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

MR. CHAIRMAN (Walsh): Order, please!

I would like to welcome everyone this morning to the Estimates Committee for the Department of Forestry and Agriculture. Before beginning I would like to welcome the Minister and his officials. Also I would like to welcome Members of the Committee: the Vice-Chairman, the Member for Humber Valley; the Member for LaPoile; the Member for Fortune - Hermitage; the Member for Green Bay; and the Member for Pleasantville.

Before beginning I would like to just lay down some of the ground rules on the way this particular Committee has worked. Of course this is a committee of the House of Assembly and we will work under the rules that exist for the House of Assembly. So our Standing Orders are in use this morning. I would also like to advise the group attending with the Minister, his officials, that all questions being asked today are being asked through the Minister and by his leave he may, if he so desires, not only seek advice of course but direct one of his officials to answer the question if he feels that is a little more convenient. But just a reminder that all questions are through the Minister.

With that in mind I would like to turn to the Minister, Mr. Flight, for his opening statement. I remind all participants this morning that for the sake of Hansard where our collective voices may not be heard that if we are going to speak would we please identify ourselves first, and then by all means begin with your answers.

The other format we have had is that we have gone ten minutes, Government-Opposition, and in the last hour we have tended to double up the time for the Opposition, Mr. Minister, thus allowing us hopefully to deal with the estimates in one sitting and be able to do it all in the three hour time limit. I might add also that the right to do that in terms of going for a full twenty minutes on occasion is by leave of the Member who would normally have the ten minutes. So if need be we may go back into the ten minute time slot for the last hour as well. We have found that format works very well for this Committee and we have been able to deal with virtually all our estimates within the prescribed time limit.

With that, Mr. Minister, if you would like to have an opening statement, the floor is yours.

MR. FLIGHT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First I should say through you to the Committee that we are pleased to be here to meet the Committee. We are putting ourselves in the hands of the Committee to have our estimates questioned or scrutinized and we are pleased with that process.

Although most Members now have individually met the various officials I should officially introduce them. On my immediate right is Bob Peters, the Deputy Minister of Forestry and Agriculture; on my far right is Dr. Hugh Whitney, acting ADM of the Department and representing the Agricultural side; on my immediate left is Dr. Mohammed Nazir, Assistant Deputy Minister of Forestry and Agriculture, again with responsibility for the Forestry side of the Department; and sitting next, behind me and to my right, is Mr. Bernie McGuire, our Financial Director.

So with that, Mr. Chairman, I do have a short opening statement, I doubt if it is ten minutes, I hope it is not any longer than ten minutes. I intend to read it and that will be my opening comment.

MR. CHAIRMAN: By leave.

MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Chairman, I would like to read a short prepared statement as an introduction to today's discussion of the estimates of the Department of Forestry and Agriculture.

The forest products industry over the past year has suffered somewhat from the recession. Prices of newsprint and lumber have remained under pressure, affecting the profitability of the industry. At the same time newsprint markets are demanding higher quality. I believe our three paper mills are coping satisfactorily with the situation and there are signs that the worst is over for a while. The outlook for 1991 is just about full production in this Province from the newsprint industries.

There are two achievements highlighted the past year in the Forestry side of my Department. One was the signing with the Federal Government a new cost shared cooperation agreement on forestry development for a total of $64.3 million over a period of five years.

This will help ensure a continued investment in improving the productivity of the forest resource. The second achievement was that a new Forestry Act was passed in the last session of the House of Assembly and proclaimed on April 15 of this year. This Act requires my Department to manage the forest on a sustained yield and sustained development basis. it also requires the Department to put in place a comprehensive system of management planning. It also provides a reasonable protection to the land base for forest production. These have always been the objectives and practices of the Department but enshrining these principles in legislation is a major step forward.

Now coming to the Budget estimates before you. The total allocation for forest resource management in 1991-1992 is slightly higher than the previous year. However in a number of areas the allocation of funds is lower as compared to last year. For example, forest inventory last year included a considerable amount of work in Labrador. That work was done as a result of an amendment to the previous forest resource development agreement. With the completion of that work this activity will be scaled down.

Similarly the reduction in the insect control programme is a response to reduced insect infestations. On the other hand, expenditures on silviculture development have increased by almost $2 million as compared to the previous year. Similarly expenditures on forest enhancement have been almost doubled.

The biggest programme in 1991-1992 will be the silviculture programme. Most of this programme will be carried out under the Canada-Newfoundland Cooperation Agreement for Forestry Development which was recently signed. A smaller portion will be directly funded by the Province. All the usual activities will be carried out: seedling production, planting and thinning, as well as site preparation and stand reclamation. Stand reclamation involves cleaning all the dead, broken and dying trees from a site. We plan to thin about 7,000 hectares and plant approximately 4,000 hectares of current cutovers. In addition some 2,000 hectares of backlog area will be planted. These reforestation efforts will require the production of 8 to 10 million seedlings per year. Under the Labrador Development Agreement operational trials will be conducted which will include: site preparation, equipment trials, direct seedling, with various species on different sites, planting trials and a fire rehabilitation study.

The estimates show that the Province will continue its forest worker training programme again this year. This is done through the Newfoundland Forestry Training Association which is an incorporated, non-profit association dedicated to the training of productive forest workers in Newfoundland and Labrador. The other two members are Abitibi-Price and Corner Brook Pulp and Paper Limited.

The Private Woodlot Management Programme, which has been operating in the western part of Newfoundland, will be extended to the eastern part of Newfoundland as well. The programme has three objectives: to encourage landowners to become actively involved in wood lot management; to create additional employment opportunities and to improve the long term financial prospect of woodlot owners; and thirdly, to promote and foster an appreciation and an understanding of forest management principles. We believe that by improving the productivity of the private woodlots the Department can increase the production of wood in the Province as well as employment opportunities for owners of the woodlots.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Carry on, Mr. Minister, do not be concerned with the time.

MR. FLIGHT: While the insect infestation has declined considerably in the Province there are still pockets of hemlock looper and spruce budworm. Of course, as the hon. Members will know, this week I announced that we did not expect and will not be carrying out an aerial control programme this year. However, intensive surveys will continue to monitor the situation.

Under the forest inventory programme the inventory work in Labrador will be substantially completed and work on the geographic information system for the rest of the Province will continue. The Labrador work consists of a compilation of an inventory of Labrador forest resources using satellite imagery, conventional aerial photography and large scale digital photography.

My Department will again be helping in the Newfoundland sawmilling industry through considerable research and development on harvesting operations, improved utilization, improved efficiency of sawmills, and promoting the forest industry in Labrador. A number of innovative fire protection concepts will be tested in our firefighting organization.

This year's budget allocation also included $1.3 million for access road construction which is now a totally provincially funded activity. In the past this was funded through the Canada-Newfoundland cost-shared agreements, since the roads programme is now totally provincially funded this allowed the Department to increase expenditures on silviculture and other areas in the new Canada-Newfoundland Cooperation Agreement for Forestry Development.

Mr. Chairman, in agriculture we are also faced with challenges that the whole country must face. The recession and increased competitive situation are putting pressures on all Canadian agriculture that were not there a few years ago.

Our industry in this Province is expanding and still needs considerable development assistance to reach its full potential. Cash farm receipts have fortunately shown an increase for 1989 to 1990 of $800,000 from $58.5 million to $59.3 million. The majority of this comes from the livestock sector, $43.3 million coming from the livestock sector with the remaining from crops and the crop value is $8.7 million. In the livestock industry, dairy, poultry, eggs and hogs have been the predominant commodities.

Our fur industry which increased rapidly in the late 1980s faced a world-wide price drop in 1988 which only recently seems to be improving through increased prices and demand for silver fox.

Though we remain an net importer of food products we are self-sufficient in fluid milk, eggs, and export blueberries, partridge berries and furs. We have recently released the Task Force on Agri-Foods Report which gives numerous recommendations on the future growth potentials in this Province's agri-food industry. A senior review committee is looking over the document and will be reporting to me shortly.

Agriculture in Newfoundland and Labrador will benefit from the new Canada-Newfoundland Comprehensive Labrador Subsidiary Agreement. New ways to develop agriculture activities are being examined in the hope of broadening the economic base of that area.

In closing, Mr. Chairman, I would like to say that even in times of economic difficulty we are constantly working on ways to improve and expand the economic activities in agriculture and forestry for the benefit of all the citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Now, Mr. Chairman, that is an overview of the activities of the past year and our expectations for the coming year in the Department of Forestry and Agriculture.

I should say to my officials that I am sure I read it exactly as they wrote it but it does in my opinion give a fairly comprehensive overview. You say the format is for a representative of the committee to respond, I am looking forward to that. I am looking forward to any questions the Committee may have with regard to the Estimates or any part thereof.

Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister.

We will turn now to Mr. Hewlett, Green Bay.

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Minister indicated that the three mills in the Province appeared to be on solid footing for this year. I would just like him to reiterate or expand on that because I know the mill closest to my District, the Grand Falls mill, has a rumour on the go every second week that Grand Falls will not see it through the next month or whatever and so far the rumours all seem to turn out false and the mill continues on. Do you feel reasonably assured that the three mills and especially the Grand Falls mill are in good shape?

MR. FLIGHT: Yes, we do. You are right, I guess it is a month to month, year to year situation with any mill, given the situation of the international market. There is an oversupply as you know. Abitibi-Price announced long ago, and we have talked about it in the House, that they have to take 200,000 tonnes of newsprint out of the marketplace. We have known for some time that one of the options they had was to shut a mill and, of course, it was in the past week that they identified that mill as being Thunder Bay. It is a fact also that the international union went back to Abitibi-Price and proposed that instead of shutting the mill, I can understand this approach, that instead of shutting the mill and losing 400 jobs and devastating the economy of that given area, one option would be to share the downtime, to take the 200,000 tons out of all the mills across the system. The result of that was there was a task force struck by company and union, from what I understand, a tax force was struck late last week to report late this week on whether or not that was an option that would be pursued. If it is an option to be pursued then the Grand Falls management, the union, and whoever takes part in that has to decide whether or not they are happy with that. I have been questioned publicly about it and my position is simply that it is a decision of the union. If this were a case of downtime, purely to take 50,000 or 60,000 tons of paper out of the marketplace my position would be that Grand Falls has taken its share of downtime. We have had as high as nine weeks back in the mid 80s and in other years. We took 40,000 tons out permanently last year when they shut down number six machine, so the position would be that we should not take downtime under normal circumstances, but if it is an arrangement to assure the operation of another mill and if that is the way the union sees it, and the company goes along, I am not sure if it is for me to support it but I would understand it and if we supported it it would be on the basis that we would hope and trust that if ever our own mill in Grand Falls were to get in the same situation that the international union would give us the same consideration, and we think they would. That is the situation presently with regards to downtime. Up until this situation developed we were reasonably assured, to the extent you could, that Grand Falls would have to take no downtime this year. They have taken downtime as I pointed out. Their order book is full and there is no marketing problem. They have a full order book for 1991 and they have been making a profit this past three or four months, so everything else considered, we do not have reason to believe that Grand Falls will suffer any downtime or any major setbacks this year.

MR. HEWLETT: I have another question, Mr. Chairman.

Recently the forest management office at Springdale Junction had a meeting of local foresters and indicated that of the approximately 300 loggers who earned their living on Crown limits in Green Bay that over the next year 200 of these jobs will be phased out because they are slowing down the rate of timber harvest on Crown limits. The Minister also indicated that there is a significant silviculture program on the go as a result of the Federal-Provincial agreement. I do not know whether or not this is too detailed a question to ask but do you have any idea with regard to silviculture activities in my district and that area because we are fast running out of trees and the word 'green' has become an almost historical description of the district rather than a realistic one?

MR. FLIGHT: The whole Green Bay area is one of the problem areas of the Province with regard to wood supply. The Member knows this as well as I do, and probably better, but it is the old cliche of too many fishermen chasing too few fish. There are too many sawmillers or loggers chasing too few trees in Green Bay. As I understand it local foresters have indicated to the various operators that there will be a cutback in their annual allowable cut to the extent that they can stand it. I cannot specifically tell the Member, but I can get the information and deliver it to him today, as to whether or not there is a silviculture project planned for the hon. Member's district.

DR. NAZIR: I think the hon. Member's question is more related to the loggers company lands. Is that correct? - to the people who are not on Crown lands?

