The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to advise the hon. House that a very important international conference is being held here in St. John's over the next several days on sealing. This conference, which is being hosted by the Province, is being held under the auspices of the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission, and is being attended by approximately 250 delegates. Representatives from the Faeroe Islands, Greenland, Iceland, Norway, and a number of other countries and regions, will be attending.

Mr. Speaker, this conference is being held at a critical period in the revitalization of our sealing industry. The conference clearly demonstrates the commitment of this Province, the federal government, and other countries to a sustainable seal harvest.

Mr. Speaker, several representatives of the IFAW will be in attendance at the conference. This group has made a public statement implying that this conference should not have been held on Canadian soil. I want to advise this hon. House that the IFAW will stoop to no end to discredit the sealing industry. They have been given the opportunity to observe and participate in the conference; yet, having registered, are now saying that the Government of Canada should distance itself from NAMMCO.

Mr. Speaker, we are proud hosts of the NAMMCO Conference on Sealing. The IFAW, for its part, will not undermine our efforts to revitalize the sealing industry. Indeed, the transparency of the NAMMCO Conference clearly demonstrates our commitment to develop this industry.

The seal industry does not belong in the past, but will become a critical component of our rural economy in years ahead. From this perspective the IFAW should turn its attention to more serious concerns, such as the concern over communities devastated by the groundfish collapse.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We over here on this side as well would like to be part of this conference that is happening right here in this Province. Not only are we the proud hosts; I think I would say to the minister that we should be the natural place for this to take place, and I commend the minister and I commend the people opposite for allowing this to happen, and for going about and being vibrant in order to bring the sealing industry conference right here to our own Province.

Here is an opportunity that exists to employ thousands of rural Newfoundlanders. In my own district alone, there is a mood of optimism, right in Catalina, where an individual has gone and taken a plant that was closed up there and now turning it into a seal manufacturing plant and a seal oil manufacturing plant and it is going to employ hundreds of people and I am very optimistic about that.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up. Does the hon. member have leave?

MR. TULK: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. FITZGERALD: But we have to be cognitive with the fact of who those IFAW people really are, Mr. Speaker. Those are people out to raise funds to go in their own pocket. Those are people out playing on the emotions of people. We see movie stars, we see, supposedly, Newfoundlanders names attached to being part of this IFAW. I would be concerned if I saw a fisherman from Bonavista Bay or if I saw a fisherman from Twillingate supporting them. That would cause me great concern.

I compliment the minister. Do whatever you can to expose those people for what they really are.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi have leave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wish to support the statement by the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture and commend him on his efforts in the area of promoting the seal fishery in this Province. This conference is rightfully being held here in Newfoundland and Labrador and I want to say to the IFAW, they should consider that a very important part of the ecosystem that is having trouble surviving right now, are the Newfoundland fishermen and fisherpersons, plant workers and our communities. If they are concerned about the ecosystem, they should be concerned about us as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods.

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

I am pleased to inform my hon. colleagues of the successful signing of the agreement for phase two of the Western Newfoundland Model Forest Project on the West Coast.

Mr. Speaker, on October 23, the federal government and the Model Forest partners signed an agreement in Corner Brook, which will see the federal government contribute $500,000 a year to the Western Newfoundland Model Forest. This contribution will be matched by the Model Forest partners for a total of $5 million to be spent over the next five years. This represents a significant commitment on the part of all partners to the work of the Model Forest.

The local partners who will be providing the matching funding include: Corner Brook Pulp and Paper, Abitibi-Consolidated Inc., Sir Wilfred Grenfell College, the City of Corner Brook, the Newfoundland and Labrador Trappers Association, The College of the North Atlantic, Forestry and Wildlife Divisions of our department, the Federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Gros Morne National Park, The Humber Arm Environmental Association and the Canadian Forest Service.

The thrust of the phase two work plan is implementation of the integrated resource management plan developed over the past five years with the model forest partners and the public - and I would like to emphasize that this will be an action plan in the next number of months.

Mr. Speaker, this agreement presents both a challenge and a great opportunity for the partners to move forward, forming the foundation for research and development of integrated resource management plan prepared over the past five years.

Earlier this year, our department announced the release of a twenty-year forest management plan. In this plan, we outline the department's new approach to forest management, the adaptive ecosystem management approach.

This approach addresses a long-term health of the forest ecosystem through the management of the range of values for the resource, such as, wood fibre, wildlife, tourism, recreation, clean air, and water resources. However, we are looking to the Model Forest to help us meet the challenge of implementing this new ecosystem approach to managing this Province's forests.

Mr. Speaker, the Model Forest project has the opportunity to provide the `model' for integrated management for the rest of the Province, and we look forward to seeing it work out to be very successful. Mr. Speaker, this will be a knowledge transfer and communications process, and we look forward to seeing the Model Forest not only for Western Newfoundland but for the rest of our Province.

I would ask the members of the House of Assembly to acknowledge the work of the government and non-governmental partners, Mr. Speaker, in the Model Forest process, and we look forward to seeing this agreement work out quite well for the future, and further agreements to be signed.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

After last week's fiasco, the Minister of Mines and Energy announcing a project on behalf of Iron Ore Company of Canada, a forty-year-old announcement, the government press releases have been turning out machines again and now we see the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods announcing an announcement that was made exactly one month ago, Mr. Speaker.

Now if the minister were serious, and he wanted to put in place a Ministerial Statement today that dealt with a model forest and with the future of the forest industry, he would be talking about harvesters and how indiscriminately, Mr. Speaker - how indiscriminately they are single-handedly raping our forests, how harvesters themselves are single-handedly replacing twenty to thirty people who would be normally employed in the industry.

Mr. Speaker, if this is all the minister is going to update the House on the future of the forestry industry, I say that the forestry industry is not only in bad shape but is in very, very poor hands, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi, does he have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: No leave? The hon. member does not have leave.

The hon. the Minister of Government Services and Lands.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Department of Government Services and Lands is extremely concerned about continuing breaches to the ATV regulations. Current regulations have been successful in reducing damage to our Province's wetlands and barrens, there are areas where certain individuals seem to have complete disregard for any of these regulations.

During a recent helicopter patrol, eight tickets were handed out, seven for violations of the ATV regulations and one for violation of the wildlife regulations. The patrol encompassed an area from Witless Bay Line, north to Placentia, and from St. Bride's to North Harbour in a west-east direction. A ninth violation is under investigation. During a second patrol of this area two days later, two more tickets were handed out for ATV violations.

Mr. Speaker, our wetlands must be protected. They are inhabited by many aquatic, animal, bird, and unique plant species; they reduce flood levels in rivers; and they provide us with a wide range of environmental, tourist and social benefits. The Department of Government Services and Lands will not tolerate abuse to the wetlands of this Province. We want to send a clear message to the violators that they will be prosecuted.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to thank the many dedicated people in our Province who are committed to protecting our wetlands and thank the majority of ATV users who respect these regulations. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

I would like to first thank the minister for a copy of his statement before the House sat today.

Mr. Speaker, these Ministerial Statements are becoming a dime a dozen, a farce, media attention-getters.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. J. BYRNE: All this statement does, Mr. Speaker, is let us know that the Minister of Government Services and Lands is in the House of Assembly, that is about it. I will tell him, Mr. Speaker, this government was warned of the problems with respect to the ATV regulations before they were implemented.

The Member for Harbour Main - Whitbourne went around and held public hearings on this and he made a report - we have not seen the report. I think two years ago he presented a report to government and he had some recommendations within that report. We are still waiting on it. No wonder the people of the Province are getting tickets they should not be receiving, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I would like to tell the House today about a new business organization for women that was launched this month with assistance from my department.

The Newfoundland and Labrador Organization for Women entrepreneurs is a not-for-profit organization with a mandate to provide entrepreneurship and business development services for women throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. It is called NLOWE for short.

Mr. Speaker, I am sure many members will be familiar with the former Women's Enterprise Bureau, or WEB, as it was called, that was established here in 1989 as the first organization of its kind in Canada. The Women's Enterprise Bureau assisted more than 6,000 women and eventually helped create 700 full-time jobs in small businesses throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

The new Newfoundland and Labrador Organization for Women Entrepreneurs is the successor organization to WEB. It is a more streamlined organization with an expanded mandate of assisting not just potential entrepreneurs, but also existing businesses owned by women.

The prime movers of the new organization are five regional facilitators located in home-based offices across the Province. These five women will travel extensively throughout their regions to assist women entrepreneurs in the following areas.

They will facilitate the start-up of viable small and medium-sized businesses.

They will provide appropriate counsel, advice, and support to women business owners and managers through a network of private business consultants.

They will facilitate the transfer of business information to their clients.

They will assist women business owners and managers to identify the skills and knowledge they need to succeed and identify sources of training and financial support.

Further, NLOWE will work with other community economic development groups. In particular, they will work with the twenty Regional Economic Development Boards as a resource to the boards, and they will encourage women to participate in community economic development generally.

In addition, the Newfoundland and Labrador Organization for Women Entrepreneurs has also hired a micro-business lending co-ordinator to organize a lending circle in the St. John's area. They will be benefiting from a joint venture between my department and the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Co-operatives, the Collective Enterprise Development Program which I described in my statement to the House Friday past. If this project is successful, NLOWE intends to set up lending circles in rural areas of the Province.

I am confident that this program will be an effective economic development tool for rural Newfoundland and Labrador. This program will help foster entrepreneurship and new business start-ups by women throughout the Province. It will help to diversify our economy. It will also result in new jobs being created in communities in all areas because firms led by women are creating jobs at four times the average rate across Canada.

I am pleased that my department through the Canada-Newfoundland Strategic Regional Diversification Co-operation Agreement has been able to contribute $244,261 to assist in the formation of the Newfoundland and Labrador Organization for Women Entrepreneurs. The overall budget is $1 million with ACOA being a financial partner as well.

Mr. Speaker, to conclude, the Newfoundland and Labrador Organization for Women Entrepreneurs is an innovative and focused approach to the needs of women entrepreneurs in this Province, particularly in rural areas. It is a welcome addition to the array of services available to businesses, and it will help my department meet its prime objective: the development and renewal of rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I am sure all members of the House will join with me in wishing this new organization every success.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS S. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I was at the launching of NLOWE and I know the people leading the charge on this initiative. It is not always easy for women to get involved in business on their own. There are a lot of wonderful success stories from women who have been assisted by the Women's Enterprise Bureau and NLOWE, and I feel certain there will be many more success stories.

This organization has done a great deal to encourage the entrepreneurial spirit of women, both in urban and rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and I commend them. Now, if I could only commend the government for their provision of services for women generally.

I remind the minister that his government is fighting, in the courts, a tribunal ruling on pay equity that simply asks the government to live up to its agreements.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS S. OSBORNE: I remind the minister of his government's refusal to provide funding for women's centres in the Province, despite the fact that staff at these centres provide invaluable resources for women throughout the Province, and often help women escape situations of family violence.

I remind the minister of his government's claw back of social assistance from single parent students, again mostly women.

I remind him of the freeze on student aid, coupled with skyrocketing tuition fees which are preventing many of our people, including women, from realizing their potential.

I remind the minister of statements which his colleague in health made at a recent women's forum, urging us to think prevention when it comes to health care. I remind him of this statement in light of his government's refusal to increase social assistance funding and in light of health care cuts.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MS S. OSBORNE: I remind the minister of the increase in domestic crimes that has accompanied rural decline and out-migration, and the fact that the victims of domestic crimes are usually women.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MS S. OSBORNE: On and on I could go.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

Does the hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave, the hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The statement of the minister concerning the Newfoundland and Labrador Organization of Women Entrepreneurs is welcomed by me and the New Democratic Party. It is encouraging to see that the government is recognizing that the models of development of women enterprises that have been tried in other places and working and have worked here are being encouraged.

It is good to see that government recognizes that the success rate in women-run enterprises is very high, and that a program to eliminate barriers to success is very important and very necessary. I would urge the government to go further and ask their partners in Ottawa, in the Government of Canada, to insist on some sort of program by the banks to reinvest in communities in this country where they make all their money. To insist on a program where they reinvest some of their –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HARRIS: - capital and profits -

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: - in enterprises, and particularly women's enterprises.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are for the Minister of Health. Last week in this House I brought up the issue of cardiac surgery waiting lists. I asked the minister what is she planning to do to decrease this ballooning list? The minister said the reason the list was so long is because of improved technology. She also went on to state that responsibility for establishing this list rests with the doctors and that it was not her responsibility.

