April 30,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLIII No. 17

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this

opportunity to inform the hon. members of the House of Assembly and especially

the Opposition House Leader, of negotiations that are currently underway to

privatize Newfoundland Farm Products Corporation. Mr. Speaker, government

announced its intention to divest its interest in NFPC in the Throne and Budget

Speeches in March of this year.

Over the last four years, Newfoundland Farm Products

Corporation and the production side of the industry, has cost taxpayers an

average of $7.5 million a year in operating losses and subsidies. Government is

unable to continue to have the taxpayers of this Province absorb the costs of

operation for the poultry sector. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, it is not

appropriate for government to be involved in the food processing sector. We have

other public service priorities for the people of this Province. The government

has accepted that the private sector is best suited to operate businesses such

as NFPC.

Since December, the Board of Directors of Newfoundland Farm

Products has studied various options for the Corporation with a view to

eliminating public subsidies.

Mr. Speaker, negotiations are underway as we speak.

Government has authorized the Board of Directors of Newfoundland Farm Products

to hopefully conclude negotiations with Integrated Poultry Limited, better known

as IPL, for the sale of its poultry business. However, IPL indicated in its

proposal that it is not interested in continuing operations at the plant in

Corner Brook as a chicken processing facility.

I must, therefore, inform members of the House of Assembly

that yesterday (Tuesday) evening, two members of the Board of Directors for NFPC

and the Chairman of the Board met with all employees of the Corner Brook plant

to outline their options to them. I would like to emphasize, Mr. Speaker, that

prior to that meeting, myself and the hon. Paul Dicks met twice with

representatives of the union - once in Corner Brook on Sunday and again in St.

John's on Monday of this week, in order to ensure that they were fully aware of

the situation, and to discuss -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: - the most appropriate means of informing

employees.

Government did not want to comment publicly on the status of

NFPC until the affected employees have been fully informed.

Mr. Speaker, at the meeting yesterday evening, employees were

informed that government has decided to continue to pay employees at Corner

Brook until an agreement is finalized with IPL. The NAPE local for the Corner

Brook plant has been asked to indicate by Friday of this week, whether it wants

the plant to remain open and in production until the deal with IPL is concluded

or whether employees want to go home on special leave. The latter option would

mean immediate closure of the plant. To facilitate their deliberations, Mr.

Speaker, NFPC has decided not to process chicken today in the plant in order to

allow employees time to consider their options.

A committee of government and union officials has been

established to consider appropriate severance benefits for affected employees.

The Board of Directors of NFPC have initiated the process to seek alternative

uses of the Corner Brook plant, a process which could include a public request

for proposals and we are prepared to involve the employees in this process. Both

government and the board are optimistic that a viable private sector opportunity

will be found for the plant.

I would assure you, Mr. Speaker, that government will make

every possible effort to achieve this goal.

Thank you.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for providing me with a copy of the news

release prior to the opening of the House.

Mr. Speaker, it seem like this is a situation where we make

one step forward and two steps back. A couple of days ago we heard a happy

announcement, if you would, down in Bay Verte where there was seventy-five jobs

created, one day after we find out we are losing eighty-seven from Corner Brook,

and I would suggest probably many more from the City of St. John's before this

thing is finalized.

Mr. Speaker, the sad part about this, and we have no problem

over here on this side with Newfoundland Farm Products being privatized. We feel

that that is where it should be, if it is going to be competitive and if it is

going to be workable, it has to be done within the private sector and we do not

believe that the tax payers of this Province should continue to put forward

money in order to subsidize it. We have no problem with that and we support it,

but Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the minister, why wasn't expression of

interest put forward so other people could go out and put forward their

suggestions of what could happen with this particular facility? Why should we go

out and take a $40 million facility and only pass it to one individual? Why

should we go and invite expressions of interest rather than put it out on

tender? I would like to ask the minister as well, maybe if he can confirm or

deny that the lawyer for this particular group is a gentlemen that use to sit to

his right there just a very short time ago, maybe that might be part of the

problem.

MR. J. BYRNE: Big factor, big factor.

MR. FITZGERALD: The other thing Mr. Speaker, it is sad

when you see eighty-seven employees treated in such a fashion as this, where

they are told two days prior to having to say good-bye. That is unfair, I think

employees who have given so much deserve better treatment then that, then to go

one day and say you are out the door by Friday.

MR. J. BYRNE: Not this government, they have no humanity,

this government.

MR. FITZGERALD: That is wrong and I think they deserve

better.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. the Member for Signal Hill -

Quidi Vidi have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave, the hon. the Member for Signal

Hill - Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, I would like to say for the record that I and

my party oppose the privatization of the Newfoundland Farm Products Corporation.

It was set up for a purpose, to establish a viable food processing industry in

the Province. The government is turning its back on that and seeing half of it

destroyed immediately and we don't know what is going to happen to the other

half.

Mr. Speaker, to hear the minister say on the radio this

morning, and in the House again today, that he is giving the employees three

days to consider their options is an appalling attitude toward workers in this

Province.

I think the government is rushing into this because they have

this ideology of privatization and they are going to go head-long into it come

what may.

Oral Questions

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today

are for the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

Could the minister tell the House how many people are going

to Bristol, who they are, why they are going, and what it will cost to

taxpayers?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

MS KELLY: Mr. Speaker, the numbers that are going to

Bristol, I don't have the list here exactly in front of me but from memory I

think we have several of the staff from our Cabot Corporation going, who are

members of our department of course. My public relations director would be

going. The Premier will be going. The Lieutenant-Governor is going. I am going,

and I believe there are six media; I think KIXX Radio, VOCM, ASN, The Evening

Telegram , and there would be two others. My memory doesn't serve me who the

other ones are, but my understanding is that there are six media who will be

accompanying us.

Also, besides that, there are people going who are not with

the government officials. Oh, I am sorry, the Mayor of Bonavista is also going.

The Mayor of St. John's is going, I think, as part of a delegation from St.

John's, and there is also a tour group going. A tour company from here in the

Province has set up a tour that will be part of the celebrations in Bristol. So

that would be a business initiative.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am sure the minister should know the exact number going

from her department, although I do appreciate the list that she gave for some

rough idea. I also ask the minister: What is the cost of the total bill for all

those travelling at taxpayers' expense?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture

and Recreation.

MS KELLY: I believe the cost per person in airline

tickets - we have a special arrangement with the air carrier because they are a

corporate sponsor - I think it is $778 per airline ticket. The cost then would

be for Thursday night, Friday night and Saturday night hotel expenses - which I

assume are the usual, about $100 a night, but I have not converted it from

British pounds to Canadian dollars - and the cost of some meals, because some

meals are part of the invitation list that has been extended to the Province. As

to why we are going, the reason we are all going is because of The Matthew

departure. It is a re-enactment of 500 years of very proud history of this

Province and the biggest tourism promotion that Newfoundland and Labrador has

ever been part of.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am very surprised that the minister, on the biggest tourism

year in our history, and we are very proud of that here in this Province, cannot

tell us how much was provided in her budget; I asked the cost. How much was the

total cost provided in your budget? Your department, I think, has $1.7 million

in your budget for Cabot 500. How much was provided in your budget for this trip

to Bristol? The minister should be able to tell us that.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture

and Recreation.

MS KELLY: Mr. Speaker, all of that information has been

provided to the hon. member through the Estimates Committee and through everyone

else. We were at the committee last night -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS KELLY: - and those specific questions were not asked.

If you would like the exact detail, and to find out, we can provide you with the

travel forms, in greater detail even, when we return.

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

Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister refused to tell us how much public money was in

the budget for this specific trip. Now, I ask: Will the minister table in this

House tomorrow - to give the minister time to get that from her department - the

number of people who are going, specifically, what the budget allocation for

travel is? I ask the minister the total cost. Today in this Province with -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. -

MR. SULLIVAN: I say to the minister -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary question. I believe he

has asked his question.

MR. SULLIVAN: In light of the fact that in our Province,

it is our role to be accountable for the appropriate expenditure of public

funds, to keep government accountable. We have a right to know, I say to the

minister, and we should -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I believe -

MR. SULLIVAN: - have tabled in this House -

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

I believe the hon. member has asked his question, as I

understand it.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, I ask the

minister -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

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

MR. SULLIVAN: I ask the minister: Will she table in the

House, the questions that I asked.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture

and Recreation.

MS KELLY: Mr. Speaker, the information can certainly be

tabled. I will not be able to table it because my flight leaves at midnight

tonight. I will not be in the House tomorrow. But I, too, have to be accountable

to the taxpayers of this Province, and I can assure you that we are being frugal

in every way that we can, that we have negotiated prices for the various media

that are going, and we have been very recognizing of the fiscal position in my

department. We have no difficulty with supplying the information to you.

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

Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is not what the Auditor General said about Cabot 500, I

say to the minister, not at all. There has not been appropriate expenditure of

public funds and that is why I am asking the minister. The minister did not

provide in the Estimate Committee the dollar value allocated for this trip to

Bristol and I am asking her to do it today. She should know it, she is the

minister of that department. She is hiding the fact. She does not want us to

know.

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

The hon. member is on a supplementary. I ask him to get to

his question.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Forest Resources and

Agrifoods. Minister, your department made it known in the Speech from the

Throne, and also from the Budget, that it was government's intention to dispose

of the interest in Newfoundland Farm Products Corporation. I ask the minister

why a call for expressions of interest was not put forward by government, so

that all who might have been interested would have had an opportunity to put

forward a plan to operate probably both St. John's and the Corner Brook

facilities?

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

MR. TULK: The hon. gentleman, I don't know what time he

got elected to this House, but I want to say to him that in late 1994 there were

proposal calls put out. One call -

AN HON. MEMBER: Ten years ago.

MR. TULK: The hon. gentleman is over there, he is always

looking for answers, and yet he can't keep his mouth shut long enough to hear

them. That's his math.

Mr. Speaker, in 1994 there were proposal calls put out asking

for expressions of interest in Newfoundland Farm Products, asking for proposals.

I have to say to the hon. gentleman that none came forward. Since that time

government has had various discussions. The discussions have never been

completely closed off with IPL. They have been stalled for a period of time. But

at that point in time proposals were called for. Every study, every look that

was taken at Newfoundland Farm Products - not by me - by a board that is very

capable to do this thing, every look that was taken suggested that the best

offer we had or the best offer we hoped to get was with the IPL proposal.