MR. HEWLETT: I talked with the Chief Forester, Mr. Joy, on the phone. What I heard about it on the radio, I could not attend the public meeting, was that there was going to be a cutback in the number of small independents operating on Crown limits, in terms of their attack on timber on Crown limits, so I was wondering in terms of an offset, to what extent would Green Bay be getting any silvicultural activity this year?

DR. NAZIR: In that case, the Minister's reply is correct, that there has been some direction, but in the meantime the silvicultural operations we have designed for that area, will continue at their usual level and we have a plan, which the Minister has which will involve the projects, but the individual projects, at what level, that will be known in the next few weeks.

MR. HEWLETT: So it is not finalized yet whether fifty or sixty people will obtain employment in thinning or planting and that sort of thing?

DR. NAZIR: We can get that information for you.

MR. HEWLETT: Okay, thank you.

MR. FLIGHT: I would say to the hon. Member also, that the company of course, the major silviculture programmes in the Province, are carried out by the company on their lands and we would not necessarily know at this point in time, just what the company's plans are in that whole area on company lands.

On Crown Lands, we are responsible as you know, but the company undoubtedly, would be carrying out some silviculture via thinning or planting in the Green Bay area.

MR. HEWLETT: One other, Mr. Chairman, in this round if I might, the Minister indicated they had just scaled down their inventory operations with regard to Labrador especially, and I am just wondering what are the successes, or prospects of success to date?

My general understanding is that there is an excellent supply of timber in the Goose Bay region that desperately needs a harvester of significant size, before stuff just dies of old age. I know during the former administration, there was always an effort on the go to find a pulp mill or a major saw mill operation or something, to utilize forest resources going to waste. Is there any progress in that particular area?

MR. FLIGHT: Not much has changed really. I am aware of the efforts made over the years by the previous administration and we are making the same efforts. We have identified, and the Member is right by the way; there is a magnificent, not unlimited, but a magnificent supply of black spruce in the Goose Bay southern Labrador area, south of the Churchill River.

We have identified and have come to an understanding with a company which proposes to establish a mill in the Goose Bay area that would produce about 25 million board feet of lumber per year. Of course, it goes without saying that we are looking for 100 per cent utilization, so the sawn logs will be exported.

We have come to an arrangement with the company and the ball is now in the company's court in the sense that we have indicated. The concessions, for want of a better word, that we would make, we have co-operated to the extent that we have made a commitment to provide ten years access roads and spending approximately $1 million a year, that will only be done on the basis of need.

Of course if the company only operated one year then (inaudible). We have provided up to $1.5 million forgiveness on RST for capital equipment and that is basically the major concession.

MR. HEWLETT: So you are waiting now for them to say whether it is a yes or no.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes. We understand they are revising their package. That particular company spent a lot of time over the years in researching and doing their thing and we are waiting, really.

MR. HEWLETT: What size of an operation in terms of employment, are you talking about fifty or 100, 200 people or -

MR. FLIGHT: We are talking 200 to 300 people. The mill itself will produce 25 million board feet, I am not sure what the numbers will be in there but then the logging operation, supplying the mill and the shipping and the rest, we are looking at a fairly major - are we figuring on 300 people overall Bob?

MR. HEWLETT: So it is another Come By Chance sized operation?

MR. FLIGHT: Yes. The thing is getting it done; what we are waiting on now, is for the company to actually make the first move.

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That is it for now and you could turn to someone else.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Langdon?

MR. LANGDON: Between Bay d'Espoir and Bishop's Falls there on the northwest Gander River there was a major fire some years ago, and a lot of the old burnt wood is still standing. I was wondering if there were any plans this year to do any major reforestation around that area or to cut down the old burnt timber. A lot of it has been cut down by people burning wood, but there are massive amounts still standing.

MR. FLIGHT: Would that particular land be company lands?

MR. LANGDON: It is company lands, and I understand that there was enough wood burnt there to keep the mill in operation for five years. Glen Petton, who operated the camp at Miguels Lake, moved out of the area.

MR. FLIGHT: The hon. Member would know that Abitibi-Price and Corner Brook Pulp and Paper have, over the years, made a major effort to harvest the budworm infected wood. I am not sure if they harvest fire-kill wood. They do not use fire-kill in the mill, so the only reason they would cut that wood is if it was for site reclamation - if they decide to go in and do a site reclamation. We do not have any plans for a major harvesting. We would encourage any domestic wood cutter desiring a major operation to sell, to go in and cut it, we could probably work out something with Abitibi-Price. It's lifespan is good for four or five years after the fire passes through and you still get good quality lumber, but basically I think the answer is we do not have the resources to go in and to site clear. We did it on the Trans Canada Highway, as the Member for Springdale will know, somewhere in the Catamaran Park area, as a job creation project and it worked really well, but the resources are not there to make a major effort all over the Province.

MR. LANGDON: Last fall, if you remember, as part of job creation, there were a number of people working along the highway to cut brush back from the sides of the road. The areas that have been finished are well done, and obviously there is better vision for people driving there to abstain from hitting moose, but there are still large tracts that were not finished. Are there any plans of having that finished this year?

MR. FLIGHT: That particular programme, wherever it was done in Newfoundland, was done under the auspices of Social Services, they provided the funding. The Department of Transportation has jurisdiction over three or four hundred feet from the highroad. I think that Social Services provides the funding and I guess the Department of Transportation provides the approvals, but it is not an initiative of the Department of Forestry. There has been a debate for a long time because people looking to cut wood on the sides of the roads normally will come to the Department of Forestry on that belief. But at this point in time we have not been involved in those kind of programmes. Whether we should or should not as a Department of Forestry, because they are cutting trees is another question, but at this point in time it is purely the initiative of Social Services in conjunction with the Department of Transportation.

MR. LANGDON: Another question following up on the comments from the Member for Green bay: I was listening and reading the other day some comments where the Abitibi group of companies said that instead of taking 200,000 metric tons out of the system, they have now elevated that to 250,000 or 275,000. I think I am correct in what I am saying. The loggers from the south coast got a letter from their union saying that they would go to work on June 3rd, and they would be guaranteed nineteen weeks of work. I understand, when I was home on the weekend, that that date has now been pushed back to June 17th. It might be pushed back to an even later date, even to July 1st. Could you comment on that?

MR. FLIGHT: No, other than to tell the hon. Member that that comes as a surprise to me. I have had recent conversations over the weekend with all levels of management, particularly with the development in Thunder Bay. My understanding was that it was 200,000 tons production to come out of the marketplace. If they would have closed Thunder Bay, that would have had the effect of taking out approximately 150,000 tons, then there would obviously have been 50,000 tons left to come out across the system. I was aware that the loggers had been notified they would go to work early in June. Was it June 7th?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: Yes. I am not aware that there has been a change in that. The people I talked to over this past week would have been mill management as opposed to woodlands management, but I will follow up on that and find out if that's -

MR. LANGDON: (Inaudible) people over on the coast are thinking about. Apparently they are in contact with the mill because they are anxious to go to work. It looks more like the 17th rather than the 7th.

MR. FLIGHT: (Inaudible) if that is as a result of a late spring, road conditions, as opposed to a decision coming from the mill?

MR. LANGDON: I am not sure. That could very well be but I am not aware of that. But the snow has melted quicker then they had anticipated so probably the roads are bad and that could very well be the case for it. Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Langdon.

I have a quick couple of questions, Mr. Minister. You mentioned in terms of the downtime of the possible arrangements that could be made by the management-union committee that has now been formed to deal with Thunder Bay. I am wondering if you or some of your officials could advise the Committee with respect to downtimes that have been experienced by Abitibi in Newfoundland prior to this. There was a direct reference to one where there was nine weeks. During that nine week period, could you tell us whether or not all Abitibi mills were affected at that point in time? Or was Thunder Bay fortunate enough to keep on producing at that time and we here in Newfoundland bore the brunt of it?

I certainly feel for the residents of Thunder Bay in terms of any downtime that they may experience, or a closure. But at the same time I am wondering if we here in Newfoundland have been carrying the load successively, shutdown after shutdown. If the offer now is being made to not only the workers but to the people of this Province, was that made in the past or are we now, as my grandfather would say, the big warmhearted Irishmen, or whatever, willing to open up and say: well, we will close for two months of the year, which is eight or ten weeks, if need be, and we will share with some other mill in Newfoundland the same kind of downtime so that we can keep Thunder Bay going?

Has your Department done any investigation with respect to the history? I think that maybe the decision that Newfoundlanders may have to make should be looked at in terms of history. I am just wondering if anything has been done that way.

MR. FLIGHT: I am not sure whether the Department has actually done any research, Mr. Chairman, back over the years. But coming from the Grand Falls area myself and having been very closely associated with the mill operation I know it has been a major debate over the years. When downtime came you would hear people saying: are we taking more than our share here in Grand Falls?

I do not know at what point the government would intervene. But certainly the union in Grand Falls would because they are all members of the CPU. But the unity in Grand Falls will certainly be a factor in helping to protect these jobs and in making sure they do not take any more downtime than they have to take. If you were to make that request we can certainly provide the downtime that has been experienced, oh say, going back this past ten years, in the Grand Falls mill and then get a comparison with the downtime that has been experienced in other mills in the Abitibi system across the country.

But you know there is the fact also that in Grand Falls' case, Grand Falls makes a specific type of paper with specific qualities and grades. There are newsprint companies in the world that will not buy anything else but paper from the Grand Falls mill as long as it is available. So in the event of downtime and (Inaudible) oversupply of newsprint, if the company was depending on the Grand Falls type sheet, then certainly it would not make sense for Abitibi-Price to take the Grand Falls Mill out unless for a very short period of time because the mills in Thunder Bay, Iroquois Falls, Chandler, or wherever could not provide the quality of sheet that a major newsprint company in Europe or Germany is buying from Abitibi-Price.

The Thunder Bay situation is different. There is going to be a decision to either close the mill probably permanently and 400 people will lose their jobs and that is the end of that mill. The unions have decided they would ask the company to look at the option of taking the 200,000 tonnes, approximately, out of the marketplace by sharing the downtime equally.

Now, we do not know at this stage if the Grand Falls or Stephenville mill will be affected. Maybe Abitibi - Price will decide to take it all out of the mainland mills because of the fact, which I have just stated, that Abitibi-Price, Grand Falls, have their orders booked for 1990-1991 to their existing customers. The decision the company would have to make is that if they shut Grand Falls for two or three weeks would they be able to supply that quality sheet to the customers of Abitibi-Price?

I would also point out something regarding the issue you raised on downtime. I was privy to a meeting held some time ago where it was made very clear to Abitibi-Price, long before we knew about Thunder Bay, that in the event we went into a downturn in the paper industry with the possibility of downtime because of oversupply, new capacity coming on stream et cetera, it was pointed out very strongly to the company - I am talking about the top management of the company - that we would not expect Grand Falls or Stephenville to take any more than its share of downtime.

This is a very vague answer, I realize, but I can get the specific information if you wish.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister.

One other quick question from myself and then I will certainly move on to one of the other Committee Members, it concerns my own district to a very strong degree.

On Bell Island we are facing a major problem. As Mr. Hewlett mentioned earlier happening in his own district, there are a tremendous number of people now burning wood and the timber stands that do exist on Bell Island are very small. Because the trees are disappearing we are facing very soon, certainly in the next five to ten years, the additional problems that go when you are without trees, in terms of the grounds ability to retain water and all the other factors that go with it, probably preservation of some of the best farmland in Newfoundland as well. Are there any plans this year or is there anything on the drawing board to look at specific areas like Bell Island which may need reforestation for reasons other than for the timber stands for the various mills? Is there anything in place? Maybe you could elaborate on it for us?

MR. FLIGHT: I guess the blunt answer is no, as to our considering reforestation for the purposes that you alluded to. We are concentrating on the reforesting of the parts of Newfoundland that supports the pulp and paper or the sawmill industry. I can qualify that on this basis, we recognize the need that you are talking about, urban forest, community forest, wood supply forest, that kind of thing. We have the capacity by way of seedling production. We really do not have the resources to do as much silviculture work as we want to do on our traditional forests, the forest that provides the jobs in the mills and to the sawmillers and that kind of thing, we do not have adequate resource for that, but we are cognizant of the need and we have cooperated and will continue to cooperate with any community groups. If a community group from Bell Island for instance wished to get into a planting programme to provide firewood forests over the years or urban forests or forests that serve the purpose to control runoff and that kind of thing, we would cooperate on the basis of providing seedlings. We would probably try to do it at a cost recovery but as a Department no, we are not into that, but we are prepared to work with any group or any town that has that kind of need.

MR. CHAIRMAN: As a final question, Mr. Minister, directly related to that - as Chairman I rarely say anything but you hit a couple of things this morning that I pick on and Hansard people do not have to worry about me saying much in these meetings but I duly noted that they wished me to be identified as well.

If a rural development association for example on Bell Island or the town itself or some other organization, were to come forward with a plan where they would, through some other sources find the employees that would be required, am I to understand that the seedlings would be made available either free or at cost recovery?

MR. FLIGHT: Certainly at cost recovery.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Would the Department also provide the expertise to these people to make sure that the job done was a job well done?

MR. FLIGHT: No question. We have the resources, the technicians and the specialists, and we would make them available to help Bell Island or any other community to see that the job would be done right.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister.

Mr. Noel.

MR. NOEL: I always thought we could grow a lot more food in this Province than we do. People who do it seem to do it profitably and in lots of cases they make a business out of it. We seem to have lots of land that is not being used at present. Is there any possibility of making a significant advance in what we can grow? Transportation is a big factor in the cost of agricultural products I would think. It can create a lot more jobs in this Province. I know it is often talked about. Everybody thinks that we should be doing more but nothing seems to have happened very much over the years. Do you see any significant advance in the near future?

MR. FLIGHT: We have made some significant advances in certain commodities. I say to the hon. Member that we have become self-sufficient in milk over the past six or seven years. We are self-sufficient in eggs. We are approaching self-sufficiency in, well that is not quite right, but we are moving toward self-sufficiency in broiler production for instance. Root crop production, vegetables: We do not have, contrary to what the hon. Member just said, we do not have a very big land base in Newfoundland. That is the biggest problem, an agricultural land base to provide land for farmers who can compete, because with potatoes, turnips and cabbage the volume is what counts, I guess. We are at a disadvantage in the sense, and the hon. Member might know this, that the market by and large is St. John's, the Avalon Peninsula. The best potato ground certainly in Newfoundland, and maybe anywhere, is on the West Coast of Newfoundland and there appears to be lots of it in a sense, but under our present rate structures and subsidies to farmers there is a subsidy to move potatoes from PEI to St. John's but there is no subsidy to move potatoes from the West Coast of Newfoundland to St. John's. That is the way it is structured so there are problems.

MR. NOEL: Is the subsidy for potatoes from PEI a federal subsidy?

MR. FLIGHT: A freight subsidy.

A lot of new people have been getting into vegetable production and various other commodity productions. We have a long way to go before we get self-sufficiency in certain commodities. I guess it is possible to give the hon. Member the figures but there is no question that Newfoundland has increased its production of various commodities in the past ten years. We have got to a point where we are self-sufficient in milk, and self-sufficient in eggs. We are moving up the production in broilers all the time. We are not self-sufficient in hog production. There has been a major expansion of the strawberry industry in Newfoundland in past years and I would not be surprised if we may be getting very close to self-sufficiency. Of course there is a narrow window there but there are a lot of commercial strawberry producers establishing and expanding on the present farms. Not far from St. John's we are producing first class celery. We have farmers getting into Chinese vegetables and providing the Chinese restaurants. We are producing broccoli and we have major farms within a fifty mile radius of St. John's, which the hon. Member might be interested in, which when looking at them are miles and miles of turnip and cabbage and they are major, major fields of top grade production. One of the problems also for our farmers is they have to market the day they harvest because we do not have major storage facilities for potatoes and turnip and that kind of thing. That is one of the problems that has been addressed in the task force report. We are getting there, and given the limited land base we have, and the level of support the Province can provide for funding, more and more people are becoming involved in farming and making a good living at it.

MR. NOEL: I know we do not have a lot of land but there is a lot of land that looks to me as if it could produce goods, which is not being used, and you say we are getting closer to even self-sufficiency with strawberries and people grow potatoes and turnips and stuff like that, and seem to make money with it. So I and other people look at this land and all the people unemployed in this Province who you would think could be doing things to grow food. Just in my own district, Brophy Place, in the middle of St. John's now, we are trying to get a piece of land from either the Pippy Park people or the Department of Transportation so that the people from there can have a plot where they can grow their own vegetables. But when you think of all the people on social services and things like that, has there been any talk between your department and the Social Services Department about the possibility of maybe setting up even some Government farms or something where people could be employed productively instead of collecting welfare and doing nothing as they have to now?

MR. FLIGHT: In rural Newfoundland, the initiative is there, it is traditional, the hon. Member for Fortune - Hermitage will know this, and every Member here will know it, that if the initiative is there, every individual in Newfoundland can find a way to grow vegetables. I mean if there was a level of Government support required we would look at it, but in the cases of family plots there is no need for Government involvement. I suppose it is a case of hard work and getting the seeds. Hundreds and thousands of Newfoundland families are indeed growing their own vegetables. One of the problems we have and one of the complaints I get is from bona fide farmers mainly on the Avalon Peninsula who are farming for a living. Harvest time comes and hundreds of little family farms in the St. John's area, or at least on the Avalon Peninsula, hit the market with their produce. It is simply a sideline for them, but they hit the market with their carrots and turnips et cetera, and we get complaints from the farmers who have big investments and see it as a way of life and want to expand their business, but this is undercutting them, and they say we should stop it. This is one of the problems that the commercial farmers are experiencing. But apart from right in the heart of the city, I am not aware of any impediment to any Newfoundland family to grow their own vegetables or at least the kind of vegetables that are easily grown such as carrots, potatoes, and turnips. My own father is 86 years old and up until five or six years ago he produced enough vegetables for all the family. We do not play a role, that I am aware of, in any Government assistance, financially or otherwise. If requested we probably would do so to the extent we would provide technical assistance or advice or brochures or that kind of thing. We are encouraging it to the extent that we have the finances to do it. The livestock producers in Newfoundland, as the hon. Member for Humber Valley will know, would be a lot better of if they could grow their own or buy in the Province their own forage, and we are putting a fair amount of research and money, and again it is one of the recommendations, and we do have the land base, and we find we can produce the quantity that is needed and the quality that is needed if we can get the farmers interested in getting into forage production, and we are encouraging that. We are encouraging people to get into vegetable production and any representation we get to the department from somebody who wants to get into the production of vegetables, whether it be potatoes, celery or whatever, we encourage them to the extent that we have a programme to assist them financially. But again the Newfoundland farmer growing potatoes, for instance, is in a very competitive market. They have to compete with P.E.I., and New Brunswick, whose volumes are major compared to ours. There are transportation advantages for these provinces that depend on vegetable and potato production. But there is also evidence that Newfoundlanders might be prepared to pay a little more for locally grown vegetables.

If you want to see what we are capable of producing - I am not sure if the hon. Member did this or not but I would advise him to do it next fall - right in the St. John's-Avalon Peninsula area, the Food and Livestock Show, it is unbelievable. I doubt if there is a livestock show or a display of vegetables any more attractive and more bountiful than we have at the show. The quality is unbelievable. So there is proof at that Livestock show that Newfoundlanders can produce quality vegetables.

Whether we can produce it in the quantities that would cause somebody to make major investments and get the kind of return that would be needed is another question. But there are a lot of people growing a lot of vegetables and making a lot of money in Newfoundland right now. We are encouraging the expansion of that.

MR. NOEL: See that is the problem that I have. There seem to be a lot of people who are growing a lot and doing it successfully but we still have a lot of land that is not being used. I do not mean a lot in the sense of the percentage of land in the Province, but there seems to be a lot of land that could be used to grow things. But it is just not happening enough, and the kind of impediment I am thinking about - you are saying that there are people who have land and if they have the initiative could be growing more on it. But I am thinking about poor people who do not have the land but they would be prepared to work. They could make their positive contribution to our economy. Is there anything that Government can do with Government land to facilitate that?

MR. FLIGHT: That will be noted, I say to the hon. Member. I know exactly what he is saying. You want to remember this though, that as you drive out through the Goulds and Kilbride and the farming areas of the Avalon - and I do it all the time - and on the west coast - you should drive through Codroy Valley if you want to see open land. And you wonder. This land was cultivated for hundreds of years. Its absentee ownership now - it lies fallow and the fences are falling down. But there are acres and acres of it. But that is private land, that stuff is private. When you drive through the Goulds and see great fields and say: well, why can we not grow vegetables here? I just want to make that point that the chances are that that is private land and for whatever reason - it may be pastureland or it may be land that is just cleared and the owners are not using it.

I can tell you, there was an experiment in Grand Falls a few years ago - and I am just speaking from memory now - where somebody - it may have been the Department of Agriculture at the time - went about a mile outside Grand Falls towards the golf course going west, and developed, set aside, a block of land, and made plots available to anyone who would want to use it and I think they provided fertilizer. It worked for a while but then it just petered off, and this was available for anybody who wanted to go in and get a fifty by fifty foot block and set carrots, turnips, and look after it themselves. First when it started people were very enthusiastic about it. But it seems to me - and I am only speaking from memory - that is no longer a going concern.

But the Member is right. The principle he is espousing is right, that maybe we as a Government could go out and identify some Crown land, clear it and say: come in and grow your own vegetables and we will assist you to the extent we can.

MR. NOEL: Maybe even look at some of this private land to see if we could buy it if it is particularly good land, or expropriate it even if it is just lying there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. NOEL: What is happening with all the land that is frozen around St. John's? That programme has been in place for some time to preserve the land for agricultural purposes. Is there any evidence that it is getting used for those purposes as a result of it being reserved? Is there any new thinking about that kind of programme?

MR. FLIGHT: The only thinking would be is whether or not it would be necessary to take a look at the boundaries again, and whether or not there is land in there that should really come out because it will never be for agriculture. When they established the zone back in the early 'seventies, the government of the day, or the department - just painted with a broad brush and everything was taken into the zone. As the hon. Member knows there have been revisions to the rezoning, periodically, and a lot of land has been removed. It was identified that it did not make sense to keep it in that context.

One of the biggest problems I have today is the desire by people who have land in the zone to have the land taken out of the zone, and it is good agriculture land. We offer $4,000 an acre, we buy that land under what we call a Land Consolidation Programme and the price we pay is $4,000 per acre.

MR. NOEL: Do many people settle for that?

MR. FLIGHT: Oh yes, but less and less; you know that the same land on the private market is worth $20,000 an acre or $25,000, and it creates a terrible problem because you have families in the Goulds for instance, and Kilbride, who now have sons and daughters who are in the housing market to buy or build a house, and they feel they have a right to have their son or daughter build on their farm land.

The purpose of the freeze is to protect the zone, protect the agriculture land, so it is a very difficult situation with which to deal, because people feel that they are -

MR. NOEL: But aside from the questionable land, you know, land that people might argue about on the border line and that sort of stuff, but the good land that is being preserved, is there any evidence that, because it is being reserved it is being used more for agricultural purposes?

MR. FLIGHT: Yes. Most of the land zoned on the Avalon Peninsula, certainly the visible land, Kilbride, Goulds, is by and large dairy, that kind of operation, where you can drive by and there is a great expanse of field and nothing appears to be there, but if you come back three hours later, the herd may be down there grazing; that sort of thing.

Here is what happens: I think last year in the estimates we had $500,000 to purchase lands, $600,000 I think last year, it is down this year by $100,000, it is down to about $500,000 or $400,000, we will get to it when we -

What happens is, we offer that land for resale or lease on the condition of course that it can only be used for agricultural purposes; there is always a great interest in leasing or buying the land to either expand existing farms or to start new ones, that kind of thing so -

MR. NOEL: There is also the land that you have around the city, now being used liked that, being leased or do you have very much that is not being used at all?

MR. FLIGHT: That we own, that the Government has brought back?

MR. NOEL: Yes.

MR. FLIGHT: I cannot be specific, but it seems to me that the Department would not be sitting on very much land. What happens is, if we buy land under the consolidation programme, then as soon as all the paper work is done and everything else, we would immediately advertise publicly and call for proposals on that land, where there is a major amount of interest in it.

The minute it happens you get people coming in wanting to either start farms or expand farms, but the key of course is, that whether there is interest or not, that has been identified; if we bought that land back, it is identified pretty well as prime agricultural land and under legislation and the guide lines, it cannot be used for anything else, so, we would not permit it to be sold for any other reason other than farming.

MR. NOEL: Mr. Chairman, I will pass for now.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Woodford?

MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Chairman, I would just like to follow up now, while it is fresh on the Land Consolidation Programme.

Did you say the total budget was reduced this year? I never looked at it.

MR. FLIGHT: I am letting myself get into trouble by drawing attention to page 135.