I would like to tell the minister that she is the one who holds the purse-strings. She does have a responsibility to allocate appropriate funding for cardiac surgery. Yesterday she stated publicly that politicians should not interfere in the waiting list, and I say to the minister that no one has asked her to do so. What we, and the hundreds of people waiting for cardiac surgery, would like to know is how she plans on dealing with this list and getting it under control.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In response to the member's preamble I would like to ask the question: Is this the same member who criticised this government's allocation of a new $3 million into the Health Care Corporation to cope and to try and address these very same issues? Is that the same member, Mr. Speaker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I said publicly yesterday when I was interviewed by the media on this very sad incident, I certainly raised the issue of the number of initiatives we have been doing to try to address the problem: working with the Health Care Corporation, allocating new money; much to the chagrin of this member, who wants to attack the politics of the issue rather than deal with the health of the issue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As a nurse you should know that you don't apply a band-aid when we need major surgery, I say to the minister.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, I was shocked yesterday to hear the minister give such a dispassionate response to the media on hearing about a protestor who collapsed at St. Clare's and blaming the fact that she can't do anything because she is a politician. That is what the minister said.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible)!

MR. SULLIVAN: That is what she said. I ask the minister today, as a former nurse and a former head of the nurses' union, if she has lost all compassion for people in the system? This man yesterday was waiting five weeks in hospital, Mr. Speaker, and was calling on the minister to do something to decrease the waiting list. Now, I ask the minister why she is now placing a higher value on saving money these days than on saving people's lives.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again in response to the member's preamble I would say for his information I'm an active nurse. I spoke yesterday to the media with great empathy for the family, and I made it quite clear that this government has done a list of things which I will review in a minute. But I also made it clear the day a politician interferes with a lineup for cardiac surgery is the day we have lost it in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Now, Mr. Speaker, I will answer the question, after addressing the preamble.

I would like to review what we have done, Mr. Speaker, in response to the question. We have done the following: we put up over $1 million last year to make renovations possible for the ICU to increase the beds from fourteen to seventeen beds. We have allocated a new $3 million, Mr. Speaker, for dedicated cardiac - Mr. Speaker, I would ask the member to listen to what I am doing. I think if he asked a question he should at least listen.

We have put an additional $3 million, Mr. Speaker, to develop a new dedicated cardiovascular unit for the recovery of cardiovascular patients. In addition to that, we have announced that there will be dedicated beds available with these new renovations that are on time, Mr. Speaker, and will be ready to start in January.

I have also said, Mr. Speaker, that we are actively recruiting a new cardiovascular surgeon. We have tried to accommodate the extra people beyond six months. We approached over 101 patients, Mr. Speaker, forty-one of them have taken us up on that offer. When we approached Nova Scotia, who had the same problems that we had, Mr. Speaker, we then approached the Ottawa institute and they are accommodating us to try to reach that fifty. As of November 21, Mr. Speaker, we had 385 cases done, in addition to the ones we are currently doing and will continue to do until December.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister to conclude her answer quickly.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: We will in fact have more done this year than we did last year, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Why increase from fourteen to seventeen, I say to the minister, you cancel two and three every week of cardiac surgery? That is what you did; you cancelled the equivalent of the increase. How do you expect to catch up on a growing waiting list? That is what the minister did. Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, the minister told us that her department has approached over 100 people, she indicated, and forty-one have taken up the department on their offer to go out of this Province. I ask the minister, will you confirm today that the people who have been added to the waiting since March 1 of this year - that is a period of nine months - that approximately 400 people who have been diagnosed since then and added to that list were not given the opportunity to go out of this Province as an option for cardiac surgery?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, we made a decision in this House of Assembly and announced it at that time that we would go to the people who were waiting longest for cardiovascular surgery. We are not going to send urgent people on a plane outside the Province. We met with the cardiovascular surgeons and we made a decision based on their recommendation. I, as a politician, did not say, you can go or you cannot go. We have to rely on the expertise of the surgeons to make that decision. They are not going to send an unstable person outside the Province, Mr. Speaker. I ask the member across the House to have some respect for the decisions made by the professionals involved here.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I would also say that I, as minister, do not cancel surgeries. If we have a car accident that comes in with major head injuries - with one tertiary care hospital in the Province to deal with head injuries - if they need the ICU bed I think anyone out there would understand, Mr. Speaker, that I don't set those kinds of priorities and nor should I. We have to count on the physicians and the doctors to make those kinds of calls. We are working towards trying to accommodate the number of increase in cardiovascular surgeons that we are trying to put in place but I would say, Mr. Speaker, if the member across the way had done any research, he would recognize the same debate is happening in Nova Scotia and the same debate is happening in Ontario. We don't hold a monopoly on this, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister to conclude her answer quickly.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: - but I can assure you, we are doing our very best, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This minister just said that anybody diagnosed and added to the list since March 1, is urgent. If you are waiting nine months for surgery the medical definition of urgency is forty-eight hours, I say to the minister. People since nine months and eight are waiting on this list. An estimated almost 200 people are still waiting after eight or nine months. If that is urgent, minister, there is something wrong with the system. There is something wrong.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: I say to the minister, she has indicated that she is doing everything she can, it is very difficult, I say to the minister, to wake up from cardiac surgery in familiar surroundings, not say -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: I ask the minister, would she allow family members to accompany the sick person who needs cardiac surgery outside this Province, so more people can take up the offer, rather then have to go out of the Province alone in a foreign area and to wake-up out of cardiac surgery with no family around?

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

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like a chance to address the member's preamble before the question.

I have to concur with Sister Elizabeth, when she said one time, `He does not know what he is talking about.' I believe it; I really believe it, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I just heard the member across the way identify a definition of urgent. Now the man is a diagnostician, as well as a politician.

I have to say that, the way a person is diagnosed for cardiac surgery is based on a number of things. Whether it is a valvular replacement or whether it is the percentage of blockage in a coronary artery, but Mr. Speaker, the member across the House does not diagnose based on time frames.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I get my definitions from medical specialists, I say to the minister, from medical specialists. That is where I get my definition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: That is right. I do not get them from the minister or for somebody in this House.

Mr. Speaker, the minister's responses and her department's actions on this matter are shameful, I say.

Now, when patients are fed up waiting because they are too long on a wait list that they risk their health even further by protesting, it is time that the minister acknowledge there is a problem and tell the people of this Province what she is going to do about it.

Now, I ask the minister again, I ask this question for the 240 people that are on the waiting list today for cardiac surgery in this Province, when is she going to allocate appropriate funds to reduce this waiting list? Tell us minister.

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

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I think we have said loudly and clearly that we are concerned and that we have put dedicated funding, much of which the member across the House apposed, to help address the issue of cardiovascular surgery. We in this Province have acknowledged it is a problem and that is why we have put in a million dollars last year, a dedicated $3 million, we are recruiting a new cardiovascular surgeon; at the end of this year, we will have done more than last year, Mr. Speaker.

We have acknowledged it and I cannot say often enough, I empathize with the family, I sympathize with what they are going through, I know it is extremely difficult to be waiting, but Mr. Speaker, the doctors and the nurses make the decisions and when the beds are available and when the surgeries can be done, that is when it is done.

We have acknowledged it and I think people will acknowledge that we have said that it was a problem and we have tried to address it. We have tried to keep the politics out of it, Mr. Speaker, by helping the people that need the help.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

I have questions today for the Minister of Government Services and Lands regarding the new policy on the private on-sight sewage disposal and waste water supply, which becomes effective on December 31, 1997.

Can the minister explain the new policy and why this new policy is required at this time.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services and Lands.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The new policy on sewage disposal: I cannot explain it without having it in front of me because I have not looked at it for the last few days.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. McLEAN: Well, Mr. Speaker, I have to - if he wants an answer, all I can say is that the new policy is brought into place because it is more effective to have private individuals out there working, designing systems that government need not be involved in. Government is there to inspect how systems are done; we should not be designing systems ourselves and then inspecting them ourselves. We need the private sector out there to develop these. We will do the inspections on them, and we feel that it is appropriate for people who want sewage systems put in place to pay for those and not have the taxpayers of the Province foot the bill for all of the sewer systems that we put in for cabin lots in the Province.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis, a supplementary.

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

Can the minister confirm that this is an essential service, particularly for rural Newfoundland, and also confirm an extra $500 to $1,500 per new home builder as an extra cost? The minister's actions could actually cost new home builders in this Province, mostly young people, anywhere from $1 million to $2 million this year, in total.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services and Lands.

MR. McLEAN: Mr. Speaker, the anticipated cost for each individual sewer system will be approximately $400; that is for cabin lots. Mr. Speaker, for anyone who wants to build a cabin, I am sure that the extra $400 is not going to make a difference as to whether or not they do the building.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis, a supplementary.

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

I say to the minister, he should check his figures before he gets in the House of Assembly and starts quoting figures, I can tell you that. Mine are correct.

Mr. Speaker, will the minister agree that this new policy will cause more red tape, slow the building process, and that rural areas with no water and sewer services will be hit the hardest? That private consultants will be hired to do it, and their travel time from their office to the more remote areas of the Province will actually drive the cost up? And that basically, if you sit back and size it up, this is just another step to force young people out of rural Newfoundland and Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services and Lands.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In answer to the first part of the question, it will actually speed up the time in which an application is approved, because now the application will be approved on principle and the testing will be done following the approval in principle.

In regard to it affecting the rural areas, when you design a system for septic tanks, it does not matter whether you live in a rural area or an urban area; it is all the same. What we are basically talking about is the design of septic systems. It does not matter where the actual application is made.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are for the Minister of Health.

The Province's health care sector today is in utter chaos because of the absolute lack of planning by the minister responsible. Yesterday I pointed out for the minister the Auditor General's Report on the Health Care Corporation, which revealed that the department plans to save money needed to pay for hospital restructuring by closing over 300 beds and sending people home sooner. Yet, the Minister of Health has just admitted that her department is not ready for the shifting of community care.

I ask the minister: Why did the Minister of Health do no planning whatsoever before signing on to a policy of closing hospital beds and sending people home sick? Does she, the former head of the nurses' union, think that kind of behaviour is appropriate for a Minister of Health?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would assume this is the same member who yesterday asked the question, if sending patients home earlier created increased infections. I have to say, not only does it not create more infections but the health care organization has a percentage of 2.7 per cent infections when the national bench mark is over 25 per cent. So, I presume that kind of statement is similar to this one, unfounded and anecdotal.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South, a supplementary.

MR. FRENCH: Absolutely not.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Another lack of planning, of course, is in Gander where we have seen the government just halt construction on the hospital there and spend much needed health dollars in closing in something before it rusts out. Why did the minister wait until after the Gander Hospital restructuring started? I ask the minister today: How much money have we spent in closing in this facility in Gander now? And why did we spend this money and then afterwards do the planning for that area for Central Newfoundland?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, again I think we need to stick to the facts rather than the anecdotal stories that we are hearing every day here and I urge the member to get the facts before he comes forward.

I also say, in response to the question, Mr. Speaker, that the member across the House knows, I am sure, that the Canada Health system is based on institutional funding, inside physicians services. Every province in the country, Newfoundland particularly, has put dedicated funding into the whole concept of community development and, in fact, Central Newfoundland is one of the first in the Province and has set the template for single-entry system and for their community development system.

So, Mr. Speaker, it is happening right across the country. We have put dedicated money into our community resources and we will continue to do so, to provide an increase in services for the people in all of the Province.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South, a supplementary.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I point out to the minister another lack of planning in the Bonavista area when a government spent $1.4 million on the Golden Heights Manor to build ten new beds that the government now will not open.

Does the minister remember being head of the Nurses' Union, condemning the government for acting without consultation, without planning, and wasting precious health-care dollars in the process? Why has she so quickly turned from an advocate for health care reform to an obstacle to health care reform in this Province?

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

MS J. M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would ask the member across the House to retract his anecdotal statements made yesterday: fearmongering and patient infections right across this Province in a whole issue to do politics, Mr. Speaker, when it comes to something as important as health care in this Province.

I am talking about health care; he is talking about politics, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Education.

Mr. Speaker, today we are witnessing the wholesale destruction of the public post-secondary education system. In Gander, the college has been reduced to four programs. It has eliminated this year computer-aided drafting, electronics communication, motor vehicle repair, and all across the Province, dozens and dozens of programs have been shut down in the public system.

Why, Mr. Speaker, is this minister and this government abandoning the post-secondary public education system in this Province?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the question, Mr. Speaker. I know the members in the Official Opposition have given the member who asked the question, the Leader of the NDP, a razz because the real opposition has just spoken, and I expect, as well, Mr. Speaker, that the members of the Official Opposition are so busy, I guess, lining up in Question Period to try to jockey a position for their aspirations of being Leader of the Opposition. It was only a couple of days ago with respect to an issue like this, Mr. Speaker, a real question about a matter concerning education, that one of the members of the Official Opposition actually leaned over - I think it is against the rules of the House - and stole an issue off the desk of the Leader of the NDP so they could ask a question - because that is where the real opposition is, Mr. Speaker, in Newfoundland and Labrador.

