Manitoba Hansard — 11 April 1968 (Sitting 38, 28th Legislature, 2nd Session)

28-2-38

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2:30 o'clock, Thursday, April 11, 1968 921 MR. CHAIRMAN: Committee proceed. Before we proceed, we have several schools up in the gallery visiting us today. We have 65 students of Grade 8 standing of the Provencher School. These students are under the direction of Mr. Fouasse, Mr. McCarthy and Brother Provencher. This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for St. Boniface. And we also have 40 students of Grade 11 standing of the Dakota College. These students are under the direction of Mr. Lohrenz, Mr. Hurlburt and Mrs. Drain.

This school apparently is located in two constituencies represented by the Honourable Member for Radisson and the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources. We have 35 students of Grade 11 standing of the Warren Collegiate. These students are under the direction of Mr. Johanns on. This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable the Minister of Agriculture and Highways. And we have 25 students 3 to 5 standing of the Golden Stream School. These students are under the direction of Mrs. Lewis. This school is located in the constituency of the Member for Glad· stone. On behalf of Mr.

Speaker, and all Members of the Legislative Assembly, i welcome you all here this afternoon. The Minister of Industry and Commerce. MR .SPIVAK: Mr.

Chairman, reference has been made to the problems of Portage la Prairie and designation, and as some members are aware, but not all, I'll just refer to the fact that there was a meeting held just in the past few weeks of representatives from the Town of Portage la Prairie and representatives from the Department of Industry and Commerce, the Deputy Minister, the Director of Regional Development with the Federal Minister of Industry and his representatives, in connection with the criteria.for designation and in connection with the application of that criteria.

I may say that from the information that was supplied to me, it would indicate that there is some reason to believe this matter will be seriously examined by the department and in fact a change in the application of the criteria in connection with the Portage la Prairie area may take place. There have been two developments in connection with the whole program of designation in Canada that I think must be considered both by the government and by the Federal Government.

One has already been referred to by the Member from Hamiota, although I think he misunder stands its application, and this is the Ontario Equalization of Industry Opportunity Program which in fact applies a provincial government program of designation to those areas in Ontario that are not designated. The Member from Hamiota is incorrect. The majority of Ontario is not included in the designated area.

The program of Ontario, and a program introduced in Quebec '.'..lst in the last month, is a program to fill the gaps that exist in the federal application of the designated program and those areas that they do not include.

There is some evidence to believe that the Department of Industry and Commerce -- the Department of Industry -- the Federal Department of Industry is examining the whole program - the whole ADA program - the whole designated program, and that at the end of this year or the beginning of next year there will in fact be amendments to the program which will have possibly great significance in its application in our area. I think that I have already referred to the fact that there are 52 firms in Manitoba that had received some contribution from the Area Development Agency.

I think that some of the statistics may be of interest to the members and I should like to refer to them. The total amount of investment, that is not the total amount of the federal investment but the total amount of investment caused as a result or to a certain extent as a result of the assistance provided under the ADA program, is $50, 660, OOO, and the total number of employees in manufacturing would be represented at 1, 348.

Of the total amount of investment that has taken place in which there has been Federal Government assistance through the ADA program in Canada, Manitoba would have achieved, of the total amount of investment, 6.1 percent of the projects in Canada. The Honourable Member from Hamiota referred to the Manitoba Development Fund and the Manitoba Export Corporation, and if I may, I would like to answer his question in the follow ing way. The Manitoba Development Fund acts as a manager for the Manitoba Export Corpora tion.

This includes the banking and accounting of any funds accruing to the Export Corporation from fees charged by the corporation or from profits made by the Corporation on its trading activities. The Manitoba Development Fund provides to the Export Corporation ai1 export offi cer who is seconded full time to the Export Corporation. For these services the Export

922 April 11, 1968 (MR. SPIVAK cont'd) ... Corporation pays $15,000 per year to the Manitoba Development Fund. This $15, OOO is provided to the Export Corporation in the form of a grant from the depart - ment's appropriations. I believe that this has been explained in the past to the Members and this is not something that the members of this House are unaware, but of course there are some, as the honourable member from Hamiota and myself, who are sitting in this House for the first time.

The Honourable Member from Seven Oaks made reference to certain statistical errors, or what would be apparent statistical errors in a variety of documents that have been furnished by the department and various representations that have been made either by myself or other representatives of the department or government.

May I say that the information is supplied from the Dominion Bureau of Statistics and the Dominion Bureau of Statistics is constantly revising its method of calculations and the items that are included and not included, and that the variations that he was concerned with and that he referred to are variations that came about as a result of the information supplied from the Dominion Bureau of Statistics and in turn was changed, and that while it may appear facetious on my part, notwithstanding the inaccuracies as they appeared in the information, all the information furnished at any given time by the department was correct.

Now reference has been made by several of the speakers to the problem of population. There was particular reference to the immigration program by the Honourable Member from Seven Oaks. I think it's important that there be a clear understanding of what is taking place not only in Manitoba but in Canada. Last year seven provinces in Canada lost population as a result of inter-provincial migration. The year before, eight provinces lost population and the year before that eight provinces lost population. Now lest there by any misunderstanding of this, let me try and explain it as simply as I can.

If you disregard any gains by births over deaths, if you disregard immigration, seven provinces in Canada lost population as a result of more movement out of the provinces than into the provinces inter-provincially; and in 1966, eight; and in 1965, eight provinces as well. Three provinces last year that gained were Ontario, B. C. and Alberta, and the previous years it was Ontario and British Columbia.

Now the significance of this is to point out that we are not unique in losing population, and that any suggestion here that this is something that is peculiar to Manitoba is incorrect and any conclusion that attempts to be drawn from this is also incorrect if it is not related to the national situation. We know that we are part of a midwestern part of the North American continent and we know that the movement of populations historically in the midwest applies here as well.

But the important thing for Manitoba in the year 1967 was that if you consider immi gration and if you took out migration, and you considered births and you considered deaths - and I might say that in 1967 our births over deaths were almost equal to what they were in 1966 - the irrefutabl e fact is that Manitoba's population climbed by 9,000 which was an in crease of 750 per month. Now I may say that I was delighted to have the Honourable Member from Seven Oaks read a portion of the brief that was presented before the parliamentary committee dealing with the White Paper on immigration.

I may say that I am very happy with that brief and I think that the members of the Department of Industry and Commerce who assisted in that brief deserve a great deal of credit, because there's no doubt in my mind that a number of changes that took place in the application or in the introdue,tion of the legislation and changes coming from the White Paper are directly attributable to the work and to the contribution made in that brief.

Our main objection to the White Paper was the fact that in it, and it expressed it almost in these words, it suggested that Canada was no longer a country of land and forest to be settled by someone with a strong back or venturesome spirit. It was our feeling that we require in Manitoba at this moment in our history, with the expansion that is now taking place and with what they contemplate in expansion in the years to come, that we rec;uire people, and we re quire the same kind of people that were in fact the ones who settled the west and built this province.

Our other objection was the fact that in reality by the application of the skill and educa tional requirements, the Federal Government were asking a higher education of immigrants, a higher education from them than that of the average Canadian. We suggested that there be a national policy that would be flexible, that would take into consideration the needs of each re gion and the demands of each region because they would vary, and that in setting up a national policy it must be one which will be expansionistic in mind and not discriminatory, and it would

April 11, 1968 923 (MR. SPIVAK cont'd) ... in fact substitute the adaptability and the ability of the immigrant to be able to enter into Canada and to be able to work and live rather than having education and skill simply as a criteria which we considered to be a false criteria. Certainly one of the criterias to be considered, but not the main criteria.

And I'm very happy in that sense to point out that the White Paper has now been changed, that in the application of the White Paper has now been changed into regulations and legislation and that the point system now operating by the Federal Government in connection with the immigration coming into Canada takes to a large extent into consideration the recommendations that were made by the department in its brief.

Now the Honourable Member from Hamiota - and I'm sorry I do not have this in order, I thought I did - referred to the question of site locations and made particular reference to the distillery in Gimli and some suggestion or some innuendo that the government was respon sible for its location or the location of any industry. Let me inform him that we provide services to industry that are interested in coming into this province and we leave the choice and selection up to them.

I may say that in connection with the distillery in Gimli, which was the one that he referred to particularly, that there were fourteen specific requirements that had to be met in connection with the site location and the water provisions. And I might say that we were in competition in :l\Ianitoba, not in Gimli but in Manitoba, with another province. It's very fortunate that the government offices were that informed that we could quickly supply the information that was required and gave them the information which would indicate the potential sites where the requirements that they specified could in fact be met.

Gimli was not the only one, but nevertheless the choice was theirs, and I think that we can be happy that they've come to Manitoba. Our concern was not to locate it in Gimli, our concern was to locate it in Manitoba, and we were, as I say, in competition with another province where another site was in fact located, where in fact tenders had been called for that specific location.

Reference has been made to the billboards in the "Spirit of '70" program in Winnipeg and in the country, and so there will not be any misunderstanding, I would suggest to all of you that you understand that we have received what I consider a tremendous and enthusiastic response from the people of Manitoba in the business community. They, themselves - Manitoba 's Growing to Beat '70. -- (Interjection) -- Well, I'm only aware -- that was volun teered by them. I can only tell you so that you will be aware that the majority of billboards that are being shown in this province have been volunteered by the company.

But they are being offered free, as a number of other things that are being handled in this province in con nection with the program which have been the volunteer efforts by business concern!' who really are filled with the Spirit of '70, who really want this province to grow, and who have faith enough to believe. that it will grow. MR . MOLGAT: In spite of the government. MR. SPIVAK: Because of the government.

The Honourable Member from Hamiota and the Honourable Member from Rhineland referred to the community data sheets, and I must say that if the Honourable Member for Rhineland was not aware that these sheets were avail able, this is an error. Certainly the sheets are available to him and they can be obtained.

These sheets constantly have to be changed because municipal officers change every year, and although there was a reference to the fact - I believe the Town of Rivers - that the sheet was outdated, I may say that I have the Town of Rivers sheet and it's as of January, 1967, but in effect they are being changed and they are changed at the beginning of the year with the new personnel that take over, or changed as a result of elections and changed in the municipal administration.

But they are maintained and they are attempted to try and bring them up to date and to keep them up to date for the simple reason that they are constantly used, and we do in fact use them for enquiries that are in fact asked for of the department. Now the Honourable Member from Rhineland referred to something and I think it is important that this matter be explained so that the committee will understand this fully.

This had to do with what he suggested was a reduced cost of running the department, and I would like to if I may at this time explain the estimates so that there will be a full understanding by this House.

In order to understand what has taken place in the budget in terms of the esti. 'llates of the department, you must reduce on both sides $1 million because the $1 million in the first item in the vote that took place last year dealt with an item which was grossed, which took into consideration in the in-plant training program the monies that were received from both the manufacturers and from the Federal Government. This does not exist today and the

924 April 11, 1968 (MR . SPIVAK cont 'd) ... amount of money on the other side is netted. So therefore in order to understand the estimates correctly of the department $1 million must be su bst ituted in either side. Thi s would then show an increase in the department budget of $590, OOO , and if I may I would like to explain where thi s is arrived at so you will have thi s better underst anding of the estimates and in turn may ask any of the questions that you would want of it . MR . MOLGAT: Added or subtr acted? MR . SPIVAK: No, added. -- (Inter jection) -- No, no , no, added on only the one side.