Last year we had 600 -

MR. WOODFORD: Yes, land development.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Just as an interjection; if we should be referring to anything from the estimates themselves, for all those who have the books and are trying to follow, the Chair would certainly appreciate your identifying the page and the item number with which we are dealing and that allows everyone to zero in on it quickly and follow through together.

MR. FLIGHT: I understand, Mr. Chairman, and I appreciate your point. Anyway, just for that particular discussion, I referred to the fact that the funding under the land consolidation program was reduced this year and that is indicated on page 135, Land Development.

MR. WOODFORD: Yes, 3.1.05.

MR. FLIGHT: Last year we spent $500,000 in the purchasing of land from farmers under the Consolidation Programme; this year we are proposing to only spend $400,000.

MR. WOODFORD: Where was that land purchased, mainly on the east coast of the Province?

MR. FLIGHT: I would guess, and again I can get the specific figure for the Member, but generally speaking I am pretty confident in saying it was all in the Goulds, Kilbride area, totally on the Avalon.

MR. WOODFORD: Is that programme only applicable now to the Avalon?

MR. FLIGHT: Yes, it is only applicable to the Avalon.

MR. WOODFORD: It is. It is my understanding that there is a clause in those agreements that if the land is ever re-sold, that the person who sold the land in the first place would be reimbursed for the total fair market value at that time.

MR. FLIGHT: We pay $4,000. If the guy who buys it sells it for $10,000 -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: My deputy confirms that that is a fact. Of course what the Member would remember is that it can only be sold -

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister, I was wondering if you could lean forward for Hansard.

MR. FLIGHT: The Member would know anyway, because I am aware of how knowledgeable he is about this particular issue, the land can only be sold by the person who bought it for agricultural purposes. Whether you would get an increase in land value based on farming, that is another thing.

MR. WOODFORD: I do not know how factual this is, but I heard that if it is ever re-zoned or anything like that -

MR. FLIGHT: Yes, right.

MR. WOODFORD: - that can be -

MR. FLIGHT: Exactly.

MR. WOODFORD: There is a clause there that protects the original owner.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes, if the land is taken out of our zone, if the land is bought under our programme or sold by a farmer under our programme for $4,000 per acre, and if five years hence that land is taken out of the zone, commercial or otherwise, then when it is sold the original owner gets the right under legislation to be compensated for the difference in the transaction.

MR. WOODFORD: So it is there now.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes.

MR. WOODFORD: Has there been any thought or suggestions given to the possibility of extending that land consolidation fund to other parts of the Province, mainly the west coast?

MR. FLIGHT: I have not been party to any discussions that would. Again, as the Member knows, the Task Force deals with land on the west coast, and the Task Force recommends that all agricultural land in Newfoundland, recognizing the limited amount of good arable soil there is, that we would look at not necessarily the (inaudible), but certainly protecting the agricultural land whether it is in Cormack, Codroy Valley or St. John's, and they go to lengths to point out that the best land is on the west coast of Newfoundland. But I am not aware there has been any consideration.

I can take note if the Member is recommending that we should look at that, I can take note of it and have it pursued. I would point out to the Member that the problem, of course, is the availability of funds. There are probably three reasons why we are reducing the amount this year. One is the financial situation we find ourselves in, the financial restraints which we are operating under, which is probably the major one. But interestingly enough the demand to sell land has been reduced, and I am told that might be for two reasons: one, we are not advertising. When the Consolidation Programme came in first I am told it was a fairly well advertised programme; we are not doing that. And the other one, this is difficult to determine, but I suspect that with the ever increasing land values in the metro area in the St. John's area, Goulds, and Mount Pearl, people are very reluctant to sell land for $4,000 that they know is commercially worth $20,000 or $25,000 per acre, and they probably live in hope that one day it will be re-zoned and they will get the full commercial value, but it is a difficult programme for the Government to defend, any government, but then again, you recognize that we have to retain our agricultural land base, that we have to protect the land.

I received a note from my officials and they say that the land consolidation programme is approved for the St. John's zone only, we have established that. But it could be expanded if pressure on agricultural land in other areas were to require it. But as the Member probably knows at this point in time that does not seem to be the case.

MR. WOODFORD: Well, the main reason for that programme was I suppose because of the fact that the limited so-called identified agricultural properties in and around the St. John's Metropolitan area were in danger of being chewed up I suppose by urbanization and other reasons. But there is another side to it that should be looked at. As you know we are all first-and second-generation farmers here in this Province. Very few are any more. The main cost of developing a farm - if you look back at the ALFI agreement, if you look back at any other agreements that were signed over the years, regardless if it is the so-called plot or a dairy operation, which is one of the bigger operations - is developing your land and getting it into production.

I suggest - maybe it is something for the Minister and his officials to look it - that it is better. Not because there is, I suppose, a pressure on an area such as this but to look at areas like the west coast of the Province, that has land that has already been cleared. I suggested it to the Federal officials over the years. They were willing to come in and give, say for instance, $400 an acre to clear land, and it will cost the farmer another thousand, but they were not willing to give a farmer $400 an acre to buy already cleared land. It was stupid, for want of a better word, it did not make sense.

They give him $6,000 for instance towards clearing thirty acres of land but here is a fifty acre farm with thirty cleared but they would not give him $6000.00 to buy it. It did not make sense. Didn't then, didn't when I was there, and doesn't today. I do not have to tell you what it is, and how many dollars were spent under the ALFI agreement for that particular reason. Millions! And it just does not make sense. It is over there now. It is one thing to put in an agricultural development zone, it is another thing to police it and it is another thing to get the municipalities involved to police the regulations that keep them in (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: The Member would know better than me in this case, but if the land consolidation programme was extended outside of the Avalon to the west coast - particularly the Cormack area, Wooddale, central, Codroy Valley - I do not where the figure $4,000 per acre came from. I guess it was determined by using land values or whatever. But $4,000 an acre would be exceedingly high for land anywhere in Newfoundland, wouldn't it, outside of the immediate St. John's area where the economic and developmental pressures have driven the land up? But $4,000 would not necessarily - in other words, I guess what I am saying: if the Government were to look at land banking or protecting agricultural land west of the overpass for instance they probably would not have to look at providing $4,000 per acre.

MR. WOODFORD: Well, your budget there for $500,000 now could save you probably in the long term over a period of four or five years probably another, to throw out a figure, probably another $1 million or $2 million in land development. I can see that just in my community at Cormack. The other thing is that if you have a good developed farm of a couple or 300 acres, cultivated, ready to walk in to, you are doing it now in the White River road area, with regards to leasing back to the farmers land that has been surveyed by the Department of Agriculture. It is a good thing. It is in a good area as well. The only thing about that land, it is still not cleared. But you do have pockets of land there that are cleared and people who are willing to sell now, and for a lot less price than what you are going to pay (Inaudible) for 100 or 200 acres of land in here, and some of them could be put into production pretty well overnight.

Because that is the problem. Dairy for instance today is big business. You are talking something like $8,000 per cow unit. So if you have 100 cows on your farm automatically your farm is worth $800,000. That is how FCC banks their figures and makes their recommendations on. That is big business. It is not, like you were saying earlier, fly-by-night operations any more. You have to run it as a serious big business. The land is there, the opportunities are there, and I think that is probably something to look it, just extending that. Because I know there is no blame - I am not casting any aspersions or blame or anything like that. It is just something I had been after my fellows when I was there for years, to have a look at it, and look at the economics versus something short-term.

I would like to get back to the silviculture, forestry part of it. The agreement you just signed stresses silviculture vis-à-vis planting and thinning, you do stress the thinning which as far as I am concerned, I said in my reply, is a good thing. I think that is where we can really gain with the thinning as I have seen some of the examples over the Humber Valley area over the last few years. When would those programmes be let for this year, is there any indication within the next two or three weeks or month or whatever, so that they can get on with their work?

MR. FLIGHT: Most of the work, as the Member would know, except the work on the company limits which they will do on their own schedules, but on Crown lands I am in the process of starting to sign contracts now. We have already called tenders for planting programmes in certain areas that we have identified as where we have decided we will plant. Certain contracts have already been called and I am in the process of awarding contracts for the planting.

The thinning, Dr. Nazir, how soon will we be looking at issuing (inaudible)?

DR. NAZIR: On the Crown Lands, as the Minister has indicated, the contracts for thinning as well as deforestation will be appearing in the newspapers within the next few weeks. One contract he has already signed for 300,000 seedlings. Most of the thinning on the West Coast is carried out by the Corner Brook Pulp and Paper Company under a cost-shared agreement with the Crown. The agreement has been finalized for this year. It is ready to be signed. Once it is signed they will be calling the unionized people to carry it out. Any work on the Crown lands we carry out through the Government union, NAPE, whereas any work on Corner Brook Pulp and Paper or Abitibi-Price, that is carried out by their own respective unions. We are ready to sign with Corner Brook Pulp and Paper, there is a little more work left with Abitibi-Price. So, they are slightly behind Corner Brook Pulp and Paper.

MR. WOODFORD: So, your programme with regards to thinning or silviculture: there was a training programme in last year, I believe, was that 80-20 or something?

DR. NAZIR: The training programme will continue, both companies plan to carry out approximately $1 million each. Crown: last year we had approximately $1 million, this year we intend to spend more than that, we may be in the order of $2 million on Crown. The major thrust last year was on the Northern Peninsula and Bay d'Espoir area, this year we may be extending into a couple of more areas. There were 177 people employed last year in that training programme. I believe sixty at Abitibi-Price Limited, fifty-four at Corner Brook Pulp and Paper, and the remaining on Crown Lands. This year there will be additional workers on Crown, twenty-four to forty-eight more workers, in addition to the 177 that we had last year because it is a 2 years training programme, so the people who were hired last year will continue this year. The people who start again this year they will continue for another year, next year. So, the programme will be ongoing in fact at an expanded level on Crown areas, about the same level of the company lands but at an expanded level on Crown lands.

MR. WOODFORD: Would you at this time be able to identify the other areas that you are talking about outside the Northern Peninsula area where the programme was instituted last year?

DR. NAZIR: We are not quite ready because it involves a lot of planning and talking to the local people, affirming the unemployment situation, talking to the federal people who have to put in most of the money, so we are not in a position to say which areas.

MR. WOODFORD: Was there any thought given to the amount of monies paid? That was a big problem last year. I remember a couple of contractors, one in the Parson's Pond area and one in the Pollard's Point area where there was a big problem with the hourly wage that was paid by the contractors themselves. That was a big problem and I do not know if they overcame it. They must have overcome it after.

MR. FLIGHT: With the training program?

MR. WOODFORD: No, I never heard anything under the training program because that was further North but the silviculture one was carried out at Pollard's Point and the Parson Pond, Cow Hear area.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister.

MR. FLIGHT: It may have been a problem that he become aware of locally but we did not receive, as a Department, or I was not aware of any difficulty or any problem with regards to the level of pay of the contractor. This was an non-unionized contractor I would presume?

MR. WOODFORD: I would say, yes.

MR. FLIGHT: If they were non-unionized contractors then I suppose they would determine the level of wages and the employees would have to decide whether or not they were prepared to work for those kind of wages. Certainly they are governed by the minimum wage but we were not aware in the Department, or at least I was not aware, that there were complaints to the extent that we would have a concern.

MR. WOODFORD: I think what is happening is that some of those contractors are going into it probably for the first time, even the second or third, and they are not bidding big bucks, so what is happening is they get the contract and they cannot afford to pay under the dollars they get. That is the problem we are running into.

MR. FLIGHT: Let me tell the Member, that over a period of two or three years this has probably become the most competitive business in Newfoundland. It is unbelievable. There are a lot of people involved now, particularly in planting, and it is unbelievable the number of people wanting to get into the business and the competition for contracts. The Member is exactly right, I am aware that contractors have got themselves in difficulties because they have bid too low, or they have been trying to access the work, and not having that much experience get themselves in some difficulty. I have talked personally to contractors who have been in this business since we started planting and with new people coming in they say it is getting almost impossible to be sure they will get a job based on the price they tender, because there are new people coming in all the time. The Member is right, it is a very competitive business.

MR. WOODFORD: The contract is let for the Chouse Brook area and they have been in there working. Is there any indication from the contractor when they will, I know it depends on the weather, a lot depends on the weather, but is there any indication when they will finish?