The other issue, I have to say to the gentleman, is that

every study, every look that has ever been taken at this, showed that it could

not be done unless you concentrated production processing in one area of this

Province, and that indeed in terms of capital cost, I say to the hon. gentleman

- not in terms of operation, nothing to do with employees being good or bad,

nothing to do with employees being good employees or bad employees -, but in

terms of capital cost the best place to do that was in St. John's. That is the

reason that today we have those negotiations ongoing.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I say to the

minister a lot of things can change and a lot of things can happen in three

years, and that isn't good enough when you see eighty-seven employees losing

their job over on the West Coast. Would the minister confirm here in this

Assembly today that there was a very serious proposal being formulated by a

Newfoundland-owned business to purchase Newfoundland Farm Products and to

continue to operate both the facilities here in St. John's and in Corner Brook?

The minister and his staff, I am told, are well aware of this expression of

interest.

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

and Agrifoods.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, let me say to the hon. gentleman

that there is no proposal that I know of that was put forward by anybody saying

that Corner Brook and St. John's were to be both operated as chicken processing

facilities.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, I have a funny feeling if

you talk to the eighty-seven employees who are losing their jobs over in Corner

Brook that they wouldn't care if they produced chicken or if they produced

seals, I say to the members opposite, as long as they had a job to support their

families. I am going to read from a news release here, Mr. Speaker, that will

back that up, and it says right here, Mr. Speaker: Seafreeze communicated to

government that it also had a plan other than poultry production for the Corner

Brook facility. That's the company I am talking about -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FITZGERALD: - and that is the news release as put

forward by the media -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FITZGERALD: - so I say there was another proposal,

Mr. Speaker-

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary and I ask him to get to

his question.

MR. FITZGERALD: Would the minister inform the House of

the sale price received for this $40-million operation and, would he also verify

or deny, that government is seriously looking at, up to a $10-million subsidy

for those new owners?

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

and Agrifoods.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, let me say to the hon. gentleman

that this is a very delicate process that we are carrying on here with the IPL

producers and I am not about, for the sake of the Member for Bonavista South and

his ego to say in this House the exact details that we are negotiating.

Let me also say to him that we are absolutely, totally

concerned with the welfare of the employees in Corner Brook and that is the

exact reason -

MR. SULLIVAN: That is the thing that they are concerned

about.

MR. TULK: Ask the Leader of the Opposition.

That is the real reason we have put in place a committee to

look for alternative means of processing, to see if the Corner Brook plant - we

have left the equipment there - to see if the Corner Brook plant can be used for

some other means of production for those employees, and if Seafreeze, which I

believe is owned by Mr. Bill Barry, if Seafreeze chooses to come forward and

say: We have an alternative, the hon. gentleman should listen - if Seafreeze

comes forward and says we have an alternative for the Corner Brook plant -

MR. GRIMES: They said they would do nothing with poultry

in Corner Brook.

MR. TULK: That's right.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: If the hon. gentleman from Seafreeze wishes to

come forward and say: We want to take over that plant to do processing other

than chicken over which we have no control, then I say to him that he will be

received on this side with open arms and every means possible given to him; he

or anybody else, to see that there is processing going on in that facility so

that the employees, that yes, are today going through an extremely hard time -

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

MR. TULK: - and will be going through for the rest of

this week will have jobs for themselves.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister to finish his answer.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South, a supplementary.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wonder if the minister would confirm here in this House

today or, inform the House, either/or, if the lawyer for this particular group,

IPL, who has done the negotiations with government would be the former Premier

of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Clyde K. Wells?

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, let me say to the hon. gentleman

that I am not responsible for hiring the lawyer for IPL. I will say to the hon.

gentleman that at this time, as far as I know, it could be Danny Williams. I

don't know, he is their lawyer not mine.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, my question today is for the Minister of

Government Services and Lands.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: It will come, everything in due course I

say to the Minister of Education, everything in due course.

To the Minister of Government Services and Lands: In March of

95, I asked the government in this House if there were any plans afoot to

privatize any of the government registries; much has changed in the past two

years and I ask the minister once again now, are there any plans to privatize

any of the government-run registries such as the Registry of Deeds, The

Mechanics Lien Registry, Crown Lands Registry or the air photo and map library -

Crown Lands?

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

and Lands.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the hon. member for his question.

Right now we are in the process of privatizing the driver

testing portion of Motor Vehicle Registration but apart from that, we don't have

plans on the books right now for privatizing any of the aforementioned divisions

of any part of our department. If and when they do come, we will bring them

forward as we did with the privatization proposal for the driver testers.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Cape St. Francis.

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

If I were to go to the registry of companies today and tried

to register the name, Atlantic Canada Online, I would find the name already

taken. I ask the minister: Does the government have any information on why that

name has been reserved? Is it true that it is being reserved for the private

company that will take over the registry operations now run by the Provincial

Government?

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

and Lands.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am not familiar with the situation that the hon. member

brings up but I will take it under notice and provide a response for him.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: There has been no consultation on the

privatization of any of the government registries at this point in time. The

Economic Recovery Commission Chair, Mr. Doug House, has privately faulted the

government on its approach to privatization in the past. Will the minister

commit, before any privatization on registries occur within this Province, there

will be a full cost-benefit analysis done and that there will be full disclosure

of the impact it will have on the taxpayer, the consumer and the employees?

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

and Lands.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We follow that process any time we determine we are going to

change anything within the department. That is standard procedure and we will

take that under advisement in due course.

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions this afternoon are for the Minister of

Education.

Mr. Speaker, the Opposition has constantly challenged the

minister to repeatedly take a hands-on approach to the once-in-a-lifetime

restructuring of our education system. The minister has not listened to the

parents and the disaffected communities who have told them the same thing, but

now we have something completely different, Mr. Speaker. I ask the minister: Is

he prepared to listen to the school council of Lakewood Academy in Glenwood, a

body that he, himself, set up under Sections 25 and 26 of his new schools Act?

It is a statutorily approved group that has the support of some eighty other

school councils from across the Province in telling the minister to get involved

in these very important decisions. I ask the minister: Will he listen to school

councils from across the Province and once and for all, Mr. Speaker, get

involved?

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

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, again, I can only register - I

guess the best phrase that I can use now is mild surprise, that the Opposition

critic would continue this line of questioning. Because, as I said in answer to

the same question a week or so ago - I guess they feel obligated to ask this

question once a week as a filler or something. The notion, Mr. Speaker, is that

this Opposition and this member, having done a detailed examination of the

legislation in this House of Assembly last December, voted for the schools Act

that leaves these decisions in the hands of the school boards. The question is:

Does the minister intend to get involved in decisions that belong, legally, to

school boards? The answer is no.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St.

John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: The same school council, Mr. Speaker,

said our government is carefully and systematically breaking down any lines of

communication between parents and government and has tried to focus any and all

retaliation from parents in school district offices. Will the minister put

politics aside and start doing the job that he was elected to do and appointed

to do -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: - both elected and appointed, Mr.

Speaker, and finally be accountable to the parents and citizens about school

reform by taking a hands-on approach to this once-in-a-lifetime restructuring

process?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the sincerity with which the hon. member reads

his question but it does not add to the merits of it, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair has recognized the hon. the Minister of Education.

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I think if we checked Hansard in

the debate last December, as we debated the schools Act, in the twenty-six

amendments that were proposed by members opposite, some of which were approved,

this issue with respect to leaving authority for these decisions in the hands of

the school boards was not at all raised by the member opposite. They voted for

the changes. They support education reform and, Mr. Speaker, I am again, mildly

surprised. I understand they have to ask the question once a week or so because

some parents now, the school council wrote a letter and they want to see - as

always, they want to be seen to be supporting a point of view. But this

Opposition and this member, in particular, supported the legislation that leaves

these decisions in the hands of the school boards.

Mr. Speaker, I addressed the Home and School Federation in

Grand Falls - Windsor last Friday at their annual meeting. I met with a

representative of the school council from the school, Lakewood Academy in

Glenwood -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the minister to finish his answer.

MR. GRIMES: - and I indicated clearly to him and to the

full group that for matters for which the government has legal responsibility

under the Act, like allocating teachers, like setting the budgets for the school

boards, if they are dissatisfied with that, come and see the minister, come and

see the government.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to quickly draw his answer to a

conclusion.

MR. GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

If they are dealing with designations, or the opening or

closing of schools, deal with the school boards because that is where the

legislative responsibility lies.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East, a

supplementary.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This Opposition supports reform. This Opposition also

supports equity, fairness and stability -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: - and it is these issues that have been

advocated by the hon. minister.

The minister knows that the Baie Verte - Central Connaigre

School Board reversed its original decision to designate certain schools in the

district as uni-denominational and, as a consequence, the churches are

challenging the decision and the entire process on the basis that the process

contravenes Term 17.B(1) of the Terms of Union by subordinating the rights of

parents preferring uni-denominational schools to a preference in favour of

interdenominational.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary. I ask him to get to

his question.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is:

Has the minister put in place a contingency plan so he will be prepared in the

event that this case leads to an injunction which will put on hold the

restructuring currently under way or, as he has done in the past, is he prepared

only to let the system continue to fall into absolute chaos should the churches

win this court challenge?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Everybody understands that there is significant change

occurring at the school-based level, right at the doorstep in school reform in

the Province this spring, in preparation for next September. Some people who do

not like the direction of some of the changes describe it as chaos. It is a

major change, and there is always some resistance, but it is a planned change.

There is no contingency in place for the department with respect to

organizational decisions made by boards, because we did not make them in the

first place.

We do understand, however, that the boards themselves may

very well have some contingency plans in case some potential court decisions

render some of their decisions ineffective or unable to be accomplished. That is

not our role. We did not make the decisions in the first place. We have no

contingency plan because we will not make the new plans if they are needed in

the second instance.

Again, I appreciate the question, I understand the question,

but the school boards themselves, the parents themselves, wanted these decisions

made at the local level. That is what the legislation provides for. There is no

role, unless all of us together now want to change the legislation that was just

brought forward in December. The process is unfolding as it should.

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

South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question today is

for the Minister of Justice.

Can the Minister of Justice confirm today for this House that

at the recent meeting of the Estimates Committee for his department, he informed

the committee that the pay-out for the Trans City deal - that he really did not

know what the pay-out was, and that, in actual fact, the pay-out would be made

through the Department of Works, Services and Transportation, and that, in fact,

they were handling that particular piece of business? I wonder, can he confirm

that today for this House?

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

MR. DECKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, the question was raised in the estimates, and what we

told the committee was that - we did not have the figure in our head, and I

believe we did say it was paid through Works, Services and Transportation, but

upon checking, I understand it was paid through the Department of Health,

actually.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Then, instead of going to the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation, I will go to the Minister of Health.