In order to be able to compare last yea r' s estimate with thi s yea r's estimate , $1 million must be taken off one side and $1 million off the other , whi ch would show $2, 612, OOO compared to three million -- I' m sorry , excuse me . I'm in error in this. Take $1 million off the one side which compares $2,600, 000 to $3,203, 000, which is an increase $590,000. I'm sorry . One was gross ed and one was netted.

The $590, OOO is made up in the following way: Increases in cost of running the departments themsel ves, that is increments, etc., of $70, OOO ; increase because of the expansion of department programs - the two programs are the Regi onal Development Budget and the new contribution to the Regional Development Corporation - and that increase is $85, OOO; the Immigration program of $235, OOO , increased because of the cost of two com mi ssio ns, the TED Commi ssion and the Northern Transportation Commi ssion, and that amount is $125, OOO ; an increase in the Information Service of $75, OOO which would make $590, OOO .

Now reference was made by the Honourable Member from Rhineland to the busine ss devel opment vote and he referred to advertising, publicity and industrial development training, and he said it showed $833, 500. Of course the great bulk of that is industrial training , and for hi s information and the infor mation of the House , in that item the budget for advertising, and th at is the budget of the department of Industry and Commerce, is $200, OOO .

The Honourable Member from Rhineland made reference to the Northern Transportation Commi ssion, and I may say that we hope that the Commission will complete its hearings and will be able to report before the end of the yea r . The Honourable Member from Ifuineland made reference to Greb Shoes, and as I already indicate d, I would suggest that he read the other paper and read the other

article where the president of the company indicated that he is not withdrawing from Winnipeg. Reference was made to the Air Canada Overhaul base and as an air center, and I think that in answer to that I may simply say, as most of the members of the House are aware, that the Federal-Provinci al working party , which was struck off in the fall of this yea r when the Mini ster of Transport was present before the National Transportation Committee , has been working.

There was a period of time , and understandably so, when a number of items of the Federal Government were sort of held in abeyance pending a certain event that took place last week and for that reason there has been a delay in connection with the activit ie s, but there is every evidence to indicate that the commitment of the Mini ster that the working party would become involved and ride herd until the inf ormation was supplied, so that the commitments of the Prime Minister would be lived up to , is taking place.

The Honourable Member from Rhineland referred to $31, OOO for hospita lity and presenta tions that is shown in the budget. May I indicate to him that the government does have a hospi tality committee. It is set up for the purpose of consi dering and recommending requests to the government for banquets and simila r forms of hospita lity and other presentati on, particularly the presentation of the Order of the Buffalo Hunt . The Committee consi sts of Mr . Derrick Bedson, the Clerk of the Executive Council; Mr. Prud'homme, the Deputy Provincial Secretary; Mr .

Blicq, the Ass istant Deputy Minister of Industry and Commerce; and Mr. Guy Moore, the Deputy Mini ster of Tourism and Recreation . I'd like to read him a list of the organizations who received thi s sum of money of $30, OOO last yea r , so that he will have some idea of the type of organizations who receive it and on what bas is.

The Associ ation of Canadian Travellers, Canadian Council of Christians and Jews, Boy Scouts, the 1967 Western Canadian Fencing Championsh ip , Canadian Ethnic Press Federation, the Baptist Youth Fellowship Annual Conventi on, the Institute of Internal Auditors, the Roya l Life Saving Society, The Canadian Ladie s' Curling Championship , the Farm and Industrial Equipment Institute - and thi s was a national conventi on as far as I know , the Mid-Ca nada Dog Shows, the Pan American Paraplegic Games, the Canadian Women's Press Club, Kiwani s West ern Canadian Di strict, the Annual Meeting Committee of the Girl Guides of Canada, Manitoba Softball Associ ation, Canadian Centenni al Grand Masters Chess Tournament of 1967, the Canadian Bridge Federation, the Dominion Curling Associ ation , the International Highway 281

April 11, 1968 925 (MR. SPIVAK cont'd) ... Convention, and the Conference of International Affairs. The Member for Rhineland - and it was sort of insinuated by the Member from Hamiota - suggested that nothing is really happening in the economic life of this province. The other night I had occasion to produce statistics which I believe indicate that there is a momentum in our economic life, that the momentum is gaining strength, and that in fact if we become opti mistic and if in fact we all try to help this province, that this province will continue to grow.

And because there has been reference made to this before in connection with this House, I think it would be most appropriate for me to indicate to the honourable members that I consider that the work that was done by the former Minister of Industry and Commerce who is now our Provincial Treasurer, and of the Government, have been responsible in the main for what is taking place in our economic life today.

I suggest to the Honourable Member for Rhineland, and others, that if it hadn't been for the leadership, the exuberance, the direction and the initiative of the former Premier and the former Minister of Industry and Commerce and other members of the government to do the things that were necessary, to try and create the kind of climate in our business life and to be able to expand our industrial activity and to attract indus trial activity, that much of this would not have occurred, and I think great credit - and I believe this most sincerely - is owing to both of them. MR . PAULLEY: Mr.

Chairman, in rising for the first time to take

part in the considera tion of the estimates for the Department of Industry and Commerce, I think first of all we should express our deep appreciation of the exuberance of the Honourable the Minister of Industry and Commerce. I think Manitoba is rather unique in having a Minister who is so jovial, who has considered various propositions and methodology to enhance the well-being of our province and the more he has become associated with it the more he believes it himself, and I think we should not fault him for that but rather possibly fault his colleagues for not shar ing in his exuberance.

My hanourable friend the Minister of Industry and Commerce is wont to criticize those of us on this side of the House who now and again look at some of the gobbledygook that was handed out, and he attributes that to us because we haven't got faith in Manitoba, that we are not apparently concerned with the development of Manitoba. Well I suppose, Mr. Chairman, a lot of this is true, because I don't see any signs on the other side of the table there as we have on this side of suggesting that Manitoba is growing to beat '70 .

I don't think I can see on the other side of the House any drummer boy buttons. -- (Interjection) -- I said I don't think I can see -- have you got one? You have one; that's fine. --(Interjection) -- I beg your pardon? --(Interjection) -- I think it's a proper thing to do too, because after all, why have a lone single drum beater? The Minister of Industry and Commerce apparently doesn't even wear one of his own badges. It's a lovely day today, Mr.

Chairman, and it being a lovely day I though I'd just take a tour around the parking lot, particularly the parking lot where the Ministers' cars are, and see how much they are beating the drum for Manitoba. At a conference that took place not so very long ago, at great expense, all of those of us who were privileged to be there received a beautiful briefcase filled with interesting data and material, and included in the kit were a number of "Beat the Drum for Manitoba" stickers. So as I say, Mr.

Chairman, it being a lovely day, and thinking that at least the Cabinet Ministers of Manitoba should beat the drum along with the head drum beater, would have on their cars the stickers which were contained in our kit. Do you know what, Mr. Chairman? I don't think that there was one car of all of the Ministers' cars, including I believe the Minister of Industry and Commerce and the First Minister, that had a "Beat the Drum for Manitoba" sticker on it. MR . SPIVAK: You're wrong. MR . PAULLEY: I'm wrong? Do you have one on yours? MR . SPIVAK: Yes, I do.

MR , PAULLEY: Well your car must have been one of those that were away. So you see I would suggest that in the process of spending some considerable amount of the taxpayers' money on propaganda for the development of Manitoba in the '70 s - and certainly we require it first of all in the '60s and we are not getting it - that maybe the Ministers of the Crown should start using some of the gimmicks dreamed up and concocted by the Minister of Industry and Commerce.

It might be that he's one of these other Ministers though across the way there that doesn't have too much influence on the hierarchy or the higher echelons in government that

926 April 11, 1968 (MR.PAULLEY cont'.d) .. they allow him to stand up here and tell us about all that he is doing to beat '70 without them even feeling that they have a

part in beating '70. And I guess that's their privilege, Mr.

Chairman, but I would suggest to my honourable friend, the Minister of Industry and Co=erce, that before he chastises those on this side because we may have some constructive criticism to offer to him, that he look inside of his own house first to see what is being done in this great crusade, in the "Spirit of the '70s." Discussions in the House have disclosed of course that the spirit of the '60s has been lost on the government; maybe there is hope in the '70s; and I suggest that the Minister of Industry and Commerce should use his sweet persuasive approaches on his own first.

So much for the hokey-pokey, or whatever it is you call it, that we have been fed on many instance so far. You know, Mr. Chairman, this even rubbed off the other day to the Minister of the Treasury.

I was really fascinated that the Minister of the Treasury, of all people, would be continually swallowing the line that emanates from the Department of Indus try and Commerce, but of course maybe he has carried it with him from the days when he was the Minister of Industry and Commerce, because we find on Page 8 of the Address of the Hon ourable the Provincial Treasurer statements such as this relating to the improvement population-wise in Manitoba in 1970. My honourable friend says, "Two marked improvements were apparent in 1967.

There were signs" - and the Minister of Industry almost repeated this today - "There were signs of a reduction in the rate of net interprovincial migration. That is, the numb.er of people leaving Manitoba dropped," -- it didn't say incidentally, l\1r. Chair man, by how many, but just the number of people leaving Manitoba dropped -- "while there was a sharp increase in the number of i=igrants coming to Manitoba from abrcad." Now what does this all mean? I suggest it doesn't mean very much.

And then my honourable friend the Provincial Treasurer goes on to say, "As a result of this, our population has grown more solidly over the past year. If these favourable trends continue, we may look forward over the coming year to further improvement in population experience for the Province." But, Mr. Chairman, what are the actual facts? My friend the Minister of Industry and Co=erce tells us that there were some seven or eight thousand new immigrants coming into the province. I believe that's the figure that he used.

The net gain in population, accord ing to 'Time and Tide" publication - which I believe is used by the government when it suits their purpose at least - a publication called "Trade and Commerce" printed here in Winnipeg states that the net population increase from January, 1967 to January, 1968 - the year - would be somewhere in the neighborhood of 7, 600 people. ' My honourable friend the Minister of Industry and Commerce sort of indicated this was wrong.

I think it is too in accordance with the figures that we were presented with by the Minister of the Treasury the other day on the presentation of his budget, because the "Time and Tide" says in Manitoba we have 966, 600 of a population; the Minister of the Treasury only recognized 966, OOO, so possibly there is. Maybe it is wrong. But it's not wrong that my honourable friend the Minister of Industry and Commerce does claim some seven or eight thousand i=igrants. But within that period of the year, Mr.

Chairman, according to this publication, our net natural growth population was 9, 856, and if we add this to the amount of immigrants that came into Manitoba, being 8, OOO, we should have then had total immigration plus natural births somewhere in the neighborhood of 17 or 18 thousand increase in our popula tion as against seven. So what does this mean? It actually means that about 10, OOO Tvlani tobans left our province in the same period of time that my honourable friends, both the Treasurer and the Minister of Industry and Commerce, said we were making headway.

Now to be fair to my friend the Minister of Industry and Commerce, he said we are not unique - we are not unique in this. Well possibly he is right, that we are not unique, that seven out of the ten provinces of Canada, if I recall what he said correctly, have this same problem. Then for goodness sakes don't brag about it. Don't clutter up all of your literature, don't clutter up the budget speech to try and bamboozle the people into thinking that we are making progress. This is what my major complaint is.