MR. FLIGHT: We are hoping to have the first access by sawmillers into the area by mid-Summer. That was the idea for pre-tendering as the hon. Member knows. Of course, road conditions and weather conditions are all factors and it is easy for something to take two weeks longer than it should have in that kind of situation. We are aware of the need and we are aware of the pressure for sawmillers to allocate in the Chouse Brook area. The pre-tendering and everything else that was done was done on the basis of making that wood accessible as quickly as possible. I remember telling people that we expected to have them in there by August.

MR. WOODFORD: What is new on the Main River besides what I am hearing out there regarding Kruger? Have you had any update from Kruger on what their intentions are for Main River this year?

MR. FLIGHT: Dr. Nazir.

DR. NAZIR: It is my understanding that Kruger plans to harvest their over mature timber in upper Humber first before they harvest the timber in Main River area. Therefore their plan is still not to go to Main River on a large scale this year. They will probably continue their presence on a very small scale as they have done the last few years. But their plan is to go into upper Humber in a large way and harvest that timber before they move to Main River.

MR. WOODFORD: When they are talking about the upper Humber now, how upper are they going?

DR. NAZIR: How long will they be there?

MR. WOODFORD: When you say upper Humber now, I am familiar with the upper Humber, but where would they be going? Just up of the Humber River itself, the main river part?

DR. NAZIR: They will be below the Main River watershed.

MR. WOODFORD: Below the watershed.

DR. NAZIR: The area which drains into upper Humber in the river. That is the part. So there are two distinct watersheds. So the areas sloping down, or south, that is the area.

MR. WOODFORD: Because I understand that they have some contractors ready to go in there already. One is Weir from Springdale or Baie Verte?

AN HON. MEMBER: Moores.

MR. WOODFORD: Moores. Yes. It was my understanding that they were ready to start. Are you going to have a break now? We might as well stop for a break.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Woodford. Mr. Minister, we are going to take a break now, and I would like to extend an invitation to you and your officials to join us in the Common Room. We have coffee and tea and we will be back here at approximately 11:10 a.m. or 11:15 a.m.

AN HON. MEMBER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

Gentlemen and Miss Murphy, welcome back to our last hour and a bit. I think we will move into our normal format now which is by leave of course. We are still in the ten minute format but we have tended to allow the Opposition Members of the Committee to take a little longer if they need it. So hopefully, as we said earlier, we will have an opportunity to deal with this Department in one sitting. I will, needless to say, certainly acknowledge any of the Government Members who may wish to have questions. So, just so that we are familiar with the format and the fact that it is by leave.

Mr. Woodford, did you want to finish off?

MR. WOODFORD: I will yield to my colleague there now first, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Hewlett.

MR. HEWLETT: The Minister in a statement in the House yesterday was I suppose pleased as punch that his bacteriological spray programme appears to have worked out okay over the last couple of years, and he did not foresee the need even of a major spray programme this year, let alone a chemical one which would be a more devastating assault I presume on a massive infestation. Last year the Minister did - and I must for the record say this - participate in some herbicide spraying to kill deciduous growth in a regrowth pulpwood forest. Is there a programme in areas of the Province again this year in that particular area? And philosophically I suppose I should go on the record as asking the Minister: if he is so happy that he does not have to use chemicals to kill insects, why isn't he distressed that he has to use chemicals to kill nasty deciduous trees - alders, birch, aspen, et cetera - that have a tendency to crowd out a regenerating pulpwood forest?

MR. FLIGHT: I thank the hon. Member for his question. I might have expected it.

MR. HEWLETT: One of your colleagues was indicating we are being too civil. So I thought I would turn up the heat a notch.

MR. FLIGHT: Okay, and you have succeeded.

MR. NOEL: I must say I did not indicate they were being too civil. I was surprised by how civil they are able to be at times.

MR. FLIGHT: To try to deal with the issue, the hon. Member knows that I would rather as an individual, as I am he would as I am sure every Member in the House would, not have any spray programme at all, including a herbicide programme. However, the facts are that we have major planting programmes in Newfoundland in areas that do not naturally regenerate or regenerate as quickly as others we identify and consider planting.

It is a fact that when these plantings are done the deciduous trees, various shrubs, and that kind of thing, blueberry bushes, I suppose, grows a lot faster than the seedlings. The herbicide spray programme is designed specifically to give the deciduous tree seedlings a chance to get up to where they can compete with the -

AN HON. MEMBER: Give them a leg up, so to speak.

MR. FLIGHT: Pardon me? Yes, give them a leg up.

That is the spray programme that he is talking about. The answer is that we will continue that programme this year at about the same level as last year. It is really a minute programme compared to the regular spray programme where we will spray in the vicinity of 3,000 hectares all over Newfoundland.

There is a little dilemma in the sense that the paper companies in particular, and we do it on Crown lands, but in particular the paper companies spends a lot of money in plantations and they think they are entitled to the right to protect that investment. There is no question about the effect and the success -

MR. HEWLETT: Environmental concerns there and philosophical views put aside it is, you contend, a very effective forest enhancement treatment?

MR. FLIGHT: I would invite the Member or anyone else if we could stuff them into a helicopter to come and look at a plantation that has been sprayed with a herbicide and one that has not. It is like apples and oranges. The Member probably has seen one, I do not know.

MR. HEWLETT: I am about to go on a trip to my district pretty soon now and I think I might take a little foray into an area that was sprayed last year because presumably the deciduous growth in King's Point area that was sprayed last year will not be budding out or leafing out this year. The carnivorous growth I guess will continue to green out as Spring continues, but I will I think see it first hand on the ground so to speak without the use of a helicopter.

MR. FLIGHT: Well, the reason I raised that the Member will know that most of those plantations are pretty well out of sight and out of mind and they are inaccessible. There are some, of course, that are and if the Member knows one that is that is fine but there is no question about the efficiency and the effectiveness.

The other point that I should make in defence of the programme is that we in the Department of Forestry and Agriculture's case apply to the Department of Environment to use the herbicide, as does Abitibi-Price and as does Kruger, there are rigid guidelines placed on that permit and we adhere to those guidelines. Herbicide spraying using the vision that we are using in Newfoundland is an accepted tool in forest management across Canada. It has been approved by the various environmental agencies. It is a fact though there is no other option.

The other problem with the spray program is that when we were using fenitrothion or maticil or whatever there was an argument as to which was the most effective. But at least Bt was an option, a little bit more expensive and under certain conditions maybe not as effective but generally speaking it was an option. Environmentally there is no option. Some people have said to do it manually but that is madness, impossible, it cannot be done. So, there is no option. It has become a little controversial but we see it as a means and a tool that can be done safely and we intend at this point in time to continue. Hopefully, there may become available another option, maybe there will be a Bt that will be developed that you can use for this purpose.

MR. HEWLETT: So to paraphrase the Minister, I guess, vision helps you to see green.

MR. FLIGHT: That is right.

MR. HEWLETT: Okay. A couple of other points I wanted to touch on. I have an industry in the Springdale area that is struggling, a secondary wood products operation producing hardwood flooring, panelling, logs for prefabricated cabin packages, etc. In a number of conversations I have had with the owner of that particular operation, apart from the fact that he is struggling to develop markets because he is operating well below capacity, the frustration he notes all the time is that Newfoundlanders have a tendency to cut birch for firewood, quite often very large mature birch trees. I have heard him mutter and sputter many times when he sees a truckload of birch junks driving past his particular facility, birch which, when you look at the individual junks, are clean, white, solid, right through the heart which would be prime birch lumber for use in his particular operation. From his point of view it is akin to taking a prime fir sawlog and using it for firewood. I wonder if the Minister cares to make a comment on that, about the utilization of lumber grade birch as firewood which I guess is fairly commonplace throughout the Province?

MR. FLIGHT: The Member is right. If you have an operator using birch then that obviously galls him, but there can be all kinds of arguments made for using birch for firewood. The Member also knows we are between a rock and a hard place in the sense that we are trying to discourage people from cutting softwoods for firewood and directing them to what was considered for some time as a non-commercial species. Birch, aspen, and alder, if it is big enough, have very low volumes of the spruce budworm. In recent years more and more commercial operators have been looking at using birch for commercial purposes. The hon. Member, for instance, has probably one of the most successful in Newfoundland in his district, that I am aware of and all I can say to him is the theory is right, the argument is right. If the gentleman he referred to were to identify a spot of birch for argument sake that could sustain his operation there is no reason that I am aware of where the Department could not look at saying, okay, that is allocated to that particular operation. There is no reason why we could not entertain that kind of consideration. I am not totally sure what the guidelines are right now but I would be very receptive to whatever the situation is, identifying, earmarking, and reserving onto him the right to cut that particular field. We are trying more and more now, and this is a new phenomenon, more and more to direct firewood cutters into low volume stands of birch and smaller birch because we recognize the potential for birch commercially is growing. It is still difficult and we are going to stop them from cutting softwood. We have to sort of educate them into cutting the lower stand birch.

MR. HEWLETT: Just one further question, Mr. Chairman. There have been a number of operations over the last number of years that have been developed either to generate electricity, I guess, in one area of the Province or as ancillary heat or electricity generation for another enterprise in regard to wood chips. Are there any new developments in the burning of wood chips on the go in the Province? I know that particular operation I mentioned in Springdale burn their sawdust and chips as a source of heat for their kiln for drying wood. Are there any other projects on the go, or planned in the Province, with regard to chipping and burning that as a source of heat or electricity?

MR. FLIGHT: I cannot be specific but we have done studies on other areas but it is still not economic to use chips, or at least our study shows that it is not economic to use chips for electrical generation although we have a major hydo plant in Roddickton as the Member knows. Are we aware of anything new with regards to heating?

MR. HEWLETT: One of the hospitals uses it. I think Gander hospital uses it.

MR. FLIGHT: Gander hospital, Grand Falls and Corner Brook, the major hospitals and the hardwoods plant, but that was all put in place a few years ago and there is nothing new. My Deputy Minister points out there is a committee, a research and development committee that is looking at all possibilities, but we have not identified a new user for our birch to generate the heat at this point in time or for chips, not birch.

MR. HEWLETT: I will finish in a second, Mr. Chairman. One of the other comments of the gentleman who owns the secondary wood products firm in Springdale is concern that wood which may have higher commercial value would be used in chipping operations and it might be more economical and efficient to take a large tree and turn it into chips, but at the same time, you are then taking a large tree out of production for other uses, so I just throw that cautionary note in there.

MR. FLIGHT: I can tell the Member, my Deputy was whispering that, that is discouraged. We would discourage that. We frown on it. As a matter of fact, if it became obvious that if it was happening and our instructions were being ignored, we would probably move to stop it.

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Hewlett, thank you; thank you, Mr. Minister.

Mr. Woodford?

MR. WOODFORD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Getting back to the announcement, Mr. Minister, I think it was yesterday, pertaining to the Insect Control Programme for this year.

MR. FLIGHT: The day before yesterday.

MR. WOODFORD: Yes, sometime this week. Last year the hemlock looper and the blackheaded budworm were the problem; this year it is just the looper, if there is a problem there it is just the looper.

What was the big difference this year in the blackheaded budworm, because I think it was up to something like 90,000 hectares last year which were infected, why would that be wiped out altogether in the past year?

MR. FLIGHT: Well there are two things. The advice we get from CFS is that the blackheaded budworm is into a natural decline, but in any event, we do not have a means to combat it; well in the case of chemicals, fenitrothion and Bt, and neither is registered by Forestry Canada to use against the blackheaded budworm, so we do not have a means of spraying it; we did, last year, use the Bt to test it.

We did an experimental spray programme on blocks where the blackheaded budworm was the major defoliator and it did not work. The results were not that good so we do not have anything we can use anyway against that particular pest, but there is research going on by CFS and ourselves to identify something that can be effective in fighting the blackheaded budworm and as I started saying to the Member, the evidence is, that the blackheaded budworm is in natural decline anyway. Let us hope it is.

MR. WOODFORD: So they are saying it is a natural decline but at the same time, where there were 90,000 hectares infected last year, we do not have a figure - is it just a natural decline or, is there a problem there?

MR. FLIGHT: There was a difficulty last year and there will always be a difficulty in the sense that the blackheaded budworm was found in the same areas as the looper, there was over-lapping, so it was difficult to determine exactly what was doing the damage, whether it was the blackheaded budworm or the looper.

There were areas where it was just the blackheaded budworm, but when the Member says 90,000 hectares, that would not have been 90,000 hectares of high or severe infestation levels, that would have been the range of -

MR. WOODFORD: Moderate and severe category.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes.

MR. WOODFORD: The looper forecast for this year predicts that 19,000 hectares would be infested and out of that 9,000 hectares would be in the moderate and severe category, and yet last year there were 27,0000 versus 10,000, that was considered important.

Why would not 20,000 versus 9,000 be as important to spray.

MR. FLIGHT: Because the indication I guess, as in all spray programmes you make a decision as to what level of infestation you will actually spray against and there are two factors.

One is that there is every indication that the looper is again in decline and that 8,000 to 9,000, some of that is in low volume stands that probably we would never harvest anyway, it would not be harvested commercially. So therefore even with a spray programme you might not have sprayed that particular area because of its non-commercial value. So those two explanations combined are the reasons I guess that basically we chose that it was not necessary to spray against the looper.

MR. WOODFORD: Is there any indication, was there much lost last year that you know of, of your silviculture programmes? Or from the year before, or whatever, from the looper or from the infestation?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: No.

MR. WOODFORD: So you are pretty well saving your silviculture programmes.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes, hopefully. But the outward indication is that there was no recognizable damage to our plantations and hopefully that continues.

MR. WOODFORD: On the mill in Grand Falls, in the announcement in 1989 I think it was where they were closing and shut down the machine and laid off 250 people, the company at that time said that they would be considering a new hydro power project to increase the generating capacity of Grand Falls. What is new on that? There does not seem to be any movement whatsoever there publicly. I do not know, maybe there is something going on behind the scenes. But could you give us an update on what has been happening there?

MR. FLIGHT: Well, an update I guess is, as the Member knows, Abitibi indicated an interest and an announcement I guess that they intended to develop the hydro potential on the Exploits River. At the time then we knew of course it would take them a while. Because simply what they told us is the process they intend to use: they intended to identify a joint venture partner; there had to be feasibility studies done; and obviously environmental studies. They undertook that. The estimated cost was in excess of $200 million. So for the first four to six months the company went out and did their thing they would have to do - the feasibility study, the identifying of a joint partner, that kind of thing.

Then the economic situation changed as the Member would know. The recession started to take hold, the paper companies went into difficult times. I think I recall Abitibi making a statement that everything would be looked at on the basis of the financial markets or the business atmosphere and the rest. But I can tell the Member that it is an ongoing project, that the company is still interested in developing the project. They are still in the process of identifying means of doing it - joint partnership, joint venture. They are talking to Newfoundland Hydro. I have in recent times deferred specific questions relative to the development of that plant to the Minister of Mines. Because it is purely a hydro project really, so (Inaudible).

MR. WOODFORD: I am rather surprised that they did not proceed with it. Newfoundland Hydro is sort of begging for someone to come in - and in fact they have an incentive there now for anybody under ten megawatts.

MR. FLIGHT: I can tell the Member that Newfoundland Hydro is very much and has been very much involved in negotiations with Abitibi-Price on the development of the new power source on the river. As I said, I see it now as purely a hydro generating facility (Inaudible) when it done but under the auspices of Newfoundland Hydro. It is an issue really for the Minister of Mines and Energy to (Inaudible).

MR. WOODFORD: One of the big points that I would like to stress here, and if you are ever talking to him - certainly I can not - they must have looked at it because it is a way of enhancing the viability of the Grand Falls mill. You have guaranteed sale for something, and Hydro can - because only for ERCO shut down Long Harbour, Newfoundland Hydro would be in desperate need for power today. Not even tomorrow but today. That is all that saved them. So it would be a great opportunity to enhance the viability of the operation in Grand Falls.

But pertaining to the sawmill part of it, and especially the wood chips, and I suppose specifically too, so-called hog fuels that have been talked about a lot. The Roddickton plant: Any problems experienced down there with regards to that plant and the supply to it?

MR. FLIGHT: No, I do not think there is a problem. I am fairly sure there is not a problem (Inaudible) been brought to my attention with regards to a supply of wood chips to the plant. I really cannot comment on the hydro aspect, the efficiency of the plant or that kind of thing. But in as far as providing the wood chips, I am not aware that there is a problem. There is not, to my knowledge.

MR. WOODFORD: And they are doing what they are supposed to do with regards to when they are cutting, when they get their permits, the Northern Development Corporation and those other contractors who have the contract for it makes sure it is done under all environmental -

MR. FLIGHT: As far as I know (inaudible) -

MR. WOODFORD: Clear cutting more or less.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes, clear cutting, but the Member would know though, of course, that it is not economical, at least it has not been in the past few years, to ship pulp wood, for instance, small wood to either one of the existing mills. We would prefer to see that happen, and there are people looking at trying to do that and make a dollar, so what is happening is the saw logs, by and large, every saw log is going to Canada Bay Limited Company, or one of the companies (inaudible), and there may well be what would normally be considered pulp wood being chipped for the hydro plant because there is no market for the pulpwood or it is too expensive to get it to the mills. What we are encouraging, obviously, is the slash, the low volume stands, that kind of thing, but I will just be up front with the Member and tell him that because of the difficulty in identifying a market for pulpwood, it is just not economic at this point in time to ship to the existing mills.

MR. WOODFORD: The markets were there. I mean Abitibi is crying for wood -

MR. FLIGHT: The market is there, but -

MR. WOODFORD: It is the distance. I understand now, though, that Abitibi has taken quite a bit of that wood down there. In fact they are putting things in place down there that they did not have to before and trying to (inaudible) because I mean the Roddickton area is a gold mine when it comes to timber resources.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: The Member is right, I was speaking in a general (inaudible), but last year we were aware, and the Member would even be aware of the operator, work the dealer or negotiate an arrangement with Abitibi and the sawmills, and is in the process of supplying something like 5,000 or 6,000 chords and trucking it down from the Roddickton area, which is great -

MR. WOODFORD: To the Stephenville mill.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes, to Stephenville. And we (inaudible), we encourage that.

MR. WOODFORD: As the Minister is well aware, the ALFI agreements that were signed, I think it was five years ago, the ALFI agreement and the Agri-Foods agreement, but pertaining to the ALFI agreement itself, that is up. My understanding is that here in Newfoundland all the funds under the ALFI - the Atlantic Livestock Feeding Initiative programme has been committed. Is there any indication that something will be forthcoming? It is also my understanding that they are now negotiating with the Federal Government through ACOA for an extension to that agreement. Is there any indication that something will be forthcoming on that particular (inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: Well, the Member is right. The ALFI agreement expired - the existing agreement expired this year. There is, again, in these estimates the money that was left over from the agreement, I think ball park figure around $300,000, a little in excess of $300,000 at this area in this budget, and we are, as the Member indicated, talking to the Federal Government through ACOA because if not all, most agreements these past few years have been funded through ACOA and we are looking for an extension to the ALFI agreement that would carry us over until we have negotiated another full fledged ALFI agreement. That is happening, and I guess that is about all I can report. We are confident that we will get that extension, we need it.

MR. WOODFORD: It is also my understanding that the other Maritime Provinces have enough money there to pretty well look after their funding issue under the agreement, but Newfoundland is the only one. There were some suggestions that the federal Minister responsible for ACOA at that time was not in favour of taking the money out of ACOA to grant an extension to the programme, so I do not know what has become of that now every since Mr. Crosbie took it over.

MR. FLIGHT: I am not aware of any new developments since Mr. Crosbie took over. I am sure that Mr. Crosbie understands the Newfoundland environment and would be sympathetic to Newfoundland needs under any agreement. I cannot verify that what the Member says is right, that the previous Minister of ACOA, Mr. MacKay, expressed an (inaudible) or interest or was not prepared to take money out. My information is that we have been well aware that the agreement was running out, started negotiations for an extension some time ago, and as negotiations are continuing, and I am not aware of any problem with negotiations, of course Ottawa has to agree, Mr. Crosbie or the Federal Government and ACOA, and hopefully they will.

MR. WOODFORD: As the Minister has stated on several occasions now over the last couple of years, and I can remember one specifically -

AN HON. MEMBER: Once (inaudible).

MR. WOODFORD: -one specifically in Humber Valley, namely in Cormack, one night that he would definitely not sign an agreement with any less money than was in the previous agreement. Does the Minister still stand by that?

MR. FLIGHT: Is that still the Minister's position?

MR. WOODFORD: Is that still the Minister's position? Because that was very enlightening for the farmers in the area at the time and I am sure that they would like to know if the Minister still stands by that statement.

MR. FLIGHT: The Member is taking great liberties with what the Minister actually said. There was no Hansard, there were no recording facilities at the particular meeting. No doubt I recall distinctly - and the Member was present; that I recall distinctly too - that I did say that the agreement seemed to be a very paltry agreement, that it was not enough money, that obviously the Federal Government and maybe the Province did not put much priority on agriculture. I said all those things. But I doubt very seriously and I will stand and say I did not say I would not sign an agreement unless it had more money. I am going to go for more money, but I may not have said that I would not sign if it contained less than $8 million. I do not look forward to signing. I will spend a lot of time arguing before I sign. We want an enhanced agreement. I am amazed that the hon. Member was prepared to sign that kind of a paltry agreement.

MR. WOODFORD: I am sorry, Mr. Minister, but I did not sign that paltry agreement. And I did not agree with it, by the way. But I do have another 149 people that heard what you said, so that is good, it is 150 against one. But the main thing is that you are aware of it, and you are aware of the fact that they need more money because of the developmental stage that agriculture is in in this Province.

Why then under pay -

MR. FLIGHT: On a point of order. I want to be serious here because I want to leave on the record that I appreciate any level of funding. I think the case was being made and I think the hon. Member agreed that that was not, it did not appear to be, the kind of funding that an industry like agriculture in Newfoundland that was a growing industry with lots of potential - appeared to be - compared to the other agreements like forest (Inaudible) $50 million, $60 million and all the other agreements. But I do not want to indicate that we are not grateful for any agreement. However the point was being made that we all thought that that was not enough money to recognize a need in Newfoundland and that we would be seeking a higher level of funding and believe that agriculture should have a higher level of funding.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: I wanted to say that for the record (Inaudible), I am sorry for interrupting the hon. Member.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister, we appreciate your added explanation for it. We are running a little less formal than with points of order and so on, but I appreciate the fact that you wanted to make the position and clarify the situation so that a sound explanation was placed in Hansard. On a lighter note though I must readily admit that the fact that there were 150 to one in the room, and knowing that you were the one, it sounds to me like it was still a fair fight.

I go back to Mr. Woodford.

MR. WOODFORD: I was going to say thank you, Mr. Chairman, but -Mr. Minister, on page 143 of the estimates, 3.6.02, under the Agricultural Initiatives - ALFI. With the agreement gone and pretty well out, why would there be such a high increase in salaries for this year?

MR. FLIGHT: One of the major reasons I would say to the Member is that, as he pointed out earlier, the ALFI agreement expired this year. There was money left in the ALFI agreement that had to be used. Positions were funded under the agreement and the money has to be spent this year. So what is happening is we are taking advantage of the fact that we have to spend that money this year, and so therefore the vote is up from last year.

MR. WOODFORD: Primarily for salaries.

MR. FLIGHT: Primarily for salaries.

MR. WOODFORD: But what would they be doing? If the agreement is out and finished, why would you want more positions and more money for salaries if the agreement is gone?

MR. FLIGHT: One of the salaries in here is the coordinator for the school milk programme. That would account for a fair amount of the increase, the salary and any expenses relative to salary.

MR. WOODFORD: That was my next question, exactly that. What is the status now, your position, with regards to the school milk programme? Because you know it is stated even in the report and previous to that that in Canada now Newfoundland is the only province without the school milk programme. I will go back to 1989, blow my own horn a little bit, although it was just before an election, it was just rather ironic because - that is, I must stress that to the Minister, and I was only there a short time - but I had it pretty well put in place with regards to an initiation anyway or a start, some start, to a school milk programme. Which I thought would be beneficial both to the industry for the increased milk consumption and production, and to the people of the Province, especially the children of the Province and in the schools. Very important that the nutritional level be kept up.

What would the status of that be now? Because I notice in the Agri-Foods report as well that they stress the funding of approximately $300,000 - no! The $300,000 annually pretty well now is coming from the producers. They have initiated something. What would be the Department's stand on that now?

MR. FLIGHT: Well, let me say, number one I support and commend the dairy industry. They have instigated a school milk programme. I think the level of funding committed to that programme is $600,000 now.

MR. WOODFORD: Yes, from the processors as well.

MR. FLIGHT: From the processors and the producers. Let me say that I support totally a school milk programme for all the reasons that the Member indicated. Both from the nutritional point of view, from a desire to have milk available to our children in schools; from the producers' point of view it expands the market and therefore helps to secure the future of the dairy industry. We support and encourage the programme that the producers and the industry have put in place.

