Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 18A (31st Legislature, 2nd Session)

31-2-18a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

• THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, April11, 1978 Time: 2:30 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER, Hon. Harry E. Graham (Birtle-Russell): I should like to direct the attention of the honourable members to the gallery where we have 120 students of Grade 9 standing of the Spring Valley School. These students are under the direction of Mr. Riches, Mr. Collins, Mrs. Perlmutter and Miss Lockhart . This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek, the Minister reponsible for the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation .

We also have 45 from the Adult Basic Education of the Red River Community College under the direction of Mr. Braid. This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Logan . On behalf of all members, we welcome you here today. Presenting Petitions ... Reading and Receiving Petitions ... Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees . MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister . HON. STERLING R. LYON, Premier (Charleswood): Mr.

Speaker, on behalf of the Minister of Finance who is not able to be here at this moment, I have the notes that have been prepared for him with respect to the Canadian Labour Force Survey which appeared this morning . I would ask leave of the House to make a short statemen t on behalf of the Minister of Finance on the March labour force statis tics which were released this morning in Ottawa . The Statistics Canada figures show that for Manitoba , the seasonally-adjusted unemployment rate remained unchanged at 6.5 percent last month . The unadjusted rate declined by 2/10ths of a point from 8 percent to 7.8 percent.

Both the seasonally-adjusted and the unadjusted rates continued to be the third lowest in Canada last month and both remained about 2 points below the national average . In contrast to the Manitoba figures , the national unemployment rate worsened in March from 8.3 percent to 8.6 percent seasonally -adjusted , and from 9.5 percent to 9.7 percent unadjusted . The unadjusted national unemployment total went up to a record 1 ,045,000.

In Manitoba , the number of unemployed remained unchanged at 31,000 between February and March on a seasonally-adjusted basis , while the unadjusted number went down by 1,000 from 37,000 to 36,000. At the same time , the number of employed in our province increased by 3,000 over the previous month 's seasonally-adjusted total and 4,000 over the unadjusted figure. There were 17,000 more Manitobans employed in March, 1978 than there were in March, 1977 both on a seasonally-adjusted and on an actual basis.

Last night in the Budget , we noted that our new private sector Youth Employment Program will take effect in about three weeks and will further improve the employment total. As was mentioned in the Speech, the Department of Education will be administering this program and the Minister responsible will provide full details very shortly . Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition . MR. EDWARD SCHREYER(Rossmere): Mr. Speaker , naturally we are happy if the data shows that there is no worsening of the unemployment situation in our province.

Rather than take any great deal of time in this House, I merely observe that with respect to the unemployment data at this time of the year- March , April , May- that there is considerable swing that takes place and that, while on the one hand as we go into the spring season , given our climate , that there is almost always a great enhancement in construction activity and in jobs. This is offset , so far as it is a problem for government, by the entry and the availability of young people from our post-secondary institutions and indeed from our Senior High Schools into the spring and summer labou sr force.

I note that, in the last paragraph of the statement , there is reference to the Private Sector Youth Employment program . I, for one, do not fault that initiative. Indeed , it is now the second year in which this province has seen fit to adopt such a component in the job creation policies and programs of tue province. It remains to be seen, Sir , whether the Private Sector Youth Employment pro~ ram by itself will be sufficient to deal with the several thousands of young people, and there Will be several thousands , coming into the labour force within a matter of 30 to 60 days from now.

As I recall , Sir, last year the Private Sector Youth Employment program that we brought forward did , perhaps , provide in the order of 3,000 jobs and I believe the estimates this year are for something approaching that , or in that same order of magnitude. But this was aided and abetted, Sir , by other youth job creation programs that had to do with the public sector, and since we believe in a judicious 737

Tuesday, April11, 1978 combination of both private and public sectors, it will be interesting to see whether an exclusive reliance on the private sector , while not gearing-up to provide for employment for young people in some of our public institutions- in the health care field , just to give one example- which of the two approaches will be more efficacious. Time , and not that much time, from now we will know . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Highways. HON. HARRY ENNS(Lakeside) : Thank you , Mr. Speaker.