Let's face up to facts; let's face up to the fact that in Manitoba, because of a lack of industrial development and resource develop ment, that not withstanding we are having a number of immigrants come into Manitoba, we are still losing native-born Manitobans or those who have been here for awhile. Mr. Chairman, the unfortunate part about it, the unfortunate part about our loss is the fact that invariably they are those who we have trained within our educational and vocational institutions and this is what I fault the Minister for. I'm glad that this is the land of my birth,

April 11, 1968 927 (MR. PAUL LEY cont'd) .•. the province of my birth, and I do not try to belittle Manitoba, but I don't think that we 're going to be able to sell Manitoba either to Manitobans or to those out side of Manitoba through the media that is being used at the present time. -- (Interjection) - Oh, you pay taxes wherever you go. Some places more than others, I admit.

Even in that_ province that used to be a progressive province to the west of us, I noted the other day that there was some considerable increases in taxes, particularly to the agricultural segment of the economy that people give so much lip-service to assisting. So you have to pay taxes no matter where you go. But I say though, to the Minister, for heaven's sakes, cut out the guff in your department; let's get down to facts.

Another document - another document that we got from my honourable friend the Minister of Industry and Commerce back at the beginning of the year or the end of last yearis 'Investment Opportunities in Manitoba, Canada". Heavens to Betsy, Mr. Chairman, I went back over some documents that I was pleased to receive when the Honourable Member for Lakeside was first Minister in this House, and by jiminy Christmas if these aren't almost word for word for the stuff that we got then. -- (Interjection) -- Well, it's practically the same source - the same source, I would suggest - Arthur D.

Little across the line in the United States still doing the propaganda foundation for Manitoba, and we claim, or the Minis ter of Education claims the advancements that are being made in the field of education for Manitobans. Progress for l\fanitoba? Combination vegetable-canning-freezing plant, hosiery, glass containers. How, Mr. Chairman, how many times have we read about the desirability of utilizing our silica sands for glass containers in Manitoba? Now I can only go back - I can only go back around about 15 or 16 years, but I bet it was even discussed at that particular time.

Carpet manufacturing, and so on - vinyl flooring - they're nice. You could pick pie out of the sky in many areas, but if you 're not doing anything about it, forget about it! Give our Manitoba boys an opportunity and our Manitoba girls an opportunity to use of their skills and their talents in this field, without the likes of the Arthur D. Littles or Dalton Camps, then you '11 be doing something for Manitoba. So I say, Mr. Chairman, that I don't want to take any longer time of the co=ittee at this time but I do want to repeat what I have said on a couple of occasions.

For heaven's name, cut the malarkey and the other aspects --(Interjection) -- yes, it's awfully hard sometimes, Mr. Chairman, I'm sure as members will appreciate, to be able to hold the line descriptive wise when one -- (Interjection) -- the hogwash, yes. I guess that is parliamentary; that can be accepted.

There's another few that I have in my mind that I don't think would be acceptable and I'm sure these are what the Minister of the Treasury were referring to, and they could be well aptly applied to -- (Interjection) -- So I say to my honourable friend, yes, I agree with you that we have to sell Manitoba; it's a great province that needs to be sold. It has been sold down the river so often now, it's about time we really sold it for the people of Manitoba instead of "agin" them.

So I say cut out the malarkey and the baloney - I think that's parliamentary - sell what you are trying to do first of all to your colleagues in your Cabinet. Get all of them to put pla cards up around their homes and in their cars and on their lapels, but I think more basically in their hearts, and maybe your position will be enhanced and maybe some of the things you give the appearance - and I'm not suggesting only an appearance - of trying to achieve, will rub off. But unless you can sell it first of all over there, you 're not going to sell it outside. MR . SPIVAK: Mr.

Chairman, I do not want to stand up and speak after each speaker, but there's one point I think that's worthy of mention here. I really wonder who's more jovial, the Leader of the New Democratic Party or myself. But there's one point that I think is im portant. It happened in the past year and I think it's pretty significant in connection with the words that he's used, and that's this.

We are interested in seeing that our Manitoba is devel oped; we are interested in seeing that our Manitobans are able to take advantage of what we consider our opportunities; and one specific example that occurred, and one very good example, happens to be the distillery that is now being built in Minnedosa.

It's a Manitoba company and it came about as a result of studies that were initiated by the department, including assistance and help from that great concern who happens to be a world organization, very knowledgeable, and who in fact made a contribution to our determination of its feasibility for a Manitoba cor poration, Arthur D. Little, and we now have a national company coming into l\Ianitoba, not Manitobans, but a national company who are building at Gimli and we have Manitobans who are themselves building in Minnedosa.

928 April 11, 1968 JYIR . PAULLEY: I aclmowledge the point that my honourable friend made. I don't know, but I have a sneaking suspicion that we had very many people in Manitoba who could have told the Department of Industry how to produce the product that's going to be produced at Minnedosa and also at Gimli. But I notice though, I notice one thing though in connection with each of these industries, that in order to locate here in Manitoba they had to receive concessions at the local level before they would do it. I wonder if my honourable friend has any comment in that respect. JYIR . SPIVAK: Mr.

Speaker, they did not have to receive local concessions to stay here. In one case it was a matter - well in the case of the national company, yes. In the case of the Manitoba company, it was a referendum and the people decided, because if not, they would have located in another area in Manitoba. JYIR . PAULLEY: This, Mr. Chairman, if I may substantiates what I say. They're not here in an era of free enterprise that you support but at the expense of the local taxpayer in order to locate here. Now then, Mr.

Chairman, may I suggest to my friend the Minister of Industry and Commerce that they're not here because of any promotion of the Department of Industry and Commerce but because of a referendum that was held at the local level. JYIR . SPIVAK: Mr. Chairman, I may inform the Leader of the New Democratic Party that I do not think that either company would have been in Manitoba without the effort of the Department of Industry and Commerce. JYIR. RUSSELL DOERN (Elmwood): Mr. Speaker, one of the key points already mentioned by the Leader of the New Democratic Party is this question of our population.

Apparently Canada's average during 1967 was 2. 7 percent up

whereas Manitoba's, according to the articles I have, was only up a third of one percent, which by comparison is only one-ninth of the national average from 963, OOO to 966, OOO. One of the important questions of course is who is leaving and who is coming in. I think the important point here is that the Minister seems to believe that we need to, in effect, popu late the prairies and populate Manitoba with the same kind of people who did so in the turn of the century immigrations and in the immigration period after World War 1, but I beg to differ with him.

He is attempting to convince the Federal Government, and was no doubt a force in encouraging the Minister of Immigration to revise and loosen their qualifications for entry, but at the same time you have all sorts of economic studies showing the reason that Canadians have a lower standard of living is because of the fact that we simply do not have equivalent educational qualifications to the Americans and consequently lack the skills.

So the Minister proposes to raise our standard of living by bringing in, to a large extent, numbers of unskilled immigrants, and then of course we are also faced with the difficulty of putting our educational system to work to attempt to bring these people up to first the Canadian average, and then secondly beyond. I.'d like to deal just briefly with what the solution might be to this particular problem. I think the key to it is undoubtedly gearing our present educational system to our provincial need.

I wonder whether or not the Minister himself works very closely with the Minister of Education, because it seems to me that this is the key, that we have to, to a certain extent, gear our educa tional system to our commercial, our industrial, our managerial needs and skills. This has to be carefully researched as to what particular skills we need, what our future prospects are, and then something in the educational system must take that into account. I wonder whether there is a very good liaison between the university and the business community.

At least in some quarters it's felt that there's no liaison and that the two are separate and distinct. Another way of course of keeping people here, etc. , are to make the province a better place to live. I think the government has done very well on the cultural level and I think their record is excellent there but I think they need more in the recreational area in order to make this province a better place to live. One thing I think we need in this province, and I'm surprised that the Minister hasn't done anything in this regard, I think is a merchandise mart.

I've heard rumours over the past couple of years that private citizens were contemplating building a proper place where com mercial people could display their wares and do business, but nothing has come of this. I think this is an essential ingredient in the kind of campaign that the Minister talks about. Perhaps something like this could be tied in with the Red River Exhibition. I don't lmow if that's the appropriate place, but if they're in a sort of partial promotion and trade area - we have many dozens of firms exhibiting there - maybe something on a permanent year-round basis could be worked out.

Perhaps the Royal Alexandra Hotel which seems to be going to waste might be a

April 11, 1968 (MR, DOERN cont'd) ..• suitable location. So I'd like to know whether the Minister or his government is doing anything to promote a merchandise mart for Manitoba. 929 I'd also like to deal briefly at this point with the question of Westbank, because it seems to me that the Minister and the government allowed an important financial institution, the Bank of Western Canada, flounder, and as a result probably leave this province. I think it would have had, or could have had if it worked properly, considerable value.

It might have stimulated development and in particular stimulated some competition among the financial institutions in this area. I thirik that many Manitobans, including myself, feel that our local financial institu tions, for example the Great West Life Company, Investors Syndicate, the banks, in this area, which are the key parts of what we might call financial capitalism, are very conservative and that the development of the Barik of Western Canada, if it worked according to its original aims, may have shaken them up a bit.

They may have helped the local business community and encouraged some imaginative development, and particularly, they might have invested in local industry which is not done to any great extent by our local financial institutions. They might have considered our own special requirements and needs. The First Minister, replying to a question that I asked him a day or so again, admitted that there were negotiations between the government and Westbarik, and I for one would like to know what happened.

I'd like to know what they asked for and what assistance was offered to them, The First Minister suggested that this matter was under the jurisdiction of the courts and couldn't be discussed sub judice, but I don't thirik his comments or the Minister's comments could possibly affect the court proceedings. The Premier of Saskatchewan is talking a great deal about bringing the bank into his province. It appears to be a winding-up operation and one in which the government did not offer a helping hand, So we could have possibly had a western bank located in Winnipeg for western development it was allowed to fail.

This may have been the only opportunity that we '11 have in the next 25 years because I believe it was some period of time before a new barik was allowed to have a charter in Canada. MR, CHAIRMAN: (a) -- passed; (b) -- passed; (c) -- MR , CAMPBELL: Mr. Chairman, before we leave the item of the Minister's salary and the related administration , I would like to say just a few words, I'm very modest when I get up to talk on matters of industrial development, Mr.

Chairman, because, like you, I feel that if I have any particular knowledge it lies in a different field, one that you and I grew up in, a:hd I have never acquired any specific knowledge in this area.

But I have acquired a lot of experi ence in listening to promoters talk about what they're going to do for the economy of Manitoba and I have been listening through the years to the promises that have been made by my honour able friends in the government of this province and what they were going to do for Manitoba, and here we are after the 10 years and my dear friend, the Honourable the Minister occupying that position today, is still dealing in the realm of what's going to be done.

Tharik goodness he admits that a foundation has been laid and this superstructure is certainly going to be built now, according to him.

But what I want to know is what's been happening in all these years, and I will not use such emphatic terms as my honourable friend the Leader of the New Democratic Party because he seems to have the faculty of using these terms .and getting away with them very well, and I hesi tate to employ such terms but I do protest in the strongest terms that I can use against this continual and continuing beating the drum about the accomplishment of a government that is unable to show that there have been solid accomplishments.

Now just because my honourable friend is guilty of intoxicating himself with the optimistic verbiage to which he has become accustomed by speaking at so many different gatherings doesn't mean that this eonstitutes a statistical basis on which he can establish any proof. His opinion, his enthusiasm, his undoubt ed efforts in this regard are commendable; no doubt about that. But where's the performance? Where is the performance? Now this isn't that I distrust my honourable friend the Minister. I certainly believe that he believes that he's going to be able to accomplish these things.

