have to wait over two and a half year for that, I might add. That is not going to happen over night.

SOME HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

AN HON. MEMBER: How much (inaudible) did you buy lately? Are you buying any

(inaudible)?

MR. SULLIVAN: No.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Chair, a person has made an unparliamentary comment in this House, I think he should have to withdraw it. That is unparliamentary. That is accusing someone of bribery, and I ask the Chair to have him withdraw that.

CHAIR: Order, please!

There is a lot of hollering and shouting across the House and there are words that are being spoken that are certainly borderline of being unparliamentary. The Chair asks hon. members to show some respect to the person who the Chair has recognized. Everybody gets a chance and opportunity to speak and I ask members, in the spirit of co-operation, if they would respect the forty-eight members of this House and allow the member who has been recognized to speak in silence.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair we brought down a -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: We brought down a Budget this year that is starting to turn things around in our Province, as much as the Opposition doesn't like it. They cannot stand the truth. They cannot stand improvement in this Province. They are used to going down hill, deeper and deeper in debt. They got comfortable with it and now they cannot shed that losing feeling of going deeper into debt and they are unhappy that we are starting to turn it around and take it back. In spite of adding to health care, in spite of putting new money into infrastructure, in spite of increasing our net Capital Budget by 50 per cent, in spite of putting $35 million into economic initiatives, we are still bringing the deficit down in our Province and making tremendous progress. They do not like success. They have not been a part of it for fifteen years, putting us under and under and under. Anybody out there, I would say, with their eyes open, knows that we are on the right track, that we are moving ahead, and we are going to have a better Province for the future, for our children and our grandchildren. One thing we do not believe in is asking future generations to pay for what we are doing now. We are asking each generation, each government, to stand up and be accountable, to pay for what expenses are occurring today, to get us back on track, and not to pass on the problem.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: We robbed twenty years of money under Term 29 and spend it. We took the South Coast Ferry Service, $55 million, and spent it.

MR. J. BYRNE: They did, not us.

MR. SULLIVAN: We took money - when I say we, this Province, this government. They took hundreds of millions of dollars and spent it and wasted it on all kinds of things to get re-elected; everything to get re-elected. Will that crackie from Twillingate& Fogo, who is not in his seat, calm down a little there, Mr. Chair. He is trying to outshout somebody who is duly recognized here. That is what is wrong with that government, they cannot accept the truth-

MR. REID: Point of order, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. Member for Twillingate& Fogo on a point of order.

MR. REID: Mr. Chair, you are talking about unparliamentary remarks. I ask the Minister of Finance to withdraw the last remark that he made about me, because it certainly was unparliamentary. It has been used in this House before and the speaker had to stand and withdraw the statement. I ask the hon. member to do the same thing.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The Chair did not hear what the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board said. The Chair was conversing with the Clerk of the House. If the minister said something that is unparliamentary, I ask him if he would withdraw that statement.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I used the word a little crackie. If that is unparliamentary, I withdraw it. I meant to say a little Liberal. I withdraw it. If little crackie is unparliamentary, I withdraw it.

CHAIR: Order, please!

I ask the member if he would withdraw the phrase little crackie.

MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, Mr. Chair, I withdraw the little crackie statement.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I was not aware, Mr. Chair. If I had known it was unparliamentary I would not have called him what I did. I will not repeat it again. We often use those words everyday, but it is unparliamentary here.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Yes.

Apparently, the member cannot take a joke. Some people can only give it but they cannot take it you know, and he happens to fall into that category there. I think people over here can give and they can also take it. You have to be able to do both you know. You have to be able to roll with the punches. You have to be able to stand up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: I did not get a chance to tell them all the good news in health care, that we have going on here in our Province. Maybe I will go back. Maybe I will mention some other things. For instance, what will another MRI do to people here in our Province? It will reduce the wait times from twelve months to eight months. That is what it will do-

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: What will two CT scanners do? They will reduce the wait time from around five weeks down to about two weeks. What will three nuclear medicine gamma cameras do? They will reduce the wait times now that is anywhere from three to six months down to about three to four months. It will also reduce, I might add, ultrasound wait times - there is one being installed in Carbonear hospital - from six weeks down to about three weeks; twenty-one down to seven with two ultrasound units and so on. All these tremendous improvements in this Budget that people in the Province are going to have access to.

I am delighted my colleague from Lab West stood up today and said in Estimates - he got up and told the truth, even though he is a member in the Opposition, sitting with the New Democratic Party. I think he said it was the best budget for Labrador that he has seen. He applauds that. He agrees.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: I do not know why people on that side of the House do not know good news. Maybe they have not seen it often enough to know good news when it arrives, but it has arrived. I am glad the Member for Lab West recognizes it. The people on this side of the House recognize it. Most people around the Province recognize it. The people waiting for cancer surgery will recognize it. The people waiting for MRI's, CAT scans and extra surgery, for by-pass, for heart surgery, they will recognize it, when 184 more people get heart surgery that could not get it before. These people will see that impact, as much as they scorn that, do not like that, and criticize that. The people who are the recipients will enjoy this and they will know that it will give them an opportunity to have a better lifestyle, to be able to enjoy it, to be able to get back to work, and with their families and so on. As much as they try to shout it down - the Member for Twillingate & Fogo - that is the actual fact, better health care, better service that they could not deliver in the Province. You built structures in this Province that you would not put people in.

In 1992, Trans City: They gave it to the highest bidder in the Province. Ten beds not even opened in St. Lawrence to this day, that you built and gave to the highest bidder, cost the Province tens of millions of dollars. In 1992 the three Trans City hospitals in Burgeo -

CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the hon. Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board that his time has lapsed.

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Chair, I was just getting warmed up. Could I have leave for one-half-hour to finish up?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No leave!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I was going to say it gives me pleasure to stand and speak to the Budget, only because having listened to the Minister of Finance, the President of Treasury Board and the Acting Minister of Health, I am sure anyone out in TV land who is watching this tonight must be just shaking their heads to think that this is the individual who is responsible for the finances of this Province, having heard the garbage that he just got on with, the commentary that he made, the foolishness that he said, when he was supposed to speak to the Budget and tell the people of the Province what was supposed to be so good about it; this man, who is supposed to stand up and be one of the leading ministers in the Williams' government. I have to say, Mr. Chairman, it is no wonder that people out there are questioning what this government is doing and shaking their heads.

We know, on the Burin Peninsula, that if you really look at what the government has done, they have written off the Burin Peninsula, and that is as much a part of this Province as any other part of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. The problem we have, Mr. Chair, is that we have a minister who probably does not even know where the Burin Peninsula is. When they are making decisions about what will happen on the Burin Peninsula, we have no representation, none whatsoever. We have one member representing the government on the Burin Peninsula and we have yet to see any impact that he has had in terms of the Budget that was made. It is funny, because the minister wasted all of the valuable time he had -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MS FOOTE: - just to poke fun and make jibes about the members in the Opposition, instead of standing up and speaking to his Budget. I guess he probably got his marching orders from the Premier.

I recall hearing the Premier on Open Line talking about the wonderful Budget that was brought down. In fact, he reread the Budget when he was coming back on a flight from Florida and he could not understand how come the people of the Province were not excited about the Budget. He just could not understand why more people weren't speaking up and speaking out about the wonderful Budget that they brought down. In fact, he felt so good about it, when he reread the Budget, he wanted to pat himself on the back. Well, lo and behold, he called in that night to the Open Line show and, I guess, they got their marching orders across the way because the next morning there were three MHAs calling in to talk about the wonderful Budget, and we have seen it here again tonight. We have seen it here again tonight. We have them standing up talking about the wonderful Budget. Lo and behold, they talk about what is happening in their own districts, but I have yet to hear the Member for Burin-Placentia West get up and talk about wonderful things that were in this Budget for the Burin Peninsula.

We talk about the health care facility in Grand Bank - and the truth is in such short supply on the other side when they stand up to speak, because I heard the Member for Burin-Placentia West say on Open Line and in the letter to the editor that he talked about a hospital in Grand Bank. We heard the Minister of Finance, the Acting Minister of Health, speaking to the Estimates today, talk about a hospital in Grand Bank. Well, it is not a hospital, it is a clinic, it is a replacement facility, it has holding beds only. It is there if someone has a heart attack and needs to be stabilized before being sent to Burin where the regional hospital is located. It is a clinic, it is not a hospital. We have a seventy-year-old cottage hospital that desperately needs to be replaced. We have a senior citizens' complex that is thirty years old that was build to take care of people who required Levels I and II care. We no longer do that in the Province. Now we look after seniors who require acute care, Level III and Level IV, and here we are trying to deliver that kind of care in a facility that was not build to accommodate that kind of health care. We have employees working down there who are risking hurting themselves just by trying to take care of acute care patients in a facility that was not built for that particular level of care.

Talk about the Budget, talk about what wonderful things you have done, but at the same time you know you are losing sight of the fact that there are other people in this Province who deserve good quality health care, not just those you pick and choose. How you could possibly look at a health care facility that was being constructed, that was under construction - the steel is down there, all the ground work has been done, $3.5 million has been spent and what did you do? You decided to cancel it. The Premier promised on three occasions during the election to complete that facility. All we have been asking the Premier to do is live up to that commitment.