I beg the indulgence of the House to table the Annual Report of the Department of Highways for the year 1976- 1977. MR. SPEAKERNotices of Motion .. . The Honourable Minister of Northern Affairs. HON. KEN MacMASTER(Thompson) : It is not a notice of motion, Mr. Speaker , it's to file some reports . I was requested by the Member for Inkster to file reports that I could lay my hands on in relationship to the Flood Agreement. I have, firstly, Mr. Speaker , copies of the Flood Agreement that was signed by all four parties. I then have, Mr.

Speaker, copies of the Referendum of Agreement and the Development Agreement signed by the four parties . I have copies of a portion of an agreement that was signed by the Flood Committee and the Honourable Warren Allmand, which was not signed by the Provincial Government. I then have copies of a document that was signed by the Honourable Edward Schreyer and Mr. Bateman on behalf of the government and the Hydro , but was not signed by the Flood Committee in the Federal Government. And that's all the documentation that I can find at this particular time , Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion .

Introduction of Bills . ORAL QUESTIONS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition . MR. SCHREYER: Well, Mr. Speaker, I labour at somewhat of a disadvantage, the Minister of Finance perhaps being temporar ily absent.

I would like to give him notice of the question, however, by placing it now, and that is to ask the Honourable Minister of Finance whether he can provide the somewhat detailed information as to the change in the receipts, or the forecast of receipts, from the Government of Canada by the Province of Manitoba with respect to both the tax collection agreement items and also the equalization payments, and indeed all transfer payments from Canada to Manitoba .

The purpose of my question, Sir, is to get clarification with respect to a question answer that took place in this Chamber two weeks ago, at which time we were advised that there was no significant alteration in the forecast of the flow of funds from Canada to Manitoba . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister . MR. LYON: Mr. Speaker , I would be happy to take that question as notice and I'm sure the material that the Leader of the Opposition asked for can be made available. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Johns . MR. SAUL CHERNIACK: Mr.

Speaker , in the same line and dir cted as notice to the same Minister of Finance, I am wondering if he would provide us with information which I assume he would have, which would indicate the numbers and income levels of pensioners who were saved entirely their school tax as of yesterday , and the number , the percentage and the income levels of those who will be saved their school taxes , a rebate of their school taxes , as a result of the Budget proposals . I assume they may well have it, and if they do , my request is that he provide them to us. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister . MR. LYON: Mr.

Speaker , we'll take that question as notice , subject only to the caveat that the Member for St. Johns has already put on it- if the information is readily available- if there are any further caveats the Minister of Finance wishes to put on it we'll let them be known , but otherwise we'll just take the question as notice and produce whatever information we can. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Inkster. MR. SIDNEY GREEN: I would like to address a question to the First Minister.

I would like to know whether the First Minister can advise us when the Minister of Finance will be bringing down his Budget Address? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Inkster with a supplementary. 738 .. , . . "

.. Tuesday, April11, 1978 MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker , the Minister of Finance has indicated to th is House that his Budget Address will not be a polit ical manifesto with misleading statistics and comparisons . I would like to know when the Minister of Finance is going to bring down this Budget address . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister . MR. LYON: Mr.

Speaker , notwi thstanding the complete and absolute frivolity of the question posed by t he Member for Inkster , I can understand- I can well understand- the feelings of concern and dismay that he has having heard last night as he did a Budget that did give the facts to the people of Manitoba- facts , Mr. Speaker, which may not please the Member for Inkster, but facts which the people of Manitoba have been waiting some time to hear . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Inkster . Mr. GREEN: Mr. Speaker , I acknowledge the fact that the First Minister brought down a speech.

I'm asking when he will deliver the Budget Address which is not a political manifesto with misleading statistics and misