MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

MR. SPEAKER: This afternoon we have members' statements as follows: the hon. the Member for the District of Gander -

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

MR. SPEAKER: A point of privilege by the Government House Leader.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is often said in the House that when you rise on a point of privilege, it is not often you do it because it is a serious point, I guess, you make. I have been in situations in my twelve years in the House - have found myself offsides with the Speaker on a number of occasions and have, I guess, as somebody in the House who, over time, has found myself on challenging the rulings of the Chair, both inside and outside of the House, have come to understand the rules of what the House is about.

My point, I guess, that I raise today is with respect to comments made publicly by the Leader of the Opposition last night on an Open Line program. I want to just read for a minute, Mr. Speaker - it is not a point of privilege but really is what I believe, in determining what he did last night and saying what he did, holds the House in contempt. In saying that - I want to get to my case in a moment, but I do reference when the current Premier was Leader of the Opposition, who made comments in a local newspaper at the time, questioning the impartiality of the Chair, basically questioning the authority and impartiality of the Chair. Everybody knows in the House of Assembly that if you question the impartiality of the Chair or if you question a decision of the Chair, that there are appropriate ways to deal with it but speaking out publicly really questions the authority of the entire House. Now, when the now Premier, when he was Leader of the Opposition did that, the now Leader of the Opposition was Premier and his House Leader, Mr. Lush, at the time, rose and here is what he said with respect to the article that appeared in The Telegram: It is the responsibility of all members to ensure that the confidence of the Chair is maintained because it is the confidence of the Chair which keeps the House going. Without that confidence, the House of Assembly or Parliament would be on the brink.

Last night the Leader of the Opposition - and I will just quote quickly what he said on an Open Line program in reference to the Deputy Speaker, who was in the Chair, who asked the Leader of the Opposition, he made a determination about what was unparliamentary. I am quoting the Leader of the Opposition: So, I believe they have made a mistake. He asked me to withdraw and the way our rules work, Linda, if I withdrew it, then from this day on it would become unparliamentary. Mr. Speaker, he knows that is not true. You could say something today or use a word today that is not unparliamentary, use it again tomorrow and it could be considered parliamentary, depending on the situation, depending on the reference that was made, how was it made, what way it was said. There is no way to codify or to say: These words today are unparliamentary forever. That does not work. Modern day Houses do not operate that way, and the Leader of the Opposition knows it.

Here is what I think puts him offsides with the Chair, Mr. Speaker. He said: The Deputy Speaker, Mr. Fitzgerald, was - and I believe he made a mistake. It is fine to believe that but we are obligated, and there is precedent right across the country - every member in this House knows that - if you are going to question a decision of the Chair, there are ways to do it. Publicly saying that the Chair of the House made a mistake really holds the House in contempt.

I guess the difference between privilege, or someone's privileges being breached, which, if the member's privileges were breached, are this: Members have certain rights, and they are known and listed.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: I am getting to it. It is important to get to it, and I am just about to, I say to the Member for Bellevue.

Privileges are known rights, to come and go from the House when you want, unobstructed, et cetera, et cetera, but contempt for the House is different.

I will just quote very quickly the authority on parliamentary privilege in Canada, which all of us use here in the House: Contempt is more aptly described as an offence against the authority or dignity of the House. While privilege may be codified - or, in other words, it may be listed what privileges are - contempt is not, because new forms of obstruction are constantly being devised and Parliament must be able to invoke its jurisdiction to protect itself against these new forms.

Mr. Speaker, I submit to you that the Leader of the Opposition should withdraw his comments on questioning a decision of the Speaker at the time. If he has a fundamental disagreement with it, he should go and visit the Speaker; but, having said that, to go out publicly - and when he was Premier he advanced the same argument and the now Premier, then Leader of the Opposition, stood in this House and withdrew the comments he made in public.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Absolutely, there is a difference.

Mr. Speaker, the fact is, I believe that the comments made publicly - I believe there is a sound case for it - I ask you to judge that. I believe that the House has been held in contempt as a result of those comments.

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will just respond briefly to the comments of the Government House Leader.

We have had many issues raised in this House in the last couple of weeks, all kinds of issues of security, who is in charge of the place, whether it is the Speaker, whether it is the government, whether it is the Premier, and emotions have been running pretty high, not only in this House but I would submit in this Province, as a result of actions by this government.

The Government House Leader talks about privileges. One of the basic tenets and one of the basic privileges that a person has, not only in this House but in society, is called the freedom of speech. Now, the Government House Leader is famous for standing up in this House and telling us: Don't try to do through the back door what you cannot do through the front door.

I submit, Mr. Speaker, that the comments by the Opposition Leader on the Open Line show is an exercise of his freedom of speech, and if the government thinks that, by trying to invoke privileges in a Parliament here, they are going to muzzle us and shut the Opposition up when we exercise our freedom of speech, they have another thing coming. This has nothing to do with anybody's breach of anybody's privilege in this House. This has all to do with an individual voicing his freedom of speech.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to make a couple of comments on that.

I am well aware of the matter to which the Government House Leader refers. The current Premier, while Leader of the Opposition, made comments to the media which were not that the Speaker had made a mistake - because I do not think perfection is demanded of a Speaker or Deputy Speaker - but was that the Speaker was bias against him. That is a very different matter and has to do with the function of the House, and whether or not the Speaker is impartial and independent, and it was recognized that there was a proper forum for bringing that up within the House.

It is no different to say that the Deputy Speaker made a mistake than to say a judge made a mistake. Lawyers do that all the time. They say: We think the judge made a mistake so we are gong to the Court of Appeal; or, we think the Court of Appeal made a mistake so we are going to the Supreme Court of Canada; or, you can even say the Supreme Court of Canada made a mistake. You have to live by it, but you do not have to agree with it.

There is a very big difference than suggesting that perhaps the Deputy Speaker was somehow imperfect, because I do not think perfection is what we expect here. We do expect regard for the Chair in this House, and regard for the rulings of the Chair in this House, and I think by leaving the House when asked to do so by the Chair, the Leader of the Opposition in fact did that. That is showing respect for the Chair.

I recall one time, not a very long time ago, when the Government House Leader was asked to leave by the Chair and did not leave for a day or so, causing a major crisis, and I think he has learned from that.

MR. E. BYRNE: I did apologize.

MR. HARRIS: He did apologize, and he did learn from that.

I think the Leader of the Opposition, by leaving, even though he disagreed with the ruling, left the House, and to say afterwards that he felt a mistake had been made is a legitimate exercise in freedom of speech and not a matter of privilege before this House.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

As members would know, the role of the Speaker is to determine whether or not a prima facie case of breach of privilege exists.

The Speaker will review Hansard, and he will also seek the transcripts from the public broadcast; I think it must have been on VOCM last evening. I will get that and review it all, consult with the Table officers, and come back to the House on tomorrow with a ruling.

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

MR. SPEAKER: A point of privilege is raised by the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to raise a point of privilege with respect to my expulsion from the Legislature yesterday. I believe it was a clear violation of my privilege as a Member of this House of Assembly. I was instructed by our rules, by the Deputy Speaker who was in the Chair at the time, to withdraw certain remarks, which I refused to do knowing full well that he would enforce the rules and ask me to leave the House, which I did out of respect for this House and its rules. I did choose, Mr. Speaker, to leave the House when requested to do so by the Deputy Speaker, even though I believe that everything he had done was in error up to that point. Mr. Speaker, I chose not to disrupt the House further but to make my points outside, which I have done, and to arise at the first opportunity when returning to the House to raise the issue again, which I am doing now. I have also written Your Honour with respect to this issue.

Mr. Speaker, if I could just take a minute, because I believe this is extremely important and serious. My view and understanding, having been a member here for sixteen years, is that the role of the Speaker is to maintain order and decorum and enforce our rules; not to make his or her own rules but to enforce our rules. The rules are clearly spelled out in our Standing Orders, that we have precedents of this House, other jurisdictions that follow the same rules where there have been precedents and other authorities. Mr. Speaker, the rules, over hundreds of years of democratic debate in Parliaments like this, are pretty well defined around the whole issue of acceptable parliamentary language as opposed to unacceptable unparliamentary language. Every time in the past - because I have been found guilty, I admit, of using unparliamentary language in this Legislature from time to time. Every single time in the past, Mr. Speaker, when that has been brought to my attention by a person in the Chair - Speaker, Deputy Speaker or otherwise - with an indication and a citation showing the precedent whereby that language has clearly been deemed to be unparliamentary, I have followed the instructions of the Chair and withdrawn the unparliamentary language. I think everyone in this House knows that to be the history and the record of my involvement.

I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, that it is not the role of the Chair to try to control debate by stifling what members can say or how they go about saying it. I have heard the former Premier, the Member for Lewisporte, the Minister of Transportation and Works, say it in his own words just recently, that everyone makes their point in their own particular way. It is also, I would contend, Mr. Speaker, not the Chair's role to try to protect government members from political references being made to them or of them. They do that themselves very well in their own debate in answers to questions and dealing with the points.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, just because all of us here know that the Minister of Finance - whom I addressed by his title, and Hansard will show that, our record will show that. I addressed him as the Minister of Finance, recognizing his position in the government, because he doesn't like to be reminded in debate or questions or otherwise of his current potential conflict of interest. It is no reason for the Chair to try to stop a member from talking about it or questioning it. As a matter of fact, I have questioned that very issue as to whether or not the Minister of Finance is in a potential conflict of interest on numerous occasions in this House and never has there been an issue raised as to whether that language was parliamentary or not. The questions were accepted, the questions were answered, the explanations were given. Yesterday, in my view, Mr. Speaker, was an unwarranted intrusion by the Chair, the Deputy Speaker at the time, into a free-flowing debate. There was nothing unparliamentary said. A reference to the Minister of Finance and then an aside saying: Old conflict of interest himself. Mr. Speaker, that was exactly what was said in the midst of a free-flowing debate. The Chair, in my view, as I said publicly last night, made a mistake, erred in judgement and stood and suggested that the language was unparliamentary and should be withdrawn.

I asked the Chair, Mr. Speaker, if he would even recess, or try to find some precedent, or some previous place, or some quotation, or some ruling, or some order on which he could justify suggesting that the language that I used was unparliamentary, and none was forthcoming. So then following the rules, the Chair decided to proceed to the next step, which was to ask me to withdraw three times, which I refused to do. Our rules are - I couldn't even say something that was totally unparliamentary. There are well-defined lists of those that are unparliamentary every time you say them. I could say that five or six times, but as long as I was willing to withdraw it the third time, I am allowed to stay here. When I said something that no one could suggest to me was in any way unparliamentary, something that I have said in this House many times before in the last number of weeks and was never challenged on as to the parliamentary or unparliamentary nature of it, that a Chair, in my view, made a mistake. But out of respect for that Chair, when he followed the orders, I left the Legislature. I believe I was deprived of my privilege to be here yesterday in error.

I have written you, Mr. Speaker, asking you to review the written record, to review the tapes, because there was some suggestion that body language might have made innocuous parliamentary language unparliamentary, and I believe the tapes will show anything but that. I have asked for an apology, because I believe if we have to respect the Chair then one of the things that does make a democracy work is that if a mistake has been made the acknowledgment of it makes the process work even better.

I would ask, Mr. Speaker, that you do take my written representation that I passed along to your office this morning seriously, that you do review the circumstance, because I do believe that my privileges were seriously breached yesterday and I was deprived of an opportunity to participate in the full debate yesterday and last night by a mistake and an error in judgement made by the Deputy Speaker while he was chairing the session and the proceedings in the House of Assembly.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to state my case.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Leader of the Opposition has asked for a ruling, and I think the member makes a serious point. There is a question as to how one proceeds. In a question like that, whether it is a ruling that is not subject to appeal under our rules, but how one deals with that is an important point. The fact that he has raised it at the first opportunity is appropriate. I have not had sufficient warning of this to make any comment on the precedents of the House, but it seems to me, Your Honour, something that should be carefully researched. We need to know whether or not this is a matter of privilege that can be dealt with in this House or if there are other methods whereby recourse may be had for a mistake of this nature, without overturning the rules of the Speaker or having the kind of circumstance that we had before where a member who is dissatisfied with a ruling ups the ante by refusing to leave.

I think it is a serious point and look to Your Honour to do some careful research and get back to the House on it.

MR. SPEAKER: I thank the members for their presentations.

Members will know that the Chair extended some liberties this afternoon to make these presentations, but under normal circumstances the Chair should only be questioned or challenged by way of a substantive motion. We did, in the interest of democracy and freedom of speech, permit the dialogue to go beyond where it quite normally has been.

The Chair will review the entire matter and will come back to the House very shortly, hopefully by tomorrow or Monday, with a decision.

The Members' Statements are as follows: The hon. the Member for Gander; the hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave; the hon. the Member for the District of Mount Pearl; the hon. the Member for the District of Grand Falls-Buchans; the hon. the Member for the District of Labrador West; and the hon. the Member for the District of Bay of Islands.

The hon. the Member for the District of Gander.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize the life and accomplishments of a dedicated and great Newfoundlander.

Mr. Speaker, this week has seen the passing of Mr. Edgar Baird of Gander, at the age of ninety-three. Mr. Baird is noted for his distinguished careers in aviation and forestry. At the age of twenty-four, he became Chief Woods Ranger for Newfoundland and Labrador. He eventually served as Flight Lieutenant in the Royal Air Force, and as Superintendent of Newfoundland Overseas Forestry Corps. Mr. Baird's accomplishments continued after his war service as he operated successful business ventures, including bush flying, hunting camps and lumbering. Mr. Baird is renowned as the person who built the first private dwelling in Gander in 1951. He was later appointed the first Chairman of the Gander Local Improvement District.

Mr. Baird has been honoured twice by the Town of Gander, having both a street and a local trail named in his honour. In 1987, the Canadian Institute of Forestry recognized his achievements and presented him with the Forestry Merit Award. Most recently, his lifetime of unselfish dedication to our Province was recognized with the awarding of the Order of Newfoundland.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all members of this hon. House join me in remembering Mr. Baird and his many contributions to Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to recognize a talented young lady from my district who has been recognized for her artistic work in honouring the many who have fought and died for our freedom during World War I and World War II.

Mr. Speaker, each year students from all over the Province recognize the price paid for freedom and promote the theme of remembrance by competing in the Royal Canadian Legion's Remembrance Day Literary and Poster contest. These poster submissions are forwarded to the Royal Canadian Provincial Command Office here in St. John's.

Along with being selected as the best in the Province, winners in the senior categories are awarded a trip to Beaumont Hamel to tour the memorials and participate in the July 1 Remembrance Day Ceremonies.

Randye Lynch, a Level III student at Ascension Collegiate in Bay Roberts was the winner in this contest. Her colour poster entitled, "Reaching Out For Memories" was honoured for its tremendous artistic content. Her poster shows a grieving woman standing over a grave covered with poppies, holding a letter. In the background, the same woman is bidding goodbye to her husband before he leaves for the war.

Mr. Speaker, Randye's poster submission was supported by the Royal Canadian Legion, Bay Roberts.

I ask all members of this hon. House to recognize her achievement and to recognize the Royal Canadian Legion for their work in ensuring our students recognize the sacrifice that was given during World War I and World War II.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DENINE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today, Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to the nominees and the winner of the 2004 Mount Pearl Citizen of the Year.

The City of Mount Pearl, in conjunction with the Mount Pearl Kinsmen Club, hosts this event each and every year, whereas they select someone from the community for this very prestigious award. To be nominated as Citizen of the Year is a reward in itself. It is a reflection of a person's commitment of enhancing the lives of others and making the City of Mount Pearl a better place to live.

This year, Mr. Speaker, the nominees were: Helen Baggs, Steve Best, Brenda Butt, Betty Cole, Claudette Coombs, Catherine Fagan, Ian Graham, Dan Maher, Maxine Thistle, and Clare Wall.

Mr. Speaker, this year's Citizen of the Year is Catherine Fagan, and I would like to mention some of the contributions that Mrs. Fagan has made to our City: Lifetime member of the Provincial Catholic Women's League, serving as President in 2004; she is a member of the church community Bereavement Team and in 2004 she chaired the World Prayer Day; a member of the Mount Pearl Seniors Independence Group; door-to-door canvasser for the Lung Association; Salvation Army Christmas Kettle volunteer; Knights of Columbus volunteer; Canadian Society volunteer; volunteers her time during the week visiting and shopping for seniors with Alzheimer's -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

MR. DENINE: Leave just to -

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MR. DENINE: - a volunteer for the past two years with the Father John B. Kent Literacy support team, helping Grade 1 and Grade 2 students at Mary Queen of the World School.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join with me in congratulating all of the nominees and this year's Citizen of the Year, Catherine Fagan.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to be in attendance last evening at the Newfoundland and Labrador Organization of Women Entrepreneurs, NLOWE, 2005 Entrepreneur of the Year Awards Gala, held at Fairmont Newfoundland, where a constituent of mine, Michelle Critch of Badger, was named the 2005 Central Regional Entrepreneur of the Year.

Mr. Speaker, Michelle Critch is the owner-operator of her own salon called Hair Alive. She started her business twenty-two years ago at the age of twenty-one, and over the years she has grown her business by providing quality service to her clients. She is the first to say that she gets a great deal of satisfaction listening and talking to her clients, and she has been a source of encouragement to young people in her own community of Badger, many of whom have since gone on to become well accomplished in their own careers.

Mr. Speaker, the self-discipline that has allowed Michelle success in her own business is also evident in her many accomplishments in the sport of karate. She is a provincial, national and world champion, whose most recent accolade was winning a gold medal at the World Karate Championship in Switzerland, October 8, 2004.

Michelle has faced many challenges over the years, with the most devastating being the Badger flood of 2003. Even though her own business was under water, she faced that ordeal head on and was up and running again in a matter of days. Her determination, hard work and commitment to everything she does makes her so deserving of this award.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am very proud of her success. She is definitely an inspiration to others.

Mr. Speaker, I would like all member of this hon. House to join with me in congratulating Michelle Critch on being named Central Regional Entrepreneur of the Year, and I wish her continued success in the future.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to compliment the Atom A hockey team from Labrador West, who participated in a hockey tournament in Baie Verte during the Easter break.

Mr. Speaker, the team won the silver medal and I congratulate them on their achievement; however, my statement today is not about winning or losing. It is about an even greater reason to be proud of them.

All too often, Mr. Speaker, we hear about who won or lost. We hear of any fights that may occur, of unruly conduct or bad attitudes, but seldom do we hear the good things. However, this is such a situation, Mr. Speaker, and it is worthy of note. I believe it is best described by reading a letter written to the media in Labrador West.

It says: I am writing to congratulate the children who represented your fine town in the past Easter hockey tournament. Unfortunately, the children did not bring home the gold medal but they can hold themselves proud and the town should honour them for the exemplary conduct put forth. Manners that are seldom used or heard any more were used constantly, and all who attended exercised patience.

He congratulated the people of Labrador and the team, Mr. Speaker, on their proud achievements and they way that they conducted themselves.

Mr. Speaker, the players and coaches and parents are to be commended, and you can be sure that the people of Labrador West take great pride in our young people for being such great ambassadors for our communities.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to recognize a group of athletes from my district who attend Templeton Collegiate High School in Gillams.

Under the guidance of coaches Derek Locke and Clinton Byrne, the Templeton Tigers Wrestling Club had a very successful year. In February, eighteen wrestlers represented the school to compete in the Provincial Age Group Championships. They won eighteen medals, including ten gold. The team placed third overall and won the Senior Boys Division. In mid-March, team members, Adrian Byrne and Matt Cassidy, travelled to Charlottetown, P.E.I. to compete in the Atlantic Championships. Both wrestlers were medal winners, with Adrian winning the silver and Matt winning the bronze.

In early April, both the boys and girls teams won the High School Regional Banners and qualified for the Provincials with all twenty-eight members winning medals, including twenty gold. Overall, so far this year, the Templeton Tigers wrestling club has won over seventy-five individual medals and three team awards.

I ask all members of the House to join with me in congratulating these students for their sporting achievements and wish them well in future competitions.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

It being Wednesday, under our Standing Orders, unless we have leave, we have to go to -

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: We have leave to continue with routine proceedings. I have a request by the Government House Leader, the Member for Kilbride, if he could have leave to make a member's statement.

Has leave been granted?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride, and Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise to ask the House to note the passing of a resident of the District of Kilbride, a Mr. Les Bruce. While he would be known to many people in the House, particularly on the opposite side, as a political activist and somebody heavily involved in the Liberal Party, I know that on Monday past he was buried.