Minister, can you then today divulge to this House the amount

of settlement, the total amount of money that was paid out in the Trans City

deal concerning the court case, and what firms received the money?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, the figure is included in the estimates for the

Department of Health. I don't have it right at my fingers but I know it is in

the order of $1.9 million - a few thousand dollars.

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

South, a supplementary.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wonder, then, would the minister supply for this House, in

writing, who received that amount of money and if, indeed, there is any more

funds to be paid out in that particular issue? Would he supply that to the House

in writing when he has the opportunity?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, I undertake to table that information in the House, but

for the information of the hon. minister, it is contained in the estimates, the

exact amount, and as to whether or not there is additional monies to be paid, as

far as I know, that is the end of it, it is finished, but I would defer to my

Justice minister colleague, who might be better able to answer that question, in

the unlikely event that I am wrong.

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

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

My questions are to the Minister of Health. The Newfoundland

Dietetic Association has submitted a report to government that deals with the

problems of nutrition and the high instances of nutritional problems in the

Province. The government's failure to introduce programs concerning prevention,

intervention and rehabilitation is costing millions of dollars in health care

expenses. These are scarce dollars we can no longer afford and I ask the

minister: In view of the questions yesterday, is the government going to act

positively on the recommendations of the Newfoundland Dietetic Association and,

if so, what are you doing by way of programs?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Time would not permit me to pontificate on the many and

various positive ways in which we are responding to the report that has come

forward.

Suffice, I think it is to say, that the Dietetic Association

met with me and made a presentation, regarding the benefits of good nutritional

policies, not only in a health context, but in our educational institutions and

in terms of our food policy generally as a government. Subsequent to that, they

meet with the Social Policy Committee of Cabinet and made a presentation, and we

committed, as a government, through Social Policy Committee, to examine their

presentation and to respond as positively and appropriately as we think is right

to do, bearing in mind, of course, the substantial amount of work that is

ongoing and the various initiatives that are ongoing within government already

in terms of positive impacts upon nutrition.

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

supplementary.

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

Research will show that effective intervention strategies,

when we talk about low birth weight babies, would have a significant impact on

reducing the number of low birth weight babies in the Province, by as much as

one-third to one-half. It costs $200,000 in health care for every low birth

weight baby in the months immediately after birth. By becoming more proactive,

we could substantially save health care dollars.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary and I ask him to get to

his question, please.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is costing the Province approximately

$3,500,000 a year in these problems and they could save substantial dollars. I

want to ask the minister: Why will you not stop, listen to the research, read

about it and do something about it, Because, on this particular initiative, we

can save real big dollars and substantially affect positively the lifestyle of

these young children, both now and in the future years.

MR. E. BYRNE: `Lloyd', this time next year, you might be

sitting on (inaudible).

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

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: I cannot hear you.

MR. E. BYRNE: You are on your way out, Sir.

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the observation as to whether I am on my way out or not, I

have to say that the hon. member who makes that assertion, fortunately, is on

that side of the House. I understand how he feels about people he wants to get

out and how he dealt with his leader.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MATTHEWS: I thank the good Lord in heaven that I am

not in your hands, nor do I lead something of which you are under me.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question Period has ended.

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Special Committees

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation.

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, I rise to present two reports.

The first is the annual report for 1995-1996 for the Provincial Advisory Council

on the Status of Women. The second is -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

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

The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

MS BETTNEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The second report is the 1995-1996 annual report for the C.A.

Pippy Park Commission.

MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion?

The hon. the Member for St. John's West.

DR. GIBBONS: I ask for leave for a brief statement, Mr.

Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

DR. GIBBONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I was recently nominated by members of the

Liberal Party in the riding of St. John's West to be their candidate in the

upcoming federal election. Since the election has now been called and I will be

submitting my nomination papers to the returning officer for the riding in the

next few days - I will not be waiting the legal limit - I hereby submit to you

today my resignation as the Member of the House of Assembly for the provincial

District of St. John's West.

It has been the greatest experience of my life and of my

career, to date, to serve the people of this district for the past eight years,

as well as the people of the Province as Minister of Natural Resources and

Minister of Mines and Energy. It has been a pleasure to serve with the present

and former members of this Legislature on all sides, and I wish you all well in

the future.

I would like to thank my constituents for giving me the

opportunity to serve them. I would like to thank all of my colleagues in this

Legislature, present and past, for the opportunity to serve with you. I thank my

caucus members and Cabinet ministers, past and present, for their support. I

thank all the staff in this Legislature and elsewhere in government whom I have

worked with so well these many years. But the election was called on Sunday, and

as you have said, my signs have gone up. I am hoping to serve further in another

jurisdiction if the people will have me.

I pay tribute to those on the other side who have been my

critics over the years. I believe my Energy critic is still Mr. Byrne. I pay

tribute, Sir, to you for your questions, and thank you. My Mines critic, I know,

is Mr. Shelley. We have been great friends since he joined this Legislature,

working on issues of mining in his district and in the whole Province. I thank

you for what you have done to help make my job sometimes tougher, but also

better in making sure we address things properly for the people of this

Province. As I jokingly said to you once before when you were asking questions

about copper, the `copper-top' will keep on running, and this copper-top is

going to keep on running. I hope the people will have me.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for this opportunity.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! Hear, hear!

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

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

I would like to rise and wish my colleague on the other side

of the House not great luck in the future, not the immediate future. But I

should say that I first met Rex Gibbons many years ago. I knew him as chairman

of the Avalon Consolidated School Board and was pleased to serve as principal of

one of the schools in that jurisdiction. I've known him to be straightforward. I

know his family. Some members of his family are personal friends of mine, and

particularly his brother and sister who live in Mount Pearl.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. H. HODDER: I am not going to get into how they vote.

The member knows and I know, and we won't get into that. I certainly want to say

to the member, serving in this Legislature is not always easy. It is a

challenging job. He has brought his academic experience to his office and I

believe it has been used wisely. Certainly the people of the Province, and the

people in particular of his home community in Wesleyville, they have every right

to be proud -

AN HON. MEMBER: Lumsden!

MR. H. HODDER: Lumsden, rather. Have every right to be

proud of their son. So I say to him, good luck in your campaigning, and I'm sure

that during the campaign our pathways may cross. Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is obvious from

the remarks of our colleague from St. John's West that he loves his service in

the House and feels very attached to what he has accomplished here. I think it

is appropriate to acknowledge his service to the House for eight years.

I may say, on a personal note, that in my view he is well

entitled and deserves the term hon. member of this House. He has always been a

gentleman, diligent in representing his constituents, and representing the

portfolios that he has had the pleasure, as he indicates, of representing. It is

an honour to serve in this House and to serve the people in this way. I too wish

him well in the future. I note that he is taking a step which has considerable

risk: to resign a seat that he recently won a year ago to seek office in the

House of Commons, which is also a great privilege and pleasure which I have had

in my experience. I do wish him well in the future, and thank him for his

service to the people in this House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, let me say to my hon. friend, now

the former Member for the provincial District of St. John's West, that before

the Christmas break I had expected he would do this and I said some of the

things that I wanted to say about him at that point.

I just wanted to say to him that I've known him since the age

of about fourteen or fifteen. That is two or three years ago. I've followed him

with great interest. I've known him in school. He is a very brilliant man

academically, and of course he has shown to all of us in the past Cabinet, and

in the little bit of experience I've had with him in this one, that he has a

great mind when it comes to mines and energy and when it comes to matters of

state. I think that St. John's West federally, and indeed the Parliament of

Canada, will be well served by the hon. member after June 2.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TULK: I want to close by telling him that while there

are certain things that we can't do as Cabinet and as back benchers to help him

in his campaign, everything that we can do on this side we will do to ensure

that St. John's West does not have a `Power' member of Cabinet but has a

powerful member of Cabinet. We will see that that is done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! Hear, hear!

Orders of the Day

Private Members' Day

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm delighted to stand

today and introduce debate on this motion dealing with the economic development

as it relates to the rural areas of the Province. First, just to read the

resolution:

WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, in these

challenging times, is making significant efforts to achieve economic renewal and

diversification in rural areas of the Province; and

WHEREAS various government initiatives in partnership with

communities throughout the Province have realized the creation of significant

business developments in the Province; and

WHEREAS some of these initiatives such as Piccadilly Plastics

Limited in Piccadilly, Steelcor Industries Ltd. in Buchans, Superior Glove Works

In Point Leamington, and the tannery announced this week for Baie Verte, are

evidence of government's continuing support and encouragement for diverse

economic development activity throughout the Province;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly support

the government in its continuing efforts to identify new opportunities and in

furtherance of its ongoing policy of forming partnerships with communities and

the private sector in the process of economic diversification.

Mr. Speaker, in recent days whenever a debate is ongoing with

regard to any number of issues, whether it is the closure of a school, or

whether it is with the privatization of our provincial parks, whatever the issue

may be, invariably we hear in some quarters people suggesting that it is an

indication of government turning its back on rural Newfoundland. Personally,

that has always caused me great difficulty.

Some weeks ago I had occasion to be in my district to meet

with parents and students of a school that has been identified and designated

for closure, and anyone who has gone through that experience - it is not easy to

be confronting a group of young men and women and their parents and seeing the

pain in their faces on the basis of a decision that has been made for all the

right reasons, but in the final analysis for them the only thing they can see is

the reality, that something they have known for years will no longer be.

Mr. Speaker, as painful as that may be, the reality is that

at some point in time, just as each and every one of us in our own personal

lives sometimes have to make decisions and undertake actions that we would

prefer not to, we, as a government, find ourselves in situations from time to

time where we indeed have to make very difficult decisions that in another time

and place we would perhaps otherwise prefer not to do.

Mr. Speaker, when I hear reference to terms such as `forced

resettlement', I find it personally very, very offensive. My entire life has

been, in one fashion or another, entwined with the whole struggle to preserve

rural roots. I have indicated on previous occasions in this House that back in

the thirties my parents were part of one of the earliest resettlement projects

in this Province, initiated by the Commission of Government, when they were

moved from a little community in Fortune Bay - Miller's Passage - to the West

Coast of the Province, an effort which they undertook in the belief that they

were securing for themselves and their family a better future.

Mr. Speaker, I grew up listening to stories of a community

that I did not know and I had never seen, but for my entire childhood - since I

was born on the West Coast and not in Fortune Bay - somehow I felt that there

was a part of me missing because there was so much that was important to the

values of my parents and my older siblings, because there was a life and a time

that they knew which I had not. So I guess my earliest beginnings and my own

values and my own way of thinking were very strongly influenced by the

experience that my parents and older brothers and sisters had endured.