My question is: When is a promise not a promise? Well, obviously a promise is not a promise when the Premier makes the promise. We will recall with the Atlantic Accord how important it was that Paul Martin live up to his commitment. Remember that, how important it was that Paul Martin live up to his commitment? We all supported the Premier because it was the right thing to do. How come, if Paul Martin made a promise and the chances are that he would not live up to it, that it was such a terrible thing for Paul Martin.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MS FOOTE: It was a terrible thing according to the Premier, a terrible thing according to all of us. At the end of the day, the Premier made a promise. Why isn't it a terrible thing that he is not living up to his promise?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

The Chair is having great difficulty hearing the Member for Grand Bank speak and I ask members to show respect to the person who has been identified by the Chair. I call on the Member for Grand Bank, and I call on all members to show respect to the member who has been recognized.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

What we are finding difficult to accept on the Burin Peninsula, and I am sure other people around the Province are too, is with respect, certainly, to the commitment that was made by the Premier. Again I repeat: When is a promise not a promise? Clearly a promise is not a promise when the Premier makes it, because he can promise something and not deliver. That is what the people find hard to understand, because even though the facility is under construction in a Liberal district, he is still the Premier of all of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. He is still our Premier. One would expect that he would treat the people in a Liberal district the same way that he would treat someone in a Progressive Conservative district. It is not happening and they are finding it very hard to accept.

In fact, the President of the PC District Association in Grand Bank has gone on record as calling on the Premier, calling on the Minster of Finance, and calling on the Minister of Health, to live up to the commitment that the Premier made, otherwise he will remove himself as being involved with the PC District Association in Grand Bank. Mr. Jack Cumbent has gone on record - and I give him a lot of credit for doing this - for saying that what the Premier committed to, he should live up to. Unfortunately, to this point in time, he has had no impact on the Premier or the Minister of Finance or the Minister of Health, just as thousands of people who signed the petition have had no impact. We are continuing to present those petitions because we are hopeful the Premier will, in fact, live up to that commitment. I am fearful that he will not, that the $3.5 million that has been spent will be money that is wasted and money that is badly needed for health care in our Province.

We all recognize, on the Burin Peninsula, the importance of having a regional hospital, and we have that in Burin. Again, the truth is in such short supply on the other side because they fail to recognize that we put a lot of equipment into that hospital when we were the government, including a bone density machine, a mammography unit, and a radiography unit. We committed to a CT scanner and, lo and behold, the government opposite decided: No, you do not need a CT scanner on the Burin Peninsula. In fact, when the Minister of Health was asked about that, he said: Well, there is one in Clarenville. There is only a two-week waiting period. I could not believe it when the Member for Burin-Placentia West stood up and agreed with the Minister of Health. Of course, you can go to Clarenville. Forget the weather conditions. Forget that there are days during the winter when you cannot get off the Burin Peninsula. In fact, there have been three or four days when we have had to wait for the Works and Transportation people to put a cut through the snow so that we could get through one car at a time. Ambulances cannot even get through. I mean, you have to give some kind of consideration to geography in this Province and the fact that people do, from time to time, live in isolation on the Burin Peninsula.

I ask again, I ask the Minister of Health, I ask the Minister of Finance, and I ask the Premier, to give this a sober second thought, recognize that you made a mistake, and do not be too big to admit that you made a mistake - it goes a long way - like you did with the cancer clinic in Grand Falls-Windsor. You looked back, you saw the situation there, and you knew it was the right thing to do. Well, it would be the right thing to do, too, on the Burin Peninsula, and that is what I am asking you to do.

I do not know if you realize, but when you talk about making promises - the promise that the Minister of Fisheries made to the crab harvesters and to the FFAW, I mean that was a promise. Why is it not important that you keep that promise? Why is it only that a promise matters when it is a promise that is made to the Premier? Why is it that when you make promises you do not feel you have to live up to them?

I listened to the Minister of Finance, the Acting Minister of Health, go on ad nauseam about what he had done, and he talked about the Budget, but he was so quiet when the crab harvesters were in the gallery. In fact, all of them over there - you could hear a pin drop. It was absolutely amazing how quiet they were when the harvesters were in the gallery. You did not hear a petition. I did not hear the Member for Burin-Placentia West stand up and present the petition that I gave to him on behalf of his constituents. In fact, I passed him this petition. They had asked me to make sure that he got it. Did he stand and present it? No, he did not. No, he did not stand and present the petition. I had to present the petition on behalf of his constituents, and I did it and I did it gladly. We have not seen one MHA over there stand and present a petition on behalf of the crab harvesters, other than, of course, the one member who had the guts, I guess, to stand up for his constituents, and that is the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's. I applaud him for doing that. Unfortunately, he still sees fit to sit as a member of a government that has no respect for the crab harvesters and no respect for the people on the Burin Peninsula.

I can tell you, that the economic and social impact of what is happening, in the absence of a crab fishery, is devastating especially in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. For this government to stand up and talk about how they are helping rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and the fact that they have a vision, the fact that they have a plan, is so far from the truth. Again, as I said, truth is in such short supply over there, because we have yet to see any type of initiative that is going to be helpful to rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Chair, if you see what they are doing with respect to the crab fishery - talk to the harvesters that were out there protesting, talk to them about the impact on their families, talk to them about the money they have invested, the loans they have to pay, how they are praying there will be a fishery and how, at the end of the day, they are going to have to take their fish to Nova Scotia. They do not want to do that. It deprives thousands of plant workers of employment. They do not want to do that, but they do not have a choice. If this government does not come down off its high horse and acknowledge that they have made a mistake - and it is not capitulating. When the Minister of Fisheries said today, we are not going to capitulate, all I could think about was he is putting it off as us versus them. That is not what this is about. You are the government for the people, of the people. It is not us versus them. When he talked about the government capitulating all I could think about was what a scenario the government has setup, where they see themselves as being in a battle with the fish harvesters, with the crab fishermen. That is not the way it should be. If you are the government for the people you should, in fact, be working with them and consulting them. It is not about capitulation, it is about consulting, it is about working with the crab harvesters to make sure that we get a fishery this year, the billion dollar industry that we are going to lose if the government does not admit it has made a mistake, get down off its high horse, consult with the fish harvesters, and maybe look at doing something similar to what they are proposing down the road, but only after they have consulted with the fish harvesters.

The impact in rural Newfoundland is devastating. There are small businesses that are feeling the impact. There are car sales that have dropped off. All of these businesses that supply materials to the harvesters for their boats, all of the equipment, all of these people are being impacted, and not just in rural Newfoundland. In fact, there are businesses in Mount Pearl that are being impacted. There are businesses in St. John's that are being impacted. It is having a devastating impact on the entire Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Those of you who represent rural communities - there must be about twenty of you. I have not done an actual head count but if you look at the number of members opposite I would say there are at least twenty, twenty of you who represent rural districts. I cannot believe that if the twenty of you joined with the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's, spoke out, spoke up and said to the Premier, this is wrong, this is having such a bad impact in Newfoundland and Labrador; certainly heavens, if you all spoke up, spoke around the caucus, told him and had the discussion with him -

CHAIR: Order, please!

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

MS FOOTE: Time to clue up, Mr. Chair?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

CHAIR: By leave.

MS FOOTE: I would think if all of you spoke to the Premier about it, as you said you have done, then he would have to listen. You make up a majority of the caucus. I cannot believe that if the rest of you stood up - those of you who represent rural districts - like the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's did, that the Premier would not listen. He would have no choice. The majority of you represent rural Newfoundland and Labrador, so let your voices be heard, make it count, stand up for the people who elected you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am in somewhat of a reflective mood tonight. Actually, twelve years ago tonight was when I was first elected in 1993.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: It was about this time when I was basically declared along with my other colleagues in the House: the Speaker of the House: the Member for Waterford Valley; I know my colleague, the Minister of Finance, was elected in a by-election about ten-and-a-half months before that; my colleague, the Member for Baie Verte, was elected the same time for the first time; my colleague, the Member for Cape St. Francis; and my colleague, the Member for Bonavista South, who was elected the same time. It has been an interesting twelve years, to say the least.

I recall the Member for Grand Bank speaking, when she was a minister on this side, actually sitting immediately to my left, promoting the good news in budgets that she was a part of, and myself and others, sitting in Opposition, doing our job as the Official Opposition, trying to point out the weaknesses, because that is part of the system we represent. It is also important to recognize some facts. The member's whole approach was about what this government is not doing in rural Newfoundland.

I would like to speak to my own budget, as Minister of Natural Resources, tonight. Let me point out some facts. For example, in 2003 - you talk about exploration and mining, I would like to talk about that for a few moments. This year we predicted that from April 1 on we would stake projections of about 7,000 claims in Newfoundland and Labrador. Less than two months in, there are 4,661 claims staked; 4,661 claims staked.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: In 2003, in the last year of their government, $7 million was expended in exploration in Labrador. Guess what is committed so far this year since the Budget? Forty million dollars in Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Forty million dollars! There are some exciting projects occurring in Labrador, some exciting mining projects. Myself and the Member for Lake Melville -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: What do you mean it has nothing to do with us? How is that? You have a government that is promoting industry. You have a government that is trying to encourage people.

MS JONES: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Is that right? Let me say to the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair - it has nothing to do with us! I was the member who was at the PDAC who sought out market resources, who set that group up with the Member for Lake Melville, who put him in contact with the council in Goose Bay who are promoting the Province to the best we can. To what end? To provide a project for the people of Goose Bay and the Lake Melville area. That is what this government is all about.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: I am not going to sit and listen to you say it has nothing to do -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: The truth. Here we go.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. E. BYRNE: Here we go.

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: That has nothing to do with us. Obviously, this just happened. It does not happen because there is any direction provided. It does not happen because of-

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. E. BYRNE: Yes, and it has nothing to do with the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, the reasons why there is $40 million being invested in Labrador this year.

If you want to take this further, Mr. Chair, lets talk about taking it a little further. Lets talk about the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair. I do not see her standing up, Mr. Chair, talking about how much more extra money this government put into forestry road construction that is going to happen in her district. Does anyone here listen to that, Mr. Speaker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Does anyone understand that this year we put an extra $1.5 million to construct more forestry access roads in the Province? Where is that happening? It is not happening in St. John's. It is not happening in Gander. It is not happening in Corner Brook. It is happening in Point Leamington. It is happening in Hawke's Bay. It is happening in the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair's own district. Do you know why we are doing it? To open up more resource for rural Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: That is why we are doing it. You do not hear, for example, Mr. Chair, about my colleague the Minister for Transportation and Works and the bridge that is going over the Churchill river system. What is that going to do?