But my honourable friend, his predecessor, who now sits in the position of Provincial Treasurer, was just as enthusiastic and just as sincere 10 years ago, and where are the accomplishments? Now I of course would have to rank as a prejudiced Nitness because I've been critical of the attempts, the cost of the attempts, the bureaucracy that develops around the attempts, the increasing taxes that have been necessary because of the increase in manpower and expenditure all along the line.

I would be a prejudiced witness, but I want to call in to wib1ess for me this document which emanates from the government itself, or from its Economic Consultative Board,

930 April 11, 1968 (MR. CAMPB ELL cont 'd) .. . and quote from it. Now surely this is an unbi ased witness and surely they are the people to whom we· should turn for an independent and well-informed report upon the government 's performance .

Now it's true that the report is almost a yea r old now and I think we have not the new one - I wish we had it because if we had the fifth report we would be much more up-to-date - but we haven't got it so we have to go along with the one that we have, and my honourable friend the Mini ster can certainly say, "Ah ha, but great thi ngs have happened since that report was writ ten ." But this is the last report we have .

This is the independent authority as far as we people on thi s side of the House are concerned, and if my honourable friend can really prove to us that certain thing s have happened that invalidates the conclusions : that are reached here, then he's certainly at liberty to present that evidence too . But in the meanti me , I think it's only right that we should consider this report as at least one of the authoritative documents on which we should base our conclusions. This is the Fourth Annual Report of the Manitoba Economic Consulta tive Board.

I' m sure my honourable friend has it before him so that he can check what I'm reading. I always feel like apologizing, Mr . Chairman, if I have to read from a document too lengthily, but it's necessa ry sometimes to read quite fully in order to escape the charge that we might be taking something out of context . I would like to just read thi s little part . I would like to just read from Page 9 and say, "This shift in emphasis can be explained by two factors:

(1) Project ions made at the beginni ng of the period underestimated the rate of job formation that had taken place between 1950 and 1960 ." Do you know what period that was ? That was those horrible dark days just preceding the time that the government came into office here. And just imagine, we have now in the latest Econo mic Cons ultative Board report a statement that they und·erestimated what had been going on there . Well now, it wouldn't be fair if I just read :hat little bit. You have to go ba ck a ways and read more fully .

Sol will read from the beginning on Page 9, and I ask honourable members to remember that thi s is the government 's own Economic Consultative Bo ard. Here's the beginning of Page 9. I' m quoting .

"In the early part of the current decade, considerable unem ployment was in evidence in Manitob a and the major concern being expressed was one of finding a sufficient number of jobs to employ Manitob a's expanding labour force, Since that time we have seen unemployment rates reduced to the point where there are currently widespread labour shortages, and attention has shifted to finding an adequate number of workers to meet current demands and thereby permit continue d expansion of the economy . " And then I come to this portion that I already read.

"This shift in emphasis can be explained by two factors: (1 .) Proje ctions made at the beginning of the period underestimated the rate of job formation that had taken place between 19 50 and 1960; and (2.) " -- Here' s an answer to some of the discussions about populati on . Here's an auth oritative answer . It's all very well for my honourable friend the Minister and my honourable friend the Leader of the New Democratic Party and me to engage in an argument about our inter preta tion of the popula tion statist ic s, but here 's somebody speaking who has the facility to make the proper kind of a study .

And here I am quoting again . "(2 .) Partly as a result of larger net out-mi gration, Manitob a 's population and hence its labour force has not grown as rapidly as was earlier antic ipat ed." It didn't grow the way my honourable friend said it was going to grow . And here quoting again - because I want to be fair to my honourable friends and quote all the relevant part - "In addition, we have witnessed a relatively strong rate of job forma tion since 1961 ." And you can read in another part of this report which will show you that a great portion of that job formation is where, Mr . Chairman ?

In the government sector . That 's where one of the big growths in job formation has occurred. So one thing that this establishes, if it establishes any thing, in my view is that that period between 1950 and 1958, to quote the more usual time, wasn't as bad as my honourable friends were attempting to say it was .

And in that connecti on, I ask my honourable friend who delights to tell about what's been happening lately , I ask him to explain to the House how would it be that in that period an organization such as International Nickel would come to this province without any' financial inducements in the way of assistance to them to esta blish their plant; and on the other hand, would actually lend some money to the government of that day in order to proceed with the development of electri cal facilities up north .

So I would say that this is a comment regarding population in Manitoba that deserves some consideration, and the part that I quoted : "(2 .) Partly as a result of larger net out-migration, Manito ba's populati on and hence its labour force has not grown as rapidly as

April 11, 1968 93 1 (MR. CAMPBEL L cont'd) .•. was earlier anticipate d." Now my honourable friend is inclined, and were I in his pos ition I would be inclined to agree with him, to play down this question of population . He says this is not by any means the most important factor . He has given us quite a dis serta tion about that and of course it 's not the only factor , but it 's one of the factors that my honourable friends opposite , when they sat on this side of the House , and one of the main ones of them was my friend the Honourable Pro vincial Treasu rer . -- (Interjection) -- Yes, ye s, it was good .

My honourable friend used to be excellent when he stood over here and he was just as good then at analyzing the many studies and reports and surveys that were taken as he is now ,j ust as inte rested in them, and he used to prove -- well he almost proved it to my sati sfaction that if they just had an opportunity of getting on the Tre asury benches that this thing of the population lag in Manitoba would be cured. Well not overnight , perhaps he wasn't quite that opti mistic , but certainly in a com paratively short time . That was an indicator , said my honourable friend, of a slow economy .

We were falling behind the rest of Canada . We weren't living up to our potential . My honour able friend thought it was extremely :important then . -- (Interjection) -- Oh ye s, the main one . But not now, not -now . So I must go on to some other questions that are dealt with . These are not my opii-iions. I wish to goodne ss that I had the capacity and the information available that these folks have so that I could give you some opinions of my own .

But I think in a discussion of this kind, it 's inuch more valuable that we should turn to the people who have the background of knowledge and have the sources of info rmation available to them and lots of money from my honourable friends to carry on their studie s. Now what do they say -- and I commend this to my honourable friend. I notice that he didn 't have it with him, he had to get it sent in from above . Well now he should be reading this report . He should have it with him . It would do him good.

And I must say for the people who wrote this report, they 're fair-minded folks; they do try to let the government down as easi ly as poss ib le; they do try to interpret the stati stics as much in favour of my honourable friends as is pos sible . But after all, they 're honest and honourable men and they can 1t do the im pos sible , and so they have to present unfavourable stati stics to my honourable frien ds . So we come to Page 22. My honourable friend who now has provided himself with a report can follow me - about the middle of the page - I'd like to put this on record from the report.

After talking about the per capita per sonal income, giving a table on it, the report says th is: "It is worthwhile to note , howev er, that Manito ba's po sition rela tive to Canada did not move upward during the past year years, despite two of the best years on record for Manito ba's agriculture .

This serves to demonstrate that even during periods when all sectors of the pro vincial economy are performing reaso nably well, it will require vigorous effort by all concern ed to maintain Manitoba 's po sition at or near the average for the national economy ." And it did not move up, say our honourable friend s, and that compared with Canada as a whole - and when they compare with Canada as a whole , you're taking into account Newfoundland , Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia.a nd New Brunswick, those maritime provi nces that we would have been very very doubtful about including in the same category as ourselves a few years ago - and now when you take them all into account in Canada, "it will require vigorous effort by all concerned to maintain Manito ba's position at or near the average for the national economy." Well , on Page 24, just on this matter of popul ation , they return to it again on Page 25, just below the middle of the page , and I' m re ading now from the report: "One of the most criti cal varia ble s affecting these estimates is the level of net interprov:incial migration .

In the third annual report of the board, it was noted that there had been a close re lationshi p between Manito ba's net out-migration" - net out-migration - "and the rate of national economic growth . During the periods of rapid national growth the rate of net out-migration from the province has tended to increase , and during periods of recessi on has tended to recline .

For the past three year period, levels of net out-migration have approxi mately counterbalanced the natural in crease in our populati on , with the result that the population is now close to the same level as it was three years ago." Now my honourable friend will say that things have improved since that . Well , I would prefer to take the statement of the consultative board.

Skipping over to the bottom of Page 26, and I'm not skipping it in order to change the argument , but simply that I do not wish to read too much into the record." This evidence suggest s that l\Ianitoba 's hea vier out-migration is in re sponse to higher wage levels in other areas , as well as to greater availability of jobs . During the recent period there has been an

932 April 11 , 1968 (MR . CAMPBELL cont'd) ... increase in the wa ge differential between Manitoba and the pro vinces in most direct competition with Manitoba for available manpower . As indicated in Table 2-4, this has been particularly noticeable with respect to Ontario and British Columbia, the two provinces which receive the majority of Manito ba's out-migration . During the same period Manitoba has been experiencing its heaviest net out-migration during the post -war period." How can my honourable friend dispute tho se statemen ts ? Then, Mr .

Chai rman, I have two or thr ee others marked here that I shall not take the time to read, but I would go -- incidentally , I don't know what Minister is re sponsible for thi s Manitob a Economic Cons ultative Board, I believe it's probably the First Minister, is it ? His department ?

I would hope when I'm quoting them as an authority that their competence is not to be judged by the binding of thi s book, because did someone notice that you go over - you read here to Page 96 and then you come immediately to Page 112 and you have to jump away over to the page facing 113 and you get 98 then, and you back up from there to 11 2. --(Interject ion) - It's not the same in you rs. Well maybe my honourable friend thought that if they furni shed me one like thi s that I wouldn't have suff icient assiduity to find the things that they say about this government , but .. MR.

EVANS: That would never deter you . MR. CAMPBELL: No . No. Well that 's the point . My honourable friend the Provincial Trea surer would know that he would have to do more than that in order to throw me off the trail of thi s government, but his honourable colleague who is now before the Committee doesn't know me so well and he might have made that mistake . You'll keep him informed, I'm sure . I hope that the Honourable the Mini ster, now that he has a copy, will find that his is properly bound and that he doesn't have to go to all that trouble because he ... Then on Page 120 .

This is a study on government employment and the effect of the public sector . The conclusion is: "We have shown that the public sector has had a significant effect upon the growth of the Manitoba economy. While further analy sis will be reiquired to understand its full impact, the study to date suggests the need for effort s to promote the most effective use of manpower within the public sector, " and that word "within" is emphasized in thi s report just as I have tried to emphasize it in reading. Within the public sector .

"The board is aware that such efforts are becoming more and more a feature of any large public agency. This is an important and significant development . In addition, it would appear to be useful to examine more systema tica lly the relationships between the benefits and costs of government programs, although one must recognize that there will be many difficulties encountered in arriving at definite conclusions. " Examine more systema ti cally the relationships between bene fits and costs of government programs . Mr. Chairm an, I think tho se are pregnant words.

I would just like to refer to the table. on Page 134 , the one on 13 5, and if I can properly interpret the stati stics there - and the compari son is between Manitob a and Canada, not Mani toba and some of the provin ces that we were going to catch up to or surpass, but between Manitob a and Canada - and if I properly analy ze them, it means that in the field of personal income per person in Manitob a as compared to Canada, we have fallen further behind during the six years covered by thi s report from 1961 to 1966 inclusive, and I repeat that this is a comparison with all of Canada; not the wealthy provinces - all of Canada, taking into account the Maritimes as well .