Subsequent to that, I had occasion over the years to be

heavily involved in the rural development movement in this Province; first of

all through the Port au Port Economic Development Association in my own area, of

which I have had the privilege of being involved for some twenty-five years, and

served as president for about twelve or thirteen years, and in various other

capacities.

As matter of fact, an organization that I am still proud to

be a member of, and to be to this day, working very closely with, in addition,

Mr. Speaker, my involvement in rural development allowed me the opportunity and

the privilege to serve in the position of President of the Newfoundland and

Labrador Rural Development Council, the umbrella body representing all rural

development associations in the Province, a position which I held for five years

and one which for me really reinforced the views which I held with regards to

rural Newfoundland generally, the importance of the values and the importance of

that whole life experience that was part and parcel of having been raised in

rural Newfoundland.

Mr. Speaker, to say that rural Newfoundland and this Province

generally is undergoing change is an understatement. But change is not always

necessarily bad; change is a part of life. We pass through different phases in

our lives. If we put it into context of our own lives, a lifetime is a process

of opening and closing doors. The experiences which we have today at some point

in time, this phase in our life which we are passing through right now, when we

have the privilege to sit am members of this hon. House, we recognize that this

is a passing phase. Some day, this will be part of our experience, some day,

this will be part of our history. Some day we will close that door and we will

move on to something else. That, Mr. Speaker, in its simplest terms, is what

life is all about and it is no different if you are talking about a person, if

you are talking about a family, if you are talking about a community, if you are

talking about a Province or if you are talking about a country. Change is

inevitable and change should not be feared.

We have to recognize that change comes about as a part of

growth, it comes about as a part of maturity and it comes about because factors

which very often are beyond our control necessitate that this change take place

and this, Mr. Speaker, is what we are witnessing in our Province today. If we

look at the rural areas of the Province and if we look at it from the historical

perspective, our history, the history of this Province has been based on the

fishery. If you look at the earliest settlement patterns in this Province, the

reason why so many of our communities and so many of our people are living in

these small, isolated communities, it is because our earliest history was based

in the fishery. The fishery is what brought our forefathers here, it was in the

pursuit of the fishery, this is why these people came and this is why their sons

and daughters subsequently decided to remain here and they cling to these rocks

and crags and to continue to make a living there.

Mr. Speaker, I don't need to report to this hon. House today

what has happened to our fishery in recent years. The closure of the

groundfishery has been devastating to so many of our people in rural

Newfoundland, and it is not something that came about overnight and it is not

something that anyone can point to and lay the blame on any one individual or

any one organization or on any one government. It is not that simple. Even

today, there is still no complete agreement that we have a definitive answer as

to what brought about the ultimate collapse of our cod stocks and the subsequent

closure of the fishery. The only thing we can conclude is that there were a

number of factors. There were a number of factors which contributed to this but,

Mr. Speaker, whatever the reasons were the ultimate outcome and the devastation

which it has brought on the people of this Province cannot be denied.

However, Mr. Speaker, despite the fact that the failure and

closure of the fishery has had such a devastating impact on the rural areas of

the Province, we also must recognize that there has been an up side and is not

always visible because one of the things that it has forced us to do, in terms

of the in-shore fishery in particular, is to look in areas at underdeveloped

species, species which in the past we have not even considered and as a result

because of the efforts undertaken by government, both levels of government, to

try to implement a fishery which would take advantage of these under utilized

species and to identify new opportunities.

The fishery of the day still remains the backbone of the

economy of this Province and there is no doubt, that with the signs which we are

seeing now, especially in the gulf and in 3Ps, the encouraging signs of a

possible recovery of the ground fish stocks, there is no question, Mr. Speaker,

in my opinion, that we can certainly look forward to better days in terms of the

fishery in this Province.

However, I think we must never again, in this Province, make

the kind of mistake, which is certainly one of the reasons that has brought us

to where we are today, we can never allow ourselves to believe that one resource

or one industry, will ever be able to sustain us. One of the great difficulties

that we have had in this Province and the reason why the closure, the failure of

the stocks and the subsequent closure of the fishery, has been so devastating to

us, is because as a people we are so dependent on this one industry.

The thing, Mr. Speaker, that it does point out is that, we

must work to diversify our economy so that in times if one area fails, it does

not mean the complete collapse of the whole infrastructure, but indeed that we

will have something else there that we can fall back on.

Mr. Speaker, some of this work has been proceeding. Anyone

who thinks that there has not, over the last number of years, been activities

and going back over a number of years, activities ongoing in this Province which

indicate that we are working to diversify the economy and also indicate that we

can, as a people, be successful in areas other than the fishery.

Again, Mr. Speaker, I reiterate, not to down-play the

importance of our fishery, for truly it is and will continue to be for some time

to come, the backbone of our economy, but I think it is worth while, if we

would, just for a few moments, focus on some of these areas where we have over

the last little while been able to accomplish some success.

Mr. Speaker, just a few days ago, I had occasion to attend a

seminar in Stephenville, arranged by my colleague the hon. Kevin Aylward, and

had occasion to listen to Mr. Lorne Janes, Chairman of the Newfoundland

Manufactures Association. It was interesting that I noticed in The

Newfoundland Herald , the most recent addition, there is an

article there

related to his thoughts with regard to what has been happening in terms of

manufacturing in this Province and what he speaks of manufacturing in general, I

just glean from that

article a few of the points that he made on that day, which

certainly, even though I did have some knowledge as to what has been going on in

the Province, but it certainly was a very powerful message and a very powerful

reminder of how successful we have been in this Province at our efforts in the

manufacturing area.

For example, he reports that we have between 500 and 600

companies, at the present time, and that these companies are employing close to

20,000 people and contributing about $1.5 billion a year to our economy.

Mr. Speaker, certainly very, very significant and I think to

most people a real eye opener because I think for most of us we do not see

ourselves as being heavily involved or successful in the manufacturing area, but

obviously that

article points out that in fact we have been doing some very

worthwhile and very successful things over the last number of years.

But Mr. Speaker, out focus today is especially geared towards

the rural areas of the Province, where most people would suggest the real

challenge lies. Most people, I would suggest Mr. Speaker, would debate and would

challenge that it is very easy to get developments of that type going in areas

like Corner Brook, St. John's or larger urban areas of the Province but how do

you attract that kind of development and how do you sustain it in areas like

Port au Port, that I represent or areas like the South Coast of the Province or

Port aux Basques? It is very easy - all of us can point to examples of things

that have been tried and have failed.

All too often our biggest downfall in this Province are the

number of naysayers that we have out there who are constantly telling us that

this won't work, that won't work and they will always point to the one or two

things that we have tried and that have failed. Well, Mr. Speaker, my personal

philosophy has always been, you never apologize for having tried something and

failed. You only apologize if you don't have the guts to try it in the first

place because unless we are able to do something and try to do something for

ourselves the one thing that we can be sure of is that we will never get beyond

the situation that we find ourselves in today. Mr. Speaker, indeed there are

some very significant success stories right now, today as we speak, that exists

out in the rural areas of this Province.

If I may, I would just like to take a minute to highlight

some examples of what has been happening throughout this Province. The one

venture perhaps that I am most knowledgeable about is the one that has taken

place in my own district of Port au Port and specifically in the community of

Piccadilly. Piccadilly Plastics, Mr. Speaker, a plastics manufacturing firm set

up in an abandoned fish plant. It was started in 1995. It started out producing

creamer cups. It went through a really negative experience of losing the plant

within the first year of operation through fire but since the plant has been

rebuilt and recently the company signed a new $20 million contract with an

American firm.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SMITH: So this is the kind of thing that can happen.

This company, at the present time, is employing twenty-two people. Once it gets

up to capacity, will be employing in the area of sixty people and, Mr. Speaker,

these are full-time jobs. We are not talking seasonal work, we are talking

full-time jobs. This is a plant today that is operating twenty-four hours a day

around the clock, seven days a week and that is the kind of development, Mr.

Speaker, that we need and there are others situated throughout this Province.

Steel Core Industries Limited in Buchans, another extremely

successful -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member by leave.

MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Steel Core Industries Limited, located in Buchans, which

today employs thirty-two people. This company had its beginnings in 1989 and was

intended to attract aerospace and defence contracts. I can remember being around

at that time and being involved in rural development because again here as well,

there is a connection to rural development and some of the players in this

particular development. When some of these things were being mentioned at that

time, the possibility that we could do this in Newfoundland was so foreign to

people. Immediately you had the naysayers saying: Well what a waste of time. Why

are we bothering with this? Why is government getting involved with these people

to try to assist them with this type of venture because this is going nowhere?

Well, Mr. Speaker, it certainly has proven its ability, this particular company.

Over the past seven years it had contracts with companies such as Short Brothers

of Northern Ireland; General Electric of Syracuse, New York; General Motors of

Oakville, Ontario; CCL Systems of Leeds, England and Computing Devices Canada

out of Ottawa. Recently Steel Core was awarded an initial machining contract

with Bowring Aircraft out of Winnipeg. Mr. Speaker, this clearly demonstrates,

when you see examples like this, that we are only limited by our own

imagination. We are only limited by the willingness that we have to take

chances, identify ideas, and to run with them.

A few other examples, Mr. Speaker, before I sit down and give

some other hon. members in this House an opportunity to participate in this

debate, for I am sure this is something that touches all of us and that everyone

here today is eager to participate.

Highland Homes Limited out of Gander: Again, I remember the

earliest days of this particular company which started back in the 1980s

manufacturing log homes. Right now, this company is designing a home for the

Chilean climate with an initial market of 500 to 1,000 units. Again, small

beginnings, but people with visions, and people who have the willingness to work

hard and have the drive to bring that dream to reality. The Superior Glove Works

Limited out of Point Leamington, employing seventy to eighty people -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SMITH: One hundred and three now, my hon. colleague

tells me. Again, this is an interesting example, as well. A company that in its

earliest beginnings got introduced to the Newfoundland worker coming to the

mainland, getting employed in a plant there, and being so impressed with the

calibre of the people who were coming up from Newfoundland to work, felt: Why

not come down here to Newfoundland where this labour force was available? Why

could we not we do that here? Indeed, Mr. Speaker, today this particular

company, in total, is producing 5 million pairs of gloves annually with a sale

of $18 million, and $4 million of that is being produced in Newfoundland, with

export markets both nationally and internationally.

Terra Nova Shoes: Everyone in this hon. House is familiar

with this Newfoundland success story. Employment in the area of 115 to 125

people, founded in 1973, and today, sales in the area of $15 million, with

target markets being both national and international.