AN HON. MEMBER: Twenty million.

MR. E. BYRNE: A $20 million investment in infrastructure that immediately, we know, government knows today, will open up about another 220 thousand cubic metres of wood. On top of doing that, Mr. Chair, we have announced a value-added wood study for Labrador. We have entered into agreements and maintained agreements with our Innu people and Metis Nation on behalf of that.

The fundamental point is this, that those necessary infrastructure requirements - I am just talking about Labrador for the moment - being made in Labrador are done for one purpose and one purpose only, to expand the economy and the benefits and the jobs for the people in Labrador, Mr. Chair. That is what is going to happen in that part of the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, we do not hear, for example, the amount of extra money we put into silviculture this year. This year we plan to, I think, grow about 14 million seedlings. That is up 4 million or 5 million seedlings from when they were the government. Do you know why we are doing that? Because we want to get to a point - we are not there yet. We are almost there between what we grow in terms of seedlings for silviculture purposes and what is naturally generated in our forestry system. We want to get to a point in the nearest possible future, and it is going to be in the near future, where for every tree we cut along with natural regeneration and seedlings we plant, that for every tree that is cut there will be another one that is grown. Now, Mr. Speaker that is an investment. Where is that happening to?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Chair, that is what you call direction and sustainable development that puts an industry on to a path where you can guarantee on a sustainable level what an annual allowable cut will be over the next fifty years. That is why those investments are important.

 

Where are those investments going to take root? They are going to take root in Fred Osmond's operation down in Hampden, in his integrated sawmill. They are going to happen in Sextons Lumber and Jamestown Lumber, they are going to happen in Postville, they are going to happen in rural parts of Newfoundland and Labrador. That is where those investments are going to show up and they are going to show up by those operations having the opportunity. They have the capacity to do much more; they need a greater fiber supply.

What is going to happen, Mr. Chairman, over a period of time, in having access to a greater fiber supply, we will be able to manufacture more on a secondary processing point of view, going up the value chain, creating more jobs and creating more export opportunities. Where is that going to happen? In the operations I talked about, in Bloomfield, in Jamestown, in Hampden, in Cottlesville, in Glenwood, in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Chair. Those are the investments that we made.

You want to talk about agriculture. I have not heard any members opposite talk about what this government is doing for agriculture. This year we are going to spend $17 million in agriculture and agrifoods on a variety of fronts; all of that investment. No government before us has made such a significant investment over a long period of time -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: No, I say to the member. Part of that is federal money but it was this government that invested $17.5 in a Land Consolidation Program in rural Newfoundland and Labrador to grow the agrifoods industry, which the former government failed to do, would not do. It is the single, biggest impediment holding back the agrifoods industry in this Province. We have made that necessary investment, for what purpose? So that the dairy industry, fur farming, eggs, broiler, chicken, root crop industries, life scientists, organic farming, all of that, can proceed. Where is that going to happen? Not on Kenmount Road, not on Massey Drive, but in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. That is where those investments are going to be made, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Chair, I want to elaborate a little further on agriculture. We have an opportunity in the diary industry alone, in the next five years, to double the size of the dairy industry because of an industrial milk quota. The industrial milk quota was signed by a former member for Humber Valley, a former minister who was their colleague over there, over four years ago. The single biggest request that has been made consistently over the last four years to the former government, and to our government, was this - it was made by the dairy industry - that industrial milk quota will be of no use to Newfoundland and Labrador unless we can put into production an additional 20,000 to 25,000 acres of ground because that is what we need in order to be able to use it. If we do not use it within that definitive period of time, which is about ten years, if we do not use it we are going to lose it.

Did this Official Opposition, when they were in government, make the necessary investment in that industry so it could double the size? No, they did not, Mr. Chairman. That is what the $17.5 five-year land consolidation program, provincial-wide, was all about, to position the dairy industry to double its size, to move from an industry that is worth $20 million to $25 million, to make it worth $50 million to $60 million, to create, not only an industry that now employs 1,000 people directly but over the next five years to provide the opportunity, the absolute opportunity, for it to create another 1,000 to 1,500 jobs.

Just look! If you need any examples, let's point to a couple. This government invested close to $750,000 in an operation on the West Coast in Stephenville less than a year ago. Mr. Chairman, let me say this -

CHAIR: Order, please!

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

MR. E. BYRNE: So soon, Mr. Chairman.

May I have leave to clue up?

CHAIR: By leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave!

CHAIR: The hon. member, by leave.

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

Less than one year ago, Mr. Chairman, there was nobody working in that facility. Forty-five people work in that facility today on just three lines with expanded operations coming. Why is that? Because we just provided the fundamentals for people, we got out of their way, and we let them go do it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Chairman, those are only some of the opportunities. If you look at what is happening across the agrifoods industry - and before the night is over, between now and 10:00 p.m., I look forward, Mr. Chair, to getting back up to talk about some of the exciting opportunities that this government is creating in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just want to rise to make a few statements on the Budget. I say to the minister: It is great when you stand up and go with figures, but lets ask the people in Grand Falls-Windsor and Central Newfoundland what do they think of your commitments to that area. Lets ask the people out in Stephenville, when, during the election, the Premier met with Abitibi and promised that he had the fibre supply and the electricity supply all taken care of for Stephenville.

I have a full page ad that the Vice President of Abitibi put in the Western Star three days after the election, asking the Premier to stand by the commitment he made during the election. That is the kind of commitment that I am saying the Premier made, that when you are out here on the East Coast you know nothing about. I was out on the West Coast when the Premier made the commitment. I will give you the commitment that the Premier made: That he would have a fibre supply for the mill in Stephenville and the electricity costs would be brought down - I will do it right away. I will show you the ad that the Vice President of Abitibi put in. Those are the promises that were made that just were not kept.

You want to talk about rural Newfoundland and Labrador! I was shocked in the Estimates, I was actually shocked in the Estimates. Here we are talking about Harbour Breton, talking about FPI. I was actually shocked in the Estimates when the Minister the Innovation, Trade and Rural Development -

MR. BARRETT: Rural destruction.

MR. JOYCE: Rural Development. I won't say rural destruction because I am a pretty gentle guy. When the minister who is making the decision for all of rural Newfoundland and Labrador, with all the plants of FPI in this Province, when she is making the decision - in the middle of the Estimates when she was defending FPI, I asked the minister: What profits did FPI make last year in Newfoundland and Labrador? She did not know. The Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development, who is making decisions for FPI in this Province, who is standing up and waving the banner of FPI in this Province, waving the big flag - oh, we cannot get involved with business, they have to make a profit - did not know that they made almost $19 million on the primary processing in the Province last year. It is right in their corporate book. The minister who is making the decisions did not even know.

When you want to talk about rural development, when you want to talk about the problems, that is one of the prime examples. The minister did not even know, but yet she is around the Cabinet table. If you want to talk about who is making the decisions here, obviously it is not her, or if she is she is making a blind decision on FPI; one or the two. It was just amazing, and I said to myself: God bless rural Newfoundland and Labrador if she is in charge of making decisions without all the facts.

If you want to talk about people who are led, the Member for Gander, who was on Open Line when the Atlantic Accord was going through, wanted everybody to stand up for the Premier and the motion that the federal Conservatives put through. They wanted the word deplorable, because it is deplorable for a person to go back on their word and that is the bottom line of it. Why doesn't the Member for Gander stand up, like the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's, stand up and be a man, when you here all the commitments that are being made. Stand up and be a man for all the commitments that were made.

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible).

MR. JOYCE: I say to the Member for Ferryland, just because you have nightmares about Fogo Island where you lost the leadership over two boxes of chicken, you should just relax. If you have nightmares over that, that is not his problem, leave him alone.

The Member for Humber East is out in Corner Brook promoting the Budget, that we have seventy-five new teaching positions put back in the system, and everybody out in Corner Brook is saying: What a good Budget! What a great Budget! I turn around and I ask the great genius, the great light bulb: If there are seventy-five new teachers put in the system, why is District 3 -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order please!

MR. JOYCE: Why are there over forty teachers taken out of District 3? You are the great minister, you are the one who stood over here and said one teaching position is too many. Stand up and be a man. If you meant what you said, stand up. You can't do it. I say to the minister, you can't do it. There you go standing there behind the Premier -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

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

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Chairperson, there is no need to stand up, because the man does not have guts enough to come over. When you were here you said: One teaching position taken out. Stand up, stand up and do it. You can't do it. That is what I say to the member.

Here we are out in Corner Brook with the great genius saying there are seventy-five new teaching positions put back in. What happens, Mr. Chairman? Thirty-nine, forty-four, those are the figures, anywhere from thirty-nine to forty-four teaching positions taken out of District 3 alone, and the minister cannot even stand up and explain how. Do you know why? Because the information he was putting out was false information. It is a spin on the Budget that is just not true.

No matter how you play it, the information that they were putting out in Estimates - the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, during the Estimates, was quite frank. He said: The Exhibition Centre is cancelled. The minister said it in the Estimates. He agrees, he is nodding his head. That is what was said. During the election, right on the brochure from the Premier and the Member for Humber East: The Exhibition Centre is one of our priorities, we are going to have it built. There is $300,000 worth of water and sewer already done on the Exhibition Centre and it is done in Corner Brook. During the election, on the brochure, they had it that it was a priority for them, and here now the Exhibition Centre is cancelled. They are saying: Yes, we are going to promote Corner Brook, we are going to promote the fine arts at Grenfell College, and they cancelled the Exhibition Centre, then turned around in St. John's and payed off The Rooms, $45 million. Then again they turn around and say: We are going to take care of Corner Brook, and then they paid $45 million to pay off The Rooms here in St. John's; $45 million.