The reality of it, Mr. Speaker, is that the question is a serious one. I think, with respect to post-secondary education, the evidence will show that the current Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, far from abandoning post-secondary education, has made moves in the last couple of years to make sure that we can guarantee the delivery of good course options in a wide range of locations in Newfoundland and Labrador to meet the needs of the post-secondary student body in Newfoundland and Labrador based primarily, Mr. Speaker, on labour-market-activity research, not on the whims and wishes of what certain people in certain places wish to have -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to get to his answer quickly.

MR. GRIMES: - but based on real facts and information as to what the needs are, what the demands are and what the opportunity should be for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister knows the only choice of students who cannot get into the public college system is private colleges at three to four times the cost of the public system, paying $8,000, $10,000, $12,000 or more for courses sometimes of very questionable value. Why is he forcing students who must obtain an education in order to get work into the hands of private operators, who have grown by leaps and bounds over the last five or six years, where they must pay the full cost of the course, plus profit for the owners? Why is he forcing people into those programs at great personal expense?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am delighted to hear the position of the New Democratic Party with respect to their total, unabashed, unashamed opposition to the private post-secondary education system in the Province. At least it is consistent with a policy point of view that they have contemplated and stayed true to for some years. I am sure we are likely to get a question, maybe tomorrow or the next day, now that it has been raised, from the education critic, again a leadership aspirant in the Official Opposition.

We would like to hear the position of the Official Opposition as to how they feel about the private post-secondary training system. We know now, for the record, and I think it should be clear, that the New Democratic Party, as just articulated by its Leader, thinks there should be no private post-secondary training in Newfoundland and Labrador. We would be interested to hear a follow-up question or a comment from the Official Opposition as to how they feel about it.

The government, for the record, in answer to the question -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to finish his answer quickly.

MR. GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker. The government clearly feels that there is room, and there should be in Newfoundland and Labrador, for a healthy mix of options in the post-secondary system between a publicly-funded system, which we still fund to the tune of $150 million a year, far from not a public system, and also some options in the private sector, the private training institutions, that can also fill in some gaps and make opportunities available -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister -

MR. GRIMES: - where the public system is not available.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister will know that since 1991, the enrolment in the private colleges has increased by over 600 per cent, now to more than 11,000 students. Some are of very questionable quality - in some cases, their marketing plans guarantee that nobody will fail.

Is the minister prepared to initiate an independent study of the private institutions to examine: one, the quality of instruction and qualifications of instructors; two, the value for money of those courses; three, the success rate for graduation from private institutes in obtaining employment; and four, the student loan or other debt level of private sector graduates? Will the minister institute an independent study of these questions?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I appreciate the question because it is a serious one. The hon. member, as Leader of the New Democratic Party in the Province, recently indicated he was not that interested in being here anymore. He would like to run something. Even though he did not get a chance to run St. John's, and he is not going to run the Province being with the New Democratic Party, if he ever ran anything - because the members opposite, not these particular individuals, but the people who preceded them, did run the Province for a period of time.

They did deal with the issue of the private training institutions. They, the former government of the Progressive Conservatives, did review each of the issues raised in the question by the hon. member with respect to the private training institutions. A further review has been conducted by Liberal administrations since 1989. The issues raised have all been researched.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, what hon. members should know is that every private training institution that operates in the Province has a licence to do so from the government. Because the questions just raised have already been examined and answered through a process that has been in place for some years to guarantee and safeguard against people being ripped off in training institutions.

With respect to student indebtedness, which is the last issue raised -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. GRIMES: - tomorrow, all members will get an opportunity to debate that issue in a private member's motion raised by my colleague. Also, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: - it has been an issue that has been on the national agenda and –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: - will continue to be until we get a further resolution.

MR. SPEAKER: I ask the hon. member to take his seat.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

In government buildings, hospitals, including the Waterford Hospital and so on, many of the quality products that are manufactured and sold here in Newfoundland and Labrador are not available in most cases. Despite government's `Manufactured Right Here' campaign, government continues to provide little incentive for assistance to local manufacturers and producers, to provide in government institutions. In fact, here in our own cafeteria, Mr. Speaker, many of these local products are not even available for sale. Can the Premier tell us what he intends to do to address this problem and to give local manufacturers and producers the edge, in supplying to government institutions?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, let me just say to the hon. gentleman very quickly, that all of us on this side of the House are working diligently every day to ensure that all of the products being manufactured in Newfoundland, are being used in this Province insofar as is humanly possible. That is the answer.

MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has ended.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition from a number of residents of Winterton, Trinity Bay - Your Honour's district - and a number of residents of the community of Springdale who are -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Springdale is not in Trinity Bay. I say to the member, they are not in -

AN HON. MEMBER: Springdale is in Notre Dame Bay.

MR. HARRIS: Springdale is in Notre Dame Bay. I remind the hon. member that Springdale is not in Trinity Bay.

AN HON. MEMBER: Not in Trinity Bay. Now, where are these names coming from in Trinity Bay?

MR. HARRIS: They are coming from Winterton, Trinity Bay.

AN HON. MEMBER: Why didn't you say that?

MR. HARRIS: That is what I said, in His Honour's district. If the minister were listening he would not even be confused that Winterton was not in Trinity Bay and that Springdale was not in Trinity Bay but in a different bay.

These petitioners, Mr. Speaker, are concerned about a serious matter. They are not concerned about the heckling from the government minister opposite who does not want to hear about this issue. They are concerned about a very important issue which is one of the consequences of poverty in this Province, Mr. Speaker, that school children are going to school hungry. They are petitioning the House of Assembly to direct the government to establish a universal, comprehensive school lunch program for every school in Newfoundland and Labrador to help end child hunger and to give our children a better chance.

Now, Mr. Speaker, these petitioners are well aware of the government support for the school children's food foundation. They are well aware of the government support for a pilot program for a couple of years. They are well aware of the government's attitude, expressed sometimes by the Minister of Education, that the voluntary sector should do the job. What they are aware of, Mr. Speaker, is that the voluntary sector cannot do the job. The communities that need this type of assistance the most cannot provide the resources to make a program work. There needs to be, Mr. Speaker, a universal program. To give you an idea of how unsuccessful the government's program is, there are school meal programs in only thirty-two of the Province's in excess of 400-and-some-odd schools. Less than 10 per cent of the schools have access to this type of program. Now, Mr. Speaker, this is a disgrace.

We are continuously getting reports, year after year, from the National Council on Welfare indicating that the child poverty rate in this Province has in fact increased by 50 per cent since 1989. Now this is a Province which has supported an all-party resolution in the House of Commons in 1989, supported by the Liberals, as well as by the Conservatives in Ottawa and the New Democratic Party, a commitment to end child hunger and child poverty in Canada by the Year 2000. Now, Mr. Speaker, that is not very far away. In another couple of years the Year 2000 will be here and we don't see the level of progress that we need in order to feed our hungry children. Mr. Speaker, there are groups in this Province who are now getting together because they feel they have to have an organized lobby to speak out for the poor hungry children who cannot speak out for themselves and to insist that the government adopt a program that is going to ensure that children can go to school with full bellies, Mr. Speaker, so they can have a chance, at least, to learn and obtain an education from the system.

We have lip services given to this and many issues regarding children, Mr. Speaker. We had a committee on the rights of children and a committee on children a couple of years ago. We had a report to the government from Dr. Patricia Canning indicating how serious a problem it is and the serious consequences to children not being able to learn in school without a proper nutritious diet. Mr. Speaker, for this program to be successful it requires a universal component. It requires that it be available in all schools in the Province so that children will have at least a chance to have one decent nutritious meal a day and to have access to that so that they can learn from the educational system and have a better chance for their future.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

I am pleased today to rise again to support the petition put forward by my friend from Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi.

Mr. Speaker, this shows that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, not just those who live in St. John's, but people who live in other parts of the Province want this government to start paying attention to the Williams' Royal Commission Report.

Mr. Speaker, I refer for a moment to chapter 16 of the Williams' Royal Commission Report, it is called, `Equal Access, Equal Opportunities', and they have a section in that chapter that is called, `Social and Economic Barriers to Achievement'. What are the first two things mentioned in Social and Economic Barriers to Achievement? The first one mentioned is poverty. The second one mentioned is child hunger.

Mr. Speaker, I refer to these because this particular report has been around for some considerable years. It has been backed up by a number of other studies. The data for this particular report was compiled in the late eighties and in the early nineties, but nothing has happened.

In the last year in this House this is my seventeenth time rising to support or to present a petition on this particular matter, and I shall continue to rise when the opportunity arises for me to speak because there is nothing more important in Newfoundland and Labrador today than the condition of our children.

What did they say in the Williams Royal Commission Report? They said that the child poverty rate for this Province is the highest in the country, and they said poor nutrition contributes to poor health. The children of low income families are especially vulnerable to academic failure.

These are not words that I just say here. They are words that are backed up by research in the Department of Health, by research in the Department of Social Services, which was the department at that time, so I say to all of us here that we had better start doing something about it.

What this petition today says is that the people who live in Winterton, Hant's Harbour, Brownsdale, and these communities in Turks Cove, these communities that are out in Trinity Bay, these people have problems too, and we are saying to the government: Let's make sure every child in this Province has equal access and equal opportunity, and to do that we have to address the two points identified as priorities in the Williams Royal Commission. One was child poverty, and the second one identified was child hunger.

Mr. Speaker, it is not sufficient for us to talk about it. We need action. We need bold, aggressive action, and we need it in this Province now.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South on a petition.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Windsor - Springdale.

MR. FLIGHT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise for a moment to support the prayer of the petition for two reasons. One, obviously, is that it has been presented on behalf of my constituents of Springdale. I have read the petition, I have read the names, and I can tell you that I recognize a lot of the names of people on that petition. I support it for that reason, and I also support it because I think there is some validity in the request.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FLIGHT: Like any other program, Mr. Speaker, and it does not matter what the program is, it appears to me that in Newfoundland today any program directed - and it does not matter - in most cases those kinds of programs are administered and sponsored by government, but even if it is sponsored by the private sector, in most cases rural Newfoundland gets the short end of the stick in any of those programs. Now that is a fact of life. That cannot be argued.

I suspect it may be saying that they don't have equal access. There is no question also, and it goes without saying, that if there is a problem with children going to school undernourished or hungry in Newfoundland, then it would go without saying that given the economy, given the battering that rural Newfoundland has taken with the state of the economy of most of rural Newfoundland that depends on the fishery, then the chances are that if there is hunger in the schools in St. John's, in Corner Brook, in Stephenville, in Grand Falls - Windsor, there would be all the more, one would expect, in communities whose economies have been devastated and who are struggling right now given the economic circumstances in most of our rural communities.

I might say this, Mr. Speaker: Almost everyone here would know, as the minister responsible for the introduction of a School Milk Program in Newfoundland, it was one of the most appreciated and successful programs. Minister after minister, from the time that this government implemented the program, improved on that program. I might tell you, Mr. Speaker, it is one of the most appreciated and one of the most valuable programs we have going on. I would only hope that it would be possible and I am sure the government is looking at ways of improving the School Lunch Program, but I would only hope that it is possible to make the School Lunch Program as successful and as valuable as the School Milk Program has become.

Thank you.

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

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

I rise again today to present another petition protesting the rate increase at Newfoundland and Labrador Housing. The prayer of the petition, Mr. Speaker, is:

We the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador wish to petition the House of Assembly regarding the rate increase at Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation on a sliding scale from twenty-five to thirty per cent.

We are apposed to this increase because of the hardships that may be endured by tenants and we therefore ask that the decision be reconsidered.

Again, Mr. Speaker, the minister has announced that he is going to reconsider this. The minister had announced that none of the tenants of housing will be worse off, the working poor, none of them will be worse off then the people that are receiving full government subsidies. Mr. Speaker, we will hold the minister to that. He is a fair man, he is probably the best minister on that side of the House, so we will hold him to that.

Mr. Speaker, I assure you that we will have further petitions on this. We will be presenting petitions on a regular daily basis and I am sure that the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador Housing eagerly await the outcome of the review, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you.