Then on the next page it shows that in the value of retail trade between Manitoba and Canada we have not quite held our own , but the difference isn't so much . Mr . Chairman, my point is simply that, as I read this report , which I consider to be more authoritative than the reams and reams of propaganda that we get from the Minist er 's department and from himself, that we simply have no cause to share in the enthusiasm that my honourable friend himself exudes.

Now in his posi tion he of course has to keep up this enthusiasm, but my honourable friend who preceded him did the same thi ngs, exactly the same type of thing s, for the whole period that he occupied this position . All of these thi ngs . \!/hen I see the Information Service tell us about the invasion of the heartland of the United State s just south of us here, my honourable friend the former Minister did that some years ago. This is not new .

When we see about the trip s abroad, there may be more of them now - I think there are - but my honourable friend explored all of those situations as well, and the results have been found wanting . The development that was so urgently hoped for and so optimistic ally prophesied simply has not come, as I read the Economic Consultative Bo ard's report .

April 11, 1968 933 MR . SPIVAK: Mr.

Chairman, I would like to preface just a few remarks by simply say ing to the Member from Lakeside that I'm one who has marvelled, as a new member to this House, at his demeanour, at the manner in which he has conducted himself in this House, at periods of brilliance that he has exhibited in the debates on different occasions, but I always have the feeling, and I have the feeling now, that one should look at him and apply the motto that Avis now use, "We Try Harder", because I have a real belief - and I do not mean this in any disrespect of being No. 2 rather than No. 1 - but I do have this feeling that he really does try harder, and he, in his attempt to try and explain his point of view, gives a feeling of sin cerity that is not matched by any other honourable member on the oppos ite side in this Hous e.

Now, I have lis tened for some time to what happened in the good old days and I think that there are certain credits and certain debits on the ledger side in connection with those days , but I would like to tell the Honourable Member from Lakeside that this is 1968 and my concern as a Minister of Industry and Commerce is for what is going to happen now and for what is going to happen in the future, and particularly in the next decade, the decade of the '7 0s.

And in terms of trying to evolve a program, and in terms of trying to set a mood, I think it is very necessa ry to put things in their proper perspective and to try and put your best foot forward to try and encourage investment, to try and encourage competence within this province, and I think that this is correct and I believe that the government obviously thinks it' s correct - it's supp orting me - and I believe quite honestly that the people of Manitoba think that this is cor rect. Now I'm not concerned about what happened ten years ago.

I do know that they had miss ions ten years ago and I may say - and I don't think the Honoura ble Member from Lakeside is aware - that I spoke in the hall in London, England that he had spoken in some ten years ago when he was in England. I don't know whether he was with a mission, I don't know whether he was by himself, but he spoke to the Confederation of British Industries, and I spoke in the exact hall that he did. But times have changed. Technological advance has changed. Approaches to industry have changed.

And in this respect I think it is incumbent upon me and the department, just as it was incumbent upon him, to try and seek potential investors and new opportunities for the province. I'm not going to read other chapters or other sections of the Manitoba Ec onomic Consulta tive Board back to him. I think I can and I can prove my point. -- (Interjection) -- Yes, I think I can, but I would rather, if I may, repeat what I said the other night because I think this puts it very simply in its perspective.

We have a challenge, and our challenge is to try and widen our economic base, and we'r e going to accomplish this in two ways . We are going to ex pand our existing industries and we're going to attract new industry, and we have results to prove this and we have statistics to prove this.

And secondly, we are going to expand our economic base to greater productivity, and all the programs that I referred to and the message that I tried to convey was an attempt on the part of the government to create the climate and to offer the services to our Manitoba firms to be able to make the decisions that have to be made to do this , because as I pointed out and I think he' s one that would agree with me, government can't do this alone. · It' s the individual entrepreneur and the businessman who is going to be responsi ble for change, and the only way in which we are going to be able to sustain in this province rising incomes, to be able to give our people the amenities of life, to be able to take care of the cost of living, will be through productivity and this is an economic fact that' s recog nized by almost every economist.

So that in terms of our programs and in terms of our efforts, we are trying to achieve that objective. Now these concerns that I've, in the various speeches, I'v e pres ented to this province and to others whom we try to bring to this province, to interest them in either expanding existing operations or in fact taking care of some new opportunities that we seek, he is concerned that I'm one who's creating a false enthusiasm about this area. Well, I'd like to read him yester day's Winnipeg Tribune, and I'd like him to listen to this. It' s an announcement of a new plant.

"Preliminary work on a $1-1 / 2 million automotive parts depot and zone sales office in Winnipeg started this week by Chrysler Canada Limited. The Winnipeg facility, involving a warehouse and office areas, will cover 100 , OOO square feet. It will be located at the corner of Keewatin Street and Burrows in the Inksterlndustrial Park. Eventually the plant will employ 75, OOO persons, " And herein I'm quoting from the Vice Pres ident of the Parts" directors -- (Interjection) -- 75 persons, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Wishful thinking on my part, wishful thinking on my part.

But may I quote what the Vice Pres ident said: "Greater Winnipeg is one of the count ry's major markets with a growth rate well above the national average. Our new

934 April 11 , 196 8 (MR. SPIVAK cont'd. ) . • . . . depot will be geared to provide faster parts service for dealers and customers. The Winnipeg facility will be the parts supply centre of Chrysler dealers in Manitoba and northwestern Ontario. In addition, it will be headquarters of the Chrysler activ ities throughout the province. " Let me repeat this: "Greater Winnipeg is one of the country's major markets with a growth rate well above the national average. " This is not the Information Services. This is Chrysler Corporation of Canada. MR. CAMPBELL: I was asking about the Ec onomic Consultative Board.

Now, would my honourable friend not agree that it's the most unbiased authority they'd get? And inclined to be favourable to the government. I'd like to say to my honourable friend that he reminds me that this is now 19 68. Of course it's 1968 and I' m not looking back. I'm no more anxious to debate the question of the bleak period that preceded 1958 than he is. I was simply quoting their - from the Ec onomic Consultative Board.

It was their statement, not mine, that I was reading there, and in case people think that once I did fall tremendously out of character and make a trip over to the Old Country, I think I should make an explanation, because I don't like folks to think that I was one who was going on these - what' s the term - junkets. No.

The fact is that when Ron Turner was leaving our government, he came to me and he said: "I have one commitment outstanding that must be carried through and I am not able to carry it through because of having to move to my new position almost immediately, and that is that I have arranged with our Agent-General in London and a program is laid on that simply must go forward.

" And he said, "In this job, the only person . .. 11 and I know that although Ron and I were very close friends he was meaning that it was because of the prestige of the position that I was occupying at that time, not because of any merit that I had as a proponent for Manitoba's industrial advancement; but he said, "the only person who I could get to sub stitute for me without our Agent-General over there and the others who have helped us to ar range these programs, is yourself as Premier to go. 11 And, what politicians often say, "against my better judgment" and at Ron's insistence, I agreed to make that trip, and it was one of the hardest ten days' work I ever did in my life, because Ron was a most energetic person and Murray Armstrong, who was our Agent-General, was a most energetic person, and they had laid on meeting after meeting after meeting, including several breakfasts, and it was tremen dously hard work.

I'm sure I didn't make anything like the impression in speaking at the Federated Bureau of Industry meeting in the hall over there that my honourable friend did when he went there, because I simply couldn't bubble over with the enthusiasm that he always does. But that's why I was there, and I tried to do the little bit that I could, and I was well briefed by the people that we had in the Department of Industry and Commerce at that time, and unless I completely messed up the material that they g ave me I at least tried to carry out Ron's assign ment.

As far as -- (Interjection) -- as other people in that position and other ministerial posts have been before and since. Now my honoura ble friend says that he wants it made very plain that the government can't do these things alone. You have to have industries; you have to have co- operation of the private sectors. Of course the government can't do it alone. My complaint is that the govern ment tries to do too much.

My complaint of my honourable friend's department is that it has expanded and still expands more than its accomplishments justify, and there comes a time in an area like the Province of Manitoba that has to export to live. There comes a time when you can get taxes up so high and costs up so high that you' re a load on the back of the private sector that it simply can't carry. Now this is justified if it can be proven that it gets results, but nobody can prove that the Chr ysler decision was made be cause of the work of my honourable friend's department.

If we could prove that it was because of them, then we would have a better argument, but we ca n't prove it. My submission is that they would have been more likely to have come here if they had not known of the recent increase that there has been in taxes on commerci al property; if they had not had to shoulder some of the other costs that have been im posed upon the Province of Manitoba in recent years.

We're in an area where we can't carry too much additional costs and this is where I fear that government, in an endeavour to help these industries, can so overdo the promotion work that they accomplish completely the opposite result. MR. SAUL MILLER (Seven Oaks): The Minister earlier today replied to some of the re marks I made the other night when he introduced the estimates, and again he seems to base his entire case and makes a stand on the matter of statistics. He just finished telling the Honourable

April 11, 1968 935 (MR, MlLLER cont' d. ) Member for Lakeside that the government has the statistics to prove the increases and they stand by it, and that the people of the province have confidence in the government and he has the confidence of the government based on these statistics; that these are valid and true. Now what better statistics, if you won't accept the Manitoba Ec onomic Consultative Board, what better statistics than his own; the statistics that he publishes in the Annual Report of March 31st, 1967; and let' s face it, this is the governm ent speaking. We have to accept what they say.

All of Manitoba has t0 believe what they read here; not just Manitoba, but investors who are thinking of comin g here, and I imagine this was sent through out the Chambers of Commerce all over Canada and the United States because this is supposed to be a picture of what's happening in Manitoba, and it's on statistics that our Minister makes his stand. Well, the statistics, as he earlier admitted to me, really haven't much credence because they seem to change from year to year and he adjusts them always so they will look better this year than last year.

And he claims it's not his fault - it's the Dominion Bureau of Statistics. Yet he uses that to build his case. In one year we are told that the employment in manufactur ing in Canada was 45. 4 million and because of that, the increase ... 47. 3 represents an in crease and he's very proud of that. But the year before we were told that this increase was actually 49 . 4 so what they'r e doing, in order to look good this year, they doctor the figures from last year - somebody doctors the figures - and we come out with a different set of figures. So every year - and this goes back obviously for years - we look good.

We look good because we've adjusted the figures from last year, the very figures that were very high to make us look good from the previous year, and so every year we have a new set of figures that makes us look good. In 1965 we were told that we had a value of industrial constructions - this is in millions of dollars - of 39 . 9, and that was a banner year and the Minister of Industry and Com merce at that time, the former Minister, I'm sure proclaimed - I wasn't in the House - but I'm sure proclaimed loudly that this represented a gigantic stride forward.

And it was, if the figure was 39. 9 and that's what he used in his Annual Report. Now we have the 19 67 Annual Report, the latest one given to us, and the previous Minister's figures are now dropped from 39. 9 to 28. 7 - that's quite a dive - in order that the new figure of 34. 5 which our present Minister claims, should show an increase of 19. 9. It' s a drop of 12-1 /2. Next year, I sup pose, the present claim of 34. 5 million will be dropped to maybe 30 so that the new figure of 34. 5 shall look like a gain.

In the retail trades, and it' s a pretty good yardstick as a rule, the 19 66 Annual Report says here: "The total value of retail trade in Manitoba, as in the case of factory shipments, for the first time exceeded the one billion dollar mark, a record of$1,007, OOO, OOO." This is really quite an achievement. New book; new Minister; one year later: "During 19 66 , the total value of retail trade in Manitoba for the first time exceeded the one billion dollar mark, a record one billio� five hundred thousand. It dropped. They didn't even change the comma. You know, really. Re-word it. Do something with it.