S.C.B. Fisheries Limited - a good friend opposite, right next

to me here - in St. Alban's, Bay d'Espoir, employs 100 people. Again, this is a

particular venture that I can remember from the earliest beginnings. Because

again, with this particular one, a rural development association started this as

an initiative down in that area. Today, the current sales from that operation

are $7 million. In the area of aquaculture we are just scratching the surface.

But it is examples like these that are giving encouragement to other areas of

the Province, to other individuals, and to other groups, to get involved in this

area of aquaculture which has such tremendous potential.

North Atlantic Stone, again in Buchans, employing thirty-two

people, produces stone for graveyard monuments from local granite. Production

currently is at approximately $500,000 with growth expected to increase

significantly in fiscal 1997.

In Bishop's Falls, High Point Peat Industries Limited: This

business started in 1990. The product produced here is an oil absorbent material

which is sold throughout international markets. The company has recently

expanded operations to include the production of horticultural peat, and while

markets are mainly provincial, potential exists for export markets. Sales in

1996 were in excess of $1 million.

Mr. Speaker, these are just some of the examples of the kinds

of things that we are doing in the rural areas of the Province, just some of the

things that are giving evidence of the kinds of ideas, drive and initiative that

exist in rural Newfoundland, and the kinds of success stories we need to

recognize and build on as we work to diversify the economy in rural

Newfoundland.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to say that it is an interesting resolution that

has been put forward, and I understand where the member is coming from in

talking about some of the successes that we have had in this Province. But I

think that we should not ignore the facts.

The fact is that we are still in very dire straits in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador. We still have a large out-migration of people, and a

lot of them are coming from the rural areas of our Province. A lot of it may be

due to the lack of finances and revenue in the economy. The closure of the cod

fishery certainly has an impact, but I think a lot of it also is due to the

bureaucracy that government has built up over the years, and this is also

contributing to the downfall of rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

I come from a district, and I represent a district, of all

rural communities in this Province, and I am certainly sure that we have had our

share of trials and tribulations over the last few years. It seems that we have

seen very little in terms of concrete infrastructure and funding. What we have

seen is hand-outs here and there to keep people satisfied for short periods of

time, with no long-term gains in employment and security for the communities in

the long run.

I look right now to the inadequate health care system that we

have in this Province, and the people who are suffering the most are the people

in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. The people in my district, just to have an

X-ray done, have to get on a plane and pay anywhere from $100 to $200 to have an

X-ray. Whenever they want to have medical services of any kind, they have to fly

in and out of communities to do it, and they do it at the highest cost to

patients, in this whole Province.

When you look at the school system and what is happening

there, it is incomprehensible, the restructuring system that is taking place in

this Province, and the minister is quite content to sit back and say it is the

boards that are making these decisions. But it is the government of this

Province that sets the precedence for those boards and gives them the lenience

to do what they can do.

There are commitments to rural communities in this Province

with regard to school systems, but there is very little that substantiates that;

because when you look at teacher allocations across this Province, and you look

at a ratio of fourteen to one, I have five schools in my district with less than

fourteen kids between Kindergarten and Grade IX, with one teacher in these

schools to administer and teach and instruct, and that is not quality education

for these students. They cannot even access Distance Education courses simply

because the telecommunications is not there for them to do so. This is totally

inadequate in the education system today.

When we look at the fishery, - the member, in his comments,

said that the fishery was what brought us to this Province. Well, I say the

fishery is what can keep us in this Province, as well, especially in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador. In my district alone, the cod fishery may have

failed, but we have fisheries that are far more wealthy than the cod has ever

been to us - in terms of crab, in terms of shrimp, in terms of turbot - however,

we do not have the flexibility to harvest, to process, the way that is most

beneficial to our communities and to our plants. We are restricted by the

licensing policies that are in place by this government and by the Federal

Government. We have inshore fishermen along our coast who could participate in

these fisheries, but cannot upgrade their licences, cannot upgrade their vessel

sizes.

We have to have freedom in policy, we have to have

flexibility, if we are to move ahead in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and

these are little things that government can do to ease the burden of these

communities, that do not involve finances but just involve changes in policy.

I guess, when we look at what government is doing in its

efforts - and, yes, I agree, Piccadilly Plastics, the glove factory in Point

Leamington and others are success stories for our Province, and I hope that we

can continue to have success stories like that, but we have a long way to go.

It is interesting that this resolution states that we work in

partnership with communities and with private enterprise, because I could tell

you stories out of my district alone. It is unbelievable the bureaucracy and the

red tape that businesses have gone through and are still going through with

government legislation to try to create employment in their communities.

I am going to talk about a couple of these things that are

happening in my district.

One, for example: There has been an application in the system

for seventeen months to develop a forest operation. It has not gotten through

the system simply because of the bureaucratic level, the red tape and the

policies that have been in place by this government. This business, right now

today, could be employing twenty to thirty people, but that did not happen.

There are many other examples like this in my district, and this is where

government has to make changes.

You talk in terms of commitment. What did we see? We saw a

commitment from government, alright. We saw an outfitting lodge put on another

river in my district. We saw the proponents come off the Island part of the

Province when people in the local area were not even considered for these

proposals and, at the same time, you signed a deal of $600,000 and gave them the

money to go and do it. If this is commitment to rural Newfoundland and Labrador,

I think it is time for someone to make an effort to change it.

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible).

MS JONES: And the fishery? You missed the fishery

section

I say to the minister, because there is lots that could be done there, as well.

MR. EFFORD: Tell me about it.

MS JONES: We are giving out quotas and licences to go out

and harvest offshore when those species should be brought inshore, processed in

our plants giving our people jobs that they do not have. Now, that is commitment

to rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. EFFORD: You do not even read. You do not even know

what you are talking about.

MS JONES: I read, my dear, I read, and I did not like

what I read; and that is why I spoke, Mr. Minister.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: If we want to make real commitment to rural

Newfoundland and Labrador, we will stop closing schools in the small communities

and busing them to the urban centres. We will start putting in place a health

care system that is comparable for all people in this Province. We will lay off

on cutting all the services that are there for rural communities and instead,

try to enhance these services for the people who live there; improve technology,

put in phone-line systems where they can do Distance Education, provide them

with telecentre services that are available through all their communities so

that they can access business opportunity and create business development.

When we start seeing efforts like that in this Province,

well, then we can stand up and commend the government for its efforts.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take a few moments to talk about the

revitalization, the opportunities in Newfoundland and Labrador and what we can

do to create an atmosphere and an environment where opportunities can be taken

advantage of, attitude change and a development of a resource that has been in

our oceans for millions of years since (inaudible) but we just never had the

vision to take care of it.

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

talking about the policies for Newfoundland and Labrador, the fisheries

policies. I just remembered, recently in Labrador, she was talking about: Why

did the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture not give core status to the plants

in Labrador? Where is the policy? She just never listened. We made a special

status for Labrador in our policy, that any fish plant on Coastal Labrador could

process any species that they wish to that is harvested, no restrictions barred;

no restrictions barred, and that means -

MS JONES: (Inaudible). What a waste of money (inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: What was that?

MS JONES: How come you (inaudible) all your (inaudible)

on Labrador? It is poured into (inaudible) why did you spend all the money in

(inaudible) Labrador?

MR. EFFORD: All of what money?

MS JONES: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: What money are you talking about? We did not

spend any money.

MS JONES: (Inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: I have to get a copy of Hansard, Mr. Speaker,

and send that down to the communities in Labrador and let them read what she

just said.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: Let them see, let them read again, once more

what she thinks of opportunities in Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, let me outline a couple of things we just did

for Labrador.

Torngat Fishery, the co-operative - Torngat Co-operative was

looking for other species and other opportunities to give the people in Makkovik

an opportunity to get the longest seasonal work possible, out of resources

available. They came to me as Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture and said:

You have the Nain Banker tied up at the university, doing exploratory

work and taking students out to the Marine Institute for training. We would like

to have that vessel in Labrador with the groundfish license so that we can go

out and fish turbot and other species of fish so people in Labrador can be

employed.

What did we do, Mr. Speaker? We gave them the boat. We gave

them the boat, and along with the boat we gave them the groundfish licence and

along with the groundfish licence we gave them a crab licence, porcupine crab,

king crab and a snow crab licence in one fish plant in Labrador. I put the

message out to all the other communities, whatever species that you want to

process in the communities of Labrador and the resource is available, as long as

it is not hurting another community - in the case of Black Tickle to have a crab

licence or a shrimp licence and take it away from Cartwright, Mary's Harbour or

St. Lewis - as long as it does not drain another community and you have the

resource, you can have the licence.

AN HON. MEMBER: Perfect, perfect.

MR. EFFORD: But then what are you talking about core

status? They all have the status that is required to process species.

AN HON. MEMBER: Get up and apologize (inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: Apologize to the people - to the people of

Labrador. Do you want me to take it away? Do you want me to say no, that's not

going to happen?

AN HON. MEMBER: Who are you, God?

MR. EFFORD: Well make up your mind because it would not

take me too long. If you don't want it somebody else does. So here we are giving

every opportunity to every community in Coastal Labrador, where there is a fish

plant, to do whatever species they want to do and the member representing that

area of Labrador is against it. Now there's an example. Mr. Speaker, I can

assure you, through my good friend in Labrador, I will copy Hansard and make

sure that every constituent is able to read it.

AN HON. MEMBER: Including Danny Dumaresque.

MR. EFFORD: Including Danny Dumaresque.

Mr. Speaker, one of the biggest problems that I found in

talking to people around Newfoundland and Labrador - my friend from Port au Port

mentioned it earlier about the change and the diversification since the closure

of the ground fish industry to other species. One of the problems that I have

encountered is people not willing to diversify, people not willing to take the

opportunity to look at other commercial values. Everything in that ocean is

valuable. Everything in that ocean is valuable to the point where there is a

market for it. All we have to do is take it upon ourselves to invest our

thoughts and our visions into it, get it out of the ocean and get it into the

markets.

One of the biggest problems that I have seen with the NCARP

and TAGS program, there was money given to people automatically, right off the

mark, for incomes. There should have been an attachment to that weekly amount of

money, that if you are going to accept that kind of an income and you are

intending to stay in the fishery then that must be part of looking at other

opportunities and developing other species that you can find work out of it. Now

we have spent several years - people getting millions and millions of dollars of

income, which they need and now the TAGS program is running out and 8,000 or

10,000 people have no opportunities and don't know where they are going to turn

tomorrow and we have millions of opportunities out there in the ocean. That is

the negative that I see with NCARP and the TAGS program. Can you imagine - we

brought in opportunities last year in experimental work in shrimp fisheries, the

pot fishery and the beam trawl fishery, scientists have told us how much shrimp

is around the shores of Newfoundland and Labrador and we found it difficult,

very, very difficult to get somebody to put a beam trawl or a pot aboard their

boat to go out to do experimental work. That is the difficulty that we have. We

are not taking advantage of the opportunities out there.