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

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

I rise to support the petition put forward by the Member for St. John's South. We acknowledge on this side that the minister, who the Member for St. John's South believes is the best minister over there, but we are going to have some discussion on that a little later on, and with compliments like that coming from the Official Opposition, I would say your tenure is in doubt.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say to the minister that the point here is not that there should be some review of this, but the point is that we are going from a twenty-five per cent increase to a thirty per cent increase in one move. The people I have talked to said a twenty per cent increase in their rent is significant given the fact that, regardless of their level of income and there are no wealthy people in those units, by definition, there may be people there who have comfortable means, having an income of, like the minister said yesterday, having an income of $25,000 or $30,000 is by no means wealthy in today's society.

So, Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister that maybe when he reviews it he should consider to having the matter reviewed both on the matter of income level, but also consider having it graduated, in other words, moving from twenty-five per cent to twenty-six per cent in a gradual step process rather than making one big change in one fell swoop, so that there might be some more equity and people might understand a little more by having a twenty per cent increase when pensions are frozen. There has not been an increase in pensions to the civil service in this Province since 1989. So, most of these people are receiving provincial pensions or some other kind of pension which have been frozen for a long time or they are on very low incomes and they have no wage increases.

So, we say to the minister, if he would, to reconsider the matter and perhaps not only look at the individual cases, but look at the whole principle here, is that when everybody else is trying to cope with their bills and trying to pay their bills with scarce dollars, that these people are asked to absorb a twenty per cent increase in one step and that I think is what they find most regrettable and we are asking the minister if he would put on hold and maybe consider having a graduated process rather then doing it all in one move from twenty-five per cent to thirty per cent of gross income.

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

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, let me say to my hon. friends across the way, do not go giving me compliments like that. If you want the best minister in the House to stay in the House, don't you fellows go complimenting him because if a certain fellow should hear that, he will start to question it himself and who knows, I might get the flick.

In reaction to the Member for Waterford Valley: a single parent, two children - a single parent, most likely female. Private market rental cost - they are not renting off us they are renting off the private sector. They are in Mount Pearl. That person, the average income is $12,671, that is (inaudible) that is for working, single. Out in the private sector - these are facts, I can provide all these facts - they are paying 46.06 per cent of that income to the private sector for housing, 46 per cent. The same person, getting a subsidy of heat to put on top of the $1,671 - that drives the income up to $13,873 - he is paying 27 per cent, not 28 per cent or 29 per cent or 30 per cent, not an increase of 20 per cent, he is paying 27 per cent of that income.

Now, the point I am trying to make to you is that, in the private sector, they are paying 46 per cent, social housing they are paying 27 per cent, not 29 per cent. You have to remember that everybody in social housing did not go from 25 per cent to 30 per cent, okay? Social services, for example, did not move at all, they are still at 25 per cent.

I will give you another example: Single, one person, a senior, old age pension, the supplement and Canada pension, a little bit of Canada pension. The majority of our seniors are getting this; $11,891 - that is what my mother was getting before she died, living in Carbonear - If she were renting out in the private sector, she would be paying 44.7 per cent - and these are facts, I can prove it to you - 44.7 per cent of her income, almost half of her income would go for rent. Now, when I say rent, I mean heating costs as well.

Just listen to this one: A single senior renting from us pays 29 per cent. Now, `Harvey', I do not have to go any further. There is something wrong with the system when the poorest people - the poorest people; I am not talking about - the poorest people are the people on social assistance. But you have all these people, you guys know, you go out to the mall tonight and go into WAL-MART or one of those stores - and what are they making? Six dollars an hour if they are lucky. There are families out there, men and women making five and six dollars an hour with two and three and four youngsters. And where do they have to live, I ask the Member for St. John's South? Rat traps, in the center of St. John's, that is where they have to live, because they do not have enough money; they do not have the money they need to go out and rent down in the East End or up in the West End, or Mount Pearl. They do not have the money.

Mr. Speaker, I ask you, quite honestly: Who are the people that we, as a government should be helping? Who are the people we should be helping? Those are the people, and I say that in all honesty. I will review it - I told you I was going to review it. There may be some way that I can accommodate some people who are having some hardships, but you know, you all know on that side, there are people living in social housing units around this Province who can well afford to be living in the private sector.

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, Order No. 2

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

CHAIR (Mr. M. Penney): Order, please!

Order No. 2, the hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to take just a few minutes today to talk about Bill 28 and the approval of certain amounts of money to be spent in various areas in the Province.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to go to, of course, health care, and I would like to take some time today to talk about the personal care home industry in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. I would like to point out to this House that it is not probably, it is, the best bang, as one minister said one time, for your buck in Newfoundland and Labrador on health care in this Province.

There have been many studies done, I guess, in recent years on health care in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. I could go back, I suppose, as far as the Doane Raymond report, but I will go back to the most recent one which was a report done by Kirby and Company. I am sure there are copies with the minister. I know there are copies with the minister, because the Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Homes for Special Care met and certainly sent a copy of this report to the department. I realize that it has been, I guess, under review for maybe quite some time.

The health care industry in this Province has been suffering, and suffering for quite some time. In the Kirby and Company report which was done last year and submitted, actually, in October of 1996, it pointed out in that report that in the homes in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador the people should be paid a minimum of $1,120 per month. Right now, personal care homes in our Province receive $900 a month, which to me is not right. We have many people - and I will go through some of them, because some people got upset in the House the other day because I dare raise an issue where people got taxpayers' dollars to go into business with taxpayers who are already in the same business in this Province.

There are nineteen personal care homes in part of my district, and surrounding it there are some twenty-one personal care homes in this Province. I have copies of correspondence that were sent to Mr. Randy Williams, who looks after HRD in Newfoundland and Labrador when we talked about home cares in this Province. I have copies of correspondence Mr. Williams sent out across this Island to HRD district directors, in which he stated he met with Mr. Legge and Mrs. Isaacs, who are two personal care home owners in this Province - one, Mr. Legge, being the president of the Association, and Mrs. Isaacs being the secretary. He outlined in the letter how these people felt their tax dollars should not go in competition with them, and for all intents and purposes agreed that this money - there would be no way there would be any federal funding go in competition in this Province with an industry which is now already suffering.

Some people got upset, as I said, the other day. I really do not care about that. Because I know personally the plight of some of these homeowners in this Province. I will just use one gentleman whose wife and he work seven days a week, long hours a day - and I mean many long hours a day - who has one son who works with a company and another son in university, who on weekends are taking their time to work in the family business so that they can keep the family business afloat. Just imagine, going to university and on Friday and Saturday nights doing the late shift so that mom and dad can have a night off. The other son, who is working a full-time job, on weekends and whenever he can, works in the family business to keep the family business afloat. That home is not in my district, but it is very close to my district, and I know the owners of that particular home personally. I know them quite well, and I speak to them on a regular basis.

I will go to another home which is in my district and who, at the end of the month, trot down to their bank with $6,000 to pay their monthly mortgage - $6,000 a month to pay their monthly mortgage - because these people had the guts and the gumption to get up, to go out, to go to the bank and borrow the money to build a personal care home. Nobody gave them a hand-out, and no federal member stood in their house and said, `We don't give money for that, Mr. Chairman', as one federal member recently did. `We don't give money for that'. But this lady and her husband, at the end of every single month, go down to their bank and have a mortgage payment of $6,000 a month.

Now I will talk about another home which is further away from my district again, on the West Coast of this Province, who goes down to her bank at the end of every month with a cheque for $4,000 - $4,000 a month - to make her mortgage payment. I am sure the Member for Harbour Main - Whitbourne knows what I am taking about. The Member for Harbour Main - Whitbourne represented part of the area that I did, and I know that he has read part of a report which was done, I think, by Doane Raymond, if memory serves me correct. I am sure he is well aware of the plight of personal care home-owners in this Province, well aware of the plight of these home-owners, of how much money these people have had to spend in recent years to upgrade their homes, but all done on their own initiative, all done on their own backs and their own sweat because they went out and raised their money, had a chartered bank, or the Federal Development Bank or wherever, they went out and raised their money, and at the end of the day these people will have to go back and pay that money back to a chartered bank in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

The home-owners' association, as I told you, met with HRD, and HRD said, it is wrong - it is wrong - to use your tax dollars to go into business with you. It is wrong. Yet, we find that $500,000 of taxpayers' money went into private industry to go into competition with industry that was already there. Five hundred thousand dollars went to a group of people who did not have a licence, who did not submit a licence. Yet, it is very interesting to note that when the federal member stood in the lady's home in Larks Harbour, he told her, `There's no money for this'; and relatives of the fellow who got the money was with him, stood up with him, stood up in the home with him when the questions were asked. This lady, being very proud of her home, took him on a tour of the home and showed him everything that was in there and answered every question that they had to ask. Then the next day he came out and said, `Oh, she asked about money for water and sewer.' What garbage, Mr. Chairman, what absolute, absolute garbage. I spoke to the lady when I got out of the House and the next morning when I came in I spoke to her very early in the morning, she said no such thing. She never asked him for money to build water and sewer for her home in Larks Harbour, never asked.

So again, Mr. Chairman, what we have done to the Homeowners Association in this Province - and people can laugh and say, `well we don't care about the homeowners in this Province, - and they probably don't, Mr. Chairman. The homeowners in this Province do not care about him either because he has never had to do the work that these people have had to do. He has never had to get out of bed at 2:00 or 3:00 a.m. to attend to people in his home who have been sick. He has never had to do that but these people have had to do that, Mr. Chairman, and it is wrong. So when Don Johnson's wife and her sister get $500,000 from the federal government, it is wrong. I said it was wrong before and I say it's wrong again and I will keep saying it's wrong. I went back the other day and wrote the federal minister again and I have copied the Prime Minister of Canada, the members of the Reform Party, the members of the Conservative Party and the Bloc, I have sent them all copies of what has gone on in this Province with regard to homeowners in this Province because it is ridiculous.

Then we have people who stand in this House who do not have a clue about the homeowner business in this Province, haven't got a clue and can get up with such rhetoric to try to defend their buddy in Ottawa. What garbage, Mr. Chairman. But if he wants a tour of homeowners I have nineteen of them. Let him pick the day and the time and I would gladly take any member from this House who would like a tour of some of the homes in this Province, out to meet - you can laugh and you can smile, I say to the Member for Humber East, because that's your knowledge of the homeowners in Newfoundland and Labrador. Don't you worry, I certainly will convey your feelings, how you laughed and so on when the issue concerning them came up in the House. They will be well aware of what you did, believe you me.

But that is not why I am up today, because of him. It means nothing to me, Mr. Chairman, but these homeowners deserve better in this Province. They deserve better. It is the cheapest form of health care. The minister, I am sure, knows what I talk about with homeowners in this Province. The minister attended their annual meeting last year in Gander. The minister has somebody in her department who looks after the homes for special care in this Province and knows full well of the problems that these people are having. My only hope, Mr. Speaker, is that when the next budget comes down that in this Province this government and this side of the House and everybody here can do more for the homeowners in this Province.

On that note, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for listening and I will sit down.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I stand today, Mr. Chairman, to make a few comments with respect to Bill 28, whereby this government now seeks approval for certain sums of money for the continuation of its obligation to govern the people of this Province. When we look at the heads of expenditure we see that some $75,700,000 is being sought by this government in the continuation of its budgetary plan but specifically, Mr. Chairman, if we look at one department, the department which stands out above all others is the Department of Education which has an expenditure of some $32,800,000. Almost one-half of a full amount which is included in Bill No. 28. When we look at the problems which the people of this Province are facing, particularly as it relates to rural Newfoundland, we have to question how this expenditure was warranted.

I had some occasion, as well as other members, to visit a number of communities several weeks ago and to find out first hand how many people in rural parts of our Province are responding to cuts or proposed cuts in education.

I had an opportunity to meet with student councils, the parent's councils or the school councils, comprised of teachers –

MR. SULLIVAN: You were not allowed to have any leaders over there other than one.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: - comprised of teachers and parents and other interested community minded people at Grant Collegiate in Springdale where it was clear during this meeting that there is legitimate and genuine concerns for the future of their schools as they now know it.

They expressed concern of the continuation of programs which they have held sacred over the past number of years, certainly since that particular school began and they were talking about programs such as the basic concept of a library. When a library in that particular school, in that particular community may be reduced to one-half time, in other words, a library in a school will be open only fifty per cent of the day. That, Mr. Chairman, is fatal, when it comes to the well being of the educational interests of our young people. I say, Mr. Chairman, that is fatal.

They are concerned about the continuing of programs such as French, music, industrial arts, sports programs, those interests, which as the Member for Baie Verte alluded to a little while ago, those interests and programs which are so essential and mandatory in keeping those children in school.

We also had an occasion to visit the community of King's Point, not that far away, where the same sorts of concerns were expressed. The same issues were being raised. What will the proposed pupil/teacher ratio be? How will that affect a community such as King's Point? How will their school be directly affected as a result of any cuts which the minister and the Department of Education may well have in store in the next academic school year?

