Pursuant to Standing Order 87 Mr. Oliver Langdon, MHA (Fortune-Hermitage) substitutes for Mr. John Crane, MHA (Harbour Grace).

The Committee met at 9:30 a.m. in the House of Assembly.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

Welcome to the second meeting of the Government Services Estimates Committee. We will be studying the estimates this morning of the Department of Works, Services and Transportation. My name is Melvin Penney, the Member for Lewisporte, and I will be the Chairman for the meeting. On my left is my Vice-Chairman, Mr. Bob Aylward, the Member for Kilbride. To my left the Committee Members: Larry Short, the Member for St. George's; Oliver Langdon, the Member for Fortune-Hermitage; and Norman Doyle, the Member for Harbour Maine - we have another couple of Committee Members who will be joining us later; and the Clerk of the Committee, Miss Betty Duff.

I would introduce to you now the Minister of the Department of Works, Services and Transportation who is sitting over on my right. He will in turn introduce the officials from within his Department shortly. Mr. David Gilbert.

The format that we will be using here today is similar to what we have used in the first meeting. The Minister will be given fifteen minutes to make an opening statement. When he has finished his statement a Member of the Opposition will be given fifteen minutes to make a reply.

MR. GILBERT: I do not need fifteen minutes.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Oh, that is quite alright sir, that is not a problem. You will be given a maximum of fifteen minutes.

MR. GILBERT: So the Opposition will be given the (Inaudible) as mine or would (Inaudible)?

MR. R. AYLWARD: Take up your time too, Dave.

MR. CHAIRMAN: No, the Opposition has fifteen minutes to reply. Once that is done we will go to general questioning from the Committee, and I will recognize Members as they express an interest in asking questions. I would respectfully request that the questions be asked one at a time, that they be concise questions and that we get concise answers. But every Member of the Committee will be given an opportunity to ask whatever questions they wish. But I will not allow any one Member of the Committee to monopolize the question period for any more than ten minutes.

The position of the Chair in these proceedings is very similar to that of the Speaker of the House of Assembly. My job is basically to maintain order and an acceptable level of decorum. But it is a much more relaxed atmosphere in here and I would remind gentlemen that they are permitted to remove their jackets if they so desire. Coffee can be brought in here to the Chamber. Those are things that would certainly not be permitted at regular sessions of the Legislature.

For the benefit of Hansard I would ask everybody, particularly the officials of the Department, that when they speak they identify themselves for the record. That they lean into the microphones. We are used to standing when we speak here in the Legislature so when you are speaking from a sitting position I would ask you to lean into the microphones and please speak up. Hansard is having a little bit of a problem with that kind of thing. I would like to welcome the news media here as well.

Now, Mr. Minister, if you would, sir, introduce the Members of the staff of your Department and then proceed with your opening statement.

MR. GILBERT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a pleasure for us to be here this morning and get our estimates considered for the coming year. I will start off by introducing my executive. To my left is Beth Marshall, the Deputy Minister; to my right is John O'Reilly, the ADM of Works. Behind we have: Harold Stone, who is the ADM of Administration and George Greenland who is the ADM of Works. So then we have Gordon Murphy, Director of Human Resources; Ramona Cole, Director of Finance and General Operations; Gilbert Pike, the Chairman of the Public Service Commission; and Jack Balram, who is the Director of Administration for Pippy Park. So these will be the support people here from this Department this morning.

Now, as everybody is aware the Department of Works, Services and Transportation is one of the new Departments that was created when the Cabinet was restructured after the present Government took over just two years ago. What is there are the Departments of Public Works and the Department of Transportation, and I think there are bits and pieces of a couple of Departments. There is some of the old Department of Communications in there. So in actual fact I suppose there were more problems and growing pains in this Department than some of the other ones by virtue of the fact that we had to learn to live with each other.

The old Department of Public Works had operated independently for years, and the Department of Transportation. So getting the two of those groups to come together as a cohesive group caused some problems and some head scratching from time to time. As I look around at the executive that are here with me today compared to two years ago when we started, John O'Reilly is the only senior executive who is left at the ADM or Deputy Minister level. When we started this thing John's hair was dark. So now just look at what is after happening to him in a period of two years. So it was a lot of work to get this Department integrated and to accept calling "us" and "them" and that sort of thing that happened for the first year or so we were there. I feel at this point in time we have sort of cleared the decks and we are ready to get on with this integrated Department.

As Members are aware this Department administers 8.4 per cent of the total Budget of the Province and we are the largest Department of Government I suppose. We provide facilities and services to the other Departments of Government in the general service. The permanent staff numbers are approximately 2,000. We employ many other Newfoundlanders and Labradorians on a seasonal basis. We operate seven regional offices across the Province. I suppose the thing that we are best known for is the fact that we supervise the road construction for the Province, and the one that is the most controversial I suppose is our Provincial Roads Programme.

Every year when that is announced we hear the Opposition critic say that it is blatantly political, and I would like to assure him again that it is done on a priority basis when the money is spent for repairs and rehabilitation of the local highways in this Province. We could highlight some of the ones that are done but I have a feeling that during the morning we might have to occasionally refer to certain projects that are done. The point that I would make is that in this year's programme it was reduced again because of the restraints that we found ourselves under. It was $25.5 million we spent this year. But it spanned thirty-four districts. What the officials did when they put the programme together was look at the serious needs and we tried to do the best we could with them.

Now in addition we have the Federal-Provincial cost shared programmes. The ERDA programme is finishing up this year. The Province as a Province is spending an additional $12 million in those projects. This year the Newfoundland Transportation Initiative for the the Roads for Rails deal will kick in and the Trans-Canada part of it, the $400 million, started last year. We are going to be spending this year for the total programme about $75 million out of that Roads for Rails Agreement and the ERDA Agreement. We are starting this year on the 235 Agreement, that is the trunk roads, and they will be announced very shortly. This programme is now finalized but Mr. Crosbie and I have not signed it but I have been talking to Mr. Crosbie and we agree and hopefully we will have this agreement signed within the next few days.

The other part of this Department is that we are involved in building construction and that we have approximately $50 million provided for building construction in 1991 - 1992, of which $37.5 million relates to new facilities, some of them include the MED Centre in Foxtrap, that is going to be $4.9 million; the Centre for Engineering Technology is $4.5 million; the Fisher Institute extension in Corner Brook is $4.5 million; a nursing home for St. Lawrence is $3.5 million; the Young Offenders Facility at Whitbourne is $3.2 million; that is just to name some of them. But as you can see it is a rather extensive programme we have this year when you take this $37.5 million in new facilities this year.

The Airstrips Programme: we will be continuing with the construction programme for airstrips in Labrador. The projects are going to finish up. This programme has been ongoing for some thirteen to fourteen years. So, I understand that this phase of it will finish this year. There are some projects in Labrador, Grand Falls, Clarenville and the Codroy Valley. These funds are fully recoverable from the Federal Government under local airport development. We have contacted the Federal Minister and the previous Federal Ministers and highlighted and pointed out that we consider the major concern we have in development of further airports under this programme would be the Winterland Airport and it is one that we feel should receive top priority. We have, as I have said in my dealings with the previous Minister, Mr. Lewis, I pointed this out and I have written the new Minister since he has taken over and pointed out again this is a priority and one that I would like for him to give some serious consideration to. I hope to be meeting with him within the next month at which time it will be a high priority on my agenda because I feel that with the development that is going on in the Marystown area and with Hibernia this Winterland Airport is one that certainly should be developed and I am surprised that more was not done on it earlier. But it is one of our top priorities.

I am sure the Members are aware that effective today the payment of driver and vehicle renewal applications will be accepted at most chartered banks and credit unions in the Province. We feel this is a very positive step and one that will make the service available to pretty near everybody in the Province instead of having to drive to Motor Registrations for the routine work that can now be transacted through banks and credit unions. We feel it is a positive thing and we are sure it will be accepted as a very positive thing by the members of the general public. As you know, what will happen, of course, is that driver's licences and vehicle permits will not be issued but the people, once they go and use the facilities at the banks or credit unions, will be given an extension of thirty days while the paper work is being processed and getting back to them. So, it is an improvement over having to put their applications in the mail.

One of the major things I suppose that we have tried to undertake during the two years we have been here, is, we have looked at the current vehicle fleet, we have tried to reduce the Government fleet and we have been rather successful at it; we are doing the mechanical assessments in the vehicles and we are trying to get the economies to scale to work I suppose, and we are cutting back on the number of vehicles. The first people to get a chance to buy those surplus vehicles are the community councils and after that they go to public auction or public tender.

We have reduced these by some 300 units over the last two years, so we are down from over 1,200 to less that 1,000 by the end of May this year, so, we consider that is going to be a saving to the public of this Province, and by judicious management of our fleet, we feel that we will be as effective with the removal of those 300 vehicles from our fleet.

We think we have streamlined the system and we are looking forward to as I said, with the executive in place which we have right now, I would like in conclusion, to thank the people who have worked with me in this Department for the last two years and I am looking forward now to great things as we square the decks and get ready to go in to the next few years. Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister. Before turning it over to Mr. Aylward, I would first like to introduce the Member for Fogo, Mr. Sam Winsor and the Member for Bellevue, Mr. Percy Barrett who joined us a little late.

I would like to mention as well, as I omitted saying this in my opening remarks, that the officials from the Minister's Department cannot be questioned by any of the people on our Committee, but they are permitted to answer any questions that the Minister would request of them; I would remind them as well that even on that account, their answers must be related to fact and not policy, and I would remind officials again, if they speak, that they should identify themselves for the purposes of Hansard.

You have had a copy of the minutes of our last meeting distributed. Are there any errors or omissions?

AN HON. MEMBER: On motion, the Committee adjourned at 10:05 p.m. to Thursday 6th May, it must be Monday, the 6th of May?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Are there any further errors or omissions?

On motion, minutes as amended were adopted as circulated.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Aylward, you have fifteen minutes to reply to the statement made by the Minister.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you, very much, Mr. Chairman.

I probably will not take that much time. I prefer to get into a question and answer period with the Minister. I do want to note that in the Minister's explanation, early on in his explanation, he finally did admit that the Department was too big for him to handle, and they had a lot of trouble getting it together over the last couple of years. Hopefully, with the great staff he has, it has come together, and I am sure they will look after it quite adequately.

I do not remember the Minister mentioning anything about the Outer Ring Road in his comments. There have been many questions raised on what is going to happen to the Outer Ring Road and whether it is going to proceed or not. The Minister did mention something about his vehicle fleet. Later on in his discussions, when he gets a chance, he might let us know, although the fleet is being reduced, I understand that the vehicles in the fleet are being kept a bit longer, so I am concerned that because of the age of the vehicles in the fleet they may be non-repairable? Is anyone noticing that maintenance costs are going higher than were anticipated? Banks doing the registration for motor vehicles is not a bad thing. I do not think I ever said it was a bad thing. It probably is a positive step. The thing negative about it is that you lose control of the cost of what the banks will charge. There should have been something in that policy to suggest what the banks could charge for the service. It might not be very much but I still do not think we have heard from the Minister what the charge is, and I have not contacted the banks. Probably that is a bit negligent on my part but it was suppose to be $1.00 when we started of this process, but I am not sure if the Minister is aware of what charges the banks are going to charge people for their handling of this motor registration. We have had policy changes in the past couple of years on the ferry systems in the Province. Some of them are positive, where you reduce the rates, and some of them are not so positive according to the people who use the services because of scheduling changes and less service than they had in the past. You would think that in the 1990s we would be trying to improve the service rather than reduce services. If the Minister gets a chance he will probably go over the point system and see how that is doing. He might report how my points are coming along.

AN HON. MEMBER: Are you still driving?

MR. R. AYLWARD: I am still walking, almost walking, I think.