He will be remembered most as a loving father, a loving husband and a loving grandfather. An individual who has made, I believe, an outstanding contribution to the community that he has lived in, in a variety of forums through the Knights of Columbus, et cetera.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the House, if we could, and all members join in passing on our condolences to his wife, his siblings and his family, and if the House would mind doing that on our behalf.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

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, I rise in this hon. House this afternoon to inform members of a significant ceremony I attended last Thursday on behalf of the provincial government at the Samiajij Miawpukek Reserve in Conne River.

I, along with my colleague, the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune, and Senator Joan Cook, representing the Government of Canada, were there celebrating two momentous occasions; the signing of a self-government framework agreement with the Miawpukek First Nation and the federal government; and the announcement of a Land Transfer Agreement with the Miawpukek First Nation and the federal government to transfer land to the federal government for the purpose of expanding the Reserve.

Mr. Speaker, it was roughly a year ago that I rose in this House to inform members of our government's intent to enter into negotiations with the federal government and the Miawpukek First Nation to determine the terms and conditions for a land transfer agreement to expand the Conne River Reserve. I am delighted to report today to this House that the Land Transfer Agreement has now been concluded.

Mr. Speaker, this additional land will allow room for additional housing development and the pursuit of economic development opportunities for the Miawpukek First Nation. It will also ensure the community has the space it needs to grow well into the future.

Mr. Speaker, our government has also supported the aspirations of self-governance for the Miawpukek First Nation. Our government recognizes the Miawpukek First Nation would like more in terms of responsibility for the programs and services offered in the community. We are pleased to be moving forward with the negotiation process.

Mr. Speaker, our government made a commitment to work in partnership with Aboriginal communities and the federal government, to encourage and assist economic and social development policies that are best suited to the culture and needs of Aboriginal peoples.

Mr. Speaker, our government values and remains committed to our relationship with Chief Misel Joe and the Miawpukek First Nation. On behalf of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, we offer congratulations to Chief Joe and Mi'Kmaq of Conne River for reaching these milestones. We look forward to strengthening our positive relationship with the Miawpukek First Nation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advanced copy of his statement. I will say again, another initiative that was started by the previous Liberal government. I was glad that I had the opportunity, as the Minister of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs, to travel to Conne River to start the negotiations.

Certainly, Mr. Speaker, it is a good news story for the people in Conne River, and as an Aboriginal person and a member of the Labrador Inuit Association, I want to offer my congratulations to them as well.

Mr. Speaker, the minister talked of having a good working relationship with the Aboriginal people. We signed the final agreement of the Labrador Inuit Association land claims in Nain, in January. It is unfortunate that we cannot say the same about the Metis people, which the government made many promises to before the election.

Certainly, Mr. Speaker, to the people of Conne River, this is a good initiative and I offer them our congratulations.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the Minister for an advance copy of his statement.

Indeed it is good news, Mr. Speaker, to see the progress that has been made in Conne River by the Mi'kmaq people and the Miawpukek First Nation over the last number of years. Anybody who had been to Conne River back in the last 1960s or early 1970s will be amazed and proud of the transformation that has taken place amongst the Mi'kmaq people, Mr. Speaker, the pride, self-respect and increased self-esteem that has happened as a result of the self-determination being -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MR. HARRIS: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MR. HARRIS: I should have asked at the beginning, Mr. Speaker, because I only -

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Perhaps we can deal with in our committee, as the Government House Leader suggests.

I think, Mr. Speaker, anybody who has been to Conne River prior to the change and transformation that has taken place as result of the Mi'kmaq people getting actively involved in the self-determination of their own future, to take over an education system which they now control, see this as a model that we hope can bring the same kind of hope and future to the Innu people of Labrador. I urge this government to try to help, as quickly and as much as they can, to assist the Innu people in the North of Labrador to achieve the same kind of goals.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further Statements by Ministers?

Oral Questions.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Many of the thousands of home care workers in the Province have not received their fifty-cent raise the Minister of Finance promised in his Budget. Private operators, Mr. Speaker, cannot afford to pay out the extra cost. There was no consultation. This was not thought out by the government. In fact, Mr. Speaker, private operators learned of their new financial obligation on the day the minister announced the Budget in this House. Mr. Speaker, they asked for full recovery costs and they were told that a decision could only be made after consulting Treasury Board.

We all know, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister of Finance, the acting Minister of Health, is also the President of Treasury Board. I ask you today, Minister: Will you consult with yourself and commit to pay the seventy-three cents to the operators in this Province so they can give their workers the salary increase that you promised in the Budget?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

At least I might get a more sensible conversation and speak with the member across the House.

Treasury Board consists - I might say, seven ministers sit on Treasury Board. There are seven ministers.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: The member is a little misinformed on the issue. We announced in the Budget that there would be fifty cents for home care workers. We also made provision -

MR. BARRETT: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: If the Member for Bellevue would let me finish.

For the first time, to my knowledge, on April 1 of this year the boards were given their budgets for the entire year. The former government used to give them in October or November. That has not been uncommon. They were given - monies flowed through to allow a fifty cent increase for home support workers. In lieu of that, and the administrative cost of handling that by home support agencies, we will put another eleven cents, which is equivalent to a 22 per cent administrative cost on top of that fifty cents to be able to do that.

The member should check on that and do her homework on it before she asks the question.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: I have done my homework, I say to the minister, but let's tell the truth here now. The Premier, last year, set the precedent when he went out to the West Coast of the Island. He offered up a salary increase to the VON workers on the same day that his party was having their fundraising golf tournament on the West Coast and now, Mr. Speaker, they are looking for a way out.

My question is this: Does the minister know that the private operators are involved in labour relations? They are currently being told that while they are bargaining there is a statutory freeze on wages. I say to the minister: you committed the increase to the workers, ante up, give them the money they are asking for.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance, President of Treasury Board and Acting Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The member should know, she sat in government. I think she was around the Cabinet table, I know for a reasonable amount of time, and she should know that the workers of home support agencies are not employers of government. They do not negotiate with government. They do not have dealings with government. I believe it was her government that brought in legislation to say exactly just that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, Abitibi has openly stated in their so-called survival plan that they are looking at developing three power generation projects for their Stephenville mill operations. Now, let me paint a picture for you. These projects are the Badger Shute, Red Indian Falls, Four Mile Pond and they are all on the Exploits River.

Mr. Speaker, can the minister confirm today that if government approves these power projects that the benefits derived will guarantee a two machine operation at the Grand Falls mill?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources, and Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

First of all, it is my understanding, in our discussions with Abitibi, that what they have talked about is the potential for two further developments on the Exploits River, not three. They have never talked to government about three potential further developments.

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, there are three developments already on the river. One of those developments, or one-and-a-half of those developments, signed by the former government. The benefits from those power developments are not applied against the manufacture cost of wood. In other words, the cost of producing paper per ton, which is a question that people must answer. To the question - sorry, the former government must answer.

To the question of: Should we get into a power purchase agreement? Will we make that apply to a two machine operation in Grand Falls? Let's not put the cart before the horse. We are not into any discussions or formal negotiations with Abitibi on power because, first and foremost, before we would even consider that, Abitibi must commit to a two machine operation in Grand Falls and until they do, we will not be discussing (inaudible) with Abitibi.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, people in Grand Falls-Windsor are still not convinced that government is doing all it can to ensure the future viability of the mill and protect the jobs for Central Newfoundland. The Minister of Natural Resources is on record as saying that he will enforce the provisions of Bill 27 and take away timber rights from the company if they close number seven paper machine.

Will the minister commit today that if he has to revoke the timber rights to Abitibi that he will put the wood supply assigned to the Grand Falls mill in trust for the exclusive use in a two machine operation at the Grand Falls mill?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources, and Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I have been very clear, very upfront and very truthful with the people of the Province, and in particular, the people in Grand Falls and Stephenville, about the situation with Abitibi. I think they have taken some confidence in that. I know the union representatives that I just met with before coming to the House at 12:00 o'clock today have taken some confidence in that. The member has asked me - and I appreciate the questions she is asking because it is a serious issue for her district and I take it in the spirit that it is meant. She has asked me today: Will I commit? In other words, will I commit to ensure that if we revoke the licences on one hand, which represent about 60 per cent of the wood supply for Abitibi, that somehow or other we do not try to navigate a way around that to give it to them in another way. I believe that is the question she has asked.

Not only will I commit today to that, Mr. Speaker, but last night in this House, in response to her colleague from Twillingate & Fogo, we made that exact commitment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

Minister, yesterday your colleague, the Minister of Transportation and Works, said, and I quote: The RNC did not need to ask, and neither should they, about putting cameras on public buildings.

We have seen the bunker mentality of this government: riot police, armed guards, undercover police, cameras on every rooftop and flagpole. Can you advise the people of our Province, Minister, who is protecting our civil liberties? Is this being condoned and authorized by the Department of Justice or the Premier's office? And, since when do the police - in this case the RNC - run this Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, after hearing the answer from the minister yesterday, to the question asked by the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, I inquired today with my officials and I am advised that a temporary camera was, in fact, placed in the building by the RNC. The police use security cameras from time to time for evidence gathering and for surveillance purposes. This is a standard operating procedure of police forces throughout North America.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, thank you.

I say to the minister, he should get tuned in here. Security is one thing. Invasion of privacy, violation of civil rights, and trampling of democratic rights, is another. Can you, in your capacity as the Attorney General - and I specify, as the Attorney General - as opposed to the Minister of Justice, the top law officer in this Province, assure the people that you will protect our liberties and not allow the Premier and the RNC to trample our rights and run roughshod over us?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I will be happy to give that assurance. I am pleased to say to the hon. member that we have the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Human Rights Act in this Province that protect the rights and freedoms of Canadians.

While I, as the Minister of Justice, have responsibility for the police, the Chief of Police has control and administration of the force subject to my direction and we will direct the police to act appropriately, but when it comes to operations I do not tell the police how to conduct their operations. They are the experts in that and we rely on their expertise. I just want to say that the RNC should be commended on how they acted this week.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Public order was maintained. Public safety was maintained. No one was hurt. No major damage was done. The RNC acted prudently, responsibly. They acted with discretion. They are to be commended, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

Mr. Speaker, there is a great sense of impending disaster looming over the crab dispute in rural Newfoundland and Labrador today. School children are now starting to demonstrate their feelings and fears and their worries about their families' future. Fish harvesters are being forced to examine the prospects of selling crab outside the Province in order to save their enterprises. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, this is a man-made disaster and it can be solved.