These are serious questions. These are problems which are being raised by Newfoundlanders throughout the Province and these are problems which must be listened to and must be addressed by the minister. How is it, that today in this Province, there is going to be or at least a proposal exists, where it is indeed possible that there may be a reduction in the availability of teachers in these schools in our smaller communities. The very life blood, as it has been expressed by many members in this House of Assembly, the very life blood of Newfoundland is the existence and the continuation of these small rural communities as we have known them throughout the years.

Newfoundlanders as we all know are leaving in large numbers, Mr. Chairman. They are leaving in huge numbers. Our communities are dying. One aspect that at least gives hope to rural Newfoundland is the continuation and existence of one of its primary institutions, namely its school. When a school disappears that is the beginning of the end, I say, Mr. Chairman, to that particular community.

I have seen it first hand, for example, in the community of Long Harbour. A population of some 400 or 500 people which was devastated a number of years ago at the time of the closure of the Erco plant; the phosphorus plant, and now today a school which has existed in that community for perhaps forty or fifty years, is now closed. That school, which experienced an improvement in its gymnasium at the cost of $250,000 only two years ago, remains dormant. It is a facility which is of no use, unfortunately, to what was once a thriving community in rural Newfoundland. Unfortunately, this is an example of what many communities may be facing.

That is why the citizens of King's Point came out in significant numbers, I may add, a relatively small community, but they attended a meeting in significant numbers to voice their concern about the very, not only existence of their school, I say to the members opposite, but to the existence of their community.

It is an important issue. It is an issue which has to be given serious consideration. I'm glad the Minister of Education has just returned, because he can perhaps comment on an expenditure of some $32,800,000 being dedicated to the Department of Education. When we see school closures, when we see the reductions in services being provided to students, when we see a school population in the Province of Newfoundland being reduced from some 160,000 approximately twenty-five or twenty-six years ago to now perhaps slightly less than 100,000. The question has to be asked, what is the explanation that the minister can give when in fact we hear so many complaints, so many concerns being expressed, by the general populace of this Province as it relates to primary, elementary, and secondary education in our Province?

Another issue which unfortunately has not been given the attention, or certainly the importance, by the minister in response to questions last week was on the whole issue of school air quality. Today I had the occasion to speak with a lady whose daughter attends a grade XII Level III class at Ascension High School in Bay Roberts. The lady gave me her consent and permission to use her name, and I will do so. Mrs. Neil was her name.

She has tried desperately through the central office of the Avalon West School Board to get information relative to the air quality as it exists at Ascension High School. A fairly basic and I think understandable question for any concerned parent. Her daughter apparently suffers from allergies, and her health concerns have been brought to the attention of the school board central office. However, with no success. The school board has refused, in an appropriate fashion, to identify the concern that has been raised.

Several days ago questions were asked in this House with respect to the important issue of air quality. A very basic question was asked. Will the minister table in this House the study, the results of the studies, which were performed throughout approximately fifty-plus schools in this Province. Information to which the public is entitled. Information to which every parent and teacher and pupil who is directly affected by the schools in question, this information is their entitlement.

The minister has refused to table the information, and says that those individuals with the responsibility of addressing the problem and hopefully correcting the problem have been aware of the circumstances and deal with it. I say to the minister that on such a serious issue as to the issue of air quality in schools, that is simply not good enough. This is public information. Public expenditure is at stake, public health is at stake. Simply, why not provide the information to the public of this Province as to the details with respect to the air quality analysis and the results. Basic information.

In today's Order Paper there is a fairly lengthy question on the issue of air quality. There is a page or a page and a half in today's Order Paper whereby questions are being forwarded to the Minister of Education on this topic. Here is an opportunity for him. In Question Period he refused to provide the answer. There is an opportunity in today's Order Paper for him to take seriously those concerns, and to hopefully provide the answers which are being asked. Answers to questions being asked by the concerned parents, teachers, and pupils of this Province.

It is an important issue, it cannot simply be swept under the rug, it must be addressed in a responsible fashion and I say to the minister to take the request, if not of me, seriously, but to take the request of a Mrs. Neil whose Level III daughter suffers from allergies, suffers from asthma; there is a direct co-relation between her health and the quality of air in her school, at least, take her plea seriously, and find out what the problems are and let her know, let her daughter know and let the public of this Province know exactly what the situation is as it exists in so many schools in our Province.

Mr. Chairman, again, the expenditure of $32,800,000 I would be interested in the minister responding - I realize in general terms because he perhaps does not have the information before him - but I would be interested in the minister making some justification for these figures as they are expressed in the schedule of Bill 28.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Humber East.

MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would just like to make a few comments today on Bill 28 which is before the House, and to address specifically the issue raised by my hon. colleague opposite dealing with personal care homes.

I suspect we both agree that one of the pressing priorities of government and pressing priorities of all sectors of our society is to provide comfortable, affordable home care for our senior citizens. I do not think there is any debate or discussion about that, and I think if my hon. colleague opposite were to have combined these comments to that point, I think we could have found a lot of grounds for agreement.

The issue at hand, and I would like to refer specifically to the situation we now find ourselves in, in the Corner Brook, West Coast area dealing with a particular application which is presently before the federal funding which has been approved. Like the hon. member opposite, I think I could agree that these personal care homes should be built without government funding, whether it is municipal, provincial or federal. However, Mr. Chairman, the facts do not support that. In Newfoundland, for many, many years, these personal care homes have been built using federal funds from many different sources. For argument sake, Mr. Chairman, under the TAGS Program, the fisheries alternative component, there are some fifteen homes which have been built and funded in this Province using that particular program, and I suspect, Mr. Chairman, that, if one were to look, one would find many examples of a large number of personal care homes in this Province which have been built with, and using federal, municipal and provincial funds.

As I say, if I had my druthers, I perhaps would argue strenuously that, that not be done, and that the private sector use their own funds and secure their own sources of funding to do these types of ventures but such is not the case, Mr. Chairman, and when programs do become available, whether they are under the fisheries alternative program or whether they would be under another federal program, people do make application and in the fullness of time, these applications are approved.

What I do take some exception to, Mr. Chairman, is the notion that there is no need for senior citizen facilities in Western Newfoundland and in particular in Corner Brook. That statement simply does not bear up under scrutiny. As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, as a result of the discussions which have been ongoing for the last little while, we will have found that many individuals in Western Newfoundland have come forward and said that there is a crying need, there is a desperate need, for additional personal care facilities. As a matter of fact, one only has to look into the Letters to the Editor of The Western Star from time to time and see senior citizens who have come forward and basically have said that there is a need, that they wish to obtain and to be able to get into personal care homes at a level and at a cost that their budgets can afford. There is no doubt that such is required.

In the last twenty-one months that I have been the Member for the District of Humber East, I have had a number of individuals come to me, a number of organizations. I recall a group in the Pasadena area, the Humber Valley Crown of the Valley Senior Citizen's Home. They are repeatedly looking for sources of funding to extend the number of cottages which they have available. They have extended waiting lists of individuals who wish to move into these facilities and to enjoy what we have all come to call `the golden years'. Unfortunately, due to the lack of funding for that particular level of housing, they have been unable to expand.

Also, Mr. Chairman, over the last number of months I have been dealing with an organization in the Corner Brook area, the Royal Canadian Legion, who are anxiously looking for additional accommodations to house veterans of the Second World War and other conflicts. They point out to me that there is a pressing lack of facilities, particularly in Level 1 and Level 2, where these seniors can go to enjoy, as I say, their golden years.

Quite in addition to that, we have quite recently had the Deputy Mayor of the City of Corner Brook basically coming out and saying in no uncertain terms that there is a need, there is a crying need, there is a desperate need, for additional personal care homes in the Corner Brook area. As a matter of fact, in the situation dealing with the legion facilities, a couple of years ago they thought they had the funding and they advertised for it. They had a waiting list at that time of no less than 171 names of individuals who wanted to move into that kind of facility.

Mr. Chairman, the point of the matter is that they want to move into a facility that is close to where they have lived all of their lives, where their family is. They want to live in a personal care home that is within the Corner Brook area. They recognize that there are other very good personal care homes in the Province. There are personal care homes in the Bay of Islands. They have indicated to me, it is their preference that they be able to stay in surroundings which are familiar to them.

Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I do not think there is any doubt whatsoever that there is a crying need, a desperate need, for personal care homes in the Corner Brook area. Therefore, it is not unusual. The individuals concerned looked at this, and they saw that there was a quality business opportunity here. They made their plans. They went to the various funding agencies and submitted their applications, and in due course the particular application for this particular project was approved.

There have been a lot of allegations made that this application - because one of the individuals concerned was a spouse of a Liberal Party organizer - a lot of allegations have now been made that because of that connection there must be, and must have been, political interference.

Mr. Chairman, we have asked on several occasions in this hon. House for proof that there was. We have asked that there be some information laid on the Table of the House to demonstrate that there was indeed political interference, and as of today we still have no such proof. All we have heard is that we stand by our statements and we believe that what we have said is true.

Mr. Chairman, when such allegations are made, one has to do more than stand by one's statements. One has to do more than to believe that one is true. One must be able to demonstrate conclusively that there are and that there was interference.

Mr. Chairman, one of the statements that has been made in recent times as to why there must have been interference involved is the fact that it only took some forty-one working days in which to have this application approved. Again, we look at the reality of the situation. The reality of the situation is that in this present year the government that I represent, and I'm part of, in cooperation with the federal government, introduced a new process for processing applications to these job creation types of employment activities.

As a consequence of that streamlining of the process, we find that the application first must go through a provincial screening and a provincial certification process. A process it must go through before it goes to the federal table. As a consequence of that process, the application in question was in the system some three months. It was reviewed; it was scrutinized by the officials. The officials made their commentary and they made recommendations that the application be approved. The application was then sent to HRDC where in due course - in this case, two and a half months, or some forty-one working days - the application was approved.

The question is not that it took forty-one days, and that that was a short time. The reality of the matter is forty-one days was much too long. Because by the time the application hit the desks of the HRDC officials all of the background work, all of the analyses had been done. My only conclusion from the fact that it took forty-one working days is: What took so long? The work was done; the streamlining of the process had been put into place. The HRDC officials in Corner Brook and in Ottawa should have had that application approved much more speedily.

The other point that has come up quite frequently is that the individuals in question had not yet even applied for a licence to operate the home. Again, the Opposition member has once again demonstrated that he is not doing his research; he is not doing his homework. Because if he had done so he would have found that in June 1996 there was a major transition and major changes made in the personal care home licensing procedures in this Province. As a matter of fact, the licensing provision was abolished. There is no need to have a licence to operate a personal care home. What is required is a registration process, and in that registration process the first thing that has to be approved is that the building itself which has been constructed meets all the required building codes, that it meets the fire and life safety standards, and various accessibility criteria. Clearly, these cannot be done until the home is built.

The second registration that these facilities must go through is to ensure and to satisfy the community health boards that they are in fact delivering a type of care that meets with the standards and the approval of the Department of Health. Again, this is information which is being submitted and has been submitted to the health board.

Once the two registrations are in place, and only when the registrations are in place, can the home be licensed as a certified and approved facility to operate as a personal care home. Nothing very magical. Just another one of the many processes that have been introduced by this government in the last year or so to streamline and improve personal care home facilities in this Province.

I just wanted to set the record straight. There is in fact nothing wrong whatsoever with the fact that it took only a few days for the application to go through the process. That is all in accordance with the procedures which have been streamlined by this government in the last year. There is absolutely nothing amiss in the fact that there was no application for a licence put in place, because no licence is required. Again, a process put in place by this government in July of last year. Information readily available to anyone who would make a few contacts within the appropriate departments and get the appropriate policies.

The last point: While I would perhaps tend to agree that there is perhaps sometimes too much government money involved in some of these activities, the fact remains, a large percentage of the personal care homes in this Province were constructed using monies available from either the federal or provincial levels. These monies were obtained in the normal course of an application process and evaluation. To suggest that there was some malicious of forethought or that there was political interference is getting pretty low and is starting to get down to the level of very cheap politics.

So once again I ask, Mr. Chairman, that the hon. member opposite produce the proof that he claims he has, lay it on the table of the House and let us all take a look at it. Thank you kindly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

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

We have spent about six hours now debating Bill No. 28. In fact, it is six hours right to the minute. So, Mr. Chairman, we decided to raise a great number of questions. We have asked the government to respond to these questions. On the first day the Minister of Finance responded to the critic's questions but he has not been available to answer questions since then.

Mr. Chairman, the bill requires or asks for the ratification of $75 million. We on this side have raised questions that concern things like rural Newfoundland. We have had a great discussion on that. My good friend from Bonavista South has brought forward the points of view that he has and questions he raised relative to his critic responsibilities and also a great champion for the rural parts of the Province. So we would say to the government, we look forward to the next piece of legislation. We are almost afraid to let this piece of legislation go because when we look at the agenda for the House we wonder, `where is the meat?' Because we look at these bills that are being put forward here we see a great deal of housekeeping things. So the substantial legislation for the fall, thus far, is this particular Bill No. 28, which is spending $75,800,000 getting ratification of it.

When we look at the other bills that are here we don't see much difficulty with many of these things. For example, the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture has a bill here, "An Act To Amend The Professional Fish Harvesters Act." Now that is purely a housekeeping matter. This requires very little debate in this House. So we have a situation where we have a number of pieces of legislation brought forward but we are wondering where is the real legislative agenda? We are looking for the legislative agenda that would see us addressing issues in education. We would like to see the new education act, the new schools act coming forward, something that we could have a very thorough discussion on.

We would like to see some real strong measures to address some of the issues that are facing the young people of this Province. We have a Private Members' Resolution tomorrow coming forward by the Member for Terra Nova and we will tend to support the initiative. It is the same thing we have been talking about for the last couple of years, talking about student loans and greater access to post-secondary education. That is good stuff. We support that and we will be looking forward to the discussion tomorrow. We will be drawing from the many times that we have spoken on that particular issue but that comes up by way of a Private Members' Resolution. It is not going to have any effect on the legislative agenda of the House. We want to see some real concrete measures brought forward by the government, not to have the self congratulatory messages that might emanate in this House tomorrow about all the things we have done. We want to see some measures talking about things we are going to do and the ways we are going to address post-secondary education and equal access and equal opportunity.

We talked here in this House about the children of the Province and how we have so many of them out there with drastic needs. We have not seen anything this autumn to look after the needs of our hungry children. We anticipated that, having raised this matter over and over again in the last year in this House, we would see something on that. So, Mr. Speaker, when I look at Bill No. 28, I say: Is this all there is to this legislative agenda for this fall, the things that we have seen thus far? I say to myself there must be more to this Province's needs and the Province's need for legislation than what we see here. We don't see anything.

We looked at the strategic social plan and we talked about that last year. We were promised in 1989 there would be an economic recovery plan. We were promised in '89 there would be a strategic social plan. In 1997, we are still here talking about: we are going to have a strategic social plan. We are pleased the Minister of Human Resources and Employment said: yes, we are coming forward with some legislation. We were told last year that the Strategic Social Plan would be ready by the spring; the work done by Penny Rowe and her group, would all be tabled and we would be here now talking about real, concrete proposals. Because in that Strategic Social Plan, we have to address some of the economic deeds and the disparity that exists between families and regions in this Province, and hopefully, look forward to some kind of equality of opportunity. I do not see anything here in the Legislative agenda that talks about that kind of issue.

Then, we look at the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs -eight years now, we are talking about revisions to the Municipalities Act. The minister is the first minister, I think, since Confederation, to appear at five different annual AGMs of the Federation of Municipalities, and that is a compliment to the minister; he has longevity. However, he has been promising amendments to the Municipalities Act now - or this government has -for eight years and we are asking them: Where are the amendments to the Municipalities Act? Where are the changes? Where is the enabling legislation that was talked about the year before last when I asked questions about it?

I talked about it last year, and the critic for last year, the Member for Cape St. Francis, talked about the new legislation for the municipalities of this Province, but we do not have it and we are told: Oh, wait until the spring. We will have the new legislation in the spring. Now, when we come to the spring, we know the primary business is the Budget. The primary business for the spring session is the financial affairs of the Province. We will have the Budget then, and we have all the reviews, the Estimates Committees and all of these things that will take up a great deal of time for members and a great deal of time here in the House. We were looking forward to an aggressive, legislative agenda for this Fall session, and what we have is a number of bills that really, are only just to cross the `ts' and dot the `i's', make a cosmetic change, in many cases.

Now, there are a couple of pieces there that might engender some debate, however, I am still waiting for the Government House Leader to bring forward the real agenda, the real legislation that will try to address the real needs of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

We are not saying that some of the needs here do not need to be dealt with, but in terms of what we are seeing thus far, we should have called this you know, `the housekeeping session' because that is all we are doing. We are not bringing forward any strong measures such as the Minister of Finance talked about in his Budget Speech last March, when he said: We have to take bold, bold measures and we have to attack them aggressively. We are waiting for the bold measures he talked about in the Throne Speech and in the Budget Speech and we are still waiting for the minister. So, where are the bold measures that were talked about last spring? Where are they? Are they here in this Legislative agenda and -

MR. GRIMES: (Inaudible).

MR. H. HODDER: I am using the notes of the Minister of Education, of course. But what I am asking is: Where are the measures that were talked about by the Minister of Finance and by the Premier? Where are those bold measures that are going to address the real needs of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians? Mr. Chairman, we have now spent a little over six legislative hours on Bill 28, about six hours and ten minutes or thereabouts, and we are still waiting. I call upon the Government House Leader and the government to bring forward those measures that we would like to see the government initiate, that will come to grips with some of the real problems in Newfoundland and Labrador, and I do not see those.

I looked forward to the session this Fall, because I was told last Spring that we would have a strategic social plan brought forward, I was told we would have new municipal legislation, I was told we would have an aggressive program. Because we believed the Minister of Finance when he said he was going to bring forward bold aggressive measures to address the needs of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

We do not see that; however, we believe that we have probably spent as much time as we would like to spend on Bill 28 and if anyone else wishes to speak on this side, go ahead, but I suggest that we call the question.

"That is it expedient to introduce a measure to provide for the granting to Her Majesty for defraying certain additional expenses of the public service for the financial year ending March 31, 1997, the sum of $75,700,000."

Motion, that the Committee report having passed a resolution and a bill consequent thereto, carried.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

On motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again, Mr. Speaker returned to the Chair.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Lewisporte.

MR. PENNEY: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole have considered the matters to them referred, have directed me to report that they have adopted a certain resolution, and recommend that Bill No. 28 be introduced to give effect to the same.

On motion, resolution read a first and second time.

On motion, a bill, "An Act For Granting To Her Majesty Certain Sums Of Money For Defraying Certain Additional Expenses Of The Public Service For The Financial Year Ending March 31, 1997 And For Other Purposes Relating To The Public Service," read a first, second and third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill No. 28)

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, Motion No. 2.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion No. 2, the hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I have received a message from His Honour.

MR. SPEAKER: All rise.

To the hon. the Minister of Finance:

I, the Lieutenant-Governor of the Province of Newfoundland, transmit Estimates of the sum required for the Public Service of the Province for the year ending March 31, 1998. By way of supplementary supply and in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution Act, 1867, I recommend these Estimates to the House of Assembly.

Sgd:

Hon. A. M. House, C.M., M.D., FRCPC

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I move that the message, together with the amount contained in Bill No. 33, be referred to the Committee of Supply.

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

CHAIR (Mr. M. Penney): Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the Minister of Finance, who today was out of the House through illness, it gives me great pleasure to bring forward Bill No. 33, which is a bill that provides for the granting of some $353 million to defray certain expenses of the Province.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Pardon me?

AN HON. MEMBER: What are you trying to do - (inaudible) for us?

MR. TULK: The $353 million, Mr. Chairman - I am sure that the Minister of Government Services and Lands, and the Member for Torngat Mountains, probably other members on this side of the House as well, including the Member for Labrador West, will have a great deal to say about this bill. This is a bill that enables us, as a government, to receive the necessary funds to carry on certain transportation initiatives - along with another bill which has to be passed later - to carry on certain transportation initiatives in Labrador. It represents a goal, I am sure, that all of those people under the able leadership of the Premier will be glad to say has finally come.

The hon. gentleman on the other side of the House, a few minutes ago, the would-be leader from Waterford Valley, the person who finds no problem with sitting in the Legislature, being the Opposition House Leader for a Leader, and at the same time, can say in the public press in this Province: I have not ruled out running for the leadership.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Shame, shame!

MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, as everybody in this House knows, there is a number of us who have been here who have seen a lot of leaders come in this Legislature and a lot of leaders go.

AN HON. MEMBER: And you more than most.

MR. TULK: Yes, I more than most. Let me say to the hon. gentleman that I never saw anybody in my life, and I do not believe the Member for Port de Grave ever saw anybody this low in their life, that they would sit in the chair next to him, collect the salary over which he has control, supposedly be his House Leader, and at the same time be whetting the knife, getting her ready, saying: Oh, no - rule out the possibility? I do not guess I have. I will tell you this: My Member for Kilbride, the member who represents me in here, will not make such a statement, even though he is not even the Opposition House Leader.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: No, he said he does not think his time is yet. He made up his mind right quick and decided: It is over for me, I am not going to run this time. I will do it some other time maybe, but not this time.

But the Opposition House Leader, the gall! The man who believes that every word that falls out of his mouth is the honest truth, that the world is waiting for it, cannot wait for his pearls of wisdom to fall upon the ground so that we can all stoop down and pick them up, that same man is sitting over there, reaching behind his Leader's back, and saying: I wonder where is the soft spot for me to stick the knife in when he taps him on the back. Just imagine, Mr. Chairman.

AN HON. MEMBER: You will not (inaudible) the Member for Bonavista South (inaudible).

MR. TULK: No, not the Member for Bonavista South. I will tell you something about the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. GRIMES: He is going to stab him right in the guts.

AN HON. MEMBER: On TV!

MR. TULK: I tell the Minister of Education this: he may stab him in the guts, but he will be standing in front of him. I tell you, the Member for Bonavista South will not be taking the Queen's shilling that his Leader has control over, sit in the House, tell him how wonderful he is, and at the same time, sneak off to the press and say: I may yet grace this leadership race.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TULK: Now `Harvey', there is no vote; you do not have to leave. There is no vote, you can stay in your seat. I say to the Minister of Education, that is one that comes from a former Member for Burgeo - Bay d'Espoir by the name of David Gilbert - and I think his saying was: `He who gets paid the Queen's shilling must carry the Queen's sword', something to that effect.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Yes and defend the Queen.

Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Education interrupted my train of thought.

MR. GRIMES: Sorry.

MR. TULK: I was talking about sharpening the knife, getting the blade just so, sitting by the side of your leader in the Legislature, doing the job over which he has control of, the Leader of the Opposition, knowing full well that the Leader of the Opposition is in a very tenuous position over there anyway, knowing that he is very weak, knowing that the Leader of the Opposition is in trouble in his own party and his House leader -

AN HON. MEMBER: Getting paid extra money too.

MR. TULK: Getting paid extra money to try and protect the back of the Leader of the Opposition, getting paid to protect his back and at the same time, going out in the local papers and saying: I have not ruled it out.

I must say to the hon. gentlemen, that I found out the other morning just how deep he is thinking about running for the leadership of the party. When we were on CBC radio, he was on one telephone and I was on the other one and Jim Brown was in the middle and he was so calm, cool and collected, until I said: Jim, I believe he must be trying to dip his foot into the leadership walk. Whoo, away he goes, caught him, just like that, away he goes, spouts off: I'm not important. What I am going to do - Harvey Hodder's political future is not important'. No, he is right. Harvey Hodder's political future is not important and I want to tell him now -

AN HON. MEMBER: Taking lessons from the Premier.

MR. TULK: -he has become known in the press, about what is happening in the House, he has become known as the old grumbler. A fellow said to me the other day from - I will not say what station he was from - a fellow said to me the other day: Beaton, he said, what is wrong with him?' I said: What do you mean, what is wrong with him? He said: he comes in the House and he asks you for all kinds of legislation, you bring it in and you poke it at him, then he grumbles about the fact that he does not have time to read it. He does not have the time in the House and at the same time, he said, we all know that the Opposition House Leader was the person who wanted the House closed for three weeks last Easter, Easter holidays last year, the first time in the history of this House, that an opposition leader ever asked to have three weeks for Easter.

AN HON. MEMBER: Opposition leader.

MR. TULK: Opposition House Leader, I am sorry. No, not the fellow who is getting stabbed, the stabber.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: His worship has just reminded me, that he is use to teacher holidays in the spring, wants to go off - but teachers do not take that long, do they Gerry?

MR. G. REID: No, ten days.

MR. TULK: Ten days, he is even worse, but I suppose you could say that he is retired, but in any case he has become known, I say to him, he stands up over there and grumbles about the agenda for the House. He has become known as the old grumbler, the man who grumbles no matter what you do, you cannot please him. He is like someone with corns on his toes, if you step on them he gets upset.

