Here's what was on the menu December 14, 1999 in the House of Assembly
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions today are for the Minister of Mines and Energy. On Friday past, the Premier speculated publicly that any notion of an in-feed or transmission line with respect to the ongoing negotiations with the Lower Churchill would be off because of the possibility - I emphasize that word - of natural gas. Yesterday in the minister’s statements it became evident as well.
My question is this. Last spring in the House of Assembly I asked the minister directly - we were in possession of information that said the federal government was not committed to working in good faith with this government and the Province to ensure that an in-feed to the Island, and also ensuring that power in Labrador, would be accessible to be used as a lynchpin and as a lever to develop industry and economic potential for the Province.
Can the minister stand in the House today and tell us what is the federal government’s stance, and in telling us what the federal government’s stance is with respect to the transmission line and the in-feed, what has been the Province’s stance in response to that?
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I appreciate the opportunity to provide some information with respect to this issue. The notion of a possibility of an in-feed from Labrador - particularly associated with the development of the Lower Churchill project so that we could have electrical energy from Labrador to supply the rest of Labrador and also to the Island - is still a matter of joint working committees between the federal and provincial governments. There have been no decisions taken. Officials from the two governments are still trying to determine whether or not such a project is feasible and economically viable. The expectation is that they will report back, the latest that we heard, was by the spring, but in fact there has been no decision taken.
I believe the Leader of the Opposition started his question by saying that now the Premier said that the in-feed is off, that is it not a matter for discussion any more. That is not the case. The issue that has been raised publicly is that in the announcement of March 1998, the position put by the government was that we would hope that at this point, if we did not get the in-feed, we would not do any deal at all. What the Premier is saying publicly at this point is that if the in-feed does not materialize because the federal government does not contribute, it does not necessarily mean now that we will not proceed with the rest of the project.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, it is amazing that last week we saw the Prime Minister of the country talking about the necessity not necessarily for an in-feed because of natural gas, the Premier saying exactly that on Friday, and the minister standing today and saying that federal-provincial officials are still negotiating.How is it that any bona fide negotiations, good faith negotiations, can take place when you have the leader of Newfoundland and Labrador, in terms of the Premier of the Province, and the Prime Minister of the country, basically scuttling it up front? How is it that such negotiations are meaningful, are going to take place in good faith, when those two individuals, the Prime Minister on the one hand, the Premier on the other hand, are speculating publicly that there may not be a need for it?
Tell us exactly what the federal government’s response is. My information is that the federal government have said no. What I am looking for is what you, on behalf of the people of this Province, have said back to the federal government.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, it is not unrelated. Minister, you know the difference between natural gas. It is finite, it is non-renewable. The difference in terms of renewable resource, hydro, as long as the water flows into the Churchill River system, if we have the infrastructure in place and the ability to provide energy, both in Labrador and in the Province, it will put this Province in a position to offer industrial users or potential industrial users low cost, continuous supply, uninterrupted supply of power.MR. E. BYRNE: I would like to ask the minister this question: You have talked about, that there is a study being done. Studies have already been done. The estimated cost associated with putting a transmission line or an in-feed to the Island portion of the Province has been done for some time. Surely you can provide us with more of an update than you already have on exactly what type of real, legitimate, progress has been made on this very significant issue.
MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, we all acknowledge that natural gas is finite in quantity and hydro power, again, would be the ideal solution. That is why, exactly why, the studies and the discussions between the two levels of government are still proceeding and why we expect to get a report in the spring as to whether or not the Government of Canada can find its way clear, under a certain set of assumptions, to make a significant contribution to an in-feed which will cost slightly over $2 billion.
Obviously, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador cannot afford to build the in-feed, but with the help of the Government of Canada we could. We would like for that still to be the long-term answer but there is no guarantee right now.
MR. E. BYRNE: The question I would like to ask the minister is this: Are you concerned that you have given up that leverage? Are you concerned that, if you do not use the leverage that you have to ensure that that transmission line is a negotiating tool on the one hand but something that you are firmly committed to, that you have given that up, and that the reality and possibility of a transmission line becomes lessened every time you and your government talk about other options?
MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I sense from the line of questioning that the Leader of the Opposition sincerely and genuinely hopes that the government is successful in getting the Government of Canada to contribute significantly towards an in-feed, because that would be the long-term answer. However, if the joint studies that are ongoing and expected to be concluded by the spring lead to a conclusion that it is not economically feasible or viable at this point in time, or that the Government of Canada is not politically willing to contribute the amount of money that it would have to, to make the in-feed a reality at this point in our history, then I am not sure that he would then suggest, though, that we should abandon everything to do with the Labrador Hydro development if we do not get the in-feed.
That is the question that has been raised publicly. Would we abandon any and all of the rest of the discussions if we do not get the in-feed? The answer that the Premier has been giving at this point is: No, we do not intend to abandon the rest of the discussions; and we are still working with the Government of Canada, hopeful that they will find a way to contribute significantly to the in-feed because it is the best long-term answer for Newfoundland and Labrador.
Ok that's two now; Loyola Sullivan and Ed Byrne. What do they have in common? Both are now controlled by Danny Williams who in turn is guided by Doug House.