Lets talk about the VON in Corner Brook.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR (S. Osborne): Order, please!

MR. JOYCE: The Minister of Finance: Did you okay the $150,000 that was spend without a contract? Did you do it? I asked you in the Estimates: Did you do it? You would not answer the question. I asked the Minister of Finance, the great saviour. You cannot waste on penny. I said: How much is spent in wages?

MR. SULLIVAN: Point of order, Madame Chair.

MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, on a point of order.

MR. SULLIVAN: He did ask the question in the Estimates, and I will answer it. He was wrong. He said it was $150,000, his sources. Absolutely wrong! I think I said around $70,000 or $80,000. We checked the number, it was $80,000, not the $150,000. I do not know where you are getting your information. Wherever you are getting it, it is absolutely wrong. You should get your facts straight when you ask a question.

MADAM CHAIR: There is no point of order, a point of clarification.

The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Madam Chair, thank you very much. I am glad he said it here tonight because I would not him to be embarrassed when he finds out that the figure came from the Premier himself when he made the announcement. I say to the Minister of Finance: If the Premier do not let you know -

MR. SULLIVAN: A point of order, Madam Chair.

MADAM CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Finance.

MR. SULLIVAN: He is misinterpreting the answer. There was $80,000 channeled in and there was another $40,000 that went for a coordinator and so on, but that is the amount that was channeled through Western into VON, with the question that he asked. He has to learn there are more parts. The question he asked and the general question were different things. He should learn the facts before he asks questions on the break-down of that, that we provided here today in the Estimates Committee. I understand you are a member of that Committee, and we put it to the Committee today. Your colleague will tell you the answer, because when we dealt with that today, the member was not present.

MADAM CHAIR: There is no point of order. A point of clarification.

The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. SULLIVAN: You were not here, you never showed up.

MADAM CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. JOYCE: I know personally, sometimes when the member says things I have to question it, and this is another example. I can assure you, when I get the information I will show that you are absolutely wrong; absolutely wrong.

How about the $200,000 that you signed off on to make us all feel good because we got the Atlantic Accord? Did you sign that off without tender? You are supposed to be responsible for the funds. Did you sign that off? I asked you that. Did you sign it off? No, you never signed it off because it did not go to tender. It went to the vice president of the election campaign. That is where it went. Ask the former minister of health: Was the VON money signed off properly? Was it signed off? Did you agree to it? Of course you didn't. I know you did not agree to it, and do you know why you never agreed to it? Because you knew that there was two palliative care programs in Corner Brook already. You knew it and I knew it. She was gone, you were in (inaudible).

MADAM CHAIR: Order, please!

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

MR. JOYCE: By leave?

MADAM CHAIR: Does the hon. member have leave?

MR. RIDEOUT: One minute.

MADAM CHAIR: One minute to clue up.

MR. JOYCE: I thank the Government House Leader for the minute to clue up.

There are things in the Budget that you have to dig up, because there is a spin on the information that is being passed around. I will get another opportunity to explain other things.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Point of order, Madam Chair.

MADAM CHAIR: The hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General, on a point of order.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Madam Chair, I happened to be out of the House but I managed to see on television what the hon. the Member for the Bay of Islands had to say, and I take strong exception to his remarks.

Madam Chair, the hon. Member for the Bay of Islands talked about a new school for Herdman Collegiate. He didn't deliver it, this government has delivered it. He talked about a long-term care facility for Corner Brook. He didn't deliver it, this government has delivered it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: He talked about it, after fifteen years of doing nothing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: He stands in this House, he has stood here too long (inaudible).

MADAM CHAIR: Order, please!

There is on point of order.

MR. REID: On a point of order, Madam Chair.

MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo, on a point of order.

MR. REID: Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to address the point of order raised by the hon. member, the Justice Minister, with regard to Herdman Collegiate, when he said that we did not commit to building that school. The funding was approved, I say to the minister. I approved the funding in the last Budget that we had in April of that year and you and your government were the ones who cancelled it last year in your Budget. How you can stand here tonight and say that you (inaudible).

MADAM CHAIR: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Just to clue up. I say to the Member for Humber East, lets make a deal here. You and your Premier promised to have the long-term care facility built and operational in four years. Lets make a deal -

MADAM CHAIR: Order, please!

Leave has been withdrawn.

MR. JOYCE: Pardon me?

MADAM CHAIR: Leave has been withdrawn.

MR. JOYCE: Leave has been withdrawn.

MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Thank you, Madam Chair.

I am very pleased tonight to be able to speak about this year's Budget and some of the initiatives in our social agenda.

Madam Chair, there is a very serious issue that is happening here this evening that I really want to speak to before I speak to the Budget. Sometimes we hear it said in this Chamber, in this House of Assembly, we hear it shouted, to stand up and be a man. I can tell you, when I stand on my feet I am as honest and as credible as any other individual in this House of Assembly, and, Madam Chair, I am a women.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: Are you sure it was said?

MS BURKE: I am very sure.

Madam Chair, I want to speak for women this evening when I address this comment. When a person is asked to stand in this House and be a man, I expect they are expecting that person to stand up and be honest and credible. I do not think that there is any sexual behaviour or anything attached to a male's sexual genitalia that is meant by that comment. I think it relates to honesty and integrity, and I think when honestly and integrity is attached to a man -

MR. PARSONS: On a point of order, Madam Chair.

MADAM CHAIR: The hon. Opposition House Leader, on a point of order.

MR. PARSONS: I know, Madam Chair, we do not often use rule 48(2) dealing with relevancy and we do not give it a lot of breadth and application here, but I would suggest that if the hon. minister wants to give anybody a lecture about women's rights or anything else that there is another forum to do it in. We are now in a debate on the Budget and I see no relevance whatsoever to this particular issue. I think it is incumbent upon the Chair at this point, in the middle of this Budget debate, to address that issue.

MR. RIDEOUT: To that point of order, Madam Chair.

MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: Madam Chair, if that comment had come from a member who was just elected, I would have understood it, but the hon. the Opposition House Leader has been in this House for some time now and he must know, that if there is one place in the business of this House where the rule of relevancy is never invoked it is the Budget debate, and is has to do with Estimates. You can talk about the colour of your grandmother's hair. You can talk about the sun rising out of the West out in White Bay. You can talk about being to the mountain top and seeing the other side. You can talk about what you like, Madam Chair, in the Budget debate and that is exactly what our colleague is doing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment.

MS BURKE: I will speak about this government's commitment to women. When a person feels that comments in this House of Assembly are sexist and degrading towards women, I think that is very relevant, at any time we speak to any policy or any budget or any action of this government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Madam Chair, when we equate honesty, integrity and credibility to being a male, it is demeaning to women, it is a slap in the face to women, and it takes away our credibility. As women, we want equality in this Province, socially, economically, and politically.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Madam Chair, whether those comments are parliamentary or unparliamentary they are indeed insulting to women.

Madam Chair, I want to speak about some issues in this government's Budget, and on the top of my list, ironically, were some initiatives of the Women's Policy Office. Madam Chair, we try to make sure that women have equal access to programming in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We have undertaken some initiatives in this year's Budget to address issues that are specific to women.

Madam Chair, during August I had the wonderful opportunity to travel to Coastal Labrador, and I traveled with the Premier and with the Member for Torngat Mountains. I had mentioned this trip before, and I indicated that was not a political trip. That was a trip to get up and to meet with some aboriginal women's groups to look at the issues in the aboriginal community and be to able to effectively address some of those issues.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MADAM CHAIR: Order, please!

MS BURKE: Madam Chair, when I went up and met with the health care professionals in Makkovik, met with the women's group in Nain, met with the women's group in Hopedale, and visited the shelter that unfortunately was not open in Hopedale, my eyes were opened to some of the issues that face the women in the aboriginal communities. Not only are we trying to establish equality for all women in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, we also have to address that women in some of our aboriginal communities need to even come up to being on par with women in other parts of this Province.

Madam Chair, as part of our Budget process, what we were able to do - and it was based primarily on the meetings that we had this summer. The hon. Member for Torngat Mountains, I have to thank him for the way he introduced me to the people of Coastal Labrador. He let me know what was going on in Coastal Labrador and he spoke with passion about the issues in Coastal Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Madam Chair, as a result of those visits and those meetings we were able to announce in this year's Budget $20,000 for a conference specifically for aboriginal women to be able to come together, to be able to set a path -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: - to be able to identify their needs and see what they need to be able to address their needs. Madam Chair, that meeting and that conference will be planned by the female leaders in the aboriginal community and it will be held in Labrador as well.

Madam Chair, we were also able to announce this year in our Budget $70,000, so that the Hopedale shelter can open, so the women of Hopedale have a safe haven to go to in times of family violence or turbulence within the home. It is not a lot of money but it is a very needed resource for Hopedale. The women have the shelter up there, they have the place, and now they will be able to operationalize it, so that went a woman is in trouble she will have a safe house to go to in Hopedale.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Madam Chair, another initiative that we are able to fund, at $100,000, was to be able to look at some of the initiatives of the Violence Prevention Initiative, some of the literature, some of the pamphlets, some of the information that is available in Newfoundland and Labrador, and to be able to make that culturally sensitive and have it printed in the aboriginal language, so that the women of Coastal Labrador have access to just as much information, the same information, and information that is culturally sensitive and written in their own language. Madam Chair, I am very proud of that initiative because that resource was also noted as being needed when we had our forum here in March with the partners in our Violence Prevention Initiative.

Madam Chair, the Violence Prevention Initiative cost this government $500,000 in the last five years, and again this year we have budgeted an additional $500,000. In addition to the $500,000 is also the $190,000 that specifically addresses issues in the aboriginal community. We had a forum in March where we brought together the groups that administer the Violence Prevention Initiative throughout the Province. We have also had a program evaluation done of the initiative, and we will be going forward with our long-term initiative as to how we are going to address the violence prevention initiatives in this Province on an ongoing basis.

Madam Chair, another Budget initiative that were able to introduce this year was the fact that we provided an increase to the eight women's centres in Newfoundland and Labrador. These women's centres were originally federally funded and the federal government walked away from these centres and did not see the necessity of funding these centres. As a result of that, Madam Chair, the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador came to help these centres and were able to provide $50,000 a year. Madam Chair, $50,000 a year just did not cut it, these centres operated, but just barely. Last year, despite our fiscal restraints, we were able to increase the funding for the women's centres from $50,000 to $55,000 per centre. This year, I am proud to say that we also added an additional $10,000 to each shelter which meant our grants increased by $80,000, and each shelter now receives $65,000. Madam Chair, I feel there can be more done for these centres and I will continue to be an advocate for these centres and make sure that we continue to fight so that the funding is adequate, the we recognize the work that they do in our communities.

Madam Chair, there are many initiatives that I want to speak to this evening. There is a lot happening right in the district of St. George's-Stephenville East. A couple that I want to specifically address is the fact that in St. George's we had the funding announced for Phase 2 and Phase 3 of the water supply. We also have money in Bay St. George South to upgrade the water system there. We have paving announced through Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

MADAM CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the hon. Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment that her speaking time has expired.

MS BURKE: Leave to clue up.

MADAM CHAIR: Does the hon. member have leave to clue up?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MS BURKE: Madam Chair, I just barely got to mention some of the initiatives I wanted to get into this evening. I would like to talk more specifically about the district I represent and some of the initiatives under the Department of Human Resources, Labour and Employment. I certainly look forward to another opportunity to be able to speak to the department.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. REID: Thank you, Madam Chair.

I, too, would like to stand and speak to the Budget. I listened all day to members opposite rise and talk about what a glorious budget this was and all the good things that they were doing for rural Newfoundland and Labrador. I say to the members opposite that they should start answering their telephones, reading their e-mails and occasionally visiting their districts so that they can find out actually what is happening in the rural parts of this Province, because I am getting e-mails and telephone calls from their districts telling me that what has happened in this Budget is that it is the death to rural Newfoundland and they actually believe out there that it is an organized plan to do exactly that.

Madam Chair, let's just talk. Let's start with the Burin Peninsula, for example, and I will go around the Island. On the Burin Peninsula, when the rig is pulled out down there now later on in the fall, there is nothing on the books. The Minister of Natural Resources told me here in the committee last week that if the management does not find something to do in the interim the next possible contract that could go down there is three years out. So, I say to the people in Marystown, that they have a long, hard, cold three years to look forward to when it comes to employment at the Marystown Shipyard.

Down in Fortune, we saw what FPI did to the Fortune plant; promised them just recently a couple of hundred jobs between Fortune and Burin. We find out now that thirty-eight of them have their stamps and that there is no commitment to open the plant after this year. So I say, what is going to happen on the Burin Peninsula with Marystown down and Fortune going down in this year?

I say, as well, Madam Chair, when you talk about health care, the Member for Marystown stands and says in the House there is nothing wrong with the people of the Burin Peninsula having to drive to Clarenville to get a CAT scan because he does not agree with having a CAT scan in the hospital on the Burin Peninsula. I also talk about the hospital that has the steel up on it in Grand Bank, a hospital that the Premier of this Province told the people in that area - they have him on tape down there - that he was going to build this if elected, another promise broken.

Let's go on over to the Connaigre Peninsula where we see Harbour Breton close down, 350 people laid off, 350 families without incomes; many of whom are leaving to go to the mainland to search for employment, many of whom are returning their vehicles to car dealerships in Grand Falls because they can no longer afford to pay the leases on them.

Madam Chair, along with the plant in Harbour Breton gone now, we have an aquaculture industry on the Connaigre Peninsula in the Bay d'Espoir area that is in total chaos. The largest company in the aquaculture industry declared bankruptcy some six to eight months ago. The Minister of Fisheries rose in this House and talked about a new loan guarantee program. Well, I tell the minister, and I tell the rest of you, that the company that went bankrupt were not eligible for the loan guarantee that the minister so proudly bragged about that was going to help the aquaculture industry. To this day, there has not been one single aquaculture company in the Province who could avail of the guaranteed loans because the government wrote the rules and regulations in such a stringent fashion that no one could apply or would receive it.

So we have the Burin Peninsula and the Connaigre Peninsula in chaos. Let's move over to the Northern Peninsula. Let's move over to the Stephenville area, where we have a mill in Stephenville. The way the minister is talking here tonight, if they have no wood and they have not honoured the commitment that the Premier made to the people in Stephenville, that he was going to find them a wood supply, a source of fibre and he was also going to find them cheaper electricity rates - which he has not done a year-and-a-half after he made the promise. What is going to happen to the people there when their mill goes down and their airport closes? Because the only way that it is open today is because of loan guarantees that the government is putting in there. I bet, Madam Chair, that will not continue too much longer.

Let's talk about the Northern Peninsula, when everyone up there on the coast is in an uproar because this government is threatening to close down health care facilities and cut services in health care. Let's talk about the plant in Englee, in the Minister of Fisheries' own district, that I have stood in this House for three times in the last week and asked him if the plant in Englee will ever open again and I have not received an answer. Well, I guess that means that it will not open again. That is what is happening on those peninsulas, Madam Chair.

Let's come down to Central Newfoundland, where Abitibi just announced number seven machine is going down and there are 250 people being laid off, people from forty communities in Central Newfoundland. Tell them that the future looks bright for rural Newfoundland, and then come along to the Burin Peninsula where FPI will not even give a commitment to the people in Bonavista that the crab plant will remain open beyond this year. They are talking about being allowed to have transferrable quotas for crab so that the crab on the Bonavista Peninsula would find its way into another plant, and maybe the shrimp that normally goes to Catalina might find its way to another plant because the people on the Burin Peninsula and the Connaigre Peninsula have no faith in what FPI will do, and I am sure that the people on the Bonavista Peninsula feel the same way.

Madam Chair, let's talk about the people out in the Terra Nova District, the people who work in the fish plant. Let's talk about the people who work in the fish plant in Glovertown, the people who are deadly, adamantly opposed to production quotas. In fact, the owner of the plant has taken the provincial government to court, to sue them over the fact that they do not have the right to take the crab away from them. They do not want production quotas down there. Let's talk about Salvage. What will happen in a plant like Salvage down on the Eastport Peninsula once production quotas come by? That plant will be gone and the people there are gone elsewhere to look for work.

Now, Madam Chair, let's go back to my own district, and the government talks about all the good things they are doing for rural Newfoundland. I do not know where they are doing it, and I am certain that the people in my district have no idea what they are talking about. We built a brand new hospital on Fogo Island. This government came along and closed half the beds in it.

The Minister Responsible for the Status of Women gets up here tonight and professes to be the great champion of women in the Province, and she talked about what a great champion of women she was on the West Coast. Well, I say to the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women, what do you tell the eighty-two year old woman, with a terminal disease, who went to the hospital on Fogo Island and was told to go home because there was no bed for her? I say, if you care about women in this Province, you cannot pick and choose which ones you care about. You cannot pick the women in your own district and say that you care about the people in this Province, while the women in my district, down in Fogo Island, are told to go home and die. That is what I say to the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women. There are ten empty beds out on that Island tonight that easily could be filled with the sick and the elderly of that Island. Whether they are women, men or children, I say to the minister, all of them should have access to that facility. It is a brand new facility and it is a shame that you and your government did not see fit, for political reasons, to open the ten beds.

Let's talk about what else you have done out there. Let's talk about the social services office that you are also responsible for, that you closed down on Fogo Island; two employees there, I say to the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women, only two employees, and guess what? Both women. What did you do then, I say to the minister? You did absolutely nothing. That is all you are ever going to do unless it is in your own district, I say to the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women.

Don't talk to me, don't get up and speak out of one side of your mouth, when you are dealing with constituents in your own district on the West Coast and tell the women on the East Coast to go find a job somewhere else or go to a hospital somewhere else. That is what I say to you, Madam Minister. That is what I say to you.

Let's talk about ferry rates. This government promised, in your Blue Book - open it up once in awhile and look at the promises that you gave to the people of this Province. Let's look at what you talked about with ferry rates. You were not going to reduce them; you were going to eliminate them. All you were going to have, the cost was going to be the equivalent of road transportation. That is why I have a man on Fogo Island who is trying to make a living off a trucking industry, and every time he puts a transport truck on a ferry out there it costs him $152. One hundred and fifty-two dollars. Then we have officials in the Department of Works, Services and Transportation who have the gall to call me and say yes, that is the equivalent of road transportation.

What he is saying is that it would cost me, you, or any of you, $152 to drive twenty-six kilometres. I say to the Minister Responsible for Works, Services and Transportation, if that is the best type of help that he can find to work in that department, it is time to let him go as well.

Not only did that happen, not only did they close half the hospital, close the social services office and raise ferry rates, but they also did away with the driver examiner who goes between Fogo Island, Twillingate Island, New World Island and Change Islands so that the people there do not have to spend a fortune taking a ferry and a day off work to take their kids to Lewisporte or Gander to get a driver's licence, I say to the minister.

The Minister of Education, today, talks and waxes so eloquently about all he is doing for education in the Province. The member who represents Clarenville got up and said the same thing. I do not know where the member is coming from when, from last June to this September, there are going to be 401 teachers come out of the system - most of which, I say to the minister, will come out of rural Newfoundland and Labrador - and he is talking tonight about the great strides he is making in education, that he is putting seventy-five teachers in. As I have said before, the minister certainly never did math because you are not putting teachers into a system when you are taking 401 out.

MADAM CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. REID: Madam Chair, I will rise again later and finish my speech on what this crowd are doing for rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

The Member for Twillingate & Fogo, in his remarks, talked about Abitibi, and I am going to correct him on a few points that he made, because, anybody listening tonight, you wouldn't know if Stephenville mill is closed down and Grand Falls is about to shut down, because I do want to correct him.

First of all, I do want to remind him that his colleague, the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans, in the first week this House opened, put a private member's resolution to this House. Basically, the private member's resolution read: WHEREAS Forestry Act amendments passed in 2002 provided for the uniform expiration of Abitibi Consolidated timber licences for the Grand Falls-Windsor mill; and WHEREAS the continuance of the licences is subject to the company continuing to operate two paper machines...; and WHEREAS these Forestry Act amendments passed in 2002 to protect production levels, et cetera, et cetera - but the THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED is the most important one. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED - and this is what the Official Opposition and Liberal caucus called upon this House of Assembly to do - that this House of Assembly requests that Government reaffirm its commitment to the Bill 27 Forestry Act amendments that protect the production levels at the Grand Falls-Windsor mill, and in turn protect the economy of Central Newfoundland - and Labrador.

Madam Chair, I do not know about you or anybody else, but people in this Province know that the amendments to that act, that call for that, what this member and the caucus did in requesting of this government, before they had a chance to even debate it in this House, we took that stand. We took it over the last twelve months with Abitibi. We took it over the last six months with them. Before they made their decision, they knew up front from the Premier and myself that we would enforce that legislation - in other words, that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador expected a two-machine operation in Grand Falls-Windsor - and the member opposite says all you are going to do is take their licences away. That is the leverage that has been provided to this House, that is the leverage that has been provided to this government, and that is what we intend to do because it is the law of the land, and Abitibi is not above the law of the land. That is what we have told Abitibi, Madam Chair, and we are not ashamed of saying that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Madam Chair, also, the member talked about: What are the people in Stephenville going to do when the mill closes? Well, this government hasn't taken the view that the mill is going to close. We are taking the view that: What are the people in Stephenville and the whole region on the Port au Port Peninsula, who depend on that mill, going to do when we find a solution for it? They are going to go to work the next morning, and hopefully that is what this government is working towards.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: We are working towards a long-term solution for Grand Falls-Windsor in terms of Abitibi operations, with a three-machine operation which, according to the legislation, they must continue until 2010, and we are working for a long-term solution for the people in Stephenville who depend directly on the mill for jobs and employment and for all of the spinoff that is associated with that economic engine on the Port au Port Peninsula.

So, when the Member for Twillingate & Fogo stands tonight, he not only does himself a disservice but he does the Province a disservice to say that it is all over anyway. What are they going to do when the mill shuts down? The fact of the matter is, this government will do everything in its power to answer the only question that matters to people. What are they going to do? They are going to get up and go to work tomorrow morning, because we will find a solution.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: It is fine to be critical. There is a difference between being critical and being constructive in your criticism. We would be far better served tonight if the member opposite, in talking about that very important issue, did not stand up and basically inform the people in the Province, particularly and most importantly the people from the communities affected, as if the whole thing is gone, the backside has fallen out of it, and all of Abitibi operations in Stephenville and number seven is gone, as if it is over tomorrow.

That is not the attitude that this government is taking. I will say this: We will negotiate hard with Abitibi. We are not going to roll over. We will negotiate hard with the partners with respect to Hebron-Ben Nevis because the people of the Province demand us to negotiate hard.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: The people of the Province demand of us, Madam Chair, that we do the best on their behalf because the taxpayers' dollar is at stake, there is no question about that. In saying that, this government will work to achieve a balance to ensure that.

To answer the question that he begged tonight: What are they going to do? Our intention is to answer that question with only one answer: They can get up the next morning and go to work, which is what we want them to do. That is what we want them to do, Madam Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: This is too important. This is much too important an issue to discuss in a way, as if it is already over.

On this issue, members of this House, all forty-eight of us, need to send a clear message to Abitibi, that we expect them -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: The forty-eight members in this House, irrespective of where we sit, irrespective of our political stripe, the message that we need to send to Abitibi, number one, is that Bill 27 stands and we will make no amendments to Bill 27. In other words, a two-machine operation will continue in Grand Falls-Windsor and the surrounding area until 2010 because that is what the legislation demands. That is the message that we all need to send.

Equally important, to the people on the Port au Port Peninsula, the message that the forty-eight of us need to send is one that we will all do what we must do to ensure that operation continues, what is in the best interests of the people of the Province. To say and do anything else is doing a disservice to the people in Newfoundland and Labrador, Madam Chair.

I want to talk about what is happening within the energy division within the Department of Natural Resources this year, and some of the things that we have taken on. For example, in this year's Budget we have just seen the partners, which include ExxonMobil, Petro-Canada, Norsk Hydro and Chevron, Chevron Texaco being the proponent of the Hebron-Ben Nevis project in the Jeanne d'Arc Basin, sign off on their utilization and joint operating agreement. What does that mean? It means that in the next little while this government will be entering into a period of discussions and negotiations about the fourth oil development for Newfoundland and Labrador. It means that we will be entering into negotiations about royalties, potentially, mode of development, pace of development. How do we get work associated with our natural resource in terms of oil resource into Marystown, into the other facilities in Newfoundland and Labrador?

To answer the question that the Member for Twillingate & Fogo asked, which is: What are you going to tell them? We are going to tell them that this government will do the best we can for them on resource projects like the Hebron-Ben Nevis project. We will leverage as much work as we can for facilities and people in this Province. To come up with the only answer that people are really looking for, the answer is this: Tomorrow morning, because of their government, they will be taking advantage of opportunities and going to work like they have never been able to take advantage of opportunities and go to work before.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Madam Chair, this is a government that is not going to roll over for the sake of rolling over. We do not apologize for being tough negotiators on behalf of the people of the Province. We do not apologize for holding out for what is best for Newfoundland and Labrador. Nor will we take a back seat to anyone who suggests otherwise.

To give you an example, Madam Chair, a tangible one, a very tangible one, the former government looked at a process for the development of the Lower Churchill. In their minds, and in their view of the world, the only partner that they could get in bed with to develop that project was Hydro-Quebec.

That was the same government that said in this House, there was no deal. When we became the government, and I was over at Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, I happened to come across this little tape, just this small little tape by the former Premier, that I plugged in for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, where he had already pre-taped a message saying: I would like to inform the people of the Province, as Premier, that we have reached a deal.

Now, this is a person who stood here and said there was no deal. Yet, when the House of Assembly closed, unbeknownst to anybody, he was making tapes about a deal that he had concocted with Hydro-Quebec, because his world view about that resource was that we would be lucky to be able to develop it with Hydro-Quebec if we had the opportunity.

The difference with our view of this is that we said we have a world-class asset, that we are going to go out for expressions of interest. We are going to see what people in the world want, to come and see if they want to develop a resource that is in the best interests of Labrador and in the best interests of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

We were laughed at first, but what happened? Twenty-five different expressions of interest we got, worldwide expressions, many legitimate proposals that are being assessed right now, and who is going to be the winner of that? The only winners of that will be the people of Labrador, and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, and the revenue stream of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: That is the difference. The question, why is it that we took that approach? We took that approach for one simple reason. We knew we had a world-class asset, that we did not need to take a second seat to anybody, and we wanted to answer the question in the only way it deserved to be answered. The question that the Member for Twillingate & Fogo asked when he said, what are they going to do? They are going to go to work on a project, a world-class facility that is going to provide energy to Newfoundland and Labrador and potentially other parts of the world, and put revenue streams into the revenue base of the Province and back into their pockets, because their government has taken a different view than the other government, Madam Chair. That is the view.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: That is the view, Madam Chair, and let me conclude by saying - let me have leave just to conclude?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Finally, we have said it is difficult, when you look at Hebron-Ben Nevis - and I will conclude with this - we put an allocation, a significant sum of money, in the Budget this year, $350,000, in terms of dealing with the potential discussions and negotiations with the oil community and the oil partners, the partners specifically on the Hebron-Ben Nevis project. The reason that we did that is because the Premier of the Province said, if that is what we need then that is what we are going to have, because we are going to negotiate on an equal footing with the oil and gas industry, Madam Chair, an equal footing where we get the technical expertise if we need it, the expertise that is available around the world to provide us with the same type of information and analysis that is required for one reason and one reason only: To get the best possible deal for Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Madam Chair.

I had to get up, because it is like this, now; it is like: Glory, glory, hallelujah! People in Newfoundland and Labrador, you can turn off the lights and go to bed now because all is right with the world, if you listen to the members opposite, Madam Chair. They are saying that we are doing everything right. We are doing everything our way, and it is the best way.

I heard the member say: We have the right attitude. Well, what I would suggest is that an attitude in this Province by a government that says: It is my way or the highway, is not a good attitude for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. It is not a good attitude for the people who elected them and sent them here.

We have seen a lot of that, Madam Chair, in the last few days and weeks. We have seen it, in fact, since the month of March this year where we have had the fisherpeople, the harvesters and the plant workers in rural communities in this Province, in a complete uprising. Why? Because of the pure attitude, on that side of the House, by a government that says this is the legislation, this is the rules, this is the way it is going to be, you take it, you work under it, you live by it, because I will not change and I will not back down. That is what they are saying. That is what they expect of people in this Province to take to bed with them every night, to take with them every single day as they wonder if their communities are going to survive, if their plants are going to open, if they are going to have a days work this summer in the crab fishery or if they are not. Well, I can guarantee you that the words of the members opposite, when they praise the wonderful, gracious Budget that has been brought down by the Minister of Finance, does not give a lot of these people too much comfort tonight, I will let you know. No comfort whatsoever it gives them.

Madam Chair, I talk to these people every single day. Do you know what I hear from them? I hear people who are uncertain. I hear people who are saying to me: Does this Premier know what it is like to have to board up your houses in a community and walk away? Does this Premier know what it is like to see your family members pack up in u-hauls and leave this Province? That is what they are saying, because that is the fate they are seeing as a result of the hobnailed boots, as a result of the divine rule that has been laid down by the members opposite and their Premier.

Well, I just listened to the hon. Member for Kilbride when he stood up and said: We are not going to roll over when it comes to the oil companies. I believe the member, that he will do what he can to make sure that the oil companies invest and make the proper investments and develop the resources properly in this Province, but do you know what I suggest? The rest of them should take a lessen because half of the caucus over there is rolled over in terms of the crab quotas in this Province. Half of them have already rolled over, I say to you. They have rolled over on their constituents who sent them here. They have refused to stand in this House of Assembly and say why they are supporting production quotas, why they are kowtowing to the Premier of the Province and supporting the stand of their government and not the stand of their constituents.

I have not heard the Member for Trinity-Bay de Verde stand in her place in this House of Assembly and tell her constituents why she will not support them. I have not heard her. In fact, Mr. Chairman, I have hardly heard her speak in this House of Assembly, hardly heard her speak since she has been here. She has not stood in her place in this Legislature and told the people of her district why she is kowtowing to the Premier and the Minister of Fisheries, why she is supporting a piece of legislation -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

MS JONES: - that is being rammed down the throats of fish harvesters in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MS JONES: Now, Mr. Chairman, I have not heard the Member for Terra Nova. I have not heard him stand up and tell the people in his district why he is supporting the stand of the Premier and the Minister of Fisheries. We have not heard him tell his constituents why I will not support you now, although you elected me and sent me here, why I will not support you in this, why I feel it necessary to have production quotas rammed down your throats two months after the fishery is opened in this Province, and there is still not a crab being landed at a wharf anywhere in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I have not heard any of the other members from fishing districts, other than the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's, who, when the pressure came on and it came on hard enough - the member was smart enough to realize that if he ever wanted to come back to this place again he would stand with his constituents and not with the government. He paid the price. He paid it with his pocketbook but he will be back. He will be back because he did what the people elected him to do. He stood up and he supported them -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: - irregardless of what the government said, irregardless of the Premier, the ultimate Premier who says: How dare you challenge me! How dare you not support the policies of this government! But, Mr. Chairman, he went against the tide. He went against the odds and he stood with his constituents. It took a lot of courage, I am sure. I thought he might have set an example for some of the others over there but, obviously, he has not. They have not found the same courage, the same insight to do so themselves. They are prepared to stand and support the views of the government while they watch plant workers out there in their districts go without work, while they watch harvesters stand on principle to the point that they are probably jeopardizing their own enterprises right now, and all for what? All for a one-year pilot project. That is not what it is about.

This is about the Premier and the Minister of Fisheries getting themselves in over their heads and now will not back down. That is what this is all about. This is all about the fact that they will not give in. They are not going to give in to a bunch of fishermen out in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. No, Mr. Chairman. That is all this is about. If they would get up tomorrow and say: Listen, we will delay this for a year. We will go and have some talks. We will have some discussion. We will work it out. We will try and implement something another year. Right now, today, there would be fishing boats leaving our wharfs. They would be getting ready to put their pots in the water, strings and strings of gear, and in a few days, Mr. Chairman, they would be landing at our wharfs with a great bounty, putting our plant workers back to work in these communities. But, that is not happening. It is not happening because the people on that side of the House are not allowing it to happen.

Mr. Chairman, do you know what is more important? What is more important here in this Budget Debate is not about the members opposite who are standing up and praising up the few good things that are in this Budget. What about the members who are not standing up? Because I have not heard the Member for Lake Melville get to his feet in this Legislature and praise up this Budget. I do not think he was all that happy that the government did not build an auditorium in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. I do not think he was overjoyed the day they announced they were going to do a study for $200,000 on long-term care in Goose Bay but were going to put $1.4 million in Clarenville and $2.7 million out in Corner Brook. I did not see him over there thumping his desk and laughing out of both sides of his face. He was not all that happy that day, but I see he is back today. The Premier is out of town, so I see he is back today. So, you never know, there might be some reconciliation there somewhere. The Member for Lake Melville may even take to his feet before the next few days are over and start praising up this Budget, but we have not seen it yet. We have not seen it yet, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I will tell you what we did see. We seen something that I have never seen before in the House of Assembly. We seen it recently by the Member for St. George's-Stephenville East. Well, I thought I would never see it, when the member jumps up to her feet and starts blurting out in Question Period all kinds of decisions that the government is now taking immediately. Well, Mr. Chairman, I could not believe it, but what was even more surprising to me is the rationale for what she had done. This is all regarding the Hay Group report, the report that will dismantle and disintegrate health care services, as we know it, in many parts of this Province. Well, there were recommendations in this report as it pertains to Western Newfoundland, to Stephenville, and to Port aux Basques, but the people in the Stephenville area pushed hard. They were on the Open Line shows everyday saying: We want to save the services in our hospital. They were in the newspapers. They had their committees set up. They organized a rally, a big rally out in Stephenville. The day before the big rally the minister stands up and says: We are now not going to cut the services in the Stephenville hospital. She says: We are not going to cut these services because I am representing the women -

CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the hon. Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair that her time has expired.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I realize my time is up and I will now sit down, but I will finish my comments later.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

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

I want to say a few words on the Budget again. The other day I was up and spoke for twenty minutes, trying to give some insight into our Budget and trying to get the members on the other side of the House of Assembly to understand the good things that are happening in this Budget.

Mr. Chair, when I listened to the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, or the Member for Port de Grave, or the Member for Twillingate & Fogo, or the Leader of the Opposition, or the Member for Torngat Mountains, it reminds me of Chicken Little, the sky is falling; nothing happening positive in the Budget; the worst thing in the world that could happen is this Budget.

Now, Mr. Chair, let me tell you something. They brought into the theme that the Leader of the Opposition - you talk about taking direction. Those on that side are trying to say that we are taking direction. They had the Leader of the Opposition - they brought right into it. They have been given their marching orders, no doubt about that. The theme is, of course: Let's attack the government on rural Newfoundland. Let's put it out there. Let's repeat it and repeat it and repeat it, like their first leader, Joey Smallwood. They figure if they say it often enough, someone is going to believe it. Like the Leader of the Opposition when he gets on his feet, he throws those wild statements out there and he figures someone will believe it some time. It is absolutely nonsense what they are getting on with.

Mr. Chair, I will tell you something. They are over there now - and the Member for Port de Grave was on his feet talking about rural Newfoundland. Last Wednesday, in this House of Assembly, the Member for Port de Grave had a private member's resolution. He had seven or eight WHEREASs, and I will not bother to read those. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED - now this is what he was going to debate. This is what he gave notice on: THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly recognizes the seriousness of the situation facing rural areas of this Province and calls on the government to finally take action against the crisis facing the future of rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

What do you think happened, Mr. Chair? What do you think happened? When the time came for him to stand on his feet and speak to his own private member's resolution he would not speak to it. Did not speak to it, Mr. Chairman.

AN HON. MEMBER: He was not allowed.

MR. J. BYRNE: He was not allowed, possibly. He possibly was not allowed, but that is what they are now talking about. That is the sincerity, Mr. Chair. That is the commitment that this bunch has on that side of the House of Assembly to rural Newfoundland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. J. BYRNE: They just brought right into the Leader of the Opposition. Let's repeat it and say it and say it, and someone is going to believe it. They think they have grasped onto something now that might get them re-elected. Well, sad to say for you people on that side of the House, that you are all wrong. You are all wet, let me say to you, I say to the members on the opposite side of the House.

Let's talk about some of things that we are doing. Let's talk about some of the things that we have done in eighteen months since we became the government of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Eighteen months! Now, those people were there for fifteen years and they wanted us to resolve all the woes of the world in eighteen months. The reality is, we are committed to rural Newfoundland.

We had the Government House Leader on his feet speaking about rural Newfoundland tonight and the things that he has been doing in his department. We had the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development on her feet there the other day speaking about things happening in her department. The Minister of Health - again, it is too bad, Mr. Chair. It is too bad that the members of the Official Opposition cannot take their lead from the Member for Labrador West instead of the Leader of the Opposition because he, at least, has shown some constructive criticism and we will give credit where credit is due. Obviously, he says that this is the best Budget for Labrador in thirty years; in thirty years.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

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

As I was saying, the Member for Labrador West gives credit where credit is due. It is too bad that the members opposite cannot take some lead from the Member for Labrador West.

AN HON. MEMBER: He is a good member.

MR. J. BYRNE: He is a good member. I would say, yes. I would agree to that, Mr. Chairman.

Now, they see some light at the end of the tunnel in their minds with respect to attacking on rural Newfoundland. I was watching the news last week and I saw a mayor of a town in this Province get up and say that - again, along the same trend that these people are trying to put forward - rural Newfoundland is being attacked. Do you know, Mr. Chair? This department that I represent, Municipal and Provincial Affairs, less than one year ago approved a $6 million project for that town and that mayor, and we are attacking rural Newfoundland? Where? How could he even think of it? Where is their accusation there?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. J. BYRNE: You know, $6 million for that one town in rural Newfoundland, and this crowd are trying to say that we are not supporting rural Newfoundland.