Later on in debate I might question him on how many light vehicles we did buy. I know the fleet is reduced, but are we buying anything, are there vehicles coming into the system every year? I would imagine there would have to be for highways equipment, to keep that on the go. The roads list the Minister mentioned, I know it is prepared by the officials originally, and I know what happens to it after it is prepared by the officials. I know this year there was something like five or seven out of sixty-eight projects in Conservative districts, and the Minister suggests these were not done by political decisions. I know we have a very professional group of public servants and they certainly always tend to look after the Ministers and try to do, even if the Minister does not tell them, try to make sure the Minister looks good. They certainly did it for me, and had to work hard at it when I was there, and they are doing the same for you, no doubt. So maybe the list is prepared by public servants, but it is certainly a list which shows that a lot of money has gone into Liberal Districts, and a lot less gone into Conservative Districts which also need it.

I notice the Minister, when he is defending this, says the District of Kilbride has no unpaved roads and certain things like that. Well, that is a fact. I got most of it paved while I was there, and I have another half mile to go, I think, but a badly paved road is worse than a fairly good gravel road. If anyone wants to drive in over Bay Bulls Road they will probably get a little shake and notice that there are monies needed in all districts. It would be better if we had more money to spend, I realize, but it would be even better if we spent what we have fairly, around the Province.

One other thing that was an issue last summer - I am not sure what it is lately, but I have tried to get in contact with the new Federal Minister on it - is the scheduling of the Argentia ferry service. I do not know if the Department has made any more representations to the Federal Government. I had a commitment from Marine Transport - I think that is what they call themselves now, whatever the name of it is, anyway - to look at the scheduling for the Argentia ferry service, to see if it can be revised for this year at least.

It was leaving here extremely early in the morning, and because there was a new boat on and it is more efficient it got to North Sydney between 9:30 and 11:30 in the evening, and it is extremely difficult for people to find hotel accommodations in the busy season. Arriving there in the middle of the night, they had to drive in the middle of the night to wherever they could find hotel accommodations. So, I do not know what the answer to it is, but I am sure the scheduling people could come up with something. Newfoundlanders, when they left Newfoundland, had to spend a night in a hotel somewhere close to North Sydney or drive all night, and on the way back they had to spend another night in North Sydney because the ferry left so early in the morning and they had to be there on time.

So, the Minister might like to make some comments on his representations on the scheduling of ferries for Argentia for this summer. I know it caused some problems for local people travelling and also caused problems for tourists travelling last year on that route, because they were not familiar with the system.

Apart from that, that is all I have for my statement, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister, if you would like a few minutes to comment on Mr. Aylward's statement before we go to questioning.

MR. GILBERT: All right, I will say a few words. I would like to point out for the gentleman from Kilbride that the size of the Department had nothing at all to do with the overall operation. It was the getting together and curing the illness that had crept in there after seventeen years of having ministers as inefficient as he was running them that caused the problem.

Just for information, I thought it might be a good time if you sort of looked at it. I have gotten some figures together. I thought the Member for Kilbride would like to get into the mud a little bit, so I always like to be ready for him when he gets involved in stuff like that. The combining of the two departments has no doubt caused problems of the growing together. But in the long run the people of Newfoundland are going to be the people who are going to be the net winners.

Just to give you an example, I have taken some figures, and we will take the Minister's Office and the Executive Support. I took it for the years 1987 and 1988, compared to this year's budget. To run the Minister's office in 1987-88, that was the Department of Public Works and the Department of Transportation, the total figure for the Minister's office, and I am sure we will get into the details later on today, was $363,985. We are budgeting right now for 1991-1992, $214,400, that is just for the Minister's office. Now when you go to the executive support back in those days, the executive support was $768,445, where right now two years later in 1991-1992 it is $630,400. So, you can see in the process the net winners were the people of Newfoundland by this change. The thing that took the problem was getting the two groups of people that had been separated under the previous government for seventeen years and this money had been wasted, so if you take into consideration the $200,000 a year that we saved and you take that for the seventeen years that you were in there, you would see how much we would have saved for people by having those together. But it was the gelling and getting those people welded together into thinking as one Department instead of the two that caused the problem. It had nothing to do with the Minister. There was a great Minister. The only thing is that we have had some staff changes and I can assure you now that we are all on the same deck it will be onward and upward.

He talked about the Outer Ring Road: as the gentleman is aware, the Outer Ring Road is included in the $405 million under the Railway Agreement. Those projects are reviewed on a yearly basis and as I have said in the House continuously, the priority for the Outer Ring Road will be established the year before it is done. We are certainly looking at it and it is one of the things that is considered as the Budget is made up. The funding is $25 million a year that we are going to be spending on that for the next little while. So, in the funding we will no doubt be looking at it each year and once the priority is established it will start to kick in.

The charge from the banks, as I understand, for processing the licence and application fees is $1.25. I think it was $1 when the thing was talked about but that was the bank's decision. If you take into consideration if people went to mail a letter it would be 70 cents or something like that right now, so I think the convenience of walking in and having the process done right there in their community - I do not think that is excessive.

The ferry service: There is no doubt about it there has been some policy changed by reducing the rates. It has been accepted with open arms and hearts. I had the occasion this weekend to be on the ferry between Ramea and Burgeo a couple of times and as a matter of fact the crew were telling me that not only is it going to be productive for the people who are living in Ramea, and I take Ramea because I suppose that is the one I know the best, but the cost of a car, a man, his wife, and three children, to go from Ramea to Burgeo, a distance of 9 miles, when we took over was $54, now you can do the same thing for $15. So, there is rejoicing and dancing in the streets with the reduction in the ferry service. Not only that they figure that with the tourist season there will not be a great loss in revenue because people can now afford to go whereas under the previous Government they could not afford to go so that is a very positive thing.

I see the gentleman holds up the fact that we have changed the schedules on some ferries. We have changed from two to one ferry in some cases, but in every case where we have done that the service to the people has not been cut back, the number of trips has been maintained with one exception, and that is the one we are in the process right now of changing, the Long Island and Little Bay Islands. What has happened there, as I understand it, they were getting five trips under the old system and they are now going to get six trips during July to September and then come September to January they were getting three trips a day and now they are going to get four trips a day. Long Island trips are going to be cut back. The Long Island trip was a five minute trip and they were getting about fourteen trips a day and right now they will be getting six and four. There is some sort of problem in Long Island but we wonder if fourteen trips a day might have been a little much when you took the number of people who were travelling on that ferry. We think it is a positive thing. We think it is the only sensible and fiscally sound thing to do under the restraints we are faced with right now. Like I said, any changes are going to be met with a certain degree of resistance, but I am sure that as we go along the people will realize, under the circumstances, that we are providing an excellent system. I am glad he brought up the demerit point system. We are quite proud of the demerit point system and I am sure when the Member got the brown envelope under his door that he was very proud about it, too. I always feel sort of good about that. I heard the previous Premier say one of the reasons he resigned was because he could not get to pass the demerit point system because his Cabinet would not go along with it. That was one of the things he said he could not do. When you take into consideration what the demerit point system has contributed, right now the fact is it has made people more aware of the hazards of driving and we are sure that the people who were suppose to be affected by that, the bad drivers are getting the message. Some of them are getting near to losing their licenses and are going to have to go for training to improve their driving habits. In that regard their has been a reduction in fatal injuries from 1989 to 1990. I will be no doubt talking about it later this morning, but I think in some ways we can attribute it to the point system.

I am glad the gentleman for Kilbride mentioned the fact that a bad paved road is worse than a good dirt road. That is the problem we are finding right now. When he says that we have to spend local capital works money in the now Liberal districts, that were Tory districts, and he says we spent everything we had on them while we were there, unfortunately some of it was spent twenty years ago and it was put down during an election, when you rolled it on during election time. That pavement did not stand up too well and what we are down to now is the money we had to spend this year, and some of it no doubt was in districts that had received a fair amount of funding when the hon. Member for Kilbride and the Member for Harbour Main were there, but those roads are now gone. They have broken up and as the Member points out himself, a bad paved road is worse than a good dirt road, so this is why maintenance had to go into some of those districts this year, and I am glad he recognized it.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

I would ask the Minister to please clue-up his comments.

MR. GILBERT: I will clue-up now but I am sure we will get a chance to go back again.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. GILBERT: Maybe when you are around

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Short first and then I will recognize Mr. Doyle.

MR. SHORT: Mr. Minister, a couple of points on which I want some clarification. You mentioned the Road for Rails Agreement and the Trunk Roads Agreement, could you expand on this? I know about the $400 million one, that is highway construction, I take it. The Trunk Roads Agreement, could you give us some more detail on that, and afterwards I want to ask a question about the building construction.

MR. GILBERT: What the Trunk Roads Agreement is: $235 million is to be spent over the next thirteen years starting this year. Eight million is to be spent this year, then it will kick in at $15 million a year for the remainder of the programme.

The Federal Minister and the officials in my Department and the officials in the Federal Department have come in with a list of where these monies should be spent over the next fifteen years. Again, it will be spent on a priority basis, as is the 405 one that is there for the Trans-Canada. We have established what should be spent out of the $8 million for this year and, Mr. Crosbie and I will be announcing that shortly. It is one of those programmes which has Federal participation.

MR. SHORT: But what would be some of the major areas that would fall under Trunk Roads, that is what I was getting at.

MR. GILBERT: Well the only thing about it is, the agreement is not officially signed between us and the Federal Government right now; there was a list which we inherited from the previous Government, a tentative list which was there when we came in.

In the two years that we have been here we have been fine-tuning it and we had to make some changes. I do not think I really can announce those today, because the Federal Minister for Newfoundland and I have to sign the agreement. I guess Mr. Crosbie, the Minister for Newfoundland, and I, have to sign the formal agreements, so I really cannot give you any details of it today.

MR. SHORT: Well, that was not what I was getting at. I will just give you an example of what I am trying to get at. For example: the last five or six years we have been doing some work, say on the road going to Burgeo, is it that kind of a link from the highway that is considered under Trunk Roads or is -

MR. GILBERT: Oh. The ones under the Trunk Roads Agreement: I can give you a basic idea; yes, the one from Burgeo would be one, the one to the Burin Peninsula Highway, would be one-

AN HON. MEMBER: Argentia access.

MR. GILBERT: - no, the Argentia access is under the -

AN HON. MEMBER: That would be a Trunk road.

MR. GILBERT: Yes, but it was included in the 405, because of the fact that the ferry comes in through Argentia so the money is going to be spent out of that 405 and the Argentia access is the only one that is considered as the main highway.

AN HON. MEMBER: Gander Bay Road is included.

MR. GILBERT: I do not know about the Gander Bay Road. The main trunk roads, the feeder, is directly from the Trans-Canada to certain areas.

MR. SHORT: Anything up the Northern Peninsula -

MR. GILBERT: Yes, that sort of thing.

MR. SHORT: Okay, I have one other question. Under building construction you listed off some of the buildings that are under construction, $50 million, of which $37.5 million is for new facilities. I just wondered if you could perhaps explain that. Is that $50 million some sort of a cost-shared agreement for building construction, or is it all totally provincial money.

MR. GILBERT: That is total provincial money. I could give you a list of it.

MR. SHORT: Yes, you mentioned the Fisher, for example, that is in Corner Brook.

MR. GILBERT: Okay. -

MR. SHORT: What I was getting at, Mr. Minister, was just some details on, not so much the program, but is it a special program geared to facilities, or something we just put a pot of money into over a period of time? How does it work?