MR. FITZGERALD: I said, what was the quotas or what was

the allocation that the scientists suggest we take out of 3L?

MR. EFFORD: I don't know about 3L but certainly around

all Newfoundland and Labrador you could take as much as 150,000 metric ton and

you would not even come close to hurting the resource.

MR. FITZGERALD: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: Well in 3L, none.

MR. FITZGERALD: 2,000 ton?

MR. EFFORD: Not in 3L, 2,000 ton for 3L fishermen to fish

up in 3K.

MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, none (inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: Oh, that is not what I'm saying. The resource

is available there.

Now one of the things that the minister had to do in making a

decision in how much shrimp he is going to allow in the quotas this year, if you

brought in a large quota and you don't have the harvesting and the processing

capability, next year you could lose it. It is better to bring in the amount of

quota that you can catch this year and look for an increase in 1998-99, it is

the beginning of a new fishery.

The fishery, Mr. Speaker, is the backbone of the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador. It is the backbone, to the survival of Newfoundland

and Labrador. Without the fishery I cannot imagine how the small communities

along Coastal Newfoundland and Labrador can survive. It is our responsibility,

as a government and my responsibility as minister, to make every opportunity

available to those individuals but it is difficult to do, Mr. Speaker, at the

same time that people are set in their ways and looking at the past and not

looking at other opportunities other than the traditional fishery.

I remember there about six weeks ago, I was driving home one

afternoon listening to The Fisherman's Broadcast and there were four fishermen

being interviewed at that time by, I think it was Jim Wellman who was then on

The Fisherman's Broadcast, and they were actually into a conversation about when

the fishery reopens. In other words, there is no fishery today, they were

waiting for when the fishery reopens and I sat there wondering what they were

talking about. The only fishery that is not there today is the ground fishery.

In 1995 there was over $500 million worth of fish landed and

we had four fishermen, representing four different regions around the Province

saying: they are waiting for the fishery to reopen and there goes the proof to

show you that they are not thinking about other opportunities. They are sitting

and waiting for the cod to come back and if the cod came back today, even as

bountiful as it used to be in the past, in those numbers, the markets are not

there anymore. The markets are not there in that particular species of fish

because of the changing markets and of the pricing of the markets, that other

species of fish has filled that gap in the marketplace. So, again we are forced

to diversify, we are forced to look at other opportunities. Opportunities are

there, Mr. Speaker, as a matter of changing our thinking, having a vision to

where I am going in the future and looking at the markets and looking at the

availability and the opportunities other than the traditional groundfish stocks.

Mistakes, we made a lot of mistakes in the past, none of us

can shy away from taking responsibility, whether we were involved in the

fishery, directly, indirectly involved or just a citizen of this Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador, we have to take responsibility because if factory

freezer trawlers or if large companies or if fishermen, in general, were out

there overfishing or destroying fish stocks and we sat idly by and did nothing

about it, then we were as much to blame as they were because we allowed it to

happen.

So, the one thing that we have to do, we all have to take the

responsibility, but we have to turn our directions in learning from the mistakes

of the past and going into the future with a different attitude altogether and

utilizing the vast resource we have out there.

I have said time and time again, if any other country or any

other province -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, it must be the accent, must be

the accent.

AN HON. MEMBER: It is a good speech.

MR. EFFORD: Am I finished?

Mr. Speaker, if any other province or any other country in

the world had the resource around this Province, similar to Iceland, we would be

doing similar things like Iceland is doing over there, importing people -

AN HON. MEMBER: It is a good speech, continue.

MR. EFFORD: I thought I was getting quite serious about

this.

- importing people into their province to work in the fishing

industry. What are we doing? We are losing people out of our rural communities

because they do not understand the opportunities that are out there.

Little country of Iceland, 220,000 people, eighty-seven per

cent of it's gross national produce is fish. In Newfoundland, people look to the

ocean and if the codfish is not swimming in around the cod traps or in around

the nets, most of them do not see any opportunity.

Another thing that we want to talk about is opportunities in

rural Newfoundland. This government is committed to the sealing industry. The

sealing industry for two factors, number one, what it means in dollars and cents

in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. This year we hunted about 280,000, 285,000

animals. Looking at about an average, the minimum amount that each animal is

worth is about $30 and when you multiply $30 times 285,000 animals, you can

imagine the amount of wealth that is coming into fishermen's pockets.

Now, what are we doing? The policy that I just brought in - I

am saying that anything caught in the ocean, whether it is seals or whether it

is any species of fish, if we are going to create an economic environment in

Newfoundland, opportunities in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, if it is going

to be caught here, it should be processed here. So, I just brought in a new

policy that no fish will leave Newfoundland or Labrador to be further processed

in some other province in Canada or somewhere else in the world.

So, there are opportunities that will make thousands of jobs

available in Newfoundland and Labrador just on that one policy alone. If we look

at the multi-millions of dollars over the years, the produce that went out of

this Province and created tens of thousands of jobs in the United States,

somewhere else in Canada, we should be ashamed of ourselves. This government

adopted a policy, it is over, no excuses, it is over now, you process it here or

you get out of the business and we are very strong on that issue.

The other thing that we just brought in is a quality issue.

If we are going to develop a fishery of the future we have to derive the best

possible price we can for that fish so the fishermen and the processors and the

plant workers can get a good living out of it. One of the things that we have

never been careful about and never had any respect for was putting a quality

product into the market. While we have some companies that are doing an

excellent job, and probably a greater percentage that are doing a good job, we

have a number of companies out there that do not care about quality, make a fast

buck, dump it into the market. Now the price is determined from one year to the

next on the worst product going to the market.

In other words, in the case of 1995, crab was $2.50 a pound

on the market. We put 25 million pounds of crab, cooked dead, and shipped it to

the market. As a result, in 1995 crab was $2.50 a pound. In 1996 it went down to

$1.10 a pound. Most of it, Mr. Speaker, was because of the type of quality that

is in the market. When I attended a Boston seafood show this year I talked with

Japanese buyers. One of the questions I asked was: Why is it that we are always

having trouble trying to get our product into your market? They said: You are

not concerned about quality and we are.

The next policy we brought in this year: Unless it is a top

quality plant, unless it produces a top quality product and it doesn't adhere to

the rules, there are no fines, no band aid approach, no court appearances, I

will take their licence immediately. We have already proven to the people how

serious we are, and I've told them that it isn't going to be flim-flam talk, or

flip-flopping from day to day. We are serious about it. Just last week we took

about 1,800 pounds of halibut from a fishermen, a small buyer -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: - and we dumped it out in Robin Hood Bay.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. minister's time is up.

MR. EFFORD: Already? By leave for a couple of minutes?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible)!

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. the Member for Cartwright -

L'Anse au Clair have leave of the House to speak again?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No leave!

MR. SPEAKER: No leave has been granted.

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I listened today for

a few minutes to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. Most times I don't

listen to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. Sometimes he makes sense,

sometimes he doesn't.

It was very interesting today to hear the minister say that

what is caught off our shores is going to be produced on our shores and

processed here. I can certainly agree with the minister in that regard. For far

too long things that have been caught off our shores have been taken somewhere

else to be produced. Some years ago I worked for the Canadian Saltfish

Corporation. The chairman of the commission was a gentleman out of Ottawa who

told me at one time he visited Czechoslovakia. While in Czechoslovakia going

through a fish plant, he discovered a label of R.I. Smith, a minister from Nova

Scotia, in this particular fish plant in Czechoslovakia. A product that was

caught off Newfoundland, put on a factory-freezer trawlers, taken back to

Czechoslovakia. The cod tongues were done, packaged under R.I. Smith's label,

and shipped back to Canada. Certainly that is wrong. Whatever we do in this

regard certainly is a benefit to this Province.

I hope the Premier takes the same step when it comes to

Voisey's Bay. They are our resources, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

For far too long we have allowed our resources to go somewhere else. How can one

today not support the particular motion as put forth by the member? How can one

not support that particular thing? I don't know why, in this House, we actually

have to have a private member's motion to ask the government to do what it

should be doing anyway.

AN HON. MEMBER: Say that again. I bet you can't say that

(inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: That is what I can. To ask the government to

do what it should be doing anyway.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: Oh no. The Minister of Fisheries and

Aquaculture, I can agree with the latter part of his speech 100 per cent. I only

hope we can do this in the rest of our industries in this Province, I say to the

Government House Leader, and especially Voisey's Bay.

For far too long our Province has been raped, and what we

produced has been sent out to other places in this world to be produced and to

be handled. We send out the raw materials. It should never be allowed to happen

in Newfoundland and Labrador. So how can one today not support this particular

motion? It is a motherhood issue, and really something that our government

should be doing regardless.

MR. FITZGERALD: (Inaudible) I feel like your mother.

MR. FRENCH: A motherhood issue, I say to my colleague

from Bonavista South. It is a motherhood issue and really does not even need to

be here.

We talk about seals. I applaud the tannery that is now going

in Baie Verte, and say to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and to the

Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology, that it is great that the two of

them intervened. And I would certainly like to compliment my colleague from Baie

Verte because he has been involved in this particular project from day one. That

is the type of industry we should have in this Province. Again, when we look at

seals, we have been sending them out of this Province for years and years and

years to be produced, to be handled by somebody else. It should never be done.

It should happen in our Province, and we should never allow this to happen

again.

Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to make those few points today.

Like I said, how can you not support this motion? I don't even really know if

such a motion was really necessary. It is an issue that every member in this

House, on both sides, will certainly support, so I thank you for your time.

MR. SPEAKER: Before recognizing the hon. minister, I

would like to draw members' attention to our Standing Orders. There appeared to

be some confusion a few moments ago when the hon. Member for Cartwright -

L'Anse-au-Clair stood to enter into the debate for the second time. I heard some

members to my right say that she did not require leave of the House to speak

again.

I refer members to Standing Order 53.(1): No member shall

speak twice to a question except in explanation of a material part of his or her

speech which may have been misquoted or misunderstood.

The hon. the Minister of Development and Rural Renewal.

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to stand in the

House today to address this particular resolution, and certainly to commend my

hon. colleague from Port au Port on the resolution that he has introduced, and

clearly again to commend him on his remarks. He has certainly hit the nail on

the head in recognizing what is happening in rural Newfoundland from an economic

perspective.