Let's talk about a task force that I asked the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Municipalities to put in place to work with us to try and come up with new ways of funding the municipalities in rural Newfoundland. They just recently made a presentation to us and we are reviewing it now, our department. We are trying to work with the Federation of Municipalities - one point there. Where is it we are forgetting rural Newfoundland, according to the members on the other side of the House?

My department alone - and I will get more time, I am sure. I only have ten minutes here tonight so I am not going to get a chance to get through everything.

AN HON. MEMBER: We have five hours, Jack (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: We have five hours, okay.

This government, we assist the municipalities in this Province and we do a financial analysis of all the municipalities in this Province when we are asked. We go in and we do an analysis and give some advice and tell them how to operate their towns, when they want it done. We are there to help them there. We look at the planning in these municipalities. We assist them with their planning in the smaller towns. The cities like St. John's, Corner Brook, and the towns like Gander and the City of Mount Pearl, they have their own staff; but we, as an Administration, assist the smaller towns from that perspective. Also, we assist the towns with the Municipal Operating Grants. Many of the towns out there, the smaller towns, depend on the Municipal Operating Grants. Last year, when we had to impact the Municipal Operating Grants, not one small town in this Province was impacted. Not one. Our support for rural Newfoundland is shown over and over and over again.

Now, it goes on. We, as a government, pay, and try to assist and pay, at least 25 per cent of the debt of the rural municipalities in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. These are just some of the things that we can touch on. Recently, and again I will say this is in your own district, Mr. Chair, in Port Union, Catalina and Melrose, where the three towns came together, we, as a government, paid down the debt of these municipalities and we are assisting them this year with infrastructure in that new town, Trinity Bay North. It is a positive thing; but, no, we do not hear members on the other side of the House talk about that. No, just get up and attack, attack, attack on anything that they perceive, in their own minds, as being a negative, something that they can try and wear down the government and try to get people to say: Yeah, my God, they are not doing this thing. They are attacking rural Newfoundland - which is so far from the truth.

Also, last year, not this past Budget but the Budget before, we brought down a difficult Budget. There is no doubt about that. We took over the debt and the mismanagement from the previous Administration, millions and hundreds of millions of dollars in a deficit situation, and we have to bring in a new Budget. What did I do, Mr. Chair? I went to Cabinet to get $9 million for debt relief for the smaller municipalities in this Province. I brought it to Cabinet and the Premier right away agreed that this was something that we had to do because, of course, the Premier had said on many occasions that we are committed to rural Newfoundland and Labrador. The urban areas, the bigger centres, certainly can really fend for themselves, I would say, Mr. Chair, but then again we assist them where necessary with respect to capital works, with water, sewer, roads and what have you. Mr. Chair, $9 million went down to pay the debt of the smaller towns in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, and we are still flowing that through to make sure that the municipalities benefit.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, that is what I am saying. We are only in eighteen months. They say: What about this year? Well, exactly. If they had been listening a few minutes ago they would have heard that I had said to the Federation of Municipalities, asked them to put forward a task force and to recommend to the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, Municipal and Provincial Affairs, that we come up with new ways to assist the municipalities, and we are looking at that as we speak. Therefore, the municipalities that are in debt to the private banks will be assisted, hopefully, in the not-too-distant future, I say to the Member for Port de Grave. The member, by the way, as I said, Mr. Chair, who brought forward a private member's resolution on rural Newfoundland and did not even bother to get up to speak to it. So that shows his commitment and his dedication and his sincerity, and the Opposition's sincerity, to the whole of rural Newfoundland - because they are playing games. They are trying to do anything, say anything, to try and get re-elected, but that is two-and-a-half years away.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. J. BYRNE: You should relax. Relax, I say to the members opposite.

SOME HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. J. BYRNE: Relax. Everything in due course. Fifteen or twenty years down the road you could be sitting on this side of the House again, so just take it easy. Sit back and watch a government who are committed to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador do things right, who do long-term planning, and are not in an ad hoc situation like they did on that side of the House, who were in crisis management for the last few years of your Administration. As a matter of fact, talk about wasting money. They are on that side of the House getting up and trying to say that we on this side of the House waste money. Now, the Leader of the Opposition over there, former Premier, leading into the last election, spent over two hundred -

CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs that his time has expired.

MR. J. BYRNE: Just a minute to clue up.

CHAIR: Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

CHAIR: The member, by leave.

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

MR. BARRETT: No leave.

MR. J. BYRNE: Make up your minds.

Is the Member for Bellevue withdrawing leave?

CHAIR: Order, please!

Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. J. BYRNE: Okay, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I will have an opportunity when we get back, no doubt about that.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I just wanted to finish off what I was saying in the debate. I was just getting to the HayGroup report, a very important piece of work that was done with regard to the health care services in Western Newfoundland and on the Northern Peninsula.

Mr. Chairman, this report, as I said earlier, would erode the health care system as we know it today, if some of the recommendations in this report were implemented. Mr. Chairman, the West Coast of Newfoundland launched an aggressive lobby to the government, saying that we want certain recommendations in this report taken out, we want them squashed, and we never want them to see the light of day.

Well, Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Health and Community Services stood in this House and said to me, in response to Question Period, that will not be government's decision. Those decisions will be left to the health authorities. They will be left to the new CEOs to make. Mr. Chairman, we accepted that as a government policy, that the HayGroup would be looked at by the health authorities, by the CEOs, and that they would make a determination on what policies would be implemented and what would not be. Mr. Chairman, we accepted it right up to the day that the Member for St. George's-Stephenville East stood in her place in the House of Assembly right before, the night before, a rally out in her district; a rally, Mr. Chairman, where they were going to take the member down, let me tell you. They were going to take the member down because she was prepared, and her government was prepared, to see the cuts in the health care system in the Stephenville hospital. Well, Mr. Chairman, the day before the big rally she stood in her place in the House and blurted out, blurted out to the public, that no, we will not make the cuts in Stephenville hospital now.

Mr. Chairman, she said this: I am representing the women in that area, and therefore those cuts will not be made because they will impact women.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MS JONES: Mr. Chairman, the only woman, I say to the member, she was saving was herself. She was the only woman that she was saving, Mr. Chairman, and she was saving herself from her constituents who were organizing the big rally on health care the opposite evening.

If the member really believed in what she was saying, if she really believed that she was standing up for the women of Newfoundland and Labrador, then she would not be leaving the women in Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair District, or the women in The Straits & White Bay North District, or the women in the St. Barbe District, in limbo, Mr. Chairman. She would be treating all of the women in this Province equally. That is not the case. That is definitely not the case, Mr. Chairman.

Right now, the St. Anthony hospital is faced with a report that says that we want to cut obstetric services, we want to cut gynecology services, pediatrics, psychiatry, radiology. Mr. Chairman, that is what the report says, that we want to erode these services from the hospital in St. Anthony - very important services to women; women in the Northern Peninsula, women in the St. Anthony area, women whom the Member for St. George's-Stephenville East says she stood up for when she took the recommendations in Stephenville and hove them out.

Well, I want to challenge her to stand up and represent the women on the Northern Peninsula and in Southern Labrador. Stand by the words that she expressed in this House of Assembly. Stand by the women of this Province, Mr. Chairman, and do the right thing and tell the people in St. Anthony that we will not cut your gynecology services, we will not cut your pediatric services, and we will not cut your obstetric services.

Mr. Chairman, we have not heard that from that minister and from that member, have we? What about the people in Southern Labrador, a report that recommends that almost 3,000 people in the Labrador Straits should go to the hospital in Blanc Sablon, in the Province of Quebec, to seek health care services because this report would take physicians out of the hospital in Forteau and send them to Blanc Sablon hospital in the Province of Quebec? Why isn't the Minister of Health standing up on his feet and saying we will not implement this recommendation?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: Mr. Chairman, I will certainly sit down and let the Minister of Health make that announcement this evening. Indeed, I will.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: With the time being 9:58 p.m., I move that we adjourn debate. We have to close at 10:00 p.m. anyway.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

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

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Motion carried.

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

CHAIR: Order, please!

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

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

There seems to be some confusion.

MS JONES: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: One second.

There seems to be some confusion.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: Obviously, there seems to be some confusion.

MS JONES: There is no confusion. I understand perfectly.

MR. E. BYRNE: Well, I was just going to make the offer that if the member wants to conclude her remarks, we will provide the opportunity to do so. Obviously, there was a misunderstanding, some confusion. If one member thought that you had given up your time, that would be another thing, but if you want to take a few moments to clear up your remarks, by all means do so. Then we will rise the Committee, report progress and we will ask leave to sit again.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I was asking a question of the Minister of Health. He stood in his place, Mr. Chairman, I assumed, to answer the question. Instead, he manipulated my time to take the opportunity to close this House of Assembly before I had concluded my remarks on this debate, and that I see as unfair and unforgiving.

CHAIR: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

The Chair is looking for guidance and direction. It is now 10:00 o'clock, and with the rules of the House, the House closes at 10:00 o'clock. I ask the Government House Leader for direction.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

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

All I can say is that there was obviously a misunderstanding. The time was offered to the member to conclude her remarks. If we have to go beyond 10:00 o'clock to do so, we are completely prepared to let the member do that. Obviously, the member has adjourned her remarks. She has time back when we get back on Thursday, I assume.

With that, Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

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

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Motion carried.

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

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South and Deputy Speaker.

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

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

When shall the Committee have leave to sit again?

MR. E. BYRNE: On tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.

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

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

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

I move that the House do now adjourn until 2:00 p.m. tomorrow, at which time we will return and be debating the private member's motion of the Member for Trinity North.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved that this House do now adjourn until tomorrow at 2:00 o'clock.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Carried.

This House now stands adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, at 2:00 o'clock in the afternoon.

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