I want to ask the minister: Why is he worried about capitulation, as he stated yesterday in the House? Is his ego and that of the Premier now standing in the way of a solution to this problem? Is it now about saving face, or is it about finding a solution that can allow the crab fishery to produce crab and operate properly in this Province 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, what I said in the House yesterday was that compromise was not about capitulation. We had heard from the people in the industry, from fish harvesters, from plant workers, and from the FFAW.

[Comments from the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Visitors in the gallery should know that they are not to disrupt the House, not to participate or show approval or disapproval in any manner. I ask them for their full co-operation.

The Chair recognizes the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I indicated then, as I have indicated along the way, that we are in interested in finding a suitable compromise that ensures that we have a raw material sharing system tried in the fishery, the crab fishery, in Newfoundland and Labrador. That is what we are trying to do. We know that there are a number of issues that need to be dealt with. We have indicated from the beginning that we were willing to try and deal with those issues. We are interested in a compromise, Mr. Speaker. We are not interested in capitulation on either side.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What the minister is clearly saying is that we want a raw material sharing system to go forward whether the union and its members like it or not.

Mr. Speaker, that is about winning. That is about us getting our way. It is not about compromise. It is not about finding a solution.

Will the minister say that he will sit down with the fish harvesters and their organization and take this off the table, that is standing in the way of a solution, and legitimately consider all the options for getting the crab fishery going this season in the proper way?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I can say that on, I believe, four or five occasions over the past two-and-a-half weeks, I have sat down with members and leadership of the FFAW, with the leadership of the FFAW. I had a discussion with the Secretary-Treasurer of the FFAW as recently as this morning.

Mr. Speaker, we are interested in finding a resolution, and a long-lasting resolution, to the problems in the crab fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador. We are not just interested in finding a short-term stop-gap measure, as some people in the past have been prepared to do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There has been much discussion over the past number of weeks from the Premier and the Minister of Fisheries regarding the protests by crab harvesters. The Premier, even though he has not a shred of proof, continues his attempt to paint these protestors as criminals, and says the public should not condone their actions.

I say to the Premier, Mr. Speaker, and the minister, what a difference a couple of years make. I ask the Minister of Fisheries: If he is so adamant that these protests should not be taking place and should not be condoned by the public, why did the minister and the Premier, on April 29, 2003, visit fishermen who were illegally occupying the Department of Fisheries and Oceans offices, and stayed there for three days, and encouraged them to keep up their fight? Why the hypocrisy, Mr. Speaker?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I have absolutely no idea what the Leader of the Opposition is talking about. I have no idea what he is talking about. I certainly did not, since I have been in politics, occupy any office, and certainly did not stay there for three days, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I am sure it will all come back to him. I know he is confused at this point in his life.

Mr. Speaker, the minister constantly describes government's fishery policy as follows - and these are his words, Mr. Speaker: There are too many plants. There is overcapacity in the fishery, and new licences would only redistribute poverty.

It is in Hansard. It is in public documents. He said it repeatedly. If that is what he truly believes, and if that is the government's fishery policy, how did he and how can he justify the new crab licence for St. Anthony?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we justify a fish licence, a fish processing, crab processing, licence in St. Anthony based on a commitment that a colleague of his made in 1998, based on the determination by three Supreme Court Justices that the decision made by his colleague, the former Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, the current Member for Twillingate & Fogo, was a patently unreasonable decision at the time. That, Mr. Speaker, is the basis for the decision in St. Anthony. It is based on a commitment that was made by a former member, by a former minister, and a patently unreasonable decision that was made by another member who still sits in his caucus. At the time, he denied to the people of St. Anthony the licence that they were supposed to have. He turned around and issued a shrimp licence in Twillingate and reactivated a crab licence in Twillingate.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me quote from the court decision. It says, when the decision was overturned by the Supreme Court, it follows and says: The issuance of the requested licence to St. Anthony, however, does not automatically follow as a result of this decision.

So, Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister again: If the objective is to rationalize, if the objective that he stated in this House is to have fewer plants, if the objective as he states it is to stop redistributing poverty, how can he legitimately now try to talk about, with any kind of credibility, the issuance of a licence in St. Anthony that adds overcapacity to the sector in a year when the quota itself is being reduced?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I have said everything that the Leader of the Opposition has just spoken about. Yes, I have said there is overcapacity, as has his former minister said there was overcapacity. His former minister said, when he was sitting in that seat that the Member for St. George's-Stephenville East sits in right now, that a former minister issued too many licences and I cannot do anything about the situation in St. Anthony even though I know they were promised a licence. That, Mr. Speaker, is what the Member for Twillingate & Fogo said when he sat in that seat over right here.

Mr. Speaker, the situation in St. Anthony, a wrong was made and a wrong was righted. That is what the Court of Appeal upheld. The Court of Appeal and three Supreme Court Justices said that the Member for Twillingate & Fogo, when he was the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, made a decision that was patently unreasonable and ordered me to reconsider it. How do you reconsider a patently unreasonable decision and make it right without reversing it?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, three years ago when the former government tried to transfer a crab licence from Ramea to St. Anthony, all the processors were strongly opposed to the idea. In fact, most of the PC caucus, I am looking in their faces right now, the ones that were out front in the rally, said: Don't transfer the licence to St. Anthony.

I ask the minister: What has he given to or promised the processors of the Province to buy their silence at this point in our history when they were out there in big numbers, going to tear down this building three years ago because they objected vehemently to a licence going to St. Anthony? What has changed? What has he said and done and promised to the processors to buy their silence now?

[Comments from the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again I remind visitors in the gallery not to participate in any way. This Speaker does not wish to have the galleries cleared. We want dialogue to continue.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I expect I got the same thing as the Member for Twillingate & Fogo got when he issued a licence for shrimp in Twillingate in the face of overcapacity and when he reactivated a crab licence in Twillingate in the face of overcapacity: absolutely nothing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe he is not listening. I am not suggesting he got anything. I would not do that. I asked him: What has he promised to the processors?

Mr. Speaker, three years ago, as well, the plant workers, non-unionized ones in particular, were strongly opposed to the issuance of a licence for St. Anthony, including an individual who the minister has met quite recently, Ms Mary Shute. She helped lead a protest outside this building against the transfer of the licence and stated, using the same words as the minister: It would only redistribute poverty in the industry.

I ask the minister: What has he told or promised Ms Shute in the last number of meetings he had with her, to convince her to stay quiet and suggest that now it is okay to put a licence in St. Anthony?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, there is no level low enough that the Leader of the Opposition will not stoop.

Mr. Speaker, I met with Mary Shute and some plant workers throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, not Friday past but the Friday before, I guess it was. Anyway, it does not really matter when it was, but some time in the last two weeks. That is the first conversation that I had with Mary Shute in the about three years.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess he does not want to tell us what he told or promised either the processors or Ms Shute and her group.

Mr. Speaker, let me pursue another issue. Can the minister, and would the minister, please explain what he knows about the relationship between the new licence issued for St. Anthony Seafoods Ltd. and Mr. John Risley, the man promoting the demise of communities like Harbour Breton and Fortune, as a board member of Fishery Products International?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I don't know what the Leader of the Opposition is fishing for. Everybody in this Province knows that John Risley, who is one of the major owners of Clearwater Fine Foods, is, I don't know, 50 per cent, 60 per cent or 70 per cent - I am not sure what the percentage is these days. It was 50 per cent when the partnership was formed. It may have changed since then, but I am not sure of that. Anyway, he was - maybe he still is - 50 per cent owner, or his company, Clearwater, is 50 per cent owner, of St. Anthony Seafoods Ltd. That is the extent of my knowledge about John Risley's involvement in St. Anthony.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would think, to use a phrase they used a few years ago, he might be a little bit more interested in what is happening in St. Anthony, in that he might find out a few things about the ownership relationship.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask the minister -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: I will ask the questions, I say to the Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I am asking members to my left for their co-operation.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I asked a question and I got an answer. He said, as far as he knows, he is the major owner of the company in St. Anthony. That was the question I asked. He gave the answer.

Mr. Speaker, I will ask this question: What meetings and discussions has the minister had with Mr. Risley and/or the company representatives? Because Mr. Risley is the major shareholder and owner of the company in St. Anthony. What meetings and discussions has he had with that company, and was Mr. Risley himself involved in any of the meetings?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I have had, I don't know, two or three, probably, meetings - two, I think it was - with Colin MacDonald over the past year probably, as it relates to activities in St. Anthony. Mr. Speaker, I have never, since I have been in politics, had a meeting with John Risley on issues as they relate to St. Anthony.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, a further question with respect to the issuing of the licence for St. Anthony. Can the minister try to explain why he bypassed his own so-called independent licensing board in issuing the new licence? Why would they not have been asked to consider this matter? Was it because he had already promised the licence to some company or some person?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, the board was not in place. Secondly -

AN HON. MEMBER: It was so.

MR. TAYLOR: No, sir, it was not.

Mr. Speaker, in late October three Supreme Court Justices ordered the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture to reconsider all matters and all documents related to the St. Anthony seafoods case. Mr. Speaker, I did that. I reconsidered the matter. To take the issue that I was ordered by the court and refer it to a licensing board would have abdicated my responsibility and would have been in defiance of an order from three supreme court justices.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I guess he read as much of the court order as he read of the Dunne report. He did not understand either one of them.

Mr. Speaker, let me ask another question -

MR. TAYLOR: (Inaudible).

MR. GRIMES: Yes, I do understand it very well, I say to the Minister of Fisheries, a lot better than he ever will.

Mr. Speaker, let me ask this question of the minister: Can the minister confirm this, that the only remaining support government has for production quotas comes from FPI with Mr. Risley on the board, two companies that have brothers of the Finance Minister in senior management positions and a company that the MHA for Bonavista North last worked for? Isn't that the fact, I ask the minister?

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 know where he is coming from. On one hand he is saying that I promised the processors something for all of their support, and on the other hand he is trying to tell me that there is nobody left supporting what we are trying to do. Mr. Speaker, he cannot have it both ways.

Mr. Speaker, when we rolled this out it was based on an extensive discussion, extensive consultations that were done by Vardy, Dunne, Jones, among others over the years, on various components of the fishing industry. Each one of those reports recommended a trial on a raw material sharing system in our fishery.