MR. GILBERT: I can give you some of the building. I gave you some in my opening statement. The new facilities we are going to build under that building program are: a new highways depot for St. Anthony; we are going to start the extension to the Howley Building here in St. John's; some work is going to be done on Hangar 21 at Gander; then you go to the Community College in Clarenville; Fisher Institute in Corner Brook; a family residence and day care centre in Happy Valley; the Cabot Institute on Prince Philip Drive; the MED Centre in Foxtrap; the Institute of Fishery and Marine Technology for the offshore simulator; we are finishing of phase one and starting phase two of the young offenders in Whitbourne; for health care we are going to construct a new facility at Roddickton; at Port Saunders we have $1.5 million to start the construction of a new health care centre; there is $1.5 million for a new health care centre for Burgeo; we are going to re-develop and get ready for the extension of the James Paton Memorial Hospital; we are going to construct a new hospital at Melville; there is a medical clinic for Hearts Delight; a nursing home and clinic in St. Lawrence; a hospital extension and re-development for the Brookfield Hospital; there is going to be money for the inter-faith nursing home in Corner Brook; the health centre in Forteau; there is an expansion and renovations to the Blue Crest Home in Grand Bank; so a total of about $12 million is going to be spent in health. You can then go on for each Department, I can list them for you, but that is basically what it is, about $50 million for new construction which will create a lot of employment in the construction industry this year.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Doyle.

MR. DOYLE: I have a couple of questions. I want to get back to the Outer Ring Road. Does the Minister have any better idea of when the Outer Ring Road is going to start other than just to say we will know the year before it starts? People are anxious to know something about the Outer Ring Road. I am wondering if Government is attaching any priority to the Outer Ring Road? If it is still part of the Roads for Rails Agreement why do I perceive some reluctance on the part of the Minister to give us any indication of when the Outer Ring Road is going to start?

MR. GILBERT: The Outer Ring Road, as I mentioned before, and I will say again for the hon. Member, the Outer Ring Road is included in the $405 million Roads for Rails Agreement for the main construction of the Trans-Canada Highway. We identify the priorities on a year to year basis. The initial money has been spent in four-laning the Trans-Canada from St. John's towards the Argentia turn off, and the money that is to be spent on upgrading the road from the turn off to Argentia, because, as I have alluded to earlier, it is one that was identified under that program by virtue of the fact it is a point of entry and it is one where the ferry service will be operating from North Sydney into Newfoundland. There is $30 million a year included in the Roads for Rails Agreement which will be identified. The priorities and the start up of the projects along the Trans-Canada will be identified the year before and then spent.

As I have said, the first priority that we considered was the road from St. John's towards Argentia, the four-laning of that because of the traffic that would be there. The one we have started on the west coast is the road from Corner Brook towards Deer Lake where there was a lot of concern and accidents in the area around Steady Brook there and the fact that you drive through. One of the worst areas on the Trans-Canada was the road between Goobies and Clarenville and that has now been stared in this year's project. I recognize that the Outer Ring Road is a priority but when we make the final decision as to when we will start then it will follow as night will follow day. Each year there will be a portion of that $30 million that will go into that construction once we have established it and put it on the programme.

What we are doing right now for the gentleman under that project for this year are: the resurfacing of the Argentia Access; grading the Trans-Canada from Holyrood to Salmonier; paving Witless Bay Line to Holyrood; realigning Tompkins' construction at Little Codroy River; and resurfacing Pasadena to Deer Lake; two bridges around Steady Brook; Riverside Drive-Massey Drive area, Corner Brook; Welcome Inn towards Clarenville, there is eight kilometres there; Glenwood towards Notre Dame Junction.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

I would like to remind the Minister that I have requested the Members of the Committee to keep the questions very concise. If the Minister does not keep his answers equally as concise the Chair is going to have some problem enforcing that rule.

MR. GILBERT: Mr. Chairman, I got carried away with the good news that I have to give. He asked about the Roads for Rails and I had to enlarge and tell him where it was, you see.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Chair understands.

MR. GILBERT: I am too exuberant about it.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I just ask the Minister to make his answers as concise as I have asked the Committee to make their questions.

Mr. Doyle.

MR. DOYLE: Asking the Minister a question is like - I am reminded of the fellow who asked the time and he was told how to make a watch. But I still want to have a go at the Outer Ring here. I want to find out, and the Minister has not indicated: is the Outer Ring Road still a priority of the Provincial Government? Number one. Listen very carefully. Is it still the priority of the Provincial Government, and has the Provincial Government made any attempt to have the Outer Ring removed from that list as a priority? Is it still a priority, first of all, yes or no.

MR. GILBERT: Certainly.

MR. DOYLE: Okay. Has the Government made any attempt with the Federal government to have it removed from the priority list?

MR. GILBERT: No.

MR. DOYLE: No. So can the Minister zero in a little bit more on when the Outer Ring is going to start? Is it going to be started within a three year period, a two year period, a five year period? The people have a right to know. Can you give us some ballpark time as to when the Outer Ring might get started?

MR. GILBERT: Not really, Mr. Chairman. As I have said the priorities are established on an annual basis. The Outer Ring Road will not be finished in one year because I understand that it is somewhere in the vicinity of $60 million or $70 million to complete it. So I think the Member can be sure that it will start sometime before the end of the next thirteen years and it will certainly have to be extended over a period of two or three years to do. So that is about as concise as I can be at this time. But I assure him that it is a priority and will be considered as such. When we figure that it has reached the level that it is the first priority it will be considered in that year's construction.

MR. DOYLE: So the answer is that it will be considered and it will be started sometime within the next thirteen years.

MR. GILBERT: That is right.

MR. DOYLE: So, that is what the Minister has said. Okay.

Moving from there to the Bell Island ferry, could the Minister indicate what the Department's plans are for a second ferry to Bell Island? You will recall that an announcement was made a couple of years ago, when the first ferry was announced, that a second one would follow. Could the Minister indicate what his Department's plans are concerning a second ferry for Bell Island?

MR. GILBERT: I think that has already been announced in the budget. The fact that we are into a restraint programme, we announced what we were going to do. Initially we were going to build an icebreaking ferry for the Fogo - Change Islands service, and then we were going to take the ferry, the Beaumont Hamel, from that service, do the renovations to it, and put it into the Bell Island service. As the gentleman is aware, because of budget constraints construction of the icebreaking ferry was put on hold for a year. So, the situation with the Bell Island ferry is on hold for a year, and we will have to assess that again as we look at what is going to happen in the budget considerations for next year.

MR. DOYLE: With respect to maintenance work, is there any consideration being given by the Department for contracting out of maintenance work? Is there any consideration being given to that?

MR. GILBERT: What do you mean? Maintenance work for what?

MR. DOYLE: Contracting out of maintenance.

MR. GILBERT: For what?

MR. DOYLE: Highways maintenance, current depots that we have, and this type of thing. Is there any consideration being given for contracting out that work?

MR. GILBERT: No.

MR. DOYLE: No? Okay.

What about road maintenance this year? Will there be any reduction in the numbers of people to be employed on the summer maintenance programmes this year, the summer work that the Department has?

MR. GILBERT: I would imagine that there is certainly going to be reduction in the temporary and seasonal workers, because of the fact that we are into a restraint programme. I do not know the extent of it at this point, but as we go along we might look at it in one of two ways, I suppose. We might take on the seasonal and temporary workers for a shorter period of time, because we have not got the same money we had before. So, to be concise, it will be a consideration, and there will be a reduction in the number of temporary and seasonal workers this year.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister.

Your time has been used up, Mr. Doyle. I will now go to Mr. Barrett.

MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I know, Mr. Minister, you outlined in your opening address that you had plans to downsize the fleet of Government cars within your department. I guess one of the biggest complaints we have, those of us who are MHAs and travel around our districts, is the number of Government vehicles, and there seems to be an abuse of these Government vehicles for personal use. Is your Department tightening up on the use of Government cars for personal use, and what plans are in place to enforce those regulations, if there are any regulations?

MR. GILBERT: Well, naturally the regulations are there. They are not supposed to be used for personal business, and they never were. But like anything else, I guess, there are certain abuses that creep into every system. By virtue of the fact that we have reduced the fleet by some 300 units in this Department, I would say, if there was a tendency for people to use them for personal use, it will make it virtually impossible for any personal use. However, I am sure that the gentleman is aware that no matter how airtight the system is, there is a possibility he can come up with cases that he perceives to be an abuse to the system.

I really do not think that it is a great problem with this Department. I would say that if we hear of individual cases, we operate on them when we hear of the case, but it is down to that now and I do not think there is any general abuse. There might be individual cases and if we hear about it we investigate it and that is basically it.

MR. BARRETT: A supplementary. Is there any requirement for the management people, particularly in the transportation area, if some of these managers live a fair distance from the highways depots, and in the whole maintenance of the road system, is it necessary for these people to have to drive the Government cars home, you know, is it part of their job that they have to take the cars home?

MR. GILBERT: Well it would depend on the type of work that the person is doing. The one case that comes to mind, where I say that yes, it would be, is the foremen in winter time who are on duty twenty-four hours a day; the week that they are on they take the vehicle that is assigned to them, that is their vehicle for the week they are on, so, under winter maintenance, yes, those people take them.

Now I do not know but another case would be the survey crews, you know they are working all over the Island. I asked the question myself because I know where I live, there are a lot of people who work with the survey crews, and I know that I asked this question a year or so ago and the answer I received was that those people would be working, hither and yon, so they would drive home in the night and then go back to work in the vehicles the next morning; those are the two areas where I could see right now that there would be a justification for employees taking it home.

Now of course, the Member is aware that we also have a log book with each vehicle, so if a fellow is going to abuse it, he has to be very good because the log is checked and monitored so we could find there are excessive miles, so I really do not think it is a major problem. But, as I said, I am sure that everybody here is aware that there is nothing you cannot find some way to get around, if you really sit down and work at it, but no, there is no major abuse I would say.

MR. BARRETT: I will get back more specifically to my own district. I represent a district that has quite a few gravel roads, a lot of gravel roads within communities, not only connecting communities, but gravel roads in the main communities where it is a real problem with dust and all the things that go with a gravel road.

I can assure the hon. Member for Kilbride that people are complaining because their pavement is bad; the people in my district are yet looking for the first bit of black top to go on the road in the community. I know that -

MR. R. AYLWARD: You should be working harder for them then.

MR. BARRETT: - within the last two years we have made tremendous progress; sometimes I hear about this Government's commitment to rural Newfoundland, but we are very pleased to compliment the department on the fact that the road to Southport has been paved, a project that took some twenty odd years to complete at one kilometre per year, but I think in the final stages we upped that to about seven or eight with the benefits of Federal dollars of course. The other one is the road to St. Jones Within, which is also a very small community, and I can assure you that this Member is sure that the Department is committed to rural Newfoundland. The other one we are very excited about in the district, and believe me the people in Markland are very excited about, was probably the worst road in Newfoundland, in that there were times in the Spring when you could lose a bus in the potholes, and that one is going to be paved. I think one of the areas, particularly in that district, there should be plans under the ERDA Agreement to extend that road to Colinet, which would open up and make it easier for the people from St. Mary's-the-Capes. I know there is a lot of fish being transported from that area, so it would enhance economic development if the road were paved. But there are other roads in my district that are a greater priority.

I would like to ask about the public works buildings. I know there is a $12.5 million young offenders building being built in Whitbourne now and I would assume that in the next four or five months the old building will be vacated. I am just wondering if the Department has any plans for the utilization of the old boys home at Whitbourne? Will it be turned into a Provincial Building?-- what are the plans for it? I would not like to see the same thing happened that happened with the Markland Hospital, that it be turned into a winery. It seems to be a fairly good building, particularly the classroom parts of it. Has the Department thought about it or made any plans? If you have not made any plans I guess I would put it on record now that you should be making plans for it.

MR. GILBERT: Well, first of all, yes, we have thought about the boys home at Whitbourne. We have had a couple of suggestions already and we are assessing it right now; we have not finalized what it is going to be but it is one of the things that is under ongoing consideration and by the time it is vacant we hope to come up with a utilization for it. The gentleman talks about the need for paving in his district and the fact there are gravel roads. I can assure him I know there is a need for pavement. Only for the restraints I could find lots of ways to spend a lot more than $25 million. I am hoping that as conditions get better, with the actions that we are now taking, we will be in a position within the next year or so to really be able to go into a paving programme and a road upgrading programme for some of the dirt roads that need to be paved, and not only that but the paved ones that need to be upgraded. But that requires money and at this time we are doing the bare maintenance that we can to keep the roads as safe as possible with the money we have to spend at this time.

MR. BARRETT: Okay, the other area, Mr. Minister - and it is a question that I am asked lots of times as I travel around my district and even around the Province - is the old railway bed in Newfoundland the property of CN or has it reverted back to the Province? Are there any plans by your Department, or probably it is not your Department that is going to have the responsibility for it, if it is reverted back to the Province do you have any plans to maintain that system, particularly right now that there are some concerns that some of the bridges may be dismantled off the old railway bed. I think it would be a crime if this were to happen. I think, as a person who frequently uses an all terrain vehicle, uses the railway track for pleasure and enjoyment, that it would be a great tourist attraction. It could bring economic benefits to the Province if we were to use the railway bed for the recreational use of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. Has there been any discussion? Who owns the bed? Is it going to revert back to the Province? Are there any plans to utilize this great resource for the enjoyment of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians?

MR. GILBERT: There has certainly been an ongoing discussion concerning what is going to happen to the railway bed. The only way my Department would be involved would be in the part that is directly related to transportation, where the railway bed and the highway sort of join up. Where we would need to take the rail bed to extend the highway or widen the highway, something like that. As I understand it the lead Department in negotiations with the railway for the reclaiming of that land would be the Department of Environment and Lands. I understand that the Department of Development would be the one that would have the concerns you have about the developing and maintaining of trails. It would not be a transportation initiative and it is not one we would be involved in. As I say the only way we would be involved in that now is in any of the areas where the old line comes into the highway network. That is the only one we would be responsible for and the rest of it comes under the responsibility of those other two Departments who would be deciding what is the future of the remaining railway bed.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Your time is up, Mr. Barrett. I will now have to turn the questioning over to Mr. Winsor.

MR. WINSOR: I want to follow-up on a question that was started by the hon. Member for Harbour Main. The salary details indicate that your Department had 2,248 permanent employees in 1990-91 and in 1991-92 there are -

AN HON. MEMBER: How many!

MR. WINSOR: -2,248. I am getting this from the salary details. This year it indicates there is 2,008, a reduction of 240 permanent staff. In addition to the 240 permanent that disappeared, according to your salary details now, how many temporary jobs were lost, and exactly where were they? They are saying permanent. Are you including temporary in your permanent, too?

MR. GILBERT: I will explain what has happened there. There were 249 positions eliminated and out of those there were only thirty-nine permanent positions. The other ones were positions that were not filled. The salary allocations were there but there were nobody in those jobs, so in other words what has happened, in the Budget for this year instead of including those jobs, these are people we can hire and the salary unit is there, the money is there, we have the position for it but we do not have the money, or whatever the case. We said we will now abolish the positions. So in actual fact 208 of those positions were people who were not working in them last year. On paper they were jobs but the actual number of people laid off in my Department was thirty-nine. Nobody was laid off in the temporary positions because of the fact that they are hired back for certain seasons of the year. Like I say there will possibly be a reduction in the number of temporary people we hire back this year, the seasonal ones. We do not have a figure and there is no way we could have a figure until we get into the construction season or out to the winter maintenance season to see where we are going to need those people.

MR. WINSOR: I want to revert back to the operations of the provincial ferry system. Some time ago you announced that the Fogo Island - Change Island run would be run by a one ferry service for nine months of the year, and I think the latter part of last year this system proved to be cumbersome at least. The boat had difficulty maintaining the schedule with the number of cars that were travelling and so on. For example, this Thursday night nine cars could not get on the boat even on a three trip a day basis and it was very difficult to maintain that schedule. I think there are five or six trips that boat needs to run in that period of time. I understand it is June 15 before it reverts back to the two boat a day system. Does the Minister know what boat is going to be the second boat in that area at this point in time?

MR. GILBERT: As I understand it right now, the Sound of Islay or the Hamilton Sound will be there for part of the time. One or the other will be there for the summer.

MR. WINSOR: The reason I ask that is because the Hamilton Sound, especially during that season, can be of much more valuable service, because it is able to take more tractor trailers and so on. It is at the peak of the caplin season, and with the flow of traffic to both islands, what was happening was one boat was frequently assisting the other to facilitate the tractor trailers, whereas the Sound of Islay will not be nearly as effective in helping both islands.

MR. GILBERT: Well, it depends on the traffic. Of course, there will be a dedicated service to each island from June 15 to September 15, during the height of the caplin season, I would say, which would not start until June 15 anyhow. As I understand it now, certainly the service seems adequate.

MR. WINSOR: The Minister has talked about the rates having gone down. I think there have been three, maybe four, rate reductions. But despite all that, for the commercial portion there has only been one rate decrease. I know for Fogo Island, particularly, it is causing all kinds of difficulties, because the rate of buying things out there, propane for example, is much more expensive, because of the high cost of transportation involved with commercial vehicles which they frequently have to charter. I guess, they are not allowed to travel with that kind of thing.

Has the Minister given any consideration to a reduction in the commercial rate as well, to keep abreast? Basically the same argument can be used, that the rate on land and on water should be the same, certainly applying to commercial traffic. I think it is twenty-six dollars just to move a truck.

MR. GILBERT: Well, that is an interesting question. I will point out again, that when the member's government was in power all they did was increase the rates. What we have done is we have reduced the commercial rates. We made an initial decrease, and then we did a survey. We wanted to find out, because we are concerned about the people who live on the islands and in Rural Newfoundland. We did a survey among the commercial people who are using the ferries all over the Island, and I think it was somewhere in the vicinity of 60 per cent of them said that they would not be passing on the reduction in rates to the consumers that live on those islands. So, it is harder to see if the benefit could be passed on. If we could be assured that the benefit would be passed on to the end user, the consumer who uses that gas in Fogo or somewhere else, I think we would be prepared to have a look at it. We realize that the ferry system that we have - you know members on the other side have, from time to time, wanted me to raise the rates. I know, the Member for Green Bay, from time to time, says that we should not have reduced the rates, we should keep the rates up.

What I am saying is, we are aware of the people who live on those islands. So, if we can make it better for them, if it could be proven to us that by reducing the commercial rates it would be passed on directly to the consumer, we would be prepared to have another look at it. However when, in a survey we had done, 60 per cent of the commercial people who are using the ferry service said that in most cases the rate would be too small to pass on to consumers and they did not have any plans for passing it on, we felt that it was not to our best advantage to reduce the commercial rate at this time. That is the reason for it.

MR. WINSOR: We have a market driven economy where if you are not competitive you buy somewhere else. That, of course, then fails to take into consideration the co-op, for example, and, in your particular district, the fishplant which is there. They are the major users from the commercial aspect of it, and so what happens is there are profits. They have greater difficulty competing with people elsewhere because their associated costs and transportation are much more.

MR. GILBERT: No, not that much.

MR. WINSOR: The Minister should check into the rates if he thinks it is not that much. It is a considerable -

MR. GILBERT: I happen to have a (Inaudible) in my district (Inaudible) deduces it so that it is not a considerable - and that is one of the highest ones, I suppose. The transporting of fish from the plant in Ramea would be one of the higher rates because of the distance and it was not reduced. But it is not a significant factor and I have talked to the people with the fish companies and it is not significant. But the point that the Member was making first was the transporting of goods in and the gas -

MR. WINSOR: In and out.

MR. GILBERT: - and stuff like that would be passed on to the people. This is not happening. Consequently it was not done. We are not seriously considering it for this year. It will certainly be under review for next year.

MR. WINSOR: So there will be no reduction in commercial rates this year, that is the bottom line.

MR. GILBERT: That is right, sir.

MR. WINSOR: Okay. Another area that I have. Crossing the Gander River there is a significant section of road referred to locally as the causeway. It is property of the Department of Transportation. It is in an unincorporated area but I guess essentially it would always belong to Transportation anyway. A couple of years ago I indicate to the Minister there was a concern in the area with respect to safety along that particular section of road. I am sure my colleague for Lewisporte can certainly attest to it. There has been a fair amount of commercial development in that particular area on both sides of the causeway recently which has meant huge increases in the amount of pedestrian traffic using that particular causeway.

Because of where it is located, quite frequently there is a low mist type thing on the causeway. I had occasion to drive over it on Friday night and you could not see any distance at all on the causeway, and there is no lighting there. Residents have often expressed a great concern about safety. There has already been two or three fatalities there over the years.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

I have given Mr. Winsor an extra minute to clue up his question. You have already gone past your ten minutes. I would ask that you clue up your question.

MR. WINSOR: Okay. Well, my question to the Minister is: would he consider putting some type of lighting in on that particular causeway to alleviate a potentially dangerous situation that exists there?

MR. GILBERT: So what is the gentleman asking me about, some sort of a lighting system?

MR. WINSOR: Street lighting. yes.

MR. GILBERT: I do not know. I will ask the people in my Department to have a look at it and do some sort of a traffic count maybe to see if - naturally we are very concerned with safety in this Department and if it is as the Member says maybe we should have a look at it. Again, we will look at it and see what we are talking about there. I take the Member's question under consideration. I will have my people look at it and see what really is the traffic count there. Is there significant traffic, is there a significant safety hazard? I am sure the gentleman is raising it with sincere concern and we will look at it (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: You have erected some signs there recently indicating pedestrians on causeway. But it is not adequate because you cannot see them.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Winsor.

Mr. Langdon.

MR. LANGDON: Yes, getting back to the demerit point system. Do I understand correctly that once a person has lost, let us say his twelve points, is there an opportunity for him to come in to classroom or other learning situations where hopefully many of his bad habits can be corrected? Once this has happened the person can then have the number of points reverted back so that he can then begin over again, is that correct?

MR. GILBERT: That is the intent of the thing and any person now of his own initiative can go to school - after he has lost less than twelve - he can go the time after he amasses those points. Once he comes in and says that he has passed this test which indicates he has acquired good driving habits his points can be reduced by up to four points.

One of the concerns that we had when we brought in the system was making sure that everybody in the Province would have access to this type of training. This has now been taken care off through the Newfoundland Safety Council who, I think, are now providing that type of service to the people. The person who goes has to pay the cost but I do not know what the cost is. However, it is one of the things that is available.

As you know the demerit system was brought in with the idea that it was not of a punitive nature but there was a certain amount of people on the highway who had dreadfully poor driving habits, and those people were hopefully going to improve or we were going to take them out of circulation. So, now they have a chance to see the error of their ways and they can go and be retrained and hopefully become good and safe drivers.

MR. LANGDON: Okay. As you said, they have seen the error of their ways, Mr. Minister, and they come and do the voluntary training. I was wondering if there has been any contact with the major insurance companies, so that the person who pays an exorbitant rate, after losing his points and having then gone to school, can now see a further reduction in the amount of premium that he would pay to the insurance company concerned?

MR. GILBERT: This would be outside our sphere of influence. It would be between the client and his insurance agency, I would say, or the person and his insurance agency. You know, we, as a Department, could not get involved in that. It would be sort of like the patient and doctor, and it would have to be more or less kept at that.

MR. LANGDON: Okay. Getting back to the paving, I was wondering, once the contractor has laid the pavement on a certain road, or whatever the case may be, how long then from the time it has been laid is the contractor responsible as to when the pavement itself deteriorates to the point of having to be replaced again?

MR. GILBERT: Twelve months, at this time. The contractor gives us a warranty of twelve months, and if there is any problem then, the people in Mr. O'Reilly's Division of our Department would go out and have a talk to them, if anything happens within the twelve month period.

MR. LANGDON: I am particularly thinking about the Harbour Breton Highway. It has not been paved all that long, a number of years, but there is a certain section from the Pool's Cove depot down towards Harbour Breton, for about probably ten kilometres, where the pavement is just disintegrating. Regardless of how much patching you do, it just does not stop the deterioration of the pavement. In fact, you can almost take it with your hands and more or less scoot it away. That is what prompted me to ask that particular question, because it has not been paved that long and there certainly had to be some type of defective material there in the first place for that to happen.