AN HON. MEMBER: Scrooge.

MR. TULK: Scrooge, no, no.

AN HON. MEMBER: Beaton, he is like on of those red things in the boat you were talking about, he -

MR. TULK: The Member for Bonavista South remembers the old red gurnet.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: I knew you would like it.

I tell you, Mr. Chairman, they have themselves in a bit of a snit over there. I sympathize with them because I spent a lot of time, I spent ten years in Opposition, from 1979 to 1989 and I will tell you something. I sit here and I say to myself now, I wonder - because I think that politics runs in waves like most things, it is up and it is down and I sit here and I say to myself - I wonder where are they. At what stage of that curve are they? What period of time are they in that we were in from 1979 to 1989? I will tell you, Mr. Chairman, as near as I can come to it -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Right on!

As near as I could come to it, is 1982 in the Liberal Party, when we were in Opposition, in 1982. They are three years ahead of where we were from 1979 to 1989, a third year. Now I ask the hon. gentleman; that took ten years. I am going to make a prediction that this leader will go, but I say to him in all sincerity that, that is founded on one premise, that there will have to be somebody to run from outside the caucus because I say to the hon. gentleman that I do not believe for a minute that there is one person in that caucus - and I would say to the Member for Waterford Valley: pay attention, there is not one person in that caucus who can beat him because I will tell you what I think is going to happen: I think the people who might be able to take a stab at it -

AN HON. MEMBER: Stab?

MR. TULK: Well we know who is taking a stab. But the people who might be able to take a successful run at it, those people like the Member for Kilbride and the Member for Bonavista South are going to sit back and I think they are going to wait until they become a little bit more experienced themselves, get better known around the Province when there is a better opportunity for them to run. The Member for Waterford Valley is seriously thinking about it and of course, the Member for Cape St. Francis, the man who leads all polls in this Province in terms of being an Opposition member, the man who asks the most succinct questions that ever you heard in this legislature, the man who gets to the bottom of everything and knows the answer to everything before he asks them, that is what the polls show, that of the Opposition members, he has gone up another 5 per cent.

MR. FUREY: Is that ten now?

MR. TULK: No, no. He is at forty-four, I say to the Minister of Mines and Energy, he is at forty-four.

Now, he is going to take a run at it. He is seriously contemplating taking a run at it but I have something to warn every one of them over there and this includes the Member for St. John's Centre, who smeared his copybook last week.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: St. John's Centre?

MR. TULK: The Member for St. John's East. I apologize, she is not here but if she were, I would apologize.

The Member for St. John's East smeared his copybook last week and I have to say to him, lost a little bit I believe on that education referendum. I believe he did but, there is one thing - I will tell you now that there is one thing that nobody on that side of the House can beat the Leader of the Opposition at, nobody, there is no two over there who can beat him -

AN HON. MEMBER: At what?

MR. TULK: At working. He works like a dog, up all night and up all day and, Mr. Chairman, it is actually –

AN HON. MEMBER: Did you make (inaudible) on that side of the House?

MR. TULK: No, I did not say it, now hold on now.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: No, I did not say that.

Mr. Chairman, it is a sin really, it is a crime. It is a crime, Mr. Chairman, what is about to happen to the Leader of the Opposition. They are going to come after him, they are going to stab him in the back; he is going to come out wounded and –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: It is very relevant, very relevant. Mr. Chairman, I am not going to carry on much longer but I am just going to say to the Leader of the Opposition, that he is a hard-working man, he deserves better, he tries, his heart is in the right place but he has no vision. He doesn't have the necessary picture in his mind for Newfoundland. Now he is making a few notes. I can compliment you some more if you want me to. Mr. Chairman, he is going to come out of this situation, and I hope he stays around. Unless somebody comes in from outside, he is going to win.

Having given that analysis - and I would ask members to take out Hansard tomorrow and read it, because this is how it is going to unfold. I say to the Leader of the Opposition today that I have seen ambitious men in this House. I have seen men and women do things to their leaders and to people around them to advance their own cause. I suppose there is nobody who has seen more than myself, the Member for Terra Nova, and the Member for Windsor - Springdale of those kinds of things going on. I say to him today that sitting next to him as his House Leader -

AN HON. MEMBER: Brutus.

MR. TULK: Not as honourable as Brutus.

AN HON. MEMBER: Not as honourable as Brutus?

MR. TULK: No. There to stick the knife, and there to twist the knife. This is the final piece of advice I'm going to give him. If I were the hon. -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: I would be quiet if I were you. If I were the hon. gentleman I would seriously consider, and I don't know whether - because I know that as an Opposition if you move (inaudible) you know what happens. But I would seriously consider removing the hon. gentleman as his House Leader. Give it some serious consideration. In any case, I say to him, watch him closely.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Who would I put there? The Member for St. John's South or the Member for Kilbride.

Mr. Chairman, this is a very important piece of legislation. It is a piece of legislation that enables the government of this Province to take in the $353 million, I believe it is, to carry on the construction and the maintenance of transportation for the Labrador portion of our Province. I'm sure that there are members on this side of the House who - and I would expect that the leadership candidates on the other side of the House would stand and praise this up. I would expect them to stand and say that this initiative is long overdue, but thank God it is here. I would expect them to say that. I've heard the expressions before from the members for Labrador. I know that indeed they feel this is a bill that should be passed and passed quickly.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR (Oldford): The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: I'm delighted the Member for Waterford Valley can get the Government House Leader on his feet and speak. As the Member for Bonavista South said, the best speech he ever gave in the House.

Isn't it great to see such ambitious people on this side of the House? One thing that is lacking in government is a lack of ambition. Poor member, the Minister of Education, he was all ready, and that big train came down from Ottawa. Step aside, he said. The only one whose lifelong dream was to be Premier of the Province, the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, stood on that track. He is like that advertisement on investing. You are sitting on the railway track and the big train comes down, and he steps off and announces to the world before it arrives: I'm not running. Called a news conference. He said: I'm not running. I don't want to get run over by that big train that the Minister of Mines and Energy talked about. He talked about the huge train.

The Minister of Education, now that the Premier of the Province doesn't want to be Premier anymore, he wants to be Prime Minister of Canada; the Minister of Education has crossed the Rubicon. He has taken too many hits on education. He has been Stephen the martyr over the last while. He has allowed everybody to throw stones at him, and now it is too late to get it back.

The Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture lost his credibility. He had to use (inaudible). He did not want to be Premier of the Province. Even though I do, he said, I do not want to be Premier of the Province. I could never figure that one out.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Oh, the humble member from Humber Heights, yes, he wanted to be, too, but -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: And who else?

MR. J. BYRNE: Conception Bay East - Bell Island.

AN HON. MEMBER: Mount Scio.

MR. SULLIVAN: No, but I said the member - Humber Heights is where he is from. That is his native -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Why, did he have aspirations, too?

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, yes.

MR. SULLIVAN: Oh, he had aspirations - he wanted to be. But there is only one person who really had the guts to carry it a little bit further, and that was the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture - I give him credit. He had the guts to carry it a little bit further, but the `heavies' came in and said: Now, John, we want a quick election here. There are a lot of things happening in the Budget. We want to be able to tell them how healthy our budget is, and the truth is going to come out pretty soon. It will be like Glen Clarke's B.C. budget, one thing on the eve of the election and something else after. We have to get this over fast, John. You step back and you will get your opportunity. I will make you Minister of Fisheries, something you always wanted to be. Your lifelong dream was to be Minister of Fisheries. When you were growing up as a little boy out in Port de Grave: `I want to be Minister of Fisheries', and now he is Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. He said: step aside, so he got to be Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and the Premier fulfilled his lifelong dream.

Now the Minister of Education is wondering: Do I have another opportunity? The Premier - parlez-vous français? He is out trying to refine his language.

I spoke to a person who teaches French and said: I heard him speak French for a little while. Will you give him some advice if you see him? He said: Please do not speak French anymore in public until you learn how to speak it. That is what he said.

In order to entice him to go back, I can tell you, you will need more than a command of the French language, for the Premier of this Province to convince Quebecers to vote for him. I can tell you, he will need more than a command of the French language. He, too, has crossed the Rubicon in dealing with Quebec. You do not throw stones at them and insult them and then come back and try to negotiate.

MR. J. BYRNE: What is going to happen (inaudible) over there now?

MR. SULLIVAN: Over there now? I do not really know what is going to happen. Because the Minister of Education made his decision back almost two years ago. He made his decision: It is now or never, and he knew: If I run now it will be never, so I might as well step aside now.

With full respect to the Minister of Education, he has a command of his area. I must say, I give the minister credit. He is one of the more authoritative people I see over on that side, in his area.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who?

MR. SULLIVAN: The Minister of Education and Training. I must say, I give him credit. He does a good job. He is good at bluffing. Even when he does know the facts he does not want to give them out. He is good at bluffing and skating around them. There is only one bigger actor over on that side that I have seen, and he has not performed much at all in this session of the House, the Minister of Justice.

I saw the Minister of Justice put on some brave acts in the past, some real shows; Academy Award winning features.

MR. J. BYRNE: What about the Premier's shows?

MR. SULLIVAN: The Premier always puts on a show. It is all fluff and no stuff. That was so appropriate, all fluff and no stuff.

MR. BARRETT: `Loyola', I will get the delegates to (inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Good. Where were you the last time, I ask? I only wanted a few out of there. I wanted five more, a couple of more, and now he speaks up. Where are you when you are needed, I ask the Member for Bellevue? You are never there when I need you.

AN HON. MEMBER: A typical Liberal.

MR. SULLIVAN: A typical Liberal, never there when you are wanted, never there when you are needed.

MR. GRIMES: There was no chicken out in Bellevue. (Inaudible) would have gone a long way.

MR. SULLIVAN: They are all chicken out there. They must be. The ones who did not vote for me were.

AN HON. MEMBER: They all voted for you.

MR. SULLIVAN: No, actually, they were not. Half did. The ones you got did not vote for me.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)?

MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, the ones I got myself voted for me. The ones you did (inaudible). There are sensible people out in Bellevue. How many votes did you not receive last time? How many votes did you lose the last time in Bellevue?

MR. BARRETT: Me?

MR. SULLIVAN: Yes. Well, however many, that is the number of sensible people there are in Bellevue, at least that number, I say to the member.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: No, it is only a joke. It is not intended to be serious, I say to the member. We all have our responsibilities as members. I guess, everybody in this House, when you look at it, got more votes than the person who ran against them and that is why they are here.

MR. BARRETT: Some of the people who did not vote for me are great people because the next time they are voting for me.

MR. SULLIVAN: Well that is the way I look at it, anyone who did not vote for you before, your goal is to convince them that you are the best person for the job and get them head on the next time. That is what we all should strive for, I must say.

I certainly did intend to have a few comments on this bill. This bill, $353 million, supplementary supply - in fact, to go toward two specific areas; maintenance or maintaining of the Labrador ferry service, to supply services and transport people actually to southern and other parts of Labrador from the Island, and the supply of goods, too, and basic services; and using it on the Labrador transportation initiative to complete the highway. To complete the `ten-year highway', that is going to be paved in ten years through Labrador, I might add, was the promise and commitment given here in the House almost a year ago. A year ago, actually, just before the smelter and refinery was announced for Argentia, was when reference was made to this.

So we will certainly look forward to my colleagues having further discussion on this bill during the course of today and again on Thursday. I am sure we will be back discussing this again. There are many points - when we get our minister back, there are things I want to ask him on this particular aspect. I will have a chance to do that when the Minister of Finance returns.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Government Services and Lands.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I just want to speak to the hon. House for a few minutes about this particular initiative. I think for many, many years we, in the Labrador portion of the Province, have looked to the Island part with a lot of hope that we would some day be able to get in a vehicle and cross our part of the Province, the same as you do on the Island. I think we have seen, over the years, some very small attempts to deal with that issue, a million dollars here and a million dollars there trying to fix up the Trans-Labrador Highway, which at that time was basically a highway between Labrador City and Happy Valley - Goose Bay.

Mr. Chairman, when this government came into office, I think we saw a very exhilarated approach in trying to bring the Labrador portion of the Province on stream and give the people up there an opportunity, that we have on the Island, of being able to communicate through a mode of transportation that you could get on the road any time of the day or night.

Perhaps I could just give you a little bit of the history of how we do get around. For many, many years, Mr. Chairman, we, in Labrador, had to depend on small aircraft, very little radio communications and no ground transportation. We had ships in the summer that would travel the coastline and our only connection between each part of the region was a very expensive and a very cumbersome way of doing it. Mr. Chair, I can go back to the days when my father used to go on the trap-line and walk across the country.