Mr. Speaker, we have taken those recommendations, those board reports, and we have tried to implement a raw material sharing system in crab. That is what we tried to do. Along the way, we are trying to deal with the legitimate concerns of fish harvesters and plant workers, and we remain committed to that.

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 are for the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women.

Have you directed the Minister of Health to have all mammography units in the Province certified immediately, and can you tell me which units are not accredited throughout Newfoundland and Labrador?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The head of the Canadian Association of Radiologists has indicated that all the machines in this Province are safe. The provincial head of the Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Radiologists indicate they are all safe. The Regional Integrated Health Authorities are moving for voluntary accreditation, and there is an individual from the Eastern Regional Integrated Health Authority who sits on that board. Some of the reasons for accreditation might be the amount of space they work in, not a reflection of the safety or the health that is impacted on these.

This government put $2.5 million into the Budget this year to get four new digital ones that do not require film production that takes up space. They are moving forward on voluntary accreditation, that many other provinces are doing, and they are certified by both of these individuals as being safe and they are no danger. Some of the considerations in some have to do with space requirements in others. That does not impact on the safety or the operation of these machines. They are all (inaudible) years old.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Time for one final question.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister, there were health professionals this morning on the radio, in my opinion, giving out some very alarming information. I would like to say to the minister, there are very few health issues as unique to women as breast cancer.

Would the Minister of Health today restore confidence in mammography units and services in this Province and commit today to ensure that all of our units are certified and accredited in Newfoundland and Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance, President of Treasury Board, and Acting Minister of Health and Community Services.

You have time for about thirty seconds to make your reply.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Dr. Wadden of the Eastern Regional Integrated Health Authority, who sits on that committee, has indicated that they are moving forward with voluntary accreditation. Mr. Laberge, who is head of the Canadian Association of Radiologists, and Dr. Mercer, who is President of the Newfoundland and Labrador Association have indicated that there is no problem with safety. These machines are safe. There are numerous requirements. They are moving in phases toward accreditation. It is being done on a voluntary basis, and if there was any danger or any jeopardy to the health of people in this Province, the machine would not be used.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time allocated for Oral Questions has expired.

Before we proceed, the Chair would like to draw attention of all members on both sides of the House, that while we encourage a free-flowing Question period, we should be very careful in our answers and in our questions, that we do not impute motives in any way or manner. So, the Chair would issue a caution to all members of the House: Be very careful that you respect the integrity, the honesty and the sincerity of all hon. members, in both the posing of questions and in replies thereto.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair would like to table the opinion of the Commissioner of Members' Interests in a matter of an application by the MHA for Exploits with respect to alleged contraventions of the provisions of part two of the Conflict of Interest House of Assembly Act by the hon. the Member for the District of Ferryland.

Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been given.

Petitions.

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

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition on behalf of the fish harvesters in our Province. I think we are all aware of the controversy and the frustration that is existing throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, not just in the rural parts of our Province, but in the urban areas as well.

I think we were all surprised with the number that turned out, actually, for the protest that happened on Monday. I guess we should not be surprised because when you realize how this government has treated the fish harvesters of this Province, I am surprised that we did not have many more here at Confederation Building.

This petition represents people from Chapels Cove, from Long Pond in Manuels, CBS, Kelligrews and Conception Harbour. What we are finding, Mr. Speaker, is that we are getting petitions now to present on behalf of those districts where there is a PC member representing them. I personally had a petition that I was asked to give to the Member for Burin-Placentia West by his constituents and he was asked to present it in the House but he chose not to. I presented that petition on their behalf, Mr. Speaker, because his constituents were so upset and disappointed that the member they elected to represent them, chose to ignore their issue when he had an opportunity to stand on his feet and speak publicly about their concerns. Even though he says he brought it to the Premier's attention and to the minister's attention, we know how effective he has been, or the other MHAs have been, in terms of those who represent the crab harvesters in this Province.

What we are dealing with today, when you look across the floor and look at the number of members who represent rural areas in this Province, there must be at least twenty of the thirty-four who represent rural districts where there are crab harvesters. What we are asking them, along with the crab harvesters, is to speak up for your constituents. Certainly, if you talked in caucus and in Cabinet, if you talked in caucus at all about your concerns, if you have at least spoken out, wouldn't your boss, wouldn't the Premier, have to listen to you? You represent a majority of the people in government. Certainly, if you were speaking out and speaking up, the Premier would have to listen. He would have to listen to a majority of the people who form the government. My question is, if you are speaking up, why aren't you being heard and why aren't you frustrated enough to go public with it, like the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's did?

When we listen to the harvesters, all they want is to go fishing. It is not as the minister said, the Minister of Fisheries said, we are not going to capitulate. It is not about capitulating. It is about doing what is right. It is about listening to the fish harvesters. It is about listening to the plant workers. It is about listening to truck drivers, and everybody who is being impacted by the fact that the fish harvesters are not out on the water where they want to be - and they want to be. They do not want to be treated like second-class citizens. These are people who are independent businessmen, people who have put a lot of money into this industry, and here we are today sitting back and watching while they are not allowed to fish because we have a government that is being headstrong, that is being stubborn, that is refusing to listen to them. Why is it we have a government that thinks they have all the answers, that they know better than the people who fish? Why is it we have a government that does not understand that without the fish harvesters there would not be a fishery?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Extra time has been granted to clue up.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the government for giving me the extra time.

The issue here, Mr. Speaker, is that we all should realize that without fish harvesters there would not be a fishery. There would not be fish to process, so the fish plant workers and the processors themselves would not have an industry.

I am calling on the government to do the right thing and sit down with the fish harvesters, take this pilot project off the table, and let them go to work.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition again today on the closure of the Harbour Breton fish plant, and it comes from the council and the communities in St. Jacques, Coomb's Cove; there are seven communities.

Mr. Speaker, I have stood in the House here on many occasions since last fall and talked about the plight of the people in Harbour Breton. Today, for the first time, I guess, I am learning that the guy behind the problems that we are encountering in Harbour Breton is also the same guy who is going to be getting a new crab licence in St. Anthony.

Mr. Speaker, after I realized that our community had been decimated in Harbour Breton, the company, FPI, treated our people in Harbour Breton not as human beings; they left us stranded. They would not even pay severance pay to the people. They would not even give us proper notice because the plant that they worked in was not fit for people to work in; Occupational Health and Safety had condemned it. Who allowed it to happen? It wasn't the people in Harbour Breton who had worked there. It was the people of FPI.

Now, today, I learned that this guy who owns 75 per cent of the plant in St. Anthony is going to get a new crab licence in a community that already has a plant, in a community that already has a shrimp licence. In Harbour Breton, a community of 2,500 people, we have nobody working there, and within the last couple of weeks more than fifty people have left the community. You call that fair?

There is something basically wrong with that, Mr. Speaker, and I guarantee you one thing: you will hear more from me and the people of Harbour Breton over the next couple of weeks on this issue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand today to present a petition on behalf of fish harvesters in this Province, fish harvesters who have come here day after day to plead with this government, to make their case so that they can get the fishery back in operation in this Province, but to no avail simply because they are being met at the door day after day with stubbornness, with arrogance, on the other side. That is what is happening. This is not an issue any more about getting a fishery going, streamlining policies in the fishery. It is a situation where somebody wants to be the winner and, regretfully, unfortunately for all of us, they will have it no other way.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the people opposite, I cannot believe they can sit in their seats day after day, knowing that there is half a million dollar industry shut down in this Province, knowing that there are families today who have drawn their last unemployment cheque, knowing that there are hundreds and thousands of Newfoundlanders out there today who have no job to go to, simply because this government refuses to back down - to back down on a policy and a legislation that no one in this Province wants to see. I even heard a sister from the Sisters of Mercy, I think it was, this morning on the radio, from the Catholic church, saying: My God, why doesn't the government back off and let the poor people in this Province go back to work and earn an honest, decent living?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

[Disturbance in the gallery]

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

This House is in recess, and I order that the gallery be cleared.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

When the House recessed we were dealing with petitions. The hon. member, I do believe, is finished with her petition. I seek direction from the Acting Opposition House Leader. Do we have agreement to proceed with Orders of the Day?

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, we are operating under leave, just for the record, so it is Private Members' Day, supposedly, at 3:00 p.m. I know that we had made arrangements for three petitions to be presented, but right now we are proceeding with the Private Member's motion as presented by the Member for Trinity North. I guess he will be our lead off speaker.

Thank you.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a real honour today, a real honour indeed, to be able to introduce this motion before the House and ask my colleagues on both sides of the House in joining with me in endorsing the motion that I am bringing forward. For the benefit of the members of the House, I will read the motion, Mr. Speaker.

WHEREAS the Government of Canada has declared 2005 as the "Year of the Veteran"; and

WHEREAS throughout Canada all citizens are being asked to pay tribute to the veterans of wars of the last century; and

WHEREAS many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have volunteered to serve their country, many of whom have made the ultimate sacrifice with their lives;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly call on all citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador to seek out veterans in their community and thank them for the contribution they made to preserving democracy and restoring peace to the world, and to pay tribute to the many veterans who gave their lives for our freedom."

Mr. Speaker, this Year of the Veteran, it is indeed a real honour to introduce this motion before the House and to talk a little bit about the major contributions that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have made to many world conflicts, and continue to this day to make a contribution on the world scene towards the preservation of peace, the restoration of peace and the protection of democracy. It gives us an opportunity this year, and we are being asked to acknowledge those veterans of wars, military conflict and peacetime. Since the end of the Korean War, as a country, Canada has not been actively engaged in any world conflicts.

Mr. Speaker, the history of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians involved in world conflicts goes back to the First World War, when in fact, during the early part of 1914 Newfoundland and Labrador sent its first 500 troops on the ship, Florizel, to England, being part of the First World War. They were a group of young men - and I say young, because that is the operative word. Many of those people, their grandfathers and their fathers before them, volunteered; again, the operative word volunteered. They were not conscripted, they were volunteering to serve their country. Many of them were lying about their age so they could volunteer. Many of them were young boys, not men but just young boys, in the prime of their lives. They made a major commitment to peace for their country.

Newfoundland and Labrador at the time, being one of the oldest colonies of Britain, during that period sent some 8,500 soldiers to participate in that war, and some 1,500 of them didn't return because they lost their lives. The history of Newfoundland and Labrador being involved in world conflict goes back to that First World War.