MR. GILBERT: This is the point, you know, you can only hold a contractor responsible for a twelve month period. Some of the paving that we had under previous rules and things like that, we used to laughingly call election paving. You did the upgrading and you put the pavement down at the same time, and where the road had not settled -

MR. R. AYLWARD: Especially when it was snowing out.

MR. GILBERT: Some of it in snow too. So, that could be the reason for it.

I am sure if you give me the details of it, we can ask our fellows to have a look at it and see what exactly the problem is there now.

MR. LANGDON: Yes, because it is a certain area and it looks like it was a red stone that was used. The pavement is, as I said, just deteriorated, almost to the point where it is beyond repair. It probably might have to be recapped sometime. I will give you further details on that.

Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I think we will now take a ten-minute recess. There is a pot of coffee and tea out in the Government common room. We will take a ten-minute coffee recess and come back and the Chair will turn the questioning over to Mr. Aylward.

Recess

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The meeting will now resume.

Before I turn it over to Mr. Aylward for questioning, I would like to comment on something that I overheard being said about members questioning the officials of the Department. I would like to remind all hon. members that the Committee members or the MHAs who come in as observers are not permitted to ask any questions of the officials. They must question the Minister, and if the Minister wishes the officials to answer, that would be at his discretion. Even then the officials would have to answer on fact and not policy.

Mr. Aylward.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I guess it does not matter who is in Office every year the roads program is announced because one side will accuse the other of political patronage no matter what the true story is, I suppose.

Has the Minister even given any consideration to his Department preparing a list of needs or a priority list of roads for the next five years, which could be published so that people would know which roads are going to be paved, upgraded or reconstructed for the next five years and with a 10 per cent variance on that, I guess, for emergencies or anything? Could the roads program be committed to something like that?

MR. GILBERT: I am sure that the officials in my Department have a five year program right now. As to the practicality of putting it in place, I have certainly never given any consideration to publishing it. I do not see there will be any great gains made, other than the political play that you would have out of it by doing it, so I would say, no.

MR. R. AYLWARD: It is a strange thing because one of the first casualties of the Liberal Government was the Liberal Policy Manual. It was put out in the last election and one of the platitudes that were in this, one of the broken promises again, `The Liberal Government will do an immediate assessment of community connector roads in the Province and establish and publish a paving and reconstruction priority program.' I guess now that you are Minister this thing is not necessary anymore.

MR. GILBERT: The program is there. There is no doubt there is a priority for ten years of roads in the Province. As to the publishing of them, I do not know what the benefit would be, but I, at this point, do not intend to publish them.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Well, the benefit, according to your Premier during the last election was that every part of the Province would know from the beginning when local road work would be done and would have the satisfaction of knowing that its timing is based on need and not politics. That is what your Premier thought during the last election but I guess he changed his mind on that, too, did he?

MR. GILBERT: The policy that was annunciated in the last election must have been a good one otherwise we certainly would not have put it in our booklet, and I will have to look at it.

MR. R. AYLWARD: That was a part of the 'real change' but the change changed backwards, or changed somewhere else in the meantime, I think.

Mr. Minister, I do not know if you have a copy of it, I cannot find it here right now, but a couple of times in the House of Assembly, I questioned you on a rental agreement for space for the Department of Education in the Remax Building on Newfoundland Drive. Apparently, the Department of Education wanted so much space and it was done without tender. I believe proposals were asked but I do not remember now. After quite some time it appeared in one of the Public Tender Exemption Act Reports. I have March here but it is not in this one. I thought it was March but it must have been sometime in January or February.

MR. GILBERT: It was in February, I think.

MR. R. AYLWARD: I think the people moved in last August and there was no report of it until sometime between December and February of this year. The reason used, as every tender exemption gives a reason why it was done, in this book was that it was an extension of an existing tender. I do not understand the reason for it because it was the first time that the Department of Education moved into this space.

MR. GILBERT: I think I might have all the details. Keep talking.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Go ahead.

I know it is the first time that the Department of Education occupied this space in the Remax Building on Newfoundland Drive. I am wondering now if it is a case where the Department of Public Works had this space rented and nobody was in it, or was there somebody else who moved out and the Department of Education was put into the space? When the Minister gets a chance to get all his details here he might get the Public Tendering Exemption Act that it was in. I have it up in my office but I forgot to bring it down this morning. I still suggest that the public tendering exemptions or the Public Tendering Act was broken, because it took so long to report the space being acquired without tender; if the space was occupied in August of 1990, and even if the tender was signed in October of 1990, it was not reported for some ninety days after the tender was actually signed.

In The Public Tendering Act Exemptions, there is also a section that indicates the award date. For that tender the award date was marked the date that the space was taken over, not necessarily the date that the contract was signed or that the lease was signed. The Minister's explanation to me when I asked the question was that it was not unusual to not have it reported in the Public Tendering Act Exemptions Report until thirty days after it is signed.

Now, it would appear that his own Department agrees with the interpretation that I put on the Public Tendering Act, that they have award date marked in their outline here in the book and the award date is listed as the date occupied and not the date that it is signed, according to this particular contract.

I have one other question on the exemptions to the Public Tendering Act: I have noticed that every month they come out lately they are getting thicker. There is no great controversy, I do not think anybody is trying to get around the system from what I can see, but, in particular - the March 1991 book has quite a bit of detail in it and I noticed that the March Book is not so bad. However, I think in the January and February books there are tender exemptions from different provincial Crown corporations or agencies dating back as far as 1989, when they were supposed to report within thirty days of issuing the tender.

There were a few exemptions from 1989, a lot from 1990, in the 1991 or late 1990 books and I am just wondering, has the Minister changed his policy or made say the Marine College more aware of the Public Tendering Act? The Marine College was one of the offenders.

MR. GILBERT: We have tightened it up.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Yes, well, okay. Now, maybe the Minister can answer some of the questions on the specific acquisition of the Remax Building lease for the Department of Education.

MR. GILBERT: The hon. gentleman has raised this question several times and I have answered it several times. I thought I had the full details and was going to give him the chronological order of what happened; I thought it was here but it was not.

Anyhow, we shall go back to 1989 when Government changed. At that time the Department of Education was renting space at Atlantic Place and the lease had expired prior to this Government taking office in March or some time in 1989 anyhow.

The then Department of Education came back and asked if they could operate in Atlantic Place on a month-to-month basis? The owners of Atlantic Place agreed, yes, they had no reason to object to it, so we will carry on. The reason the Department of Education did this, as I understand it is, they were not quite sure how much space they were going to need because they were in the process of signing a Federal-Provincial agreement and they did not know how many more staff they would need; it was a comfortable arrangement and they went on on a month-to-month basis and operated without having the lease extended in that way.

Then last year in July the owners of Atlantic Place came to the Department of Education and gave them thirty days to vacate, because with the Hibernia hype they had then arranged a long-term rental for the space that was occupied by the Department of Education. This put the Department of Education at sort of a disadvantage as they had to move by the end of August.

So, then when they came to our realty department and said that they had to go, they were being kicked out of their present facilities within thirty days, you must find a place for us. Our realty division, the division of our Department that looks after it, as there was no time to call a public tender, went out for proposals. They obtained three proposals and the one that was finally decided upon was the space in the REMAX building and they went for it. The Department of Education moved in there, I think it was the first of October.

Now as to the niceties of the Public Tendering Act, the people in my Department have told me that yes, they lived within everything that was done because the Department of Education was operating in Atlantic Place on a lease that had expired some two years before and had gone when the hon. Member's government was there and they had operated on that month-to-month lease. So, the reporting of the exception - and when I asked the question, why was it not reported at the time that the transaction occurred, I was told that it did not have to be until such time as the new lease was signed for the two year period, you know, the exception to it.

Now, I do not know what else the gentleman asked about it but that is basically what happened. I will now say to him again as I have said several times in answering the question, it has not changed any - but what I will do is I will ask the ADM of Administration if he could give the chronological order of just exactly what happened. I can either table it in the House for the gentleman or we will mail it to him so he will have it, to put his mind at rest. Because if the gentleman is indicating there was any impropriety, there is none. It was a system that was followed and had gone on from time to time.

As to the thickness of the Public Tendering documents on a monthly basis: I would submit to him that this is maybe because of the fact that we have insisted on the Crown corporations and all the reporting agencies reporting their exceptions where there had been a slackness crept into it and they were not reporting it on a regular basis. This is the reason why now we have said: `Listen, under the Act you must do this.'

Now the other thing I would say to the Member, it is possibly time that the Public Tendering Act be looked at. As the policy of this Department, I would say if he wants to have a question to ask me next year ask me: Did you look at the Public Tendering Act (Inaudible)? It is one of the things that I think should be looked at. It has been there 1975 or 1976. It came into being, it was born in a hurry, if I remember. I think it was Judge Mahoney who put the thing together, and I think there are some inequities in the system that should be tidied up now and maybe it is time that we have a look at a new Public Tendering Act for the Province.

But I do not know why the thickness of it other than in the fact that we are enforcing the rules that are there and asking the Crown corporations to report, where they were not doing it before.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) -

MR. CHAIRMAN: Excuse me, Mr. Aylward. Your ten minutes is up. I would remind the Members of the Committee that everybody on our Committee has had the opportunity to ask questions of the Minister on at least one occasion. I would recognize Members who wish to question the Minister only if I see a hand being raised. Mr. Aylward has informed me that he wanted to ask one more question of the Minister. In view of the fact that I had not seen another hand raised prior to this I will grant him the privilege of doing that.

I would like at this time to officially recognize Mr. Glen Tobin the Member for Burin - Placentia West. When I say I recognize him I do not mean that I recognize him as a questioner but just that I recognize him to the Chamber. I would like to remind, Mr. Tobin, as well as all other members that our Standing Order 86(b) states: "Any member of the House who is not a member of a Standing Committee, may, unless the House or the committee concerned otherwise orders, take part in the public proceedings of the committee, but he may not vote or move any motion, nor shall he be part of any quorum." What the Chair has been doing is allowing Members who are coming here as visitors to ask questions but it would only be at the leave of the Committee. So, if any Committee Member has a question to ask the Committee will be given preference.

I think Mr. Tobin has stated that he has a question he would like to ask. That is my understanding. Is that correct, Mr. Tobin? Do you have a question you would like to ask the Minister?

MR. TOBIN: I have a couple of district questions I would like to ask the Minister.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Now, we have gone from a question to a couple of questions. I will go back to the Committee and when the Committee is finished or wishes to give you leave the Chair will entertain your questions.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, if I could have leave, it will only take a couple of minutes and then I will (inaudible).

MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, we will go to Mr. Aylward first.

Mr. Aylward.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Just one short question on the Public Tender Exemptions: The reason for going without a tender on this REMAX Building: in your book it says lease renewal extension, renewal of existing lease in accordance with Minute of Council 1876 '90. If this is a new space, why are you renewing a lease? That is my main question.

MR. GILBERT: I have explained to you why we were renewing the lease. The situation occurred because the Department of Education were occupying a space at Atlantic Place and the lease had expired so they renewed it on a month-to-month basis with the same existing lease. It was to accommodate the Department of Education who wanted to keep the space and they did not know how much space.

So, what they did when they were forced - normally there would have been a tender call for the Department of Education to replace what they were occupying at Atlantic Place, but because of the fact that the owner found a person to lease the space occupied by the Department of Education who had a one-month lease, he had no obligation to them other than to say that you are now kicked out as at the end of August. Then there was a great hue and cry and the Department of Education came to our realty's division and said they have to have space in a month's time. There was no time to go to tender, so we had to go to proposal. We asked for three proposals - we received three proposals. The decision was made to lease REMAX, so, as I say, the niceties of The Public Tendering Act and what was included in there was the extension of the existing lease the Department of Education had with the owners of Atlantic Place and it had been operated on a month-to-month basis for maybe a year, I do not know.

MR. R. AYLWARD: So, the REMAX contract is the same as the Atlantic Place contract? That is the renewal. If you are going to renew a lease you are going to get the same lease.