When we talk about rural Newfoundland, and revitalizing rural

Newfoundland, it is difficult because everything tends to be lumped into

whatever is happening around the Province, whether it has to do with education,

or whether it has to do with health care, or whether it has to do with roads or

water and sewer.

Clearly the focus that I am looking at, and that I am really

concerned about from my perspective, would be economic renewal. As my hon.

colleague from Port au Port said, we can point to any number of businesses that

have started in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, businesses that are doing very

well.

As he said as well, attitude is what is important here, and

people are very reluctant to change. I know that from experience, from having

been out around rural Newfoundland and Labrador and talking to people about the

new approach that this government is taking to economic development. Here I am

talking about the new process, the unique process that we have entered into as a

government with the volunteers and the people around Newfoundland and Labrador,

and I am talking about the Regional Economic Development Board process, the

process that involves hundreds of volunteers throughout this Province, people

who are committing their time, talent and energy to a process that will see them

identify strategic economic plans for each of the twenty economic zones in the

Province.

I am happy to report that in fact we have received four draft

strategic economic plans to date. We expect to have another eleven in by the end

of June. The only two zones where they are still having some difficulty they do,

in fact, have their provisional boards in place; I am talking about Zone 18 and

Zone 20. What we are doing with those two particular zones is letting them find

their own way, because clearly there was an issue there initially. There was a

zone here that they felt was too large for what they hoped to accomplish, so I

agreed to their request, after speaking with them, to in fact divide that

particular zone into Zones 18 and 20. They are working at their own pace, and

that is fine with me, as long as they know where they are going and what they

want to accomplish.

The other eighteen economic zones are alive and well, and

they are working very hard to develop these strategic economic plans for rural

Newfoundland and Labrador, and for the urban areas of our Province. Because even

though the title of this department is Development and Rural Renewal, it is

development for the entire Province, not just for rural Newfoundland. Clearly,

if we look at what is happening in rural Newfoundland we are well ahead of the

game, if you look at the types of businesses that have started out there.

I have had a chance since coming into this particular

portfolio to visit a lot of businesses throughout this Province in all twenty

economic zones. When we installed the official boards for the regional economic

development boards, what I always take the opportunity to do when I'm out in the

regions of the Province is to go out and visit some of the businesses out there.

I suppose more than anyone else, because I've had the chance to travel

throughout rural Newfoundland and Labrador, I can tell the House about any

number of success stories out there. My hon. colleague referred to Piccadilly

Plastics in Piccadilly. George Yates in Springdale has a wonderful business

going there making fibreglass boats, and he started in 1989. He is exporting his

product. That is something else we should recognize. Businesses in Newfoundland

and Labrador, particularly in rural Newfoundland, have recognized the potential

globally to market their products and they are very much into exporting their

products. George Yates is just one of those businesses.

One of the things I've always said when I go and visit

different businesses, I always ask them if they source locally. I mean, the

point here is that if you are going to support each other and grow your

industry, then we have to source products that we need from other industries in

the Province. Certainly for Mr. Yates in Springdale he recognized this. When I

visited his business and he was showing me some of the photographs of the boats

he and his staff had built, one of them had a canvas canopy. My first question

to Mr. Yates was: Where did you source your canopy? I was delighted to hear that

in fact he had sourced this canopy from Superior Sewing in Lord's Cove, which

happens to be in my district. I was equally pleased that he had recognized the

value of a product that is being produced in the District of Grand Bank as well.

Superior Sewing, which I just referred to, in Lord's Cove,

two young people who returned to Newfoundland and started a business. No

government money involved in this business. This is from their own savings. They

have started a business where they make canvas canopies, they make backpacks,

they do a lot of upholstery. For a couple of the hulls built in the Marystown

Shipyard they in fact did the upholstery for that. This is a young couple with

three young children, and they are working out of their homes. They had bought

machinery and they have it in the basement of their home. They are employing a

couple of young people from Lord's Cove who otherwise would not have any

opportunity.

Bay d'Espoir. Again, my hon. colleague for Port au Port

referred to the aquaculture industry that is alive and well in Bay d'Espoir. We

are talking about 300 people being employed in that particular industry in that

particular area of the Province, and that is 300 directly and indirectly. There

are a lot of things happening in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

One of the other companies that has obviously recognized the

value of exporting their products is EDM Consultants out of Deer Lake. Brad

Chalk, who owns EDM Consultants, is in fact selling his services to St.

Pierre-Miquelon. We all know about the initiative this department has undertaken

to try and export our products, and particularly if we can export it into the

European Common Market. We are trying to do that through St. Pierre-Miquelon. We

are working very closely in developing a working relationship there.

Clearly there is a history there in terms of a long-standing

relationship between Newfoundland and Labrador and St. Pierre-Miquelon.

Certainly that relationship is even more prevalent when you look at the Burin

Peninsula. What we are trying to do here is see that relationship develop where

it is mutually beneficial from an economic perspective. If you look at the

product that is being imported by St. Pierre-Miquelon, you are talking about

$100 million worth of product. Only $3.4 million of that $100 million actually

comes from Newfoundland, and of that only $1 million of those products are

actually made in Newfoundland. So we have ample opportunity there, Mr. Speaker,

to grow our industries and certainly to export more into that particular

marketplace, and while I recognize that there are only about 6,600 people in St.

Pierre-Miquelon altogether in terms of using the product or needing the product,

if we look at the European Common Market that we have access to using St. Pierre

et Miquelon as a gateway, then certainly, the potential is that much greater.

I want to talk about another industry that has great

potential in this Province and is certainly an industry that I guess, is geared

primarily to rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and that is the craft industry and

we are very, very excited about the potential in the craft industry. Most of you

will have received a catalogue which we recently produced which has crafts of

character and is a 1997 apparel and gift catalogue. These are wonderful

products, Mr. Speaker, that are made in Newfoundland and Labrador; they are

quality products second to none. The point being, Mr. Speaker, is that we have

to be able to produce the quantity in the way that we can produce the quality to

make this a viable industry. Clearly, we have to look at not only the tourists

coming into our Province and selling to our own people but again, exporting our

products.

My department is very interested in continuing with a process

that was begun a number of years ago and that is, enabling craft producers to

take

part in three different craft shows. One is the Alberta Fall Craft Show

which takes place in Edmonton in Alberta, the other is the Atlantic Craft Trade

Show that takes place in Halifax and then there is the Toronto Fall Gift Show,

Mr. Speaker, and this is a wonderful opportunity for our craft industry, for our

people out there who are producing these quality products, to display what they

have made and to find markets for them. These catalogues are distributed to the

wholesale markets throughout the country. But again, to be in this catalogue,

you have to be able to produce the quantities that will be required to the

wholesaler who comes looking to buy the product and that is what we are trying

to do in building the craft industry, Mr. Speaker, in rural Newfoundland and

Labrador because, again it is something that can be made from your home. You do

not have to incur a lot of expense and have overhead or a studio although, if

you look at Linda Yates down in King's Point, she is doing very well indeed with

her pottery and again has a wonderful product line and you can always see her at

the craft fairs here in St. John's.

The craft industry is in fact, alive and well in the Province

but it has a long way to go to be seen as a viable business, and what we are

hoping to do, in working with them as a department, is to work very closely with

the Newfoundland and Labrador Craft Development Association, to have them take

responsibility for working with the craft producers to in fact, look at the

technical aspects of the program. What we are attempting to do with the craft

industry is to market the products because it is only in marketing the products

that we will realize the sales and the potential sales that are there to make

the industry grow.

As well, Mr. Speaker, we talked earlier about the funding

available for different projects in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. My hon.

colleague referred to a number of businesses that have started over the past

while, particularly Picadilly Plastics Limited, Superior Glove Works, Superior

Sewing and he made reference to all of those industries and I can tell you, Mr.

Speaker, that under the Strategic Regional Diversification Agreement, $35

million has gone into rural Newfoundland and Labrador in different projects and

some of those, Mr. Speaker, are tourism projects but under the SRDA, the

Strategic Regional Diversification Agreement, the funding is for non-profit

organizations. So if there is a community organization out there or anyone who

wants to submit a proposal, a non-profit organization can submit a proposal to

my department under SRDA for funding and $35 million dollars have been

available, Mr. Speaker, to be spent in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

If you look, for instance, at the Southwest Coast Development

Association, $203,000 to develop an area known as The Neck for restoration of

the stone lighthouse at Rose Blanche; again an example of money well-spent from

a tourism perspective. If you left the Town of Harbour Breton, $58,000 to

establish a cultural heritage centre which will serve as a focal point for

tourism development in the Costa Bay region, and the list goes on and on, Mr.

Speaker. Gambo - Indian Bay Development Association, $533,000 to study the

feasibility of farming sea urchins. It could be a very viable industry in that

neck of the woods, Mr. Speaker. The Great Northern Peninsula Development

Corporation, $85,000. Interim funding for the Daniel's Harbour arctic char

project and I referred to that earlier in the House this week. Again, the Great

Northern Peninsula Development Corporation, $1 million yet again for the

Daniel's Harbour arctic char facility.

These are developments that we are receiving, Mr. Speaker,

because we see a long term future for these particular initiatives and that is

why the government is there and that is why we are putting money into these

types of projects because we see a future. We have to diversify the economy. We

especially have to diversify the economy in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. I

think both of my hon. colleagues, in making reference to the fishery and the

collapse of the groundfish fishery, we all recognize that even with the fishery

coming back, the fishery of the future will not be the fishery of the past and

neither should it be. Again, as my hon. colleague from Port au Port said, we

should never be putting all of our eggs into one basket.

The point here is that we must work very hard to diversify

the economy and we are doing that. With my staff, Mr. Speaker, we have presence

in all - or we will have within the next thirty days - a presence in all twenty

economic zones in this Province. The whole point being here is that we want to

work very closely with people out in the field, people who have ideas about new

initiatives, people who want to identify opportunities and work very closely

with other groups and organizations to partner with them, Mr. Speaker, because

we have to make sure that the few dollars we have to put into developing

industry in rural Newfoundland and Labrador is spent wisely. The best way we can

do that is to work in partnership with existing organizations. My department is

doing that, Mr. Speaker, with the federal government because clearly if we come

together, pull our resources together, cut out the inefficiencies and the

duplication and try and work together in the best interest of Newfoundland and

Labrador and if we work together as a team, Mr. Speaker, rather than going in

separate areas and taking different tactics, there is great potential for rural

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Both of my colleagues have referred to the opportunities out

there and to what is happening there and having gone around rural Newfoundland

and Labrador several times and taken advantage of the opportunity to visit any

number of businesses, I can tell you that people out there in rural Newfoundland

and Labrador know full well that they have a future, that things are not as

bleak as one would have us think. The problem that most of us have, Mr. Speaker,

is that we are confined to our own areas of the Province. We really don't get

the chance to visit all areas of the Province and see what is happening in all

twenty economic zones. There are good things happening out there, Mr. Speaker,

and I have had the opportunity to go to all of twenty economic zones. So I can

speak to that and speak confidently about the future of Newfoundland and

Labrador, particularly rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Again, Mr. Speaker, the

number of initiatives are -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. minister's time is up.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Development and

Rural Renewal, by leave.