Much has been written, Mr. Speaker, about the heroism; the Battle of Beaumont Hamel, when some seven hundred and seventy-odd people went into battle and the next morning only sixty-eight of them answered the roll call. Heroics, stories, documentaries have been made and told of the heroism of those people, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, who participated in that First World War. In fact, there is a theatre group from my own district, Rising Tide, who are, as we speak, touring the Province presenting in high schools a play entitled No Man's Land which depicts, Mr. Speaker, what it was like in that battle, where men, young men, gave of their lives in a situation where, in fact, they couldn't win.

When we think of their commitment, their heroism, I couldn't help but reflect on - I just want to cite, because I want to reflect on a quote made by the famous Prime Minister, Sir Winston Churchill, who made a speech in the House of Commons in Britain in August, 1940, some twenty-six years after that battle, when he was talking about the Battle of Britain. He said at that time - and this is a quote that has been repeated many times: Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few. Those words, even though they were spoken some twenty-six years later, are equally applicable as we describe and comment about the commitment of Newfoundlanders during the Battle of Beaumont Hamel.

My colleague from St. John's North just returned from Turkey where he helped celebrate the ninetieth anniversary of the Gallipoli campaign where the Newfoundland Regiment was the only North American troop to participated with Australia, New Zealand in that great campaign.

AN HON. MEMBER: St. John's Centre.

MR. WISEMAN: St. John's Centre, I am reminded. I have him placed in the wrong district. In the right city, in the wrong district.

That particular campaign, Mr. Speaker: Newfoundlanders and Labradorians were great contributors in that campaign.

The history continues well into the Second World War and again in the Korean War, and today Newfoundlanders and Labradorians continue to make a major contribution to world peace. Our military: Today, I understand, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians still make up some 8 per cent of the recruits to the Canadian Forces when in fact we only represent a little over 1.2 per cent or 1.3 per cent of the entire population. I think, Mr. Speaker, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, since the First World War to this day, as we speak, continue to participate, in this case with Canada, in the early years as a nation by itself, continue to participate and make a contribution to world peace and democracy.

We use today, in this House - in fact we heard today references to the Freedom of Rights, the Charter, democracy. Words that we use today and use in this House frequently, we use them flippantly and frequently. We talk about them as if they are givens. Well, Mr. Speaker, that was not always that case. Without the commitment of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians in the past and joining with other nations, we would not be able to sit in this House today and enjoy the freedoms that we now enjoy.

Mr. Speaker, there have been many references in recent days and recent weeks about some of the issues we faced in this House of Assembly, in being able to continue with the business of the people of the Province, but the reality I say, Mr. Speaker, the reality of that today is that we have some people who have joined us in the galleries to have their voices heard. Mr. Speaker, it is that very freedom that many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have died for and have made major commitments for. We have an obligation, I believe, Mr. Speaker, the people not only in this House but the people in all of Newfoundland and Labrador have an obligation - the biggest commitment we can make to the veterans who have gone before us is that we will never allow their memory to die.

I ask each member of the House of Assembly to join with me today in endorsing the thrust of this resolution. I think, as we talked about a debt that we owe - it is difficult, in fact impossible, to replace the lives of the young sons and the young women who have given their lives. We talk frequently of young men, but there were many of our conflicts, World War I and II, where women - I think in the Second World War there was some 700 Newfoundland women who were part of that campaign.

I say, Mr. Speaker, it is impossible for us today, this generation and future generations, to replace their lives, to let them relive the lost time they had in that conflict. The one thing we can do, and should do, and are obligated to do, is to never let their memory die and to never forget the contribution they made. That is why I ask members of this House today to join with me in asking all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to never let their memory die. We owe that to them.

I ask people to join with me in asking the rest of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, to all of us in this Year of the Veteran, to make a special effort to thank and to acknowledge the contribution of our veterans. I ask other colleagues to join with me.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to say right at the beginning, that I support wholeheartedly the resolution that has been put forward here.

I can remember, over the last couple of years when we were government, a couple of things that we did, in particular to honour the veterans and, I guess, to keep their memory alive, as the Member for Trinity North has just said. I know that my colleague, the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace, designated a special licence plate for the veterans. As far as I know, that is still there and that is good. Also, my colleague here, my seat mate, the Member for Bellevue, they named a highway, Conception Bay North, the Veterans' Memorial Highway. I am sure long after we are gone they will be remembered from that.

Mr. Speaker, for me, personally, as a young person growing up on the South Coast of the Province and as a young fellow going to school, I knew very little about war, being isolated, no televisions and things of this nature and very few papers, as such. I remember a gentleman in the community who is now deceased, Mr. John Loveless. Somehow when you looked at the man, as a young boy, you were somewhat curious about him, and, as I stated in the House before, as I got older I appreciated what it was. He had been shot by a sniper just before the end of the war. He told us, as boys, many, many stories. He had a number of medals for bravery and so on. He told me, the first time the German sniper fired at him and he did not see him, he cut the button off his tunic, and the second time the German sniper fired, he put the bullet through his mouth and came out through the jaw here. The jaw - of course, they never had the surgery in those days to be able to put it back in the form that probably you could today. It was quite noticeable, but, you know, he had tremendous respect. Every person in the community respected him. I remember when I going to school he used to come out on Remembrance Days and be able to speak to the class.

As I got a little older, another person - I guess I was in Grade 7 or 8 - came to our community as a minister. The Speaker, himself, would be quite familiar with this person. It was Enos Darby. Enos had fought in World War II and had been a gunner when the ship was struck and the artillery and the metal and so on from the gun, as it explored, struck his face. He deceased a few years ago, but the Speaker knows him, as I said, quite well. Here in his forehead was about a two-inch scar that was replaced by plastic surgery, and the nose itself also was probably replaced. He told the story where he was unconscious for - I think it was for about sixteen or eighteen months that he did not know he was in the world. He came around and lived to be a - had a great life and was a pastor in our community when I was a boy. I think it was in Grade 7 and 8.

Then, as I became older and went to high school, you start to read some of the poems. I remember a poem that had an impact on me. It was by Thomas Hardy and it was called: The Man He Killed. I just want to read it into the record.

Had he and I but met

By some old ancient inn,

We should have set us down to wet

Right many a nipperkin!

But ranged as infantry,

And staring face to face,

I shot at him as he at me,

And killed him in his place.

I shot him dead because–

Because he was my foe,

Just so: my foe of course he was;

That's clear enough; although

Off-hand like –just as I–

Was out of work–had sold his traps–

No other reason why.

Yes; quaint and curious war is!

You shoot a fellow down

You'd treat, if met where any bar is,

Or help to half a crown.

Thomas Hardy in that poem probably looked at war, in a sense, a little sad about what it does. I can remember the thing that really did it for me to rekindle, if you wish, the whole idea about war and how we appreciate the people who fought for us, was when I had an opportunity to go to Beaumont Hamel myself in 2001. It was the same time that the Newfoundland Pavilion was opened there. I can remember, on this day, laying a wreath on behalf of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador - and, by the way, we did sponsor students. I am sure the Minister of Municipal Affairs, in his capacity, still does that. I think I heard the Member for Port de Grave talk about where one of the students from his community was selected through a contest.

I remember my wife and I, on the field of Beaumont Hamel, walking down and it was not level. There were mounds, of course, because of all the shooting and stuff. We walked down right at the edge and saw where the Newfoundland Regiment had gone that morning, the 873 of them, and how they were sacrificed, if you wish, to move ahead. They did not have a chance. As a result of that, there were just a few of them returned. We walked through the cemetery. Having children of our own - the thing that really amazed me were the row and row and row of crosses. You look at them and some of them were our own sons, Newfoundlanders and Canadians. On the cross, on the epitaph was seventeen-years-old, eighteen-years-old, nineteen-years-old. Very few of them were in their twenties. You look at it and say, what a supreme sacrifice they made that we might have freedom of worship, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom to speak, freedom to associate. It was through their sacrifice, World War I, World War II and the Korean Wars, that people did that; our people, people that we know. I would think that everybody in this Legislature, the forty-eight of us, knows some person who gave of his life, or her life, so that we might be able to have a way of life that we enjoy in the form of democracy.

If I live to be 100, I will never, ever, ever be able to forget. I can never explain the feeling that I had, as I said, as I walked the field, and probably, in a sense, knowing that some limb from some person was somehow under that particular field. It was like, in a sense, in the biblical connotation, you wanted to take off your shoes because the place that you were standing was holy ground, because they had fought for our freedom.

I also had the opportunity, as a part of that particular trip to Beaumont Hamel, to visit some of the tunnels and see how these underground tunnels - how they had been able to cut down through and then go on the back of the enemy, the German forces, and to come up from the rear. To see how they had done that gives me an appreciation, I guess, of the sacrifice they made to have life like we have it.

Really, in a sense - I do not want to prolong it or to go on any longer than that. I think I have said what I wanted to say, and I think that is important. I have tremendous respect, I have tremendous adoration for the people who fought, that we might have the type of life that we have. As I said, it was enhanced for me when I had an opportunity to go to Beaumont Hamel to see it firsthand and be able to, on that day - and I felt proud, very, very proud when they opened the Newfoundland Pavilion and seen some of the Newfoundland artifacts that were there. It is an experience that all of us, I guess, should try to experience sometime during our lives. It had an impact on me, one that I can - I am like Wordsworth, in a way, speaking. I cannot find words to be able to express the feeling and how I feel about it, but in my own heart I realize the contribution they made; very, very young, gave of their lives that we might we able to enjoy peace. I think, as the Member for Trinity North said, they did it of their own volition. They were not conscripted. They went voluntarily, and many of them, not knowing the supreme sacrifice they were going to pay. Really, as Legislators, we can never forget the sacrifice that they made. Today, and through this here this year, I honour the sacrifice and I want to thank them sincerely for giving us the opportunity to be able to do what we do in this House and this Province and a country as a whole.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am certainly pleased to have an opportunity to join in supporting the resolution brought forth by the Member for Trinity North and spoken on so ably by him and the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

I think everybody in this House, Mr. Speaker, indeed, everybody in the Province, has relatives who have been involved as veterans either of the World War I or World War II or the Korean War, or working in the forces today as peacekeepers and serving their country through that means. We also have, of course, in addition to veterans of World War I and II, people who were not in the regular forces but served, and many lost their lives, in the Merchant Marine. In fact, many have said that they wanted to escape the Merchant Marine to get into the Navy because it was safer to actually be in a ship of war than in a merchant ship during World War II.