MR. GILBERT: Basically, I think it was.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Can we get a copy of both leases?

MR. GILBERT: I can ask them to find that out for you.

MR. R. AYLWARD: They can be tabled.

MR. GILBERT: Oh, yes.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Can we get a copy of Minute of Council 1878 '90?

MR. GILBERT: No, there will be no copy of the Minute of Council. As the Member is aware the Minute of Council copy will not be tabled, but I am sure he is aware of that.

MR. R. AYLWARD: So, we shall have a copy of both leases before the Committee passes everything I would imagine?

MR. GILBERT: No, I do not think you will.

MR. R. AYLWARD: We could.

MR. GILBERT: Well, you could, okay, but it might be a while.

MR. R. AYLWARD: It might be a while before it is passed in that case.

MR. GILBERT: All right.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Does the Committee give leave to Mr. Tobin to ask a couple of questions?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Sure.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Do we have to give leave for that? I thought the Member had a right to ask questions.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member has a right to ask questions unless the Committee wishes him not to. It is stated quite clearly in the Standing Orders.

Leave has been given, Mr. Tobin.

MR. TOBIN: You do not have to bother with the Standing Orders for the questions I have. I have a question for the Minister, and we have chatted about it before, basically. First of all it is dealing with the bridge in Marystown that the Minister no doubt is familiar with. If work is going to be done the bridge has to be closed down to do the work and I do not think there is anyone who disagrees with that, Mr. Minister.

What the question is - and I ran into it on the weekend when I had some meetings there, particularly discussions with the councils, and I am going to be having more; they will probably be requesting a meeting with you, by the way, on the issue - is the possibility of having some sort of a walkway constructed there in that general area while the bridge is under construction. That is probably a technical question, Mr. Minister, and I realize that you probably need to consult with your officials. But it is going to take some people approximately twelve miles. If you are looking into September, you know, and it is only across the bridge and you are to the churches, the malls, the supermarkets and everything else within a matter of minutes in terms of walking.

But I was just wondering if it was possible - and granted there are going to be times during the construction of the bridge that it may not be possible for people to walk there. But I will just leave that with you and see if you can give me sort of a response as to what your position is on it.

MR. GILBERT: Well, we have already discussed that with the Marystown Town Council, they were in, before the decision was made to put the bridge there. That is one of the things that they were concerned about - what would happen during the construction period and the twelve miles that people would have to drive. Now, the point that we made to them then, and I checked as a result of your question to me the other day about it, and what our people are concerned about, once you are into construction of the bridge it would be virtually impossible to guarantee the safety of the people if you put in a walkway. The cost of putting it in safely would be prohibitive. I mean if we are to get into that, how do you have safety - in any construction project you try to keep people away from it. So if we are trying to construct a bridge and you have a walkway for pedestrians there it could cause some problems. So I really do not think it is possible but I will ask my people to have another look at it but I would not hold out too much hope.

MR. TOBIN: Well, I am going to be meeting with the councils tomorrow evening as a matter of fact, so I guess I can advise them then that you are taking a look at it and at least -

MR. GILBERT: Yes, but I mean, tell them that there is not too much hope and there is the safety factor. All you have to do is just look at it from a practical point of view. When you have any construction project on the go how do you guarantee the safety of people and kids who are walking, and stuff like that? So it is -

MR. TOBIN: I know what you are saying there. But I think that it is possible if the walkway is put there that it can - again I do not know - but I have spoken to some engineers, I have not spoken to safety people. But to some engineers who told me that indeed it is possible for the walkway to be there.

MR. GILBERT: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: It may not be accessible at all times while construction is taking place but I do not think you will have twenty-four construction on the bridge and things such as that. So I think that after hours and during weekends - I really think, Mr. Minister, that if there is any way possible, and there is a way possible from what I have been told, that the walkway should be put in place there.

I know it is probably the advice you are getting and no doubt I realize, I am aware, you are getting that advice. But from what I have been told it is quite possible to put a walkway there without getting into too much cost. And the walkway would not be always open to the public. There are times it would not available to the public. But on weekends there may not be construction, and after hours and things such as that. And it is important to the people of that area that it be done if it is at all possible.

Having said that - and I know you are looking at it - I have one other question. The last call I think I received last night was from South East Bight. They are wondering when you are going to be travelling down, if you will be travelling, or if your officials will be travelling, and if you could give me some sort of a ballpark figure of what date you would be in a position to do it? If you cannot do it I am sure they would not mind your Deputy or other officials from your Department taking a boat and travelling down.

MR. GILBERT: Mr. Chairman, we have had a couple of meetings set up with the people of South East Bight. For one reason or another we could not get there but I have asked my Deputy to arrange another meeting. If they want to come in to see us, we are open. I do not know when we will be going. The service is going to be put in place by April 12 next year. But I would not hold out that it would be in the immediate future that we will be going to have a meeting with them. But we are certainly open to have a meeting with them in here.

MR. TOBIN: Well, if you cannot make it yourself would you be able to arrange for your senior executive members to visit South East Bight?

MR. GILBERT: Not really. I am going to leave that to the decision of the executive.

MR. TOBIN: Okay then, and I will leave that with you. Would you be able to advise me within the next few days as to what your position is?

MR. GILBERT: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Okay, I appreciate it. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Tobin.

Mr. Short.

MR. GILBERT: We have already had people down there by the way.

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible).

MR. GILBERT: They are not going (Inaudible).

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHORT: A couple of questions, Mr. Chairman, but first of all certainly -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. AYLWARD: They should go.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! Order, please!

Mr. Short.

MR. SHORT: I wanted to pick up on some comments I guess made by Mr. Barrett about the commitment to rural Newfoundland. Certainly the Department this year in my district has shown their commitment and I do not think it has anything to do with politics, but certainly a need in the district. My predecessor of course was the Minister of Transportation as well. That does not mean that there certainly are not needs in the district. I believe I have probably more concrete bridges in my district than anywhere else in the Province. Something like thirty-two concrete bridges. There certainly is a need for some of those to be repaired and I have said to some people that I have as many bridges this year being constructed as Mr. Dawe had in ten years. So there is certainly nothing wrong with that. But there certainly is a need and when that need arises it has to be taken care of soon. The commitment to rural Newfoundland is certainly there.

I had a couple of questions. I remember some years ago - this came up under the - we were talking about insurance a little while back. A few years ago there was some idea being bandied about that we should be able to have better control over people who cancel insurance policies or do not renew their insurance policies. Obviously they are not allowed to be on the road. Has the Department looked at any way of - I do not know - tapping into computer systems with insurance companies or something like that? The system that we now have, there is a lot of concern I know out in the public about people driving around with no insurance policies, driver's licence or whatever it is. I do not know where the idea came from, if it came from us when we were in Opposition or if it came from the Party that was in power three or four years ago. But it sounded like an excellent idea to me. There certainly is a lot of concern in the public about it and I wonder if the Minister could -?

MR. GILBERT: It is certainly a good one and where I came in contact with it first was when I was president of the Newfoundland Automobile Dealers Association. It was one of the things that we used to raise when we presented our annual brief to the Government. It was one of the concerns that we used to raise. Because it would have made our life as automobile dealers - that was in my other career - an awful lot easier if we had that sort of information. At the time, and I have not had it raised to me since I have been the Minister, the Department was saying that there was just no way you could control it.

Because what would happen is that a fellow buys a car, he goes to an insurance company, he gets his insurance policy, he pays his month down, then he does not pay it any more. The policy is cancelled. The maintenance of it and to keep it updated would be just impossible. Now that is the understanding that I was given when I was asking about it as a private individual or as a person who was concerned with it. I am sure that there is still a lot of concern out there but I do not think there is any way that we as a Department can control it for the fact that we cannot stop people from cancelling.

Then, the other thing that I think we might be involved in now is the matter again of privacy between the insurance company and the person who buys the insurance. About why they cancelled it and things like that.

MR. R. AYLWARD: I thought the insurance companies automatically reported now when you cancelled your insurance. I know one of them did on me one time.

MR. GILBERT: Yes, they do I think, they do, but then you go back to them and someone else will report it and then you follow-up and then they have insurance somewhere else and so it is just impossible to control.

MR. SHORT: I am just wondering; it seems to me we are into a computerized system, not just the Department, but certainly companies and I cannot for the life of me see why we cannot have, certainly better control over -

MR. GILBERT: Well I can check it again because it is the first time I have heard of it, but I will certainly have it checked and I will get back to you on it.

MR. SHORT: Okay. I have a couple of questions, very short ones. Going back to the railway property, I guess Mr. Barrett asked this question before, or was trying to get at it. Do we know when the property will be turned over to the Provincial Government?

MR. GILBERT: I would not because that is a question that would be more properly asked of the Department of Environment and Lands, because they would be the lead Department in that. We sit on that Committee I think, purely as an advisory one, but that is a question that would be proper for the Department of Environment and Lands.

MR. SHORT: The other question I had: under the winter maintenance programme, is it my understanding that the change over with the winter foremen and so on, that there was to be an evaluation of some type done at the end of the season, is that what was anticipated?

MR. GILBERT: What has happened with that is that Mr. O'Reilly, the ADM who is responsible for the maintenance programme has done a survey of it, checked it out and talked to every one of the foremen who were involved in that and 73 per cent of them still maintain that they want the system that we put in place last year. They find it is better for them and they are happy with it and he has talked to every one of them over a period in the last two weeks since the season has been over.

MR. SHORT: The last question then had to do with the National Occupant Restraint Programme, and I understand that there has been a fair amount of success in terms of figures for seat belts -

MR. GILBERT: That is one we are very proud of, as a matter of fact. When we started the programme last year there was a lot of concern about the fact that the usage of seat belts had slipped and we were down to a wearing rate of 64.4 per cent, so last year, in September, we signed up with the rest of the provinces under the RTAC Agreement, and we started a campaign. As a result of it, we have brought it up to - the last statistics we had for the end of the year, it was up to 82.2 per cent of a wearing rate from 64.4.

Now what this has done and the important thing about that is that, with the increased wearing of seat belts, there has been a decrease in the number of fatalities, a rather significant one of 29 per cent from 1990 over 1989, which translates into twenty-four fewer persons killed in traffic accidents in 1990 than there was in 1989.

The seat belt usage rate is still up there in the eighties and the unofficial figures we have to the latter part of April show a 30 per cent reduction in fatalities for the corresponding period for this year, 1991. So it translates again into six lives being saved.

When you see the advertisements telling people to buckle up - we think it is well worth it. It is not only the people's lives that we think were saved because of the increased usage but you must take into consideration the savings in the health care system, with the reduced injuries. We do not have the statistics on the number of reduced injuries due to people wearing seat belts. But when you take the rather significant number of fewer people killed which we attribute directly to the fact that more people are wearing seat belts, just imagine the thousands or even millions of dollars I suppose that is saved in health care in people whom we do not have to treat for injuries sustained in accidents by not having the belt.

So it is one of the success stories of last year and we continue to advertise the thing and put it in people's minds that yes, it is important that they buckle up. Like you say, we have gone from 64 per cent to 84 per cent and we are hoping to get to 95 per cent within the next couple of years of seat belt usage. It will be much better for all of us who are driving on the highway.

MR. SHORT: That completes my questions.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Barrett.

MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to get away from the actual Department of Works, Services and Transportation and direct some comments and questions to the Public Service Commission. I understand that the Chairman of the Public Service Commission I guess through the Minister - I do not think it will be an area of policy, it is more about programmes and details about programmes.

I am aware that the Public Service Commission for a couple of years now has an affirmative action for disabled adults, trying to integrate them and ensure that a fair number of disabled adults are employed within the Public Service of this Province. I guess as one who has been actively involved in equal opportunities for disabled and disadvantaged adults in this Province, I think last year there was probably some fifteen disabled adults working with (Inaudible) Departments or agencies within the Government service. I am looking at the estimates for the Public Service Commission and trying to determine whether the money is voted for it this year. But it looks like it is probably under the Human Resource Services division because I think that is a Federal-Provincial programme. I notice that there is revenue from the Federal Government and I guess that is the only reason that the Federal Government would be financing anything within the Public Service Commission.