I think we are starting to see now that we are going to advance beyond those forms of transportation. We are going to be able to get into a situation where we can leave St. John's in our vehicle, cross on a ferry up in the Straits and drive right on to Labrador and out into any part of Canada you want to go. I think, Mr. Chair, one of the great amenities of this kind of money that we have established for a Labrador transportation initiative will see the enhancement of the quality of life along the Labrador Coast in the six-year period that we are working on that part of the highway. We will certainly see a lot more reasonable rates on goods and services that are provided to the other parts of the Province, similar to what we certainly will see - except for the North Coast. Within the next five to six years we will be able to get in a vehicle and drive from any part of the Province to any other part of the Province. Hopefully, while this is happening, what we will be able to see on the North Coast of Labrador will also be a road link.

We have started, we have continued, we have gone many years with a snowmobile trail, which is something that the people really appreciated at the time we were doing that. I believe this initiative, which is set up to certainly enhance the fact that we will get a road link, we will have a marine service that is certainly appropriate and applicable, shortened up, I might add, to a great degree, because we will be able to use a transshipment point from Cartwright or Happy Valley - Goose Bay to the North Coast, rather than having to come all the way up the Coast by ship.

Mr. Chairman, the enactment of this particular bill will ensure that we are to see a vast improvement in our communications in the part of the Province that has waited many years for this kind of an initiative. I think the one thing we have to remember is the tenacity of this government to ensure that we secured the funds to see this through, to see this as a reality. For a long time, the people I represent in Labrador were sceptical that it would ever happen. Now we are seeing that this is actually happening.

There was $25 million spent this year on upgrading the Trans-Labrador Highway between Labrador City and Happy Valley - Goose Bay. For anybody who gets an opportunity to travel that, this year would be the good year to travel, because you see the contrast between what is new and what was there. It is a very striking comparison. It is like coming out of the ditch and driving on the shoulder. We are advancing in getting these highways upgraded.

Many people along the coastline are very anxious to see the first piece of equipment go in and start to build the surface of a highway that they will be able to drive out on and be able to receive goods and services on, be able to supply the fish to the market, be able to supply the wood to the people outside the region who require it.

I believe this transportation initiative fund and board, at the end of the six years when the $350 million will be expended, we will see perhaps more than we anticipate right now in terms of the road between Cartwright and Red Bay and the other part of the highway between Labrador City and Happy Valley - Goose Bay. I believe, by that time, we will have another initiative in place that will connect Labrador by building the piece of highway between Cartwright and Happy Valley - Goose Bay. I think the commitment of this government certainly indicates the commitment that we have to ensuring that all of the Province is treated fairly when it comes to transportation and communications.

Mr. Chair, I think this is a very good initiative, and I think this is the beginning of a process that will see the whole Province being treated equally. Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

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

I just want to get up and have a few words. I wanted to, first of all, thank the minister who just spoke and outlined some of the work that will be done. But one of the concerns I have and will address this to the minister is: How much work this will be able to do and to give us some idea as to what will be left to be done when this money is expended. We have heard some comments in the public press that would cause us to have some concern that there might be, you know, a lot of work left that will not be completed and some of the strategies that the government would like to put in place I am sure for Labrador, will not be able to be addressed by the amount of money that we are talking about here.

Maybe, the member, if he wishes to talk about that, I would like to have a little more detail to find out what you are going to do with this money and how many roads you may be able to connect. I think you made some comments on that but I would like to get a little more detail on it, and perhaps as well we could then look at how this stands in terms of the overall scheme. We have some kind of appreciation of the master plan that you would like to have for Labrador in terms of connecting up the coastal areas and the areas in Goose Bay to Red Bay and that part of the coast. I have been in those places a couple of times and have some connections to the coastal part, the Red Bay-Blanc Sablon area, I have connections to that particular part of the coast but, I wanted to know as well, the plan of the government in terms of what this work will be able to do and what will be left at the end of it so may be, if the minister would like to comment on that, then certainly I would like him to do it now.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. H. HODDER: Okay, the minister indicates for the public record that in the next time he speaks, in the next couple of days that he would be able to give us a more comprehensive plan and maybe even, if he could, for the benefit of all members, because you have the access to the resources, might be able to do a schematic thing with Labrador to show all members what the allocation of funds are and what the plan is because, I think that most of us here will certainly support this kind of initiative to make sure that Labrador people get an adequate share of their resources and that they can be an integrated part, not only just with each other in Labrador, but integrated with the province of Quebec and also be integrated with the Province of Newfoundland.

So, if we can ask the minister when he speaks, probably on Thursday, if he could have some of that information brought back to the House, it certainly would be helpful to us. Not only would we know what you plan to do with it, but also to give us an idea of what monies are needed to be able to complete the overall scheme that your government talks about.

The minister indicates that you have a package put together for all members of the House and the members on the other side may very well know all the information because they would have talked about it in caucus, but he indicates that he will get for us a comprehensive package showing what this initiative is going to do in terms of work to be done in Labrador -

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. H. HODDER: Well, the minister indicates that he is going to put it together and I know it is in the very - but it is in bits and pieces I say to the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: No, it is not (inaudible).

MR. H. HODDER: The word that we have is that, this $353 million will be insufficient to do the job that is contained in the governments plan. That is the point I want to make to the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, as far as I know -

AN HON. MEMBER: You are right.

MR. TULK: I am sure I am right - that the Opposition House Leader is about - when was this announced Ernie?

MR. McLEAN: May or June.

MR. TULK: - is about five or six months behind.

MR. McLEAN: May it was.

MR. TULK: May, seven months behind. The truth of the matter is that when this was announced there was a package put out and I tell you, there were even pictures in it for the hon. gentleman; pictures in it.

AN HON. MEMBER: Especially for the hon. gentleman.

MR. TULK: Especially for the hon. gentleman, so that he could understand what it is that this money is going to do. There was a bound volume put out that is a matter of public record and here he comes in this Legislature - I know what it is. Too busy after Loyola.

AN HON. MEMBER: That is exactly what it is.

CHAIRMAN: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

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

The point I am making is that members on that side of the House have indicated to us in the Official Opposition, that this amount of money that is allocated here will not be sufficient to carry out the work that you talked about in June. Therefore, what we are saying is: Would you tell us exactly what this amount of money is going to be able to do, when it will be done?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. H. HODDER: The minister has indicated that he is going to do that, and I'm satisfied with that.

Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that in terms of the government's wish to be fair to the people of Labrador, we on this side of the House support the fact that when it comes to resources in Labrador, we support that the resources of Labrador should be reflected more in the expenditures that occur in Labrador. In terms of the revenues that accrue to the treasury from Labrador, it should be used to a greater extent to address some of the needs of Labrador in terms of transportation initiatives, in terms of being able to spend it on social policy, and initiatives in health care benefits and new schools and that kind of thing. We on this side of the House have no objection to that.

We want to say to the members for Labrador, particularly my friend for Labrador West, that we on this side of the House have listened with some attentiveness to the dialogue that is occurring between various bodies and various groups that are involved in the Voisey's Bay, shall we say dialogues, and the various interest groups that are involved there. We are listening with some interest. Because we on this side of the House want to say to the people of Labrador that we have heard what they have been saying to all of us in this Province for some years.

They want to have a better share in the good parts of this Province in terms of sharing the revenue, sharing the resources, and being financially, shall we say, able to look to a government - whatever label it is - and say: We want to have expenditures occurring in our part of the Province that reflects to some extent our contribution to the total economy.

We on this side are saying to the Member for Labrador West that we believe the time has come that you can't - just like a few years ago, I mean, I used to drive to Trepassey. I would drive down there on dirt roads. It was years after Confederation. I used to say to myself: When will Confederation come to the people of the southern Avalon? They are only two hours' drive from St. John's, but it took many years for them to get the benefits of Confederation.

The very same way the people in Labrador are saying that they want some of the benefits from the resource development of Labrador. They want to say we want some of the benefits reflected in the services that are offered to us. I have been to Sheshatshit and in other parts of Labrador and know a little about that part of the Province, not a great deal. Not as much probably as I would like to know and not perhaps as much as I should know but I would say to the member there that we support the general thrust that Labrador deserves a more equitable share than it has been receiving.

In particular, I was pleased a few weeks ago to go to the briefing sessions that were held relative to the land claims and to be briefed by the officials that were actually at the bargaining table, the negotiating table. That is very helpful because all of us in this House, regardless of what label we carry, we have a fundamental obligation towards fairness and towards having all parts of this Province equally able to look forward to equity and equal access and equal opportunity. For many people in Labrador they have not had equal access or equal opportunity. So we support these kinds of initiatives because they bring us closer to the point where the people of Labrador will be able to look forward to having a greater ability to have some of the benefits that their resources represent and the benefits that their resources contribute to the overall financial position of this Province.

So, Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to say that we will support this kind of initiative. We like some of the messages that the Labrador people are sending. We know that government is going to be involved in intense negotiations relative to Labrador but I think all of us in this House have to stand up and pay attention to what is being said by the people of Labrador and how they have a just cause to speak up. We, on all sides of the House, have to be a little bit more attentive to the needs of Labrador and in particular, the needs of the native people in Labrador, the Inuit and the Innu. So I say to my colleagues from Labrador that maybe if we do get an opportunity to speak again on this particular motion, which I am sure we will, that I look forward to their comments because this is a very important piece of spending, it is a very important message we are sending. Maybe, with these few comments, I will yield to one of my colleagues on the other side.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I rise today to support this bill. I think it is a very important step in the development of Labrador and the recognition of the importance and needs of Labrador transportation.

Listening to the debate today, Mr. Chairman, I think it is unfortunate that the Member for Virginia Waters' suggestion has not been taken up by the House to have the House televised.

MR. EFFORD: What?

MR. HARRIS: To have the House televised, Mr. Chairman, because I think the people of Newfoundland and Labrador deserve to hear what is going on here in this House. I think the people of Labrador for example, would have been very delighted to hear the speech by the Member for Lake Melville, The Minister of Government Services and Lands, and I am sure they would be delighted to hear the speech that the Member for Labrador West is going to make on this particular piece of legislation and no doubt, the speech that the Member for Torngat Mountains is going to make on this legislation and the speech that the Member for Cartwright - L'Anse au Clair would make if she were here, Mr. Chairman. I understand she is out of the Province on parliamentary business, because the people of Labrador deserve to hear first hand from their members on the progress of legislation and financial support for Labrador issues.

You know, we have a situation in this House, Mr. Chairman, where, often times members have been competing for media attention, who can be the most flamboyant, who can be the most outrageous, who can get the attention of the media but, who has the attention of the media now, Mr. Chairman? Not me, not me, there is no media here. I do not see very many people in the galleries so the Member for Lake Melville, the Minister of Government Services and Lands, a very fine member, a very fine member, better than the last member, a very sincere member of the House, a son of a trapper -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: That is right, it should be televised because, Mr. Chairman, the speeches before that, the one of the Government House Leader and the Leader of the Opposition, were all a whole bunch of malarkey, all a bunch of malarkey, even if it was the best speech that the Government House Leader has given in this House, the people of Newfoundland should be able to watch it and judge for themselves whether or not it was a good speech and judge for themselves whether their money is being well-spent on keeping the Legislature open to have this kind of debate. But I listened very interestingly to the speech the Member for Lake Melville, the hon. the Minister of Government Services and Lands, I think he is a very sincere member. I would say that Labrador is well represented in this House, unfortunately not by New Democrats. That is the only thing wrong with them. So if you are going to quote me to your constituents, say: The only thing wrong with the Members for Labrador is they are not New Democrats, but very fine members.

The Member for Torngat Mountains has done an excellent job in bringing this government's attention to the desperate needs of his constituents.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARRIS: He has done an excellent job. The Member for Labrador West, a steel worker, is a very good member. The Member for Cartwright - L'Anse au Clair is an excellent member, all Labrador natives for the first time, all rookies, I think, too. They are doing an excellent job representing their constituents.

I see that the hour is getting very close, but I do want to say I will continue on the next time on this. I think it is an excellent measure. It is a long time in coming, and I would like to speak some more about this issue and other Labrador issues the next time that this matter is called.

I thereby adjourn debate.

CHAIR: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again.

On motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again, Mr. Speaker returned to the Chair.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Trinity North.

MR. OLDFORD: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole has considered the matters to it referred and has directed me to report progress and ask leave to sit again.

On motion, report received and adopted, Committee ordered to sit again on tomorrow.

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I move that the House adjourn until tomorrow at 2:00 p.m., at which time I think we will be debating a resolution that will be so ably put forward, I am sure, by the Member for Terra Nova.

On motion, the House at its rising adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, at 2:00 p.m.