We had the Foresters, who were remembered today by the Government House Leader in recognizing the death of Edgar Baird who was the Superintendent of the First Foresters Unit that went to Scotland during World War II to serve as part of the war effort ensuring that there were sufficient pit props to keep the coal mines in Britain going as part of World War II.

I have not had the honour and the privilege of being at Beaumont Hamel. I know I have heard other members, including the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune, speak very eloquently about how moving an event it was for them to visit there and I hope to share that experience one day. My father had a first cousin who died at Beaumont Hamel. During the Second World War, my mother's brother, my uncle, served in the RAF. We all shared the sorrow at the death of Corporal Jamie Murphy last year, who died in Afghanistan. We do know, Mr. Speaker, that serving in our Forces is an honour, is a duty, but often a great sacrifice for individuals, and it is because of their sacrifice and their effort that we enjoy the freedom, the democracy, that we experience today.

Democracy is not something that is straightforward and neat and tidy and lined up in rows. Sometimes it is a bit raucous, as we have seen outside this Legislature in the last few days, and sometimes even in the galleries, but that is the democracy for which the veterans fought in the wars and are still prepared to volunteer their service today to join in peacekeeping efforts around the world from this Province and this country.

We can all discuss the nature of war. There have been a lot of anti-war books written, some of them very passionate, some of them very explanatory. I don't know if I would call The Danger Tree, written by David (inaudible), I think his first name is -

AN HON. MEMBER: David Macfarlane.

MR. HARRIS: Pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: David Macfarlane.

MR. HARRIS: David Macfarlane - about the experience of Beaumont Hamel. It is certainly a strong experience of what a family goes through in having their members participate in a war effort.

Regardless of what one's views are, Mr. Speaker, we do know that a genuine and definite sacrifice has been called upon by many people and many families in this Province - and, before we were a Province, in this country of Newfoundland - and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador have done their part, and in many cases more than their part, in acting on behalf of world peace.

I will say, Mr. Speaker, since we are talking about the Canadian Year of the Veteran, we do have a very important office in this Province run by Veterans Affairs, called the Bureau of Pensions Advocates. There was an attempt a few years ago to actually close that down in the Province. I just want to remind members of that, that this was threatened a few years ago, and the actions of some members of this House to make representations helped to change that decision. I would hope that the Government of Canada will see fit to continue that service to the veterans who are still alive from World War II - I think we have a few left from World War I - but for all those who are also served by that office, who are veterans of the Canadian Forces, the RCMP and other services that are provided there. I would urge hon. members to be vigilant if they hear of any issue or any attempt by the Government of Canada to reduce this service that is now available to veterans of this Province, to advocate on their behalf to the Government of Canada to ensure they get the appropriate level of benefits and services to which they are entitled.

Having said that, Mr. Speaker, I know other members want to join in this occasion to put their comments on the record, but I do wholeheartedly support the effort by the Member for Trinity North to bring to the attention of hon. members the Year of the Veteran and to urge all people in this Province to acknowledge and pay tribute individually to the many veterans we have in our midst, and to encourage young people in this Province to also remember that the sacrifice made by others helped to create the world that we live in today.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

First of all, before I start, I just want to refer to something that the former member had mentioned, the book called The Danger Tree by David Macfarlane, which is one of the most touching books that I think I have ever read on the First World War and on Newfoundland at that particular time, and the thoughts of Confederation, and the struggles of the Goodyear family of Central Newfoundland.

I expect that the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans or the Member for Windsor-Springdale would probably know about that. Anyhow, Mr. Speaker, it was a New York Times Bestseller. It was written up in The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times. It wasn't just a Canadian Bestseller. It was worldwide, and the author presently writes columns for The Globe and Mail.

Mr. Speaker, I just wish to pay tribute to our war veterans. My friend from Trinity North, I thank him for the thoughtfulness of bringing this to the House of Assembly, and, I guess, the federal government who has made the year 2005 a tribute to the Year of the Veteran, and a tribute to not only our veterans but those people who serve in our Armed Forces and people who have served in foreign wars.

Mr. Speaker, I am a student of history and I suppose I have read more history since I left the University than I ever did while I was there.

AN HON. MEMBER: Did you pass?

MR. J. HODDER: Did I pass? Yes, I have to tell the hon. member that I did.

Mr. Speaker, I think that the lessons of the First World War, the Second World War, the lessons of society at the time, are something that we should reflect on from time to time because these were sophisticated societies that found themselves grappling in warfare to the detriment of the young men and women of that age.

Mr. Speaker, I was born during the Second World War and my earliest memories are of my uncles who came from a town, which I would think was in the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune's district, Pushthrough. One of my uncles, whose name was Eric Caines, joined the Canadian navy as an ordinary seaman and he ended the war as the commander of a minesweeper called the Mary Stewart. He was at Dunkirk, and he later spent some time floating in the North Atlantic having had the ship he served on sunk by enemy fire.

After the war the ship, Mary Stewart, was stationed in St. John, New Brunswick. It was a pivotal point in my mother's family history, because, I suppose, like all declining Newfoundland ports at the time, people went to Boston to look for work, or they went to Montreal or Toronto. In this case my Uncle Bert was the first to go, then followed by my mother's seven brothers, then eventually my grandfather and grandmother who are buried in St. John, New Brunswick. It was all through that event that took place because my uncle's ship had been stationed in St. John.

Mr. Speaker, I have to say that I have great respect for veterans. I hope that the lessons they learned will not be forgotten. I think war, the Second World War in particular, took place because democracy was abandoned. Our country was under threat. It felt that it should not have lost the First World War. Many historians fell that the Second World War was just a continuation of the First Word War. The circumstances that took place in Germany at the time should always be remembered and should be taught, and young people should know about them.

Mr. Speaker, I personally have some memories of the sixties. I was involved with the military and I served in Aldershot, Camp Borden and eventually at the RC Barracks in Calgary. At that time, many of my colleagues, the people who worked with me, were either veterans of the Korean conflict or were Second World War veterans. As a matter of fact, the armor that we used, the Centurion tank - the rifle that we fired was a 303. We were still using weapons of that war and we were side by side.

I have a good friend in Port au Port West, I think in a town of Aguathuna. His name is Richard, known as Dick Alexander. He is the Honorary Colonel of the Royal Newfoundland Regiment at the present time. I think he has served in every rank that there is in the Canadian Army. He was a veteran of the First World War, a veteran of the Korean War, and presently holds the rank that I just mentioned. One other thing: When he was just a young recruit he was involved in the Knights of Columbus fire here in St. John's and was one of the people at the door bringing people out. I think he was mentioned for that in a book which has recently been published about the event. I realize the sacrifice that these people made and the burden they carried.

I should apologize, I suppose, to the Canadian Legion in Stephenville because I am a full member of the Legion and I am invited to their ceremony on the eighth, but my mother is eighty-nine and has been ailing. For that day, I have to make a choice and I will be here rather than in Stephenville.

Mr. Speaker, I have had the opportunity to visit Normandy. I guess, the biggest impression that I had of Normandy was Omaha Beach where I went first. I stood at a point in the graveyard near Omaha Beach and looked around, and for 360 degrees nothing could be seen but crosses. It was suddenly an eerie feeling. We then went and looked at where the British had landed and where the Canadians had landed at Sword and Juno. It is hard to believe that - we often look at veterans now - these people were eighteen, nineteen and twenty.

I once went to Twillingate, it was quite awhile ago, and there was a museum there. I do not know if it is still there or not. It was probably twenty years ago. At the entrance of the museum there were pictures of the - they were not called the Cadet Corps at that time but it was a military corps similar to the cadets before Confederation. It was before the First World War. At the back of the museum were the pictures of many of the same people but they were there in memorandum. It was just a shock to see all these children who had sacrificed their lives at that particular time.

The veterans are getting older and there are fewer of them. They deserve our praise and they deserve our recognition. I think we have to help to see that they are remembered and we need to thank them for what they have accomplished; and not only the veterans, but the people who serve in our armed forces now. There are Canadian soldiers, at the moment, in Afghanistan. They are probably in Iraq. There were Canadians in Vietnam, there were Canadians at Cyprus and we -

AN HON. MEMBER: Jamie Murphy.

MR. J. HODDER: Yes, and Jamie Murphy, one of our own native sons who recently - well, we all know the story.

Mr. Speaker, I had the advantage one time of visiting NORAD, the warning centre which is under Cheyenne Mountain near Denver, Colorado. A lot of people do not realize it, but we co-operate with the Americans all the time. At that particular facility, which is a Star Wars like facility, the Deputy Commander is always a Canadian and it was a Canadian who showed me around. You could see the screens - this was during the cold war, of course - and where the missiles would take off and where the satellite shots were and all that sort of thing. You went in through a great steel door where all the buildings inside the mountain were on springs and you suddenly realized that this is Ground Zero. You do not feel like being there. We have soldiers who are serving in these places, and they still are.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair regrets to interrupt the hon. gentleman and colleague in his presentation but I do believe there is an agreement of a ten-minute time limit. By leave, I am sure members would permit the hon. gentleman to continue his presentation.

MR. J. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I will just clue up and say that, this is the Year of the Veteran,

it is our opportunity not only to renew our commitment to remember the sacrifices of our Canadian veterans, but to pay tribute to them. I am very pleased to be able to stand here today and do this.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

Being an associate member of the Bay Roberts Royal Canadian Legion, it gives me honour today to be able to stand and pass a few words with regard to the year 2005, Year of the Veteran, and to say that I thank the Member for Trinity North for providing this private member's motion so that we can take this opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, when we look at what we are referencing here, the veterans, no more fitting is the freedom that we enjoy inside the walls of this Chamber. What a tribute to the many sons and daughters who enlisted during World War I, World War II, and the Korean Conflict, and many of them paid the ultimate sacrifice by giving their lives. We remember those war heroes, and I can speak first-hand from within my district and surrounding area, and I am sure the same can be said throughout the Province, the work that is done by town councils and various organizations and citizens so that their memory will be kept alive.

I speak personally, from this past Sunday, when I had the opportunity to join the Minister of Municipal Affairs, representing the government, the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne, the Minister of Education, and my colleague from the District of Bellevue, to take part in the sixtieth anniversary of the Battle of the Atlantic.