So I would like for the Chairman through the Minister to update us on that particular programme and how it is going. Are we on target in terms of the objectives of this particular programme? Will the present layoffs within the Public Service have any affect on this programme? Are the unions cooperating in terms of this affirmative action? So these are some of the questions that - I do not know who is going to answer them. I guess the Minister can decide (Inaudible).

MR. GILBERT: Well, I would ask Mr. Pike to possibly answer that because it is a technical question.

MR. GILBERT PIKE: Yes, thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to provide information with respect to this programme.

As Mr. Barrett knows, the history of employment of people with disabilities in society generally and certainly in the public service has not been good. Indeed, in 1989 a survey was done within the Newfoundland Public Service and only thirty-four people, who were identified out of the 10,600 then employed, who viewed themselves as being disabled and being employed in the Newfoundland Public Service.

Beginning last year there were fifteen positions created specifically as avenues for entry of persons with disabilities to the Public Service. These were identified in various departments of Government and the plan was that the fifteen positions would be created and fifteen individuals recruited, which happened through public competition, and at the end of one year the individuals and the positions they were in would be evaluated, and if deemed appropriate would be made permanent. Quite a number of that fifteen have now been made permanent. Indeed, we have funds provided. Of course, when the position is made permanent the person would go on the staff of the particular agency or department and then the salary unit which has again been provided is freed up to provide for the entrance of another person. Within the fiscal year 1991-1992 another fifteen will be recruited through that process and there has been good cooperation with the union with respect to this matter. The plan is that these fifteen positions would be maintained as an avenue of entry for disabled persons only. The disabled persons, once employed in the Public Service, of course, would have access to all competitions so that if the person became employed in a regular position, the position left would then be vacant and be the avenue for another disabled person to be employed.

So, it has worked extremely well with the cooperation of the Department and as Mr. Barrett has indicated with the Union as well.

MR. BARRETT: Yes, I am aware of the programme and I am pleased that it is being carried on and I guess I also would like to compliment the staff that is involved in this type of programme like the Public Service Commission. I think the person providing the leadership there is a person himself who is disabled and I know that he has shown a great sensitivity to the programme. I have met some of the employees who are involved in the programme here in the building and some of the people that I have been associated with over the years and have provided training programmes for two or three years ago. I think in this society today we hear a lot of negative things but as a Member of this Committee today I think it is deserving that the Public Service Commission and the people - I know that the Social Services Department and other Departments of Government have been involved in this programme - involved be complimented, I think it is one of the positive aspects of what is happening in our society today for the people who are disadvantaged and disabled. I am hoping that people like Mr. Pike in their future considerations, even thought it may be a restraint program, I compliment you on being able to maintain this particular program.

Next, I would like to get back to the roads part of the thing. I would like to get some update on, I think it is probably part of the ERDA agreement, when the road from Whitbourne to Hearts Content, which I think is badly in need of resurfacing, and I heard some rumours this was suppose to be done next Summer, so probably I can get an update as to whether that is going to be part of a new agreement?

MR. GILBERT: I do not think it is under the new agreement and it would then be considered a priority based under our local roads thing. It is like many other roads in the Province that, as the Member for Kilbride referred to, a bad paved road is worse than a good dirt one, so that is one of the ones that was done some years ago. As the Member is aware pavement has about a twenty year life and when it starts to break up we have to try and have the money in hand to do the projects as the road reaches the end of its useful life, otherwise it becomes much more expensive to do and more of a hazard to drive on. I am sure the people in my Department know the road the gentleman is talking about, down the Trinity Shore there, and it will certainly come up on a priority basis. Of course that is a budgetary decision for next year so I cannot tell him what is going to happen.

MR. BARRETT: The other question, I guess, is again in terms of planning and I guess to alert the officials within the Department. As you know the Bull Arm site is in my district, in the area between Sunnyside and Arnold's Cove, and I note that recently there is a tremendous increase in the traffic flow in that particular area. Is there any intention to do any upgrading of the Trans-Canada, is there going to be an off-ramp? I have not seen the plans and I have some concerns about the safety and the parking of cars on the side of the road. The traffic is just tremendous. I think we now have only about 200 or 300 workers but wait until we get up to 2000 or 3000. I know there is a study being conducted so probably the Department may be waiting until Knight and Associates complete their study. Has the Department asked the Offshore Development Fund for any funds to improve the transportation system as it directly impacts that part of my district?

MR. GILBERT: Our Department has been in contact with the developers and as the project is completed they will have to conform to the normal safety standards for exit and entry to the Trans-Canada and it is being discussed. I guess you will be hearing something in the not to distant future on that, before it reaches the crisis stage.

MR. BARRETT: I just wanted to alert you to the fact that there is such a tremendous increase.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member's time is up.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Continue, Mr. Barrett.

MR. BARRETT: I brought them coffee earlier so I anticipate their co-operation.

MR. R. AYLWARD: You did not get me any.

MR. BARRETT: The other thing I would like to say as a positive thing is the renewal of the driver's licence policy and the fact that people can go to the banks for their renewals. People in my District see that as a great asset even though we lost the Motor Registration Division in Clarenville which used to serve as part of my District. The feedback that I have been receiving is that they do not miss the Motor Registration, now that they can go to the bank it is just as good.

I think one of the biggest problems is the retail sales tax, and we are working on that. Tonight, I shall have a question for the Minister of Finance in terms of how we can better facilitate the paying of the retail sales tax and some of these fees that are necessary for the renewal of licences. I think we need them but I think it is positive that the people in Arnold's Cove and Whitbourne can go to the bank now and get their renewals.

MR. GILBERT: I think it is positive for the whole Province. One of the things I am glad you bought up is the matter of fees again because I indicated to the gentleman from Kilbride that there was a $1.25 charge but I have since found out that actually the charge goes from 95 cents to $1.25, depending on the institution. All the various institutions have their various charges for this type of transaction so, if you go to some of them you can get it done for 95 cents and some are as high as $1.25 but it is in the dollar range. I do not think we were out of line. So, it is almost the same price as to mail a letter so I thought I would pass along that bit of good news.

MR. R. AYLWARD: It does not cost $1.25 to mail a letter.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: Well, Mulroney is bad but he has not gone that far.

MR. BARRETT: That is the end of my questions at this particular time.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Barrett.

Mr. Aylward then Mr. Winsor.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Seeing that the Minister brought up the charges at the bank it is interesting to note that although some of it might range as low as 95 cent, since the Minister introduced this some six or eight months ago or when he talked about it at our last meetings last year, there have been increases. I mentioned at the time and I mention again that he has lost control of the charges. If there was some type of control that his department had maintained it would have been even better but just as he has announced it it has increased some 25 per cent already in less than one year. There is a problem. I know that $1.25 is not a big fee. If there is a convenience there people will certainly pay it. But still again, it could be $25 next year. You have no control.

MR. GILBERT: They could then use the mail. I mean this is put in as an extra convenience for the people. People who live in Stephenville now do not have to go to Corner Brook, line up and spend $6 on it -

MR. R. AYLWARD: They never did.

MR. GILBERT: They can do it through their bank or they can mail it in. It is there as a convenience. This is why this was introduced. I think, the Member will remember when it was introduced it was put there as another convenience for the people who live in rural Newfoundland.

MR. R. AYLWARD: I hope it works. It probably will but I just wanted to say to you that we still do not have control over the cost of it.

I just want to move along to another Division of the Minister's many-divisioned Department, and that is the Pippy Park area which operates under his Department also. From some of the statements that are contained in the 1989-1990 Report of the Pippy Park Commission, I just wonder if there is going to be a Pippy Park in the next four or five years? When you read some of the statements talking about the three pond barrens: `This area, however, is subject to vandalism and littering et cetera. The Commission has suffered immensely in this area and is unable to provide control service to the Park due to budgetary cuts, park patrolman have been reduced from five full-time to one seasonal person.' That is one statement that concerns me in the Pippy Park Commission's Report. There is another statement when you move on to page fourteen in the report. It says that: 'the grant in lieu of funding has remained at the $500,000 to $600,000 level. This level of funding does not keep up with the inflationary or salary increases over the years.' That again is causing a big problem. I am not suggesting only the Minister. From looking at the figures, certainly we were a part of the problem that has been created, but I did not read it in any of the reports before. One of the other statements here says that staff has been dramatically reduced in numbers, however dollars continue to out pace funding levels. Since 1980 the Commission's maintenance and operational staff has been reduced from twenty-five full-time to thirty seasonal, and the Commission is having a big problem with that.

The Commission also says: the Commission has had to cut back on the level of services to the public, in areas such as park patrol and garbage cleanups which is certainly a big problem in all areas. I guess, we should be trying to promote garbage cleanups now in this day and age of environmentally aware people. It says all of these things have to be curtailed as a result of cutbacks.

It also says here: the state of the Commission's equipment, buildings, ski trails, hiking trails, and other infrastructure, is a major cause of concern. Mr. Chairman, when a Commission writes statements like that in its report, it certainly would give me cause to have concern, if I was the Minister of a Department that operated this Commission or operated Pippy Park.

The main question I would like to ask the Minister - it obviously seems as if the Government does not have the money to handle Pippy Park. They are not doing the job required at Pippy Park right now, according to the Commission's report, and have not done so for some time now, including a part of the time of our administration I would say. Is the Government now considering transferring the Pippy Park administration to a regional government system which is being planned for the Northeast Avalon? Is the Minister's Department considering transferring responsibility for Pippy Park to that regional government?

MR. GILBERT: I will just fill in for a minute and then some of the details, you could ask Mr. Balram if you wish.

Just to acquaint the gentleman with Pippy Park, because I am sure he had sort of indicated that in his government it was a thing that was forgotten about too. Since it came under this Department, I have expressed some concern and I have tried to find out exactly the reason for Pippy Park and why it was there. As I understand it, back in the 1960s the Pippy Park was set up initially to provide a bank of institutional land around this building here which would embody Memorial University, and this building and would provide for future expansion for a Government headquarters facility as well as the university. It was set up and governed by a Commission which was going to be made up of a member appointed by the city, someone from the university, someone from the Province, and then someone from the Pippy Family, because initially it was a grant from the Pippy Family that got it started, hence the name.

I agree with the member, that during that time there has been some expansion, but the amount of financing that the Government has put into it has remained pretty much the same. Now, it needs to be looked at, and one of the recommendations that this Department is making, as a matter of fact, is that we look at the overall structure of Pippy Park as to just exactly where we want to see it go. Should we as a Province be more involved in it or should the city become more involved in it? What do we want to do with the institutional land bank that is here? Again, as the Member is aware, there are many other concerns. The Ring Road is now causing some concern to the environmentalists in their concern with Pippy Park. I would like to correct one little thing the Member referred to, and that concerns the headquarters of Pippy Park. During the past year we arranged for the Pippy Park headquarters to be moved to the famous Mount Scio House, so I think that was a very positive move and shows again the commitment that we as a Government have in the concern we feel for Pippy Park. I agree there is something we have to look at, and it is one of the recommendations that I am making, that over the next year we do look at the make-up of Pippy Park, what is the Government policy, and where is it going to go.

MR. R. AYLWARD: The reason I mentioned the regional Government taking over the operation of Pippy Park, one of the reasons anyway, is we have heard over several years, and particularly lately, from the City of St. John's that they are paying a lot of fees, and residents outside the City of St. John's who use the facilities, or who work in the city, are not paying the same tax structure, or getting away free. Now, what I would suggest is by Pippy Park being part of a regional Government, and Government taking over responsibilities for snow clearing and everything else in the Pippy Park area, which is the University, Confederation Building, and Howley Building areas, is that it would be one way for the region to pay their fair share of taxes, and that is the reason I suggest it to you.