But if the Minister is going to stand here and say that statistics prove it, then he' s proving nothing except that this is a beautiful juggling, or not so beautiful because it' s very easy to spot. Now while I' m on my feet, Mr. Chairman, the Minister in reply to some of the remarks I made the other night took exception to some of the remarks that I made with regard to immi gration, and he said that I didn't quite understand what they were doing.

He quoted the Ec o nomic Council of Canada and their attitude about the need for immigran ts, and that perhaps there wasn't a need for immigrants any longer in the old sense, and he said he wanted to go back and get the type of immigrants representative of this phrase, and he used it today, "The strong back and the veturesome spirit, " and he talks to the Member for Lakeside and says to the Member for Lakeside that he' s behind the times ! Where are you going to get these strong backs and venturesome spirits? This isn't the coolie days.

You're not going over to Europe and getting the illiterates and the depressed and those who wanted to come to a new land be cause they were persecuted and wanted to get away and would work for anything - to lay the rail lines, to open up the west. He talks to the Minister of being old-fashioned, of thinking in the past. Those days are gone. The people of Europe are as affluent as we are.

The people of Europe can be induced to come here because when they're told they' re going to get $1. 00, $1 . 15 an hour, they don't quite comprehend how little a dollar's going to buy in Manitoba; they think it's a lot of money. But the truth of the matter is this, and it' s said in every report, it's said by CO MEF, by our

936 April 11, 196 8 (MR. MILLER con t'd. ) . . . . . own Manitoba study, it's said by the Eco nomic Council of Canada; if you want to develop the north country you've got to come up with some imaginative approaches, and the imaginative approaches that this government has is to simply show up the loss in our population which we are losing because they are lured away by better living condi tions in other provinces, in our sister provinces; they're lured away from Manitoba, the ones that can least afford it, and we're shoring up this drain by trying to bring strong backs and venturesome spirits into Manitoba. Mr.

Chairman, they may come to Manitoba initially, but these people are not stupid, they are not immobile. They'll come here; they'll spend a little while here; they'l l take a look at what's doing in the rest of the country, and they'll depart the same way as they came. MR. SPIVAK: Well, I'd like to just answer the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks, only because I would like to clarify his mixed-up thinking and some understanding of what I thought I clearly had indicated.

The statistics that are brought forward by the department come from the Dominion Bureau of Statistics and there's a constant revision that takes place. There's no intention to mislead ... MR. MILLER: Then why use them ? MR. SPIVAK: It's very hard for us to understand and be able to publish statistics that will be changed six months after they'r e published. We don't know this in advance. It' s very hard. But . . . -- (Interjection) -- Well, let me explain it. In the good old days they didn't use statistical information.

It's very important that we use it now because judgment in planning for government comes from statistics, and you take the best information you have at the time. But in order to clarify this - and I wanted frankly to be able to allow others to participate in the debate - but in order to clarify this I would like to, in these items that have been mentioned, to clarify them once and for all for the record. Let's talk about retail trade. In <]"une of 19 6 7, the Dominion Bureau Publication Retail Trade gave revised retail sales figures by provinces for the years 19 61 to 1964.

In 19 67, the Dominion Bureau of Statistics revised the statistics that had been published and which govern ments had operated on from 19 61 to 1964. This revision incorporated a change to the standard industrial classification whereby the following changes were effected. Restaurants, caterers, cocktail lounges, taverns and dressmakers moved from the retail to the service trade. Lumber and building material dealers, farm implement dealers, feed and seed stores, farm supply stores and harness shops moved from retail to wholesale.

And automotive repair shops, radio and TV shops, jewellery repairs and engraving, bicycle repairs, moved from . . . serv ice to the retail trade. As a result of these changes, revisions occur in the Manitoba' s total retail trade picture, and the annual total for the year 1965 dropped from a value in excess of a billion dollars to a total of $937 , 441, OOO. At the time the annual report for 19 66 was pre pared, these revisions had not been available.

The revised figures of the Dominion Bureau of Statistics for the year 19 61 to '66 are here, but I do not think it necessary to read it, other than to indicate that. Now let me deal with construction. The Dominion Bureau of Statistics publishes an an nual report entitled Construction in Canada. Contained in this report are annual value of con structions figures for the present year and two years historically by province. The construc tion values for the present year are estimated intention - that is, their estimate of what will happen.

The previous year's historical is a preliminary figure, while the second year's historical gives the actual figure of construction performed. They are actually basic ally two years behind. In the 19 66 annual report, the industrial construction value for 1965 was 39 . 9 million, and that was a prel iminary figure which was subsequently revised by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics to an actual value of 28. 7 million. This revised figure appears on the 19 67 annual report, properly so. Well, we didn't have it available before that; no one knew this.

In addition, the latest report indicates that the 19 66 value of industrial construction was 34. 5 million, another preliminary figure, and this figure again will be revised when the actual value of construction for 19 66 becomes available from the Dominion Bureau of Statistics, which will be approximately in June of this year. Now, with reference to manufacturing. Employment in the manufacturing industry is derived from the Dominion Bureau of Statistics employment section. It' s based upon a survey of those establishments employing 15 or more persons.

Establishments of fewer employed are estimated based on a sample survey. In 19 66, the Bureau made an adjustment to their data to the 19 60 standard industrial classification code. For Manitoba, the most significant

April 11, 1968 937 (MR. SPIVAK cont' d. ) change occurred as a result of transferrin g railroad repair and maintenance shop from the manufacturing sector to the transportation sector. This resulted, for Canada as a whole, in a shift of appro ximately 16, OOO people from the manufacturing in dustry. And so, therefore, the information that was supplied which was ac curate at the time, showed the following increases in manufacturing: From 1961 to '62, from 42, 500 to 42, 800; to 19 63, 44, OOO; to 1964, 46, 700; to 1965, 49 , 400; and these are the statistics that were fur nished.

The revised statistics that have come as a result of this change show the following: For 19 62, 40, 300; for 19 63, 41, 400; for 1964, 43 , 500; for 19 65, 45, 400; for 19 66 , 47, 300. Now these are the figures we operate, but the interesting thing is that they show a rise in each occasion, and they show the kind of percentage in increase that was reflected before in the other statistics which were furnished by the Dominion Bureau.

Now the Honourable Member from Seven Oaks obviously either did not read the brief that was pres ented to the sub-c ommittee of the Federal Government in connection with the White Paper, or he did not read the White Paper. The words "a strong back and a ventu resome spirit" are not my words. They'r e the words of the White Paper, and the fact of the matter is, that all we said is that Canada needs these kinds of people.

And if he believes that Canada does not need people who have a strong back and a venture some spirit, and who ::haracterizes the people that built this province, then I'd like him to stand up and say so. MR. JOHN P. TANCHAK (E mers on): Mr. Chairman, thank you. I've been trying to get up. I didn't intend to get into this debate because we 've got some speakers here who really can express themselves much better than I do. But coming back to what the Honourable Minister has just sa id about the Honourable Member from Lakeside, he seemed to accuse him of living in the past.

I don't think the honourable member's livi ng in the past; he' s living in the past, in the pres ent and in the future, interested in all of those things. But, reading some of the Pro gram Highlights and list ening to the Honourable Minister of Industry here, it seems to me that he is living in neither age. To me, he strikes as a great dreamer, a dreamer in the age of tomorrow. I read in this market news, read some of the Program Highlights that were pub lished on April 5th, quite similar to what we got in the Program Highlights, and I didn't get too much out of it; I didn' t get too excited.

But then when we come to this, reading it is one matter, but when the Honourable Minister got up and he ran through it in his own words, it sounded to me like the drums of a cheer leader. Ninety-nine percent of this we heard last year. There was nothing very new in it. It's at least a year old. And he is a dreamer, as I said. He' s a man of vision, maybe another Diefenbaker, a man of vision who had vi sions but those vis ions were alway s in the clouds and they don't seem to come. And I have a reason for saying that.

Reading this Program Highlights for 19 68, as we go through it we will notice that in here he refers mostly to tomorrow. If you look through the paper and check it there' s no less than -- the word "will" appears in here no less than a hundred times , no less than a hundred times. It' s always will, will, will , all the time. Isn't that dreaming ? It is dreaming. Now, you take the first thirteen paragraphs in here, I think the word "will " is used 25 different times, and I'll ju st quote a few: "Will continue to be practical and direct. Will narrow the field.

" And then: "Opp ortunities in the Province of Manitoba will be continued. " "The department will investigate. " "We will continue our efforts. " "Industry in the foreseeable future will be fore cast. " "Manitoba will be developed. " It's always will, will, will , will. It' s always some thing in the future. He doesn't give too much for the pres ent. In the first paragraph, in the introductory paragraph, he' s got four "wills". A dreamer -- dreaming all the time. So, he' s just liv ing or dreaming of tomorrow but I don't think there 's very much action.

There's an awful lot of different groups that are supposed to do this and do that, and he' s boasting about it, but I do not think that there is really too much action in that. . Now, we know that there are other agencies, there are other groups of people in the Province of Manitoba as well as in the whole of Canada, who are trying to help us . They're trying to establish industry, new industry in the plains, in the prairi es. We've got the Federal Governmeat trying to establish that, by giving these incentive grants.

Even the Minister of Industry is going through all kinds of motions and acrobatics trying to convince the people of the Province of Manitoba that there' s a lot of action. And he really thinks he' s doing some thing, very much. He's convinced himself but he can't convince us here and he can' t convince the people of the Province of Manitoba. People in the cities and people out in the rural areas are trying to attract industry to

938 April 11, 1968 (MR. TANCHAK cont'd. ) ..... their different tovms and villages and cities. The Municipal Council is there offering incentives to encourage this industry. And what does the Ministry do here ? As was mentioned by the Honourable the Leader of the New Democratic Party before, the other ministers do not seem to share the same excitement, share the same vision, because they don't even follow up with him. What does the government do and the rest of the ministers ? The Government of Manitoba is pouring cold water on the industrial development here in the Province of Manitoba.

And by that I mean that the government now, after telling the people for about ten years that they'r e going to shift the burden of taxation from the real property on to a wider base, they've reversed themselves and now the real property is being taxed to the hilt; 4. 1 mills up this year on taxation. I do not think that's encouraging to industry very much. I've got one concrete example. There was a party from Quebec who came and wanted to start a small industry, not a very big industry, in the village of Dominion City.

They tried to get it; the Chamber of Co mmerce worked hard for it, trying to get the industry; and after the whole thing went through, what was the answer? He said, "I do not trust this government of the Province of Manitoba; I'm afraid of the taxes, the real property taxes, " And that was be fore the 4. 1 mill increase in taxes.

It seems to me that the expressions of confidence - and the Minister seems to be very satisfied, if his satisfaction of accomplishments are correct, he seems to be happy and satisfied all the time - why is it that Manitoba is still lagging in in dustrial development behin d most of the provinces in Canada? And that is what has been stated before. Why is it, if the Minister created so many new jobs in the Province of Manitoba, why is the unemployment in the Province of Manitoba higher than the other prairie provinces ?

And that came out in the paper just lately, that our unemployment exceeds those of the other two prairie provinces. Why so ? Why are we losing our skilled labor faster than most other provinces in Canada ? There must be a reason for that. If the Minister of Industry is so con fident, he should convene with the rest of his ministers and see if some of it wouldn't rub on to them. Maybe they might listen to him; they might open their ears. As I said in my opening, the Minister is just a dreamer. I do not think he lives in the past. At least the Honourable Member from Lakeside has something to be proud of.