Mr. Speaker, during that day of events, there was a tremendous parade which took in all the Legions from District 2. They were from Blaketown, Carbonear, Harbour Grace, Upper Island Cove, Spaniard's Bay, Bay Roberts and Brigus, and they were represented. I would say there were approximately 600 or 700 people there to take part in that parade and to say thank you to those who served.

Like I said, this event was sponsored by District 2 for that area and I guess it was co-sponsored by the Town of Spaniard's Bay and the Corporal Matthew Brazil Royal Canadian Legion in Spaniard's Bay.

Mr. Speaker, even though the number of veterans we refer to - and I know they are dwindling each and every year - it was so good and heartwarming to see them on parade or being driven to the site.

I would like to mention two gentlemen from my district: Mr. Gordon Young of Spaniard's Bay - I don't know if he has left yet or not, but probably has - who has gone over to Holland to take part in the VE celebrations over the next few days; and another gentleman, Mr. Joseph Miller of Bay Roberts, who will be attending the ceremonies at Beaumont Hamel.

Mr. Speaker, many of those young men and women, not only throughout my district but throughout the Province, enrolled at a very early age. I don't know if anyone saw the play that is put off at Trinity each and every year - it is called No Man's Land, and I am sure you are familiar with it - but I happened to see it just a couple of weeks ago at the arts centre in Carbonear. I challenge each and every person in this Province to get out and see it, and see how those young people - some of them even lied about their age so that they could go overseas to help liberate other countries as well as to see that their own country was kept free.

Mr. Speaker, what stories we hear from the war brides who returned to this Province to be called home, when they tell about the terrible situations that they were placed in when they lived in those various countries.

Mr. Speaker, I know it is the same in every district but I believe that the schools in Port de Grave District have a tremendous relationship with the Royal Canadian Legions, and in particular in Spaniard's Bay, the Holy Redeemer school. They have a wonderful relationship where they work back and forth with the school and the Legion, and throughout the year all events that take place are being sponsored by the Royal Canadian Legion. Ascension Collegiate, again, they put off one wonderful display at the school on Remembrance Day.

Mr. Speaker, when the call went out, whether it was the First World War or the Second World War, those men and women did not know where they were going. They knew they were going overseas, but what was to face them, they never knew what was going to happen. We have read this in history, in the First World War, Admiral of the Fleet, Mr. Earle Beatty; he named the Newfoundland and Labradorians. He said, they are the best small-boat men in the great fleet.

Mr. Speaker, when we come to the Second World War, Prime Minister Winston Churchill asked: Where are the Newfoundlanders? The same can be said today, Mr. Speaker. They showed great pride in their Province, and their country at that time, and I can assure you that it continues today.

We are very blessed, Mr. Speaker, in this Province, to have a young gentleman by the name of Rick Hillier - I think I have his title right - Chief of Staff for the Canadian Armed Forces in Canada, a gentleman who has gone a long way -

AN HON. MEMBER: From Campbellton.

MR. BUTLER: From Campbellton, I understand, my hon. colleague tells me.

AN HON. MEMBER: Lewisporte.

MR. BUTLER: Lewisporte?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. BUTLER: Lewisporte District. No problem saying that, sir.

Like I said, those young men and women, when they went overseas, and in particular those who paid the supreme sacrifice, they did not do this very lightly. They fought for democracy not only in other countries, so that we could enjoy the same here in Newfoundland and Labrador and later on in Canada. Their memory has to be preserved. The veterans who are still with us, each and every Newfoundlander, as the motion states, should get out, hunt them out, say hello to them, and express our feelings for what they have done.

Mr. Speaker, I know, in a private member's motion, probably I should not make suggestions, but if the government and the Cabinet were ever to look at anything in the future to relive and keep going the memory of those veterans, I have a gentleman in my district - and I am going to put this to the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, because I know how much he thinks about the veterans and what they did - I have a gentleman in my district who has a picture of every war memorial in this Province, Mr. Bill Tetford, and a lot of them are falling to the point of repair. Many places do not have Legions.

MR. J. BYRNE: I have already talked with him.

MR. BUTLER: Wonderful, he has already spoken to the gentleman about it, so I will leave that alone and hopefully we will get wonderful things from that conversation.

Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I just want to say that it was a privilege to be able to say a few words on behalf of our veterans, and that, when the time comes, whether it is in July or whether it is in November or any time throughout the year in any event that is being sponsored through the Royal Canadian Legions, I think we have to stand shoulder to shoulder with them and just say thank you to them.

Once again, Mr. Speaker, like we always say: Lest we forget.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DENINE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today it is a real pleasure to stand in this House and speak to this motion, as was eloquently stated by all the members of this House. They all had their own little twists and their own little stories and their own feelings about what this motion is all about.

I am going to try to put my perspective, how I feel about this motion. It says, to seek out and to thank all the veterans in their communities, and thank them for what they have done; not only what they have done during the war, for which we are certainly very, very thankful, but also when all the veterans who came back and the community services that they were involved with. We have to thank them for the numerous events that they have participated in.

Mr. Speaker, this hon. House is because of the veterans who went to war and did this for the freedom of democracy. Out here in the foyer of Confederation Building, if you take the time to go out, stand around and look, you will see all the flags of different Legions of Newfoundland and Labrador. Each one of those flags, Mr. Speaker, represents a significant number of individuals from those branches throughout our Province who gave their lives and gave sacrifices to go for freedom of today. That is very inspiring. Sometimes we walk by, but just take the time, the next time you are in Confederation Building, just to look around and to see the flags. That is a real dedication to say thank you to our veterans.

Mr. Speaker, when I was young - some people say that was quite a time ago, but it wasn't that long ago. I can remember very vividly, I was in the Boy Scouts and at the War Memorial in St. John's our job on July 1 was to go to lay a wreath at the War Memorial. Mr. Speaker, I remember that so plain because what happened was, there would be family members there who laid wreaths on behalf of their son or daughter, their uncle, aunt or whatever the case may be, who was in the War in respect for them. We had to lay the wreaths when there was no one there to lay the wreaths for them. I can remember people - we read the names, this is so-and-so. I can remember as a Boy Scout we would talk amongst each other and say: I wonder what that person was like. Who was this person? Mr. Speaker, we probably will never know. There are names that escape me now because I never could remember all the names that I laid the wreath for. But, I tell you, as a young person and a person of that Scout troop, the people I talk to today can still remember the fact that they had the pleasure and the honour to lay a wreath on behalf of that individual. That was very significant, Mr. Speaker, for me.

When I think back on it, I can remember this lady who came up and said: Will you lay this wreath on behalf of my son? I can just remember her eyes and just how she felt about it. I can remember - I went up and laid it and when I came back she said thank you. You always remember those special occasions, those times that are memorable and those times that you will never forget.

There are a couple of other things I want to mention, Mr. Speaker, the schools. When November 11 rolls around - and you and I have participated in a number of them in our districts, and I am sure all other hon. members have done the same. I go there and the veterans are there to be the honoured guests. I will tell you, they say the young people have forgotten, they have not, because the teachers and the students in the schools have put on a display that is second to none. There is organization and there is respect. To each and every veteran that I speak to at the schools during and after the celebrations, they say: My God, wasn't that just beautiful. The young people do remember. The young people do respect and the young people will never forget. They are moved by that experience, very moved. I think that when you look back on it - all you have to do is listen to the music of the people, the plays that they put on and the fact of how thankful they are of the peace that we have in our communities, in our Province, in our country and in the world because of the veterans and the sacrifices that they have paid - the ones who have passed on and the ones who are still alive today. To thank them is such an easy two words to say: thank you, but look at all the benefits and the rewards that we have reaped from what they have done for us.

Mr. Speaker, I know this is not a hard sell because I have listened to all the other hon. members speak and they all spoke from the heart. They all spoke with sincerity and respect. So when you look around different communities in Newfoundland and Labrador, I am sure all residents of Newfoundland and Labrador will go out and take this resolution and say to each veteran they meet: Thank you for the work that you have done. Thank you for the sacrifices, and thank you for the peace and tranquility that we have here today.

Mr. Speaker, on Saturday night both you and I will be at a banquet in Mount Pearl. I cannot wait to be there because the veterans will be there. We are there to celebrate their contribution and to remember the people that have gone before them - the people that will not be able to attend, but will be attending there in spirit. That is what we are going to celebrate and that is what we are going to give thanks for. As the hon. Member for the District of Port de Grave said: Lest we forget. Let's not forget that and let's always remember it.

There is one little story - and I do not want to go over time because I know there are people who may want to wrap up. When I was on the tour of Europe - and I was telling my hon. colleague from Trinity North. I was on a tour of Europe, and the bus tour stopped outside a graveyard of Canadian soldiers. There was a lady from Alberta - and I remember it very distinctly because I will never forget it - she never saw her brother after the day he left to go to war. He was killed in the war. She said: I don't know if I can find the gravesite, but I hope I do.

Mr. Speaker, she got off the bus and went into the graveyard. We all went around and had a look at the names, and sort of paid respect to them. She found the grave, Mr. Speaker, and I remember that today. She found the grave of her brother. She never saw him. He was, I think, fifteen or sixteen years old. This is back - she was about forty-five or fifty at the time, and she was looking forward to it.

Mr. Speaker, if that is not the respect and dedication that individual gave his life for, I do not know what is. She came back to the bus and she was beaming. She was crying, she was sad, but in her heart she felt so rewarded and so satisfied that she had a chance to visit the grave. The sacrifice that veteran, that individual, that brave soldier, went to war and fought for our freedom.

Mr. Speaker, I spoke of three things here today. Those are the three things that affect me as an individual, as a member of the community of Mount Pearl, a community of Newfoundland and Labrador and a Province of Canada. I have so much respect for the veterans. I look forward to all the celebrations throughout the year, and I will made a special effort to attend.

I will not take up any more time, Mr. Speaker. I just want to say thank you to the Member for Trinity North for bringing this resolution forward. I appreciate it very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Are we ready for the question?

All those in agreement with the resolution put forward, say ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

The motion is carried unanimously.

Motion carried unanimously.

MR. SPEAKER: With that, I wish to advise members that on tomorrow, Thursday, in the Speaker's gallery, there will be a sizeable contingent of veterans on a very special day. I look forward, and I am honoured by their agreement and their presence in the House tomorrow.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I note that on Wednesdays you move the adjournment, not me.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair was anxious, if there were any directions or instructions that should be given to the House, and I wanted to give the hon. member the chance to do it.

With that said, this House is now adjourned until tomorrow, Thursday, at 1:30 of the clock.