MS FOOTE: Just in cluing up, Mr. Speaker, because I know

there are others who want to speak on this side.

There is a grand total of sixty-nine initiatives that have

been approved under SRDA funding for a total of $32 million. So there is money

being spent in rural Newfoundland. People in rural Newfoundland and Labrador are

identifying initiatives. They are recognizing the potential. They are coming

forward with ideas. They are not sitting back and doing nothing. They are not

saying all is lost. They know the future is bright and we have to work in

partnership, not only with the government, Mr. Speaker, in terms of accessing

this type of funding but with the private sector as well. This is why I am so

pleased with the representation on the regional economic development boards.

When you look at the make-up of the boards and the stakeholders, when you have

educational institutions, you have municipalities, you have businesses, you have

rural development associations, you have the youth and you have special interest

groups and you have all of the people that have a stake in their future in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador and they are working - for the first time, Mr.

Speaker, they are working collectively. They are working as a team to identify

their strengths and their weaknesses. To come together and put a plan in place

that will see a strategic economic plan identified for all twenty economic zones

and in doing that, Mr. Speaker, what they are doing is in fact identifying a

strategic economic plan for the Province as a whole. Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

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

I thought I would rise today and make a few comments. I won't

use up the whole fifteen minutes but make a few comments on this motion put

forward by the Member for Port au Port.

Now, Mr. Speaker, knowing the Member for Port au Port, and

reading it, of course, there is nobody in the House who is going to disagree

with the motion, especially - although the urban members, all the time, think

they know it well, but they really do not know it as well as we do. Because

every day we go back out to our district - and we do not go to the bigger

centres, even; there is even a difference between rural Newfoundland in going to

the bigger centres, and then really going to rural Newfoundland - that is the

big difference. Because when I go home, for example, when I go into places like

King's Point, Baie Verte and La Scie, those are the bigger communities, 1,000 to

1,500 to 1,600 people. That is not even real rural, Mr. Speaker - the real rural

is when I go to thirty-three other communities in my district, anywhere from

Tilt Cove with fifteen people, up to 100 and 150 in some places, Shoe Cove, for

example, with 200 people.

So, Mr. Speaker, there is a variety out there. If you go

around to your district - I know the member for Port au Port does; he goes

around to his district - and really sit and talk, not just pass by, say hello

and move on. But if you stop and talk to people in rural Newfoundland, Mr.

Speaker, you get the real story. And, Mr. Speaker, not a problem, I suppose, but

one thing that I pick out is the word `significant' - `significant efforts to

achieve economic growth' and so on. A lot of people, even in the bigger centres,

say - and I agree with the minister, to a point, where she says that there is

diversification and different thinking going on in rural Newfoundland; there is.

I go into the telecentre - I will bring up the telecentre again with the

minister. I have gone in there and bumped into people who were coming out with

business plans and so on and they had good ideas because they had some hope.

Well, Mr. Speaker, what I would like to share with the

Minister of Development and Rural Renewal and the member who put forth this

motion, and talk about for my five or six minutes, is on philosophy, because it

has to be a philosophy that is the basis for any plan.

Mr. Speaker, we start with philosophy and we start with hope.

In rural Newfoundland, the key ingredient to beginning something is hope. These

people out there living in rural Newfoundland, if they have some hope, then they

move to the next step. The next step, if they have hope, is being creative. So,

if they have hope, then they are creative. Then if they are creative, Mr.

Speaker, they are ambitious and they are business-like and they feel like they

are entrepreneurs, so they take the next step and say: I am going to try

something.

So, we started with hope, became creative, then went on to

being a little bit ambitious, and said: I am going to try something now. It

might be starting a mushroom farm, or it might be anything, Mr. Speaker - there

are all kinds of ideas out there.

AN HON. MEMBER: A cucumber farm.

MR. SHELLEY: A cucumber farm, it could be even that, Mr.

Speaker. Well, the Minister of Fisheries always talked about the cucumbers in

the ocean. That is another idea, diversify the economy.

So, we went from hope, to being creative, to being ambitious

and actually going and doing something. Well, what we need after that and what

nobody has really mentioned here to date - I have not heard, maybe I missed it;

I did not heard all the conversations - was when these people get to that stage

where they have had hope, then they got creative, came up with an idea and they

moved on to say I am going to try something, there is a problem in this

Province. These people with the great ideas - and I have seen them eighteen

years old, I have seen them fifty years old, who have the ideas - get smothered

by bureaucracy and people turn them off. I have seem people walk in with ideas

and -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Yes, well, same thing, alright.

Mr. Speaker, I have seen these eighteen-year-olds walk in and

before the person, the bureaucrat they bump into, tells them about the great

idea it is and glad to see them coming and so on -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: What about the (inaudible) in Shoe Cove?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SHELLEY: Before they get to the next stage - and I

have sent them on to telecentres and to do business plans, I have encouraged

them - the first thing when they go into these offices, they find out fifteen

reasons why it should not work. They do not encourage them, they do not say,

bring it on forward. As a matter of fact, it happened with big business, too,

but moreso because big business has a bit more fortitude and, I guess, a bit

more backing. But these people only have a small bit of hope, a small bit of

money, usually, and they run into this brick wall right away and it dies. That

is the problem in rural Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker, and what we have to do is

break that barrier, so that the first ingredient which I talked about, which is

hope - and this is what I want to connect here today, Mr. Speaker. The first

ingredient that we have to have with -

AN HON. MEMBER: Every Tory runs into a brick wall.

MR. SHELLEY: This Tory did not, Mr. Speaker, run into a

brick wall.

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes, you did.

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, what I try to do in this

particular talk here today, is talk about the hope that they need and I am going

to reflect it to the infrastructure funding that was just announced. Yes, there

are some parts of this Province that are coming up with good ideas and move on

and they have encouragement, but the bad sign is that the infrastructure program

that was just announced did not give very much hope to a lot of people in rural

Newfoundland. The concrete examples of necessities - I said it the other day. We

are talking about people who do not want sewage running in their back garden and

they want a decent road. I had a petition here the day before yesterday in which

they did not even want pavement. They had it in quotation marks after. It said:

We will even settle for upgraded road. We do not want pavement, we do not expect

it. You talk about hope? These are people who just saw their school close down.

In one week they had their school closed down, the road became impassable, and

they could not get their grandmother into the hospital in Baie Verte, all in one

week. Now we are asking those people to go out and say: Give a bit of hope.

I say to the Minister of Education, that is an actual fact in

one community. I will not name the community in the House because there are a

lot of them like it. But it is an actual fact that on a Monday they got the word

that their school was closed, in my district - maybe the minister knows the town

I am talking about. The same week they went on protest because the road became

impassable, and it certainly did. I was down there with the R.C.M.P. officer. It

was impassable. And one lady who was on that picket line, who had just heard the

school closed and they could not pass along the road - she said: I went up to

the hospital; my mother is supposed to go in for heart surgery, she is on a

waiting list. All in one week she got that. I bet you that there are many

communities in this Province that - maybe not as tight in one week, but over a

two- or three-week period, got all the same news: school closing, your hospital

is full, and so on.

So, Mr. Speaker, not to dwell on that, but I just want to say

that the ingredient to starting a productive people in this Province, in rural

Newfoundland, is to give them a bit of hope. Say: Yes, we are going to commit to

your necessities, your infrastructure, your water, sewer and pavement. We are

going to do something for you. Now, when you do that and you put a piece of

pavement through a town, or you say: Your water and sewer is coming next year,

the young people, the older people, and so on, they have hope. And once they

have hope, then they start to move to the next stage and say: I have an idea for

a business. That is what happens, and that is the only point I wanted to make

today.

We talk about rural renewal and supporting the member's

motion. I know his intentions are good, and I support him on it. But what I am

saying to the government of the day is that we have to show - and it is a

critical time in this Province. I've never felt it so much as in the last month

to two months, because I guess the schools and the hospitals and the roads all

came at one time. But I have never felt it so much.

Mr. Speaker, they need hope, and they need to know that

small-town Newfoundland that we always bypass -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, I am trying to be constructive

today, because the motion has the intent of what every member in this House

would want. We need hope in rural Newfoundland if we are going to have

productive people who are going to be creative and move on and do things for

themselves and diversify and so on. It is great to talk about all that, but the

philosophy has to start with hope in rural Newfoundland.

Mr. Speaker, the best way to show it - we can easily go out

and say commitment to this, or we have a vision for this or that. That is all

rhetoric. We have heard it from all parties for years. But when you see pavement

going down or a sewer system going in - after living in a community for fifteen

years and not seeing pavement, then they say: Yes, they are committed to us.

My message to the government is, if you want to follow up on

the motion by the Member for Port au Port, then show in concrete evidence that

it is out there.

I was very disappointed - the minister left early before I

had a chance to say it the other day (inaudible) this week. You talk about the

government side and Opposition side. I feel sorry for the MP for Humber St.

Barbe - Baie Verte, who has to drive down the Baie Verte Peninsula next week. I

do not. I do not have to go down there campaigning next week. It is the MP for

Humber St. Barbe - Baie Verte who has to drive down the Baie Verte Peninsula

next week to the nineteen communities without pavement, and fifteen without

water and sewer, and a program that his government initiated, the infrastructure

program. He has to go down the Baie Verte Peninsula. Mr. Speaker, I am telling

you, if the accusations made across the House by the government side and

Opposition side - I think they missed the boat. Because the federal Member for

Humber St. Barbe - Baie Verte, the government side in Ottawa, the people who

initiated the infrastructure program, have got pittance for that district, and

he has to go down there with a pamphlet and go door to door. Mr. Speaker, I am

going to tell you, both government and Opposition sides, that I hope they

remember who was on the government side, who initiated the program.

MR. FITZGERALD: Who said anything about being in

Opposition?

MR. SHELLEY: Because, Mr. Speaker, if you talk to people

in Springdale when they talk about Oppositi