I cannot make a commitment with regards to financial commitment by the Government obviously until a position is determined and approved, but to the extent that I can say to the Member, I support the programme. I know that the committee or the organization that is responsible for administering this $600,000 has indicated that they intend to come and talk to Government about a Provincial contribution. At this point in time I can only say that of course I will meet them, hear their arguments, listen to their case and do whatever is possible. However, the Member will understand that I cannot at this point in time make a commitment of any particular amount of funding. Again, it is difficult for us and for me and for Government to have to deal with this particular item in the financial reality that we find ourselves in.

But there is no question about the value and the level of support and that we will do what we can do to make sure there is a successful school milk programme and that the industry is supported in its initiatives.

MR. WOODFORD: Is this coordinator put in place now, working in conjunction with the committee or...?

MR. FLIGHT: I am not specifically - have you (Inaudible)?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: I do not think the individual is in place. The policy has been accepted, it has been announced, I think it has been announced as a six month programme, but I do not think the individual himself is in place at this point in time.

MR. WOODFORD: I am trying to get the - the Department is not putting any money into the school milk programme itself, but yet they are setting up a coordinator, a coordinator to do what? Work between who? Because there is a committee in place now working with the processors, the consumers, and I understand that the Department has a representative on that committee as well.

MR. FLIGHT: Oh, there's a committee of - I think the Department of Education -

MR. WOODFORD: Department of Education.

MR. FLIGHT: There are several committees, now, there's certainly there is -

MR. WOODFORD: Department of Health.

MR. FLIGHT: Department of Health.

AN HON. MEMBER: We are leaning towards (Inaudible) being hired by the industry rather than be hired by us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. FLIGHT: The explanation to the hon. Member is that we are leaning towards having the industry hire the individual. But we would provide a portion of the salary funding and that is reflected here.

MR. WOODFORD: And that will come out of the ALFI?

MR. FLIGHT: That will come out of that particular agreement, that particular vote.

MR. WOODFORD: Will you say that is for a period of six months?

MR. FLIGHT: It seems to me, yes, it is six months; I am drawing on my general memory from conversations with the Milk Marketing Board in particular.

MR. WOODFORD: Because with an extra $135,000 in salaries this year it would lead me to believe there is a lot more involved.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes. I think what I will do, Mr. Chairman, for the hon. Member, is to undertake to provide him with the details on that, immediately after this committee rises, within the next - probably during the sittings this afternoon or certainly tomorrow, because I cannot indicate exactly what that increase covers and I will see that the members of the committee have the information immediately upon the rising of the committee.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Noel.

MR. NOEL: There is that question of land utilization that I brought up earlier, has given an immediate problem for me. As I indicated, residents of Brophy Place have been trying to get a piece of land to grow some of their own produce and a lot of people in that area are unemployed or disadvantaged in some way, so they are interested in doing something for themselves, and so I talked to the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, to see if we could get some of his land up there and he says that he does not have any that is available and suggested that we talk to Pippy Park.

I have just had a call from Pippy Park and they said they do not have any suitable land available and they referred me to the Minister of Agriculture -

MR. FLIGHT: They may have referred you to the right Minister finally.

MR. NOEL: -so I said that I have him right where I want him, but this is the kind of problem - we have a group of people who are interested in doing something for themselves and growing more things for the Province and, out of all the land around this city, can we not find a piece of land that - I am not saying it is your responsibility to provide it, I understand that -

MR. FLIGHT: Well, to the Member, it is obviously my responsibility to encourage the production of agricultural products. As I understand it, what the Member is suggesting, he has constituents in this case, in the Brophy Park area who do not have land available for vegetable and we are thinking in terms of production for home use as opposed to - okay.

What I will do and I guess all I can do is to take this issue under advisement, and discuss the possibility with my officials. We do have, obviously earlier in the estimates, we have identified that we buy land and we then lease that land out to the industry.

We may well have land, that we are trying to lease and have not been successful in doing that and if the purpose was, purely to grow vegetables, I cannot think, off the top of my head, of any real reason; I may be able to give the Member twenty reasons after I talk to my officials, but right now I cannot think of any reason why I would not support that kind of an initiative.

MR. NOEL: Sure, and I expect that you would, but the kind of a little problem that we have here, is that, those people would like to find a piece of land close to where they live; many of them do not have their own -

MR. FLIGHT: Where, exactly is Brophy Place?

MR. NOEL: At the top of Bell's Turn, a sort of last housing area you will see if you look in that way; it is a group of town houses, and the ironic thing is, that they are very near some really good agricultural land, the Thomas farm up there and land that has been acquired by the Province for the Outer Ring Road.

You know, the Minister said yesterday or a couple days ago that it might be thirteen years before the Outer Ring Road goes ahead, so why could not those people have access to that land and of course, obviously this is something I am going to have to take up with him as well, but maybe you could give me a hand in that, because we have, you know, people who are interested in doing something -

We have good land very near where they want it, but it seems that red bureaucracy is standing in the way.

MR. FLIGHT: I generally agree with the philosophy that the Member is indicating and we will talk about it and we will look at it.

MR. NOEL: I know that it will be more appropriate to talk about it afterwards, but, I just thought it would be useful to bring it up at this meeting to illustrate the kind of thing the Province should be looking to do some more with -

MR. FLIGHT: I agree.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Are we ready for the question?

MR. WOODFORD: Oh no, no.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, I understand.

MR. FLIGHT: I thought the Member for Kilbride - I was going to welcome him first but I thought he would keep looking down and reading his paper and miss the question.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I make light of the moment, I want to welcome the Member for Kilbride who decided to join us this morning. I am cognizant of the fact that he would like to ask a question and I thought I would catch him off guard just for that moment and bring him back to where we are.

By leave of the Committee, if there is no one who wanted to ask a question immediately and following through with the normal format that we had I will offer the floor to Mr. Aylward, if you would like to ask a few questions.

MR. NOEL: A point of order.

I can see the Member clearly but I assume that the Chairman is making sure that he is not unacceptably decorated in participating in this meeting today.

MR. R. AYLWARD: (Inaudible).

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member was being very kind to the Chair and the only problem with being properly attired is that in this particular forum the Chairman of this Committee could have a problem with the attire simple because the Chair is at leave to allow the Member to ask questions. I would not want to see attire causing a problem of other Committee Members wanting to keep the questions going. The Chair goes into a dilemma. I would think that out of our long-standing relationship that goes back to my days of being, and I want Hansard to be careful with this, a chicken plucker and having many successful meetings with the Member, knowing that there is a ruling anticipated on that particular subject from the Speaker of the House that the Member might allow this Chair not to have to deal with this issue, and leave it for a ruling this afternoon.

MR. R. AYLWARD: May I make a comment on that.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Certainly.

MR. R. AYLWARD: I was quite willing to allow the Chair not to have to rule on that but, Mr. Speaker, when we have a committee Member who wanted to point out the fact that we should be allowed to express our views in the Assembly and we should not be muzzled by being restricted in expressing any views, I felt that I had to put back on the lapel pin which is totally in order according to the rule books. Now, it might not be according to the Speaker's ruling today.

Just for the Chairman's sake, Vice-Chairman's, and Committee Members sake so that you can get on with your work I shall put it away for now.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I appreciate that. I would also like to say that the Chair might have inadvertently set a stage for that lighthearted question to be asked simply by doing what I did in terms of jokingly wanting to move the question, knowing full well that the Member would be welcomed and certainly would be entitled to ask questions by leave.

Now, then I will go back to the hon. Member for Kilbride and allow him to ask questions.

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

I do not have a lot of questions. I just want to ask the Minister, I have been looking through the Estimates here and I cannot find the heading for the Land Consolidation Programme within the agricultural zone in St. John's. You might point out the heading to me so that I might have a look at it.

AN HON. MEMBER: Page 135.

MR. CHAIRMAN: On the bottom, 3.1.05. There was some discussion earlier with regard to that, Mr. Aylward, your colleagues might be able to answer for you unless there is something specific you wanted.

MR. R. AYLWARD: It is a hard job for me to find it when I have the 1990 Estimates.

I apologize; I have to check my Estimates first.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, again I see the amount has been reduced from last year's expenditures again by another $100,000 - is that 3.1.05 Property, Furnishings and Equipment -

MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes. I appreciate the question, Mr. Aylward, but I am going to say that if you had a number of items that you wanted to discuss, we dealt with that earlier, and I have no problem dealing with that again, but your colleagues were well versed in that a little earlier. Again, I say I am more than willing to have the answer again but if there were items you wanted to cover, other than something we already covered, I want to make you aware of that, but the question is still valid.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Chairman, I realize that my colleagues are quite versed in this and they are pretty well versed in every aspect of all that is going on in the Estimates but my reason for bringing it up again is because I was not able to attend earlier so I did not hear the answers and we will not have the printed copies of these until sometime next August, September or October. This directly affects my district which is the reason why I came here. Mr. Chairman, I notice that again there is a reduction in the Land Consolidation Program funds. I think this is the third year in a row that the Minister has decided to reduce these funds. I know they were at least $750,000 a year at one time so I wonder if the Minister could give an explanation for the reduction? Is it that we have all the desirable agricultural land bought up now in this area, or might it be that he is not as strong a supporter of this program as were some of the former Ministers who occupied his position might have been?

MR. FLIGHT: To the hon. Member I would like to think I am as supportive of that program as any other Minister. The obvious reason is the financial restraints we find ourselves in. It is a budgetary problem. The Member knows that and we can debate that all day. The Department of Agriculture had to take its share of the financial -

MR. R. AYLWARD: This is not a current account expenditure. It is a capital expenditure.

MR. FLIGHT: It is a capital expense, however the fiscal situation we find ourselves in is reflected in the capital account as well as in the current account, but I would say to the hon. Member that there are probably other reasons. The Member knows better than most people that first when that program was announced and became a policy it was well advertised, and of course people were aware of it probably to a greater extent than they are today, but we do not advertise it, number one, and it has been suggested to me that is the reason why we may not be getting as many requests as we did initially. Another reason is, as the Member knows, we pay in the vicinity of $4000 per acre for land removed from that zone under the consolidation program. I am told, I have not had it verified, but I accept it, that land is probably worth in the vicinity of $20,000 if it were on the open market for industrial or commercial use.

MR. R. AYLWARD: That would be zoned as agricultural.

MR. FLIGHT: Not while it is zoned as agricultural but the people who would normally take advantage, and I am trying to tell the Member why there may not be as much pressure or as many applications these days.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Does the Minister know that he has applications on file that could not be dealt with last year because he never had enough money, so you cut the money back this year so you would have more applications on file next year?

MR. FLIGHT: But there are not as many applications on file as were on file in the past. There are applications on file where we offered $4000 and they said, no, thank you, so when we talk about the applications on file there may be twenty applications on file and we dealt with some and the other individuals when told they would be paid $4000 said, no, thank you, and the applications stayed on file and were not acted on. I am just suggesting to the Member that one of the reasons why some of the applications are on file is because they are just not going to sell at this point in time and are probably hoping that the land will be removed from the zone or whatever and they will get full commercial value.

MR. R. AYLWARD: But the Minister will agree that there are applications on file from individuals who wish to sell their land, who wish to negotiate a price and sell their land, and because there was not enough money last year in the Budget they couldn't and it happened every year. I am not saying it was just last year but in the last three years we have reduced the Budget.

MR. FLIGHT: I cannot specifically identify it, but I have no doubt that what the Member is saying is right, that there were more applications on file than we could fund. Be that as it may the fact is that we only saw fit this year to put $400,000 into the land acquisition program and that is the level of funding. It does not indicate a lack of support for the program.

MR. R. AYLWARD: It does not suggest an increase in support for it, certainly.

MR. FLIGHT: It just indicates a recognition of the realities, financial and otherwise.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Well, the realities are that we have 2 per cent of our land base that we can grow food on and quite a bit of it is being wasted in this area. It is not being used.

MR. FLIGHT: In 1989, we budgeted $500,000 for land acquisition. In 1989 - 1990, there was $350,000; in 1990 - 1991 there was again $500,000. Now, the Member was probably responsible for 1989 - 1990.

MR. R. AYLWARD: No, Sir, I was not. It was $800,000 and something in 1988 or 1987 while I was there. I was not there in 1989, I was in the Department of Forestry, I believe, at the time.