We 've got the greatest industry in Manitoba at the present time, the Thompson Mines, and it's still expanding, and many others that came. It's something to think about; something to be proud of. But the present Minister is dreaming, dreaming and dreaming in the clouds. The trouble with him is that he does not know how to translate. these vis ions into realities; just dreams all the time. And I would say to him, quit dreaming; wake up; come down to earth; do not stay in the clouds ; do something for the Province of Manitoba. MR . CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Inkster. MR . SIDNEY GREEN (Inkster): Mr.

Speaker, I'm going to follow up very shortly on the remarks that were made by the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks with regard to some of my honourable friend the Minister of Industry and Commerce's references to statistics, and I'm not going to belabour the issue.

I think that the Minister answers the Member for Seven Oaks by indicating that statistics are subject to change and that they are not reliable, and I think that this is the point that was being made, that if they are not reliable then let us not place such a great deal of reliance on that, let us not talk about a gigantic move forward on the basis of statistics which we know is not reliable.

I think that this is something that would probably stem naturally, quite naturally from the Minister's desire to present an enthusiastic front, and when he is doing that - and we know that this is his thinking, that one of the main attributes of prosperity is that you must think positive - and I think that this is probably one of the points that he's trying to sell the House. Well, at least let him reserve to us, at least, the position that thinking positively alone, and presenting statistics which we know are unreliable, may create a semblance of progress but may not really be indicative of anything at all.

I want to deal with the first page of his address which is contained on Page 848 in Han sard, in which he deals with gross provincial income as being $2, 800, OOO, OOO. I wonder just how much of this gross provincial income, the increase, relates really to an increased level of unreal wages, that is that the 2. 8 billion is not going to buy anything more than the previous level of income purchased the previous year. The same with all of the other suggestions. The investment of capital, a magnitude of 65. 8 as against 67 . 6 in 19 67 .

Is that an investment of "increased real wealth or does it really reflect an increase in prices ? Right down the line - total investment for new capital assets, 950; up 10. 6 percent. Couldn't that all be attributed

April 11, 1968 939 (M R. GREEN co:i.t'd. ) . . . . . to price ? How much of it is attributable to increased wealth in terms of tangible goods or services in the Province of Manitoba ? None of the se statistics are related to price. I would like the Minister to tell us how many -- how much for instance will the average wage purchase in real commo::lities this year as against last year. Is there a dif ference or are they the same ? Because unless we 'r e dealing with real commodities rather than with a price level, we don' t have a meaningful picture as to what has happened.

I'd like to deal very briefly with one point which I think was made and underlined _b y the Minister in his address. "First of all", he said, "agric ulture is still very important in the Province of Manitoba, and Manitoba accounted for 8. 7 percent of all Canadian farm cash in comes. Manitoba agriculture is now producing more than it did 15 years ago with cons iderably lower input. Pro::luctivity per man employed has increased very substantially and the achieve ments are very con siderable indeed.

" So he quite corre ctly points out that the productivity of the agricultural population has increased substantially and that this is som ething of course to be enthusiastic about. And then on the next page - and I'll get to the point in a moment - he says, "In short, improvements in productivity are the ess ential means for real advances in living standards. There is no other way. " Then he says: "Let me repeat that. In short, improvements in productivity are the essential means for real advances in living standards. There is no other way. " Well, Mr.

Speaker, I agree in part with those sentiments, and I think it' s not a new concept. It was a concept that I remember reading about in Jonathan Swift's "Gulliver' s Travels", where he says that the man who makes real progress is the man who can make two ears of corn grow where one grew before. And indeed I think it sounds right. It doesn't appear to the average person that you could have a great increase in productivity and that this increase would not find its way to improve the general well-being of the citizens in the community.

But let's go back to what happened in agriculture, because that' s a perfect example. Why is it, Mr. Chairman, why is it that the productivity per man employed in agric ulture has in creased subs tantially, and why is it that the farm incomes have stayed relatively the same or have gone down ? Isn't this the paradox of my honourable friend's pos ition ? And isn't the same true in other areas ? Why is it that increased productivity in agriculture hasn't been matched with a decrease in the price of agricultural commodi ties, because this is what it's supposed to do.

And isn't that the paradox and isn't that what my honourable friend never deals with ? We could double the population. Instead of having one million people in Manitoba, we could have two million people in Manitoba. We could double the gross national product; we could double the amount of investment income; but if it results, as it has resulted in the United States, that instead of 300, OOO people liv ing on the poverty level we have double the amount of people livi ng on the poverty level, then what has been achieved ?

In what way have all these advances reflected themselves in increased living conditions which is what he is interested in ? And in what way do any of his statistics show that any of his enthusiasm or any of his programs have reflected in an increased well-being to the citizen of Manitoba ? How many more people are able to get a higher education ? That' s important. How many more people are able to have the benefit of the Manitoba Medical Servi ces ? That' s important. How ever many more people are able to have the benefit of adequate housing ? That' s important . None of these things mean anything.

If my learned friend could double the population and double the amount of investment income and still have that income not distri b uted to the people of the Province of Manitoba, I think he would think that by the statistics he' s done a good job. Now, Mr. Chairman, I think that the department has got to start thinking in terms of a different form of statistics, in a form of statistics that demonstrates that these things which he is talking about do indeed result in Manitobans having a better standard of living, and I don't think he makes any attempt to show this.

He says it, but I do n't think he can produce figures which would substantiate it, because even in the great United States the y've never been able to do it. If my honourable friend could say that we had the population of the United States, 200 million people, and had the investment capital of the United States, and then had to get up and say, as did Presi dent John Kennedy, that in the United States 20 million people every day go to bed hungry, then what would he have achieved ? Is that what he wants in Manitoba or is there something more important about increasing the economic level of activity ?

I don't think that his statistics reflect any achievement other than a bare statistic which he has already in dicated as fairly meaningless.

940 April 11, 196 8 (MR. GREEN cont'd. ) Now, Mr. Chairman, I don't intend to take up more of the committee's time on this par ticular subject. I would like the Minister to cogitate what I have said, try and find out what Manitoba is going to look like when there are two million people and how many of those people will then be living on the fringe of poverty. If he 's going to double it, then he hasn't done any thing. I do wish to deal with one further aspect of the Honourable Minister's prog raffil, and this one, Mr. Chairman, I consider to be of major immediate importance, and that is the question, Mr.

Chairman - and this is done in conjunction with the Federal Manpower Program - and that is the question of new people coming to the province to take jobs which have either been adver tised or which the Minister has succee ded in luring them to by virtue of his energetic sales manship in other countries. Now, l\ilr. Chairman, over the past year and between sessi ons, there were numerous cases - and I am not perso nally acquainted with all of them but I am acquainted with some of t heni - of people who have come to Manitoba on the basis of our immigration program.

And I hasten to say to the Chairman that I believe in a good immigration program, I believe that a country with the wealth of Canada has to provide for more immigrants to come to this country, and I believe that the immigrants who come to this country should have every opportunity of enjoying the kind of life and the kind of opportunity to bring up their children as my parents did when they came to this country. I am of immigrant parents and I hasten to say that I owe every opportunity that I've had to the fact that my parents immigrated to this country, and I would like that to continue.

I think that there is great room for immigration to this country to partake in the wealth that is here. On the other hand, Mr. Chairman, I am worried that sometimes in our enthusiasm to at tract immigrant population to jobs here that we are not giving them a candid picture of what to expect. It always reminds me of the story that I heard about the old immigration days when they got immigrants to the country on the basis of glowing reports.

One of these immigrants in the Ukraine had gone to America and then had come back, and his family and his assoc iates said, "Why did you come back?" and he said, "Well, I went to America because the people here that told us about it said that in America the streets are paved with gold. When I got to America I found that it wasn' t true, the streets were not paved with gold. The fact of the matter is that the streets were not paved at all, and what is worse, I was expected to pave them.

" I think that this is the kind of immigration problems that can be created when we are not candid with the people who are coming. One case that attracted some attention, Mr .

Chairman - and this I'm not going to be too critical of the department on it - it's the case of the immigrants who came from Italy to be employed in the garment industry in Winnipeg and they were told, not by this Minister, but they were told as a result of apparently errors in translation that they would be earning during training a rate of $50 a week or somet hing of that nature, and when they got here they were actually earning a lesser amount. I can't attribute that particular error to this Minister, but, Mr. Chairman, I think that these people were also misled in other respects.

First of all, I don't know that these people were acquainted with what one dollar an hour meant in terms of living in Canada. I further, Mr. Chairman, am not satisfied that these people were told all of the conditions under which they would receive $1. 00 an hour.

For instance, in the industry concerned and at the time - the regulation has since been changed - but at the time that these immigrants were sold the program it was possible for them working within a piecework establishment to earn less than $1. 00 an hour, because the regulation was that if there were 15 people around the table and on a piecework rate a certain number of them - I think it's 80 perce nt - work at a rate that they could earn more than $1. 00 an hour, then the others were deemed to be working at the minimum wage even if they couldn't produce at that rate or didn't produce at that rate.

Now these are the type of things, Mr . Chairman, that I am worried about when we talk about this kind of program, and I'm also worried about it because I thin k that to some extent a pursuit of this type of a program is a subsidy to continued reduced wages. Now, Mr.

Chair man, one thing that any of the classical economists would turn over in their grave, and these class ical economists are the economists that my honourable friend would cite as being the great free enterprise economists, Adam Smith and John Stuart Mill and the others, to suggest that wages should be kept low by importing a group of lower standard of living workers would

April 11, 1968 941 (M R. GREEN cont'd. ) cause them to certainly, as I've said before, turn over in their grave. What they said was that when an industry required workers, that the natural way of that industry attracting workers would be to increase wages and workers would then flow from other areas into the industry that he is talking about. And to do what my honourable friend is doing is to some extent, Mr. Chairman, subsidizi ng low wages and su bsidizing it also at a price of the candid advice to these people as to what they can expect in Canada when they come at that rate. Another case, Mr.

Chairman, is one that I was perso nally involved in, but I think that it' s relevant to the issues that we are here discuss ing. A man in England was employed as a tool and die maker. That' s correct. The Honourable Minister of Labour knows of the case. He was employed as a tool and die maker, and a tool and die maker in England, or any tool and die maker, is acquainted with all of the aspects of making tools, inclu ding the machining of tools.

He was employed by Bristol Air craft to come to Canada, and they admit - there is no argument about this at all - that they called him here to work as a tool and die maker, When he got here, they put him at the post of a machinist, which a tool and die maker can do but which is not the most skilled area of the trade and which a machinist can do.

If I can us e an analogy that will explain to the members of the House what I'm talking about, it' s like going to England and hiring a man as an arch itect and then calling him here and putting him to work at a draftsman's bench and never taking him off the draftsman's bench, that he continues to be employed as a draftsman. This man came to work at the highest skill in the trade as a tool and die maker. He was put on a machine and he was employed as a machinist; he was working with machinists - only mach inists. He stayed on.

As he put it, he persevered for five or six months and then he left and went to work at another place where he was given a jo b as a tool and die maker. Would you believe it ? The company sued him. The company su ed him for the living allowance which they paid him and they were entitled to, because part of the deal was that if he didn't work with them for a year he was to give them back the two weeks li ving allowance that they gave him when he first came, which amounted to some $319. 00, or thereabouts - I can't remember the exact fig ures.