MR. GILBERT: We will be looking at Pippy Park but I do not foresee it being included in any regional Government at this time. I think it has to be looked at and I will take the Member's suggestion.

MR. R. AYLWARD: There was another report a little while ago. I attended a meeting, it must have been two weeks ago, called the ATVs Dealers and Users Association, or something like that. There was a prominent ATV safety supporter involved it in, Glen Davis, but there were also others involved. I noticed an article in the paper about a certain petition that is being collected. The Minister earlier today, and rightfully so, said they spent some extra money on trying to promote the use of seat belts. He should have done it because we were not wearing them as much as we should. Does the Minister not consider ATV safety to be similarly as important as seat belt use because there are a considerable number of accidents on ATVs lately? There have been, over the last four or five years, several deaths involving ATV accidents. There are very few regulations and no training required that I know of for the use of ATVs, I mean regulations that the Department of Transportation would ordinarily require for a person to operate a vehicle. Now, these vehicles might not be on the highways, or are not suppose to be, but quite often they are. For a person to have a license to operate, which you do for a motorcycle which is a modified ATV, or a car, or a four-wheel drive, you need to go through a certain system to get a license, yet the ATVs, which I understand to be over a $325 million business in the Province,

per year, there are some 60,000 or 70,000 new vehicles sold every year. I think of some of the statistics like that which are frightening because in my mind the country will not stand very many more of them, something has to be done. I know it is not the Minister's responsibility to look after the environment. I guess wildlife or someone else will have to do that. But as a vehicular use I would say that the Department of Transportation should be responsible for at least regulations for safety use or safety training and is the Minister giving any consideration to some of the proposals that were put forward with the petition?

MR. GILBERT: Oh, yes. There is no doubt about it, the gentleman raises some good points, but just how to cure the situation? I think, basically we have a general budget which we would use for advertising as we do in the seat belt programme and that is the involvement that we have in the seat belt one. I think we have from time to time used advertising to promote safety in ATVs and it is one of the things that we will no doubt be looking at.

Now, as to being involved in the training of the drivers our policy so far has been that it is the responsibility of the operator as it is the responsibility of the operator of the automobile to pay for the instructions that he receives in the operation. The other thing I am sure the gentleman will be aware of is that there are rules and regulations in place now for the operation of ATVs, where they are supposed to be operated and who is supposed to operate them, all this sort of thing, but the only thing about it is the enforcing of the rules when you are sixty miles in the country. I have made some statements on that this year. There is no police force that we know of that could enforce it.

My idea when I was interviewed about it was that the common sense of the people who operate them is the only thing that we can see that can enforce the rules. We can make all the laws we like here in this House but if we do not have facilities in place to enforce them, there is not much point in making them. The ATV, as you know is only supposed to cross the road and not supposed to be on it. Now the environmental aspect of it that he referred to is something that is not in my sphere of influence. He is also aware that the ATV in rural Newfoundland has replaced the pony, so there is a use there. Again, for us to police the rules that we have is virtually impossible because once they go across the public road we do not have a police force that operates in that area.

The training that Mr. Davis is talking about I think is great. The same that I think you have to have training to drive a car or a motorcycle and the person has to pay for it. I have told Mr. Davis that was the route this Department was prepared to go. As far as advertising safety in ATVs we are quite happy with it. We do not have any money to put in a training programme for use with ATVs. This is the responsibility of the person who owns the ATV and this is the policy that we are annunciating at this time.

MR. R. AYLWARD: We support the Newfoundland Safety Council now financially to some extent, our Government does, who provides training for motorcycles.

MR. GILBERT: Ten dollars per (inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: Yes. But is it not realistic to support a training facility or group to the same extent who would provide training for other recreational vehicles?

MR. GILBERT: No, no because the motorcycles are used on the public highway, and the rationalization that went into the training of the motorcyclists was the fact that they were used on the public highway and we pay so much towards the test or something like that for it but it is not the total amount of the training or anything like that.

We do not at this time envisage getting into an ATV situation because you are into something that we as a Department of Works, Services and Transportation really have no control over other than the fact that we make the regulations, but then once they cross the road - and our regulations are basically that they have insurance for crossing the road and that there is a certain age limit if anyone is caught, but that is up to the Department of Justice anyhow.

MR. R. AYLWARD: By the definition of public highway, you probably have more control than you realize, because a lot of the roads, although they are not necessarily public highways, fall under the definition and these things are being used on some of the back roads and forestry roads.

MR. GILBERT: Maybe they are, but there are regulations that cover them being used. There is no regulation to cover common sense and this is where a lot of the accidents are caused.

MR. R. AYLWARD: But it is kind of hard to depend on a thirteen, fourteen, fifteen year old youngster to have common sense; you have to train them to have common sense and that is the problem.

MR. GILBERT: Yes, and we maintain that this is the responsibility of the parents.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Yes, it probably is.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Winsor.

MR. WINSOR: Yes. Just two or three questions because I know we are getting close to 12:30.

With respect to layoffs in the civil service, the public service, in the event that vacancies would occur now: I noticed in the paper this week there were a couple of jobs posted, would the people who were recently laid off have the first recall to these jobs or is their service terminated in the Province and they would have to re-apply like anyone else? Perhaps we can address that one first.

MR. GILBERT: I will let Mr. Gordon Murphy answer that (inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: No, I think he is talking about the Public Service Commission.

MR. WINSOR: The Public Service Commission; you know there were a number of jobs -

MR. DOYLE: Not the Department of Works, Services and Transportation specifically, the Public Service Commission.

MR. GILBERT: Mr. Pike is here he will answer that.

MR. PIKE: Yes, Mr. Minister. Mr. Chairman, people whose positions have been declared redundant and are laid off because of that go on a re-employment priority list and are eligible for consideration for any vacancy that then exists in the public service.

During recent layoffs, the Public Service Commission referred approximately sixty people to various departments for re-employment under that programme or that policy; indeed, thirty of these people have been placed, now that is in addition to those people who may have bumping rights under their individual collective agreements which they of course exercise according to their desire.

That re-employment priority lasts for varying periods at the present time depending on their seniority in the public service, however, all such employees are eligible for internal competitions for a period of two years, so that, the persons whose positions have been declared redundant and are thereby laid off, are certainly the first people who are considered for any vacancies that occur and these people can then be placed in these vacancies if they are qualified, without competition.

MR. WINSOR: But they still have to re-apply though, once they-

MR.PIKE: They can re-apply for any position for two years. They do not have to re-apply for any position that they are deemed to be eligible and qualified for, they can be referred to the Department by the Public Service Commission for that position. Have I answered the question?

MR. WINSOR: Yes, okay. To the Minister then. In my district there are sixteen communities there which do not have councils, they are unincorporated areas. Of course the maintenance of the roads, particularly on Fogo Island, is rather difficult as the Minister knows due to the fact that there is no fill there, it all has to be crushed. In Stag Harbour, Island Harbour and Deep Bay these roads have been in terrible condition for the last number of years and perhaps this spring is even worse. Could the Minister indicate how much money is in the budget this year for road improvements and construction in unincorporated areas?

MR. GILBERT: I think it is around $200,000.

MR. WINSOR: Two hundred thousand dollars? Total?

MR. GILBERT: That is roads in unincorporated areas for the whole Province.

MR. WINSOR: I have sixteen communities.

MR. GILBERT: Yes. There is a lot more than that.

MR. WINSOR: In my district alone.

MR. GILBERT: I would not hold out too much hope. That is one of the problems that we have, roads in unincorporated areas. Again, with the restraints that we have now, we have $200,000, so it will mean basically that we can only touch the emergencies. When we get more money we will be able to do something in that area. It is one of the things that has to be looked at.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: Is that capital and maintenance -?

MR. GILBERT: No, that is the capital.

MR. WINSOR: That is capital, that is not including maintenance.

MR. GILBERT: No, that is not the maintenance. The maintenance is somewhere in the budget. Do you have any ideas what it is, John?

MR. JOHN O'REILLY: (Inaudible).

MR. GILBERT: Well, there is $70 million in the total budget for maintenance so it would be somewhere in that $70 million that there would be some for the local roads.

MR. WINSOR: My second area is again in road construction - while it is not my district, but it is certainly used by my district - is the road from Stoneville to the ferry terminal. It is in my friend from Lewisporte's district, he occupies the district. But that road has been I think over two if not three years now upgraded to the point that it is ready for the blacktop. The road was finished last year and I see no provision in the announcements that you announced in the House some time ago for placing the blacktop on that road. Is it a priority of the administration to get that road done and would that be included in possibly that trunk road thing in another year?

MR. GILBERT: It shows again the fairness that this Government is showing. The Member for Lewisporte has made many representations concerning that road. I am sure that it concerns you. But again it is a case that we have a restraint Budget. It will be recommended I would imagine by officials next year in the budget but again I cannot make any commitments on it. It will depend on the amount of money that is available. If we can come up with money I assure you it will have a priority but I cannot tell you what the priorities are going to be for next year at this point.

MR. WINSOR: Aspen Cove, Ladle Cove and Branch I would assume would be in the same category.

MR. R. AYLWARD: I have one question and then I will move a motion that we pass all this and let the Minister get back to his busy job.

Last year in the salary details it showed the Minister had two Executive Assistants assigned to his office although I know that he did not have two Executive Assistants, but all the money was spent for that position that was not filled. Where did the other $35,000 go?

MR. GILBERT: We didn't have anyone there.

MR. R. AYLWARD: But you spent the money, that is all I was looking for.

MR. GILBERT: I do not think that position was funded. I think there was only one funded. I think the two positions were there - a carry over from the previous administration.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Executive Assistant $77,200 and there was only one person to fill the position.

MR. GILBERT: I do not think there was any funding in there. I think it was put in as such but there was no funding.

MR. R. AYLWARD: It was in the Estimates, $77,000 for two people.

MR. GILBERT: Oh, yes. There was money in the Estimates but there was no funding for it. Do you have an answer for that, Mr. Murphy?

AN OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. GILBERT: According to the expert witnesses that we have, it was transferred out to pay for other salary positions in the Department.

MR. R. AYLWARD: I see.

MR. WINSOR: I have one quick question if the hon. gentleman is finished. On page 70 of the Estimates, Section 5.2.02, the provincial revenue for last year for the Queen's Printers was revised to be $300,000, this year it is in the range of $1,200,000. What accounts for such a difference?

MR. R. AYLWARD: Spreading all the propaganda that Clyde Wells wants.

AN HON. MEMBER: He is not selling that because no one wants to buy it.

MR. GILBERT: There is $800,000 in there to provide for the printing of the revised Statutes, they will be printed, sold and this will be recovered when this is done. That is what that is for.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Aylward was about to make a motion.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Rather than go through all the subheads which would probably keep us here for another six months I move that all the subheads under Works, Services and Transportation and all the subheads under the Public Service Commission be moved as presented.

AN HON. MEMBER: Seconded.

On motion, under the Department of Works, Services and Transportation sub-heads 1.1.01 to 5.3.02 inclusive, carried.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I thank all hon. Members of the Committee. I most respectfully thank them for the hon. manner in which their questions have been asked today. I thank the Minister as well for replying in kind. This has been a meeting that I took great pleasure in sharing both from the quality of the questions and the quality of the answers. I would like to thank the Minister's officials as well. I thank Ms. Duff, the Clerk of our Committee. I would like to thank our Page, Paula, and Mark Vaughan-Jackson from the Evening Telegram for sitting with us for the three hours, and of course I would like to thank Hansard.

The next scheduled meeting for our department would be to study the estimates of the Department of Finance which is scheduled for 7:00 p.m. at the Colonial Building today. Now I do not believe there is any Committee meeting scheduled for the House of Assembly this evening. I will confirm that later on in the House this afternoon, but if I find that the House of Assembly does not have a meeting scheduled, and I believe that to be correct, then we will transfer our meeting from the Colonial Building to here.

On motion, that this Committee do now adjourn.

Thank you very much.