MR. FLIGHT: So, there is not that major difference. We are with the trend, if these figures - and I have to accept the figures - are accurate in 1988 - 1989, $500,000 was budgeted, $620,000 spent; in 1989 - 1990, $350,000 was budgeted and $350,000 spent; in 1991 $500,000 was budgeted and $500,000 spent; and in 1991- 1992 we have budgeted $400,000 and I suspect we will spend $400,000, but that is $50,000 up from 1989 - 1990.

MR. R. AYLWARD: That is $100,000 down from last year when you did not have enough money last year to cover what the demand was.

MR. FLIGHT: And we probably never will, as the Member knows.

MR. R. AYLWARD: The only point I am trying to make, Mr. Chairman, is -

MR. CHAIRMAN: Gentlemen, please.

I appreciate the fact that we have two individuals: one with a thorough background and knowledge from a previous Government and one with a thorough background in the current Government. I can appreciate that you are both trying to reach a point here but I would suggest that we will never reach the point if as one is making a statement and the other one is interrupting. The point I am making goes in both directions gentlemen. I am more than happy to entertain questions and listen to answers but if the jousting continues in both directions I do not think we shall really get the answer or the question out properly. So, I would ask that we offer each other a little courtesy in both directions.

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

I would like to ask the Minister one final question: Could he give us some figures on the land acquisitions over the last two or three years, the acreage of the land that was purchased? Does he know if all of that land has been released to farmers to be put back into use? Is that figure available?

MR. FLIGHT: Obviously, Mr. Chairman, I will take the question under advisement and supply the hon. Member with the exact figures possibly for this afternoon. We have that information available to us and I will make it available to the hon. Member possibly in the House this afternoon.

An amount of $4,000 per acre is what we pay and that is negotiable from, I think, from $2,500 per acre up to $4,000 per acre -

MR. R. AYLWARD: Fifty-two hundred is the highest paid.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes, $5,200 is the highest it has gone.

So, if one would take $4,000 as a norm and divide it by the dollars I just announced one would come up with the exact acreage that was sold. But, what I shall do is undertake to provide the hon. Member with the exact information before the day is over.

MR. R. AYLWARD: One think to point out for those who might not notice and the Minister might want to concur is that the reason we get such a deal is that we give a pretty good option when we buy it. If the land freeze is lifted within fifteen years that person can take the land back give you your money back -

MR. FLIGHT: Exactly.

MR. R. AYLWARD: And that is the reason we are getting it for what seems to be a bargain price, actually if we lift the freeze we are only leasing the land for the amount of years that the freeze exists.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Alyward, for attending and your courtesy shown to the Chair.

We are fast approaching the 12:30 mark. I am to understand from the Vice-Chairman that he has a couple of questions that he would like to deal with. It may mean that we may go over by five, ten minutes or so, but I think in the interest of dealing with the estimates while we are here now out of courtesy to all participants it might be wise to take those extra few minutes, deal with the estimates while we are here now as opposed to having to ask all participants to join us again at another time that we are not even sure that we could arrange. So rather than go on with that explanation, if we should pass the 12:30 mark, you understand why.

Mr. Woodford.

MR. WOODFORD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It might not take that long, I just have a few questions. I want to get back to Forestry for one short question. Is there going to be any programme this year for cone picking on the west coast?

MR. NAZIR: Most of our cone collecting in the last two years have been done by hiring the people from Social Services, Social Welfare recipients. The Department of Social Services has a central amount of funds through which they try to hire those people. Cone collection is a very convenient way of providing them meaningful employment because it is not that arduous, not that hard work, but at the same time very productive work, and we have been fortunate in the last few years to access those funds. We have not planned to use our old regular silviculture farm for cone collection, but we are hoping that if funds become available through Social Services or through any other special job creation project we should be able to launch a reasonably good cone collection programme, but we are not planning it with our own funds.

MR. WOODFORD: You are not planning to do anything through your department like you did before. If it is going to be done, it will be done through Social Services.

MR. NAZIR: That is correct.

MR. WOODFORD: I see that Dr. Whitney is here this morning. He would be very familiar with this particular problem, the meat inspection services in rural areas of the Province. It has been discussed for some time now, and there are over 100 facilities around the Province, slaughter houses and so on in rural areas of the Province, and one of the big problems with the sale of meat, to Dominion or Sobey's or somewhere like that, is the lack of inspection services. Are there any movements being implemented pertaining to that particular problem?

DR. WHITNEY: The actual figure of 100, I do not think it is important to debate that one, but that figure was taken from a Task Force report which asked the Department of Health for the number of establishments licensed under what they call class six. That includes, unfortunately, dairy farms, so they had the Task Force use a listing that included dairy farms, so the actual number is not 100, I believe it is about sixty that are licensed. But the question of development of meat inspections services: as you may be aware, a survey was sent out on February 25th to all people who were licensed abattoir owners, to development associations, agricultural societies, marketing boards, anybody who is potentially interested in this, that was the first step, and that was one of the first steps recommended by the Task Force in the development of meat inspection service. So that was a measurement of the demand. We have received a fair number, there was well over 100 questionnaires sent out, and I believe thirty or forty received in response. These have been looked at to see where the demand is and that is the first step in the development of a meat inspection system. I agree, it is a necessity for a number of reasons. Access to market as well as the regulation of products.

MR. WOODFORD: Yes, like you say, the two reasons, the market part of it and then there is the risk of contamination. Because a lot of this meat has been sold locally anyway without going through a specific retailer or wholesaler. The one that comes to mind, that brings it to my attention, is the one in Humber Valley now. A very successful operation has been put in place over the last couple of years by the development association. It was started off by the development association in Cormack and I think it is still managed by the development association. Very successful. I think it puts something like 30,000 pounds of meat through there - as high as 20,000 pounds a day last year, by just two or three people last fall.

Without the inspection services. That is just the domestic and -

DR. WHITNEY: Department of Health licence.

MR. WOODFORD: - custom killing and slaughtering. So that is being looked into then (Inaudible)?

DR. WHITNEY: Yes. It is very important.

MR. WOODFORD: Another subject that came to my attention a couple of years ago, and that is about the coyote problem. I did not think we had one in the Province, to be honest with you. I firmly believe we do not have one today. But there has been a lot of concern expressed. It so happened that it came to my attention from a couple of people in Hughes Brook, right in my area, there a couple of years ago. They said they were convinced that they saw a couple of coyotes there.

But I am after having two or three pieces of correspondence from people in the Port au Port area - I do not know why they would send it to me but I got it - that they are after seeing a lot of coyotes around, they claim. I notice that it is in the Task Force, and the Task Force recommends that a trapping season for coyotes be implemented now. Do we have such a problem?

MR. FLIGHT: There have supposedly been a couple of incidents of coyotes trapped in Newfoundland. However, we do not have any specific reason to believe that there is - I agree with you - a specific problem. The problem is I suppose that people are aware of just how easily the coyote becomes domiciled or can get a foothold and how easy they can spread. But we do not have any definite... we have heard rumours. The sheep breeder's association in particular is very concerned, and I think that they have made statements to the effect that we should start (Inaudible) a programme to eradicate.

Well, to eradicate you have to be sure you have a population. Dr. Hulan identifies the problem that if indeed there is a coyote population established it would create great problems for the industry. But we do not have specific incidents of where coyotes have been known to be breeding in Newfoundland. At this point in time it is a major concern. Obviously the sheep breeding association in particular is concerned, but we do not have a programme in place to eradicate coyotes because we have no real evidence to this point in time that we - our people are being observant. We are watching to see any indication that there is, and if we become aware of coyotes we will have to make a decision on a trapping or eradication programme.

But at this point in time it is a case of being vigilant. We are sure that whenever there is a sighting that it will be reported. Then you have the problem of confirming that the sighting was actually a coyote as such. But it is there. The threat of coyote colonization, the threat of coyotes establishing in Newfoundland is a level of a concern, the agriculture industry is concerned.

MR. WOODFORD: Yes, because it is rather ironic that this should happen now when the sheep and lamb industry is on the upswing. That is one of the industries where we have an awful lot of potential. I was just looking at some figures there. I think it is back in 1951 that we had 60,000 slaughterings of lambs or sheep in the Province, and as of 1986 we had 2,900. That should give you an example of where our sheep industry has gone in the Province and the potential (inaudible) -

MR. FLIGHT: But it is on the up swing now, though.

MR. WOODFORD: Yes, it is on the up swing.

MR. FLIGHT: And there is a lot of renewed interest in it this year.

MR. WOODFORD: There is a lot of renewed interest, and it would be rather sad to see at the same time that this would happen, that we would have an increase or a predator come on the scene such as the coyote because they are prolific breeders. I mean they are just like rabbits, once they are in there is no way to stop them, it is just bang, bang, bang. They are survivors.

I have one other question, Mr. Minister. I take it for granted that your department is monitoring that situation and is abreast of what -

MR. FLIGHT: If the Member would want it confirmed, I just chatted with my official. There is no question that there have been sightings of the coyote in Newfoundland confirmed in Hughes Brook, by the way, in the Member's own district, and in other areas of Newfoundland, and that in itself is cause for concern because as the Member indicated, the coyote is a prolific breeder and once they get established it is almost impossible to eradicate them. So it is a concern for us and it is a concern for wildlife. As a matter of fact, Wildlife is involved in identifying and checking out sightings and that kind of thing, so we will stay on it to the extent we can, and when it becomes necessary the Province will have to look after an eradication programme or any other means to -

MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Minister, one of the problems that farmers in this Province have had for some time now, and I was always against the system put in place, is with regards to the lease versus grants. There has always been a conflict with that. What is your position on that now? Is there any chance of some change in the future with that particular problem?

MR. FLIGHT: Dr. Hulan, as you know, addressed the issue, and I understand he got representation on the issue so we are looking at his recommendations. There are good reasons for leasing up to a certain point, as the Member will know, the Government or the Department of Agriculture wants to be sure that the land is being used for the purpose that the person indicated he wanted it for. I agree with the Member, that was a certain time, whatever time that is, when the land has been developed, cultivated, worked, and major investments made both in time, in human resources, and finance. I personally would have no objections and I think it makes some sense to look at issuing a grant. The situation that he was aware of is still in place and it is a policy decision, I would guess, and I know that there is an interest in it, and there is a lobby from the farming community itself, as the Member knows, the Federation of Agriculture supports converting leases to grants under certain conditions. So we are looking at it, and that is the best I can say at this point in time to the hon. Member.

MR. WOODFORD: Yes, because I think it is very important that when crown lands or agriculture gives you a so called farm in this Province they give you a piece of wilderness out of which you have to cut a farm, so more or less it is like the pioneer days. But at the same time they put so many restrictions on that lease, and I think the two in place now is a fifty year lease, and you could get sick after two or three years before you got that x number of acres cleared, and automatically it is gone out of your family. You could spend ten or fifteen years working a piece of land, so it is very important, I think, that that problem should be addressed. I was trying to lobby people in the department while I was there through the years, but with no success. But I think now there is more backing from the agricultural industry itself than there was a few years ago. I think they are finally realizing what the serious implications are.

MR. FLIGHT: I think that the rational or the justification for the lease as opposed to grant in the first instance, and it is understandable, is again the desire to protect the agricultural land. But I agree with the Member, there comes a point when it has been established that the man is operating in good faith, that this is a farm, it has been cultivated, he spent his life at it, he has a right to have the grant. I agree with that.

MR. WOODFORD: And one of the ways that can be done, I suggested some time ago, is that it can be written into the lease, that after x number of years that the land must still stay in agriculture the same as it would under an agricultural development area, and other than that, it cannot be sold, so you are protected.

MR. FLIGHT: I would assume that a lot of the land under the agricultural freeze in the St. John's area is granted land but under the freeze it still must be used for agricultural purposes so the same rationale applies.

MR. WOODFORD: That is right, but it could apply to a lease versus a grant.

MR. FLIGHT: Yes.

MR. WOODFORD: I have lots of other questions, Mr. Chairman, but for the sake of trying to get it wrapped up I think most of the important ones have been covered.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Woodford.

Before moving to the point of the Estimates I would entertain a motion to move the minutes of our May 7 meeting, the Resource Estimates Committee for the Department of Fisheries.

On motion the Minutes of the May 7 meeting of the Resource Estimates Committee for the Department of Fisheries were adopted as circulated.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01 through to 3.6.03, carried.

On motion, Department of Forestry and Agriculture total head, carried.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister, and your officials thank you very much for attending the Resource Committee meeting this morning. I would like to thank the Members as well as the media for attending. Hansard and Elizabeth, thank you, as well.

The meeting now stands adjourned.