They sued him for the $319. 00 on the basis that he broke his contract, and the com pany insisted, Mr. Chairman - it' s a case which I argued before in court but it's now finished and I bring it here as a general problem, not as a court problem because I think it is a general problem - the company insisted that they had employed him as a tool and die maker, that they had not employed him as a machinist, that even though he was working as a machinist this was part of the tool and die making trade. It went before the County Court Judge who said various things.

First of all, he said that he couldn't see any difference between a tool and die maker and a machinist. I'm sure the same judge would see a great difference between a barrister and a soli citor, but he didn't see the diff erence in the two trades. He also said that even if he wasn't given a job as a tool and die maker, even if he was employed as a machinist, he was getting the same wages and there fore what was he sq uawking about.

Therefore, the County Court Judge gave ju dgment against this man who came from England to work as a tool and die maker and wasn't given that job, the County Cou rt Judge gave judgment to the company in the sum of some $319. 00 plus costs, plus his own lawyer, but apparently he didn't have as good a lawyer as he should have had be cause he didn't win, and that's the real measure of suc cess.

Anyway, this came as quite a startling decision to myself, so it was appealed to the Manitoba Co urt of Appeal, and at the Manitoba Court of Appeal - and I ask the Minister to listen to this because I think it' s important - the Manitoba Court of App eal, the court unani mously found that the company had broken its contract. Unanimously . They each said that the man was not employed in the job that he was hired for when they went over to England to see him.

But in view of the fact that the wages were the same, that there were no damages, they allowed the company's claim, which means -- and let's accept that then as the law. I disagree with it but that' s the law under which people can be employed in England, can be lured from England to come to Canada. We can say to them: "You can come here. Ac cord ing to the Manitoba Court of Appeal's decision, you can come here. We'll offer you work as a tool and die maker ; when you get here we'll put you on sweeping the floors but, provided the wages are the same, you can't do anything about it. " Now, these are two cases , Mr.

Chairman. Since then, and before then, I' ve read numerou s accounts of people who are either involved in law suits or have come here and are

942 April 11, 1968 (MR. GREEN cont'd. ) going back as the result of some misunderstanding -- let's be generous -- some misunderstanding as between them and their employer or them and the De partment of Manpower with regard to what they were supposed to get and what they did get. Now, Mr. Chairman, the point that I am making is this. I don't expect that my particular case should be found right or somebody else' s should be found right.

What I am saying is that there should be some procedure whereby these people can have their complaints dealt with other than through the courts; other than through being sued, or suing . That the department should have some influence with regard to the employers concerned, with regard to the employees con cerned, and there should be a standard procedure whereby this person could do something about his particular case. Now in. the case that I've referred to, my client, he was sued by Bristol Aircraft.

It's not as if Bristol Aircraft went to the Department of Manpower and said, "This man left us and we have a complaint. " He was sued. He had to get a lawyer. He had to defend his case. And with all of that he lost. I mean it didn't help him a great deal ; and it seems to me that where we are engaged in this type of program, where we have reason to expect that there may be dif ficulties and diff erences of opinion between the employer and the employee, that the department itself should be, as a matter of policy and as a matter of regular procedure, involved in solv ing some of these difficul ties.

Now I don't know whether the Minister indicates that there is a way, but I see that he is nodding his head so let' s hear what he has to say. MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Chairman, I don't intend to devote my short contribution to the promis so:ry notethat the Minister has put before us, the 21 pages of what he hopes to do in 1968. I wish to bring up a few items of the past year under his stewardship, and to see if he can make some comment on them.

I would like to start off by mentioning the largest plant we have in the Portage la Prairie area, the Campbell Soup Company plant, and I believe many people may have noticed the press release they put out September 5th, 19 67. This is a plant that spent in the past year $3, 400, OOO for wages and supplies. Now, this was acc ording to the Plant Manager, Mr. E.J . Corhonan. Employees received $1, 300, OOO of the total that I've just mentioned; the remaining $2, 100, OO O were spent in the surrounding Portage la Prairie area for ingredients, supplies, services necessa ry for the plant's operation, and so on.

It mentions that the plant was built in 1960 and enlarged in 19 65 and it produces canned soups for the western provinces of Canada. Now, Mr. Chairman, my reason for mentioning this press release is this : that this company, along with many many other companies in Manitoba today - and I mention the Greb Shoe Company as one - are faced with a very serious problem. They're faced with a yearly increase in taxation that they had not planned upon when they came to Manitoba.

They are competing outside of our province, in some cases in the international market, but in many cases these plants are competing in the interprovincial market across Canada. Now, the Minister has made great promises for next year and the remainder of the time he has there. He 's made great promises about new programs and new developments. Nothing concrete, mind you, but they're ideas and ·they' re dreams, as the Honourable from Emerson has mentioned.

Now I ask the Minister, what is he going to do about those firms that are caught in this sort of a squeeze when in the Budget Speech it comes out that there is really no increase in taxation but we all know that this was a flim flam job, that there is an increase in taxation and it's hitting these businesses and hitting them pretty hard. It's hitting them pretty hard. About two years ago this government put on a tax on all electrical usages. That hurt certain busi nesses, but after pressure from this side and the group on my left, this tax was taken off.

Now I think that for the good of the businesses we have here, never mind the ones that we're giving away all sorts of concessions they get to come in, but the ones that we've got here. They've got a huge investment here. They employ hundreds and thousands of people, and they're faced with this and they' re caught and they can't do anything about it. For the past four or five years, their cost of operation has gone up and a large perc entage of the cost of their operation going up has been the increase in real estate taxes and the taxes on the products that they have to use.

Again, speaking about the area that I know best, the Portage area, I think about three years ago the Department of Industry and Commerce purchased the MacDonald air field, and at that time there were great glowing statements about this industrial park-to-be. I notice that there were ads in the Toronto newspapers extolling the virtues of the industrial park at MacDonald air field, and for some reason or another in the past year there's been no mention

April 11, 196 8 943 ( l\ffi . JOHNSTON cont'd . ) . . . . . made of this propos ition. As I unders tand it, and my figur es could be wrong, but I was given to understand that the province had paid $240, OOO to the Crown Asse ts Corp oration for the buildings and the site at MacDonald. Now, if we assu me that the money market today is at least eight percent for anybody trying to borrow - eight to ten - this could be a $20, OOO a year upkeep, as far as interest goes , on the original inves tment.

We've had the MacDonald air field now for, I believe three yea rs, so perhaps we can mark in $60, OOO going to the original cost at $240, OOO. 00. Then there 's the -- I was goi ng to say the upkeep. I don't believe there has been any upkeep, but there is the matter of the caretaking facilities out there, where men are on duty all the time, and I suppose some of the util ities have to be kept up, which to say $2 0, OOO a year wouldn't be that out of the way, I would think.

And if we say for three years, although I think it could be a little longer than three years, that' s another $60, OOO for the last three years. Then I have a news releas e, or a news report in my hand from the Portage Daily Graphic, and it says: "MacDonald pipeline to be relocated. Tenders for relocation of the water line connecting with the former MacDonald air station have been called by the Manitoba Highways Department. The tenders will close at 12:00 o' clock noon, Wednesd ay, Apri l 17th.

They call for the supply of all materials and the construction of a new 8-inch diameter portable water pipeline with all applicative works , approximately 4, 265 feet long. 11 Well, Mr. Chairman, I' m certainly not an expert on construction of this type, but at a minimum of $10. 00 a foot, that 's around $42, OOO for the relocation of a pipeline. So if one were to add up the figures that I just quoted, they come pretty close to $400, OOO. 00.

Now, this spri ng I had the occasion to go out to the MacDonald air field and I drove around and I lo oked, and the outward appearances are of nothing whatsoever happening, windows broken, the buildings falling into disrepair, and I would like the Minister to give us a comprehensive report of what is going in at MacDonald; what has it cost to date - are my figures wrong or are they underest imated or overesti mated ? And what is the future of this facility ? Because I can recall at the time that it was purchased, the then Minister of Industry and Commerce had great hopes for this project.

I have here, again to come back to how the high taxes are affecting our existing busi nesses, a quotation from a newspaper and I'm so rry -- Sheldon Bowles is the author, so is that the Free Pre ss ? That' s the Free Pres s. March, 1968, and the heading is : "Fans et to quit board. " This is the Industrial Developme nt Board of Greater Win nipeg. And I won't read a great deal out of the

article but the re's quite a discussion about how the 33 mill asses sm ent affects industry. This is what, in part, he says : It is an unfair tax. It is a discriminatory tax against industrial develo pment and it will hurt developme nt in the city. And now in quota tion marks: "People come to look at our city and they want to know what the taxes are and then they don't come. They compare taxes here with other communities. They never say why they don't come but we are missi ng out on certain industries we ho;ie to get. There can be no doubt that this tax has hurt us. 11 Now, Mr.

Chairman, those re marks apply to the former rate of 33 cills not the present announced rate of the gove rnment which is 4. 1 more, over a 10 percent in crease. I also go on and Mr. Fanset is also concerned with the proportion of public buildings to private buildings bei ng built. "Industry pays taxes and they don't se nd kids to school. Public buildings don't help any towards payment of taxes. 11 And the re' s quite an

article here. If the Minister hasn't seen it I'd like to -- he can have this copy if he wishes to make a study of what the problems are facing Winnipeg in that regard. What did the Department of Industry and Commerce do when they found out that the Souris Creamery was in difficulty? l\ffiS. FORBES: They did an awful lot. l\ffi . JOHNSTON: Well then, I would like to hear it, because certain members of this House don't think they did a great deal. I would li ke to hear what the department did to help out an industry that was in trouble and needed some technical advice. So perhaps the Minister could tell us that.

Perh aps the Minister of Urban Affairs, who seems to know a great deal about this, would like to get up and tell us. l\ffiS. FORBES: ... surely do. It affects my part of the country, and the Minister of Agriculture did a lot too. l\ffi, JOHNSTO N: Well, would you li ke to tell us now, the Honourable Minister. I'l l take my seat while the Minister tell s us what she did. -- (Interj ection) -- Well, perhaps later. Another suggestion I have for the Minister of Industry and Commerce is that he prevail

944 April 11, 1968 (MR. JOHNSTON cont' d. ) . . . . . upon his colleagues in the Cabinet to try and keep some of the advertising in Manitoba that is presently going to firms located outside of Manitoba. I know he's very sensitive about this but there hasn't been any action to stop the out-flow of Canadian advertising dollars to firms without even an office in Manitoba, and of course I'm referring to Dalton Camp and Associates, where from the 1960 to 19 67 period inclusive, they've received $1, 107, 814. 62 worth of advertising.

So perhaps If he could put a little pressure on some of his mates in the Cabinet there to get some of that money stay here, that would certainly be a shot in the arm for the advertising industry in Manitoba. Mr. Chairman, I have in my hand here a publication put out by the West Man Development Corp oration and it's known as "West Man Topics. " Now from what I've heard about this or ganization, they're certainly doing all they can for their part of the country, the Brandon area west and surr ounding, and rm glad to see an approach that they are taking that will certainly help industry come to small towns.

I think the Industries Department of the Manitoba Govern ment could take a leaf out of their practice and out of their book and do something about these problems which will make it much easier to bring in industry whether large or small. On the back of their publication they have "Business Opportunities. " The first four are requirements for small towns : Needed in Hamiota - a dentist. -- (Interjection) -- This must be out- of-date b

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	28-2-38
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	28th 2nd hansardpdf 38.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	04f18e33299572d2f833659f59de48a449c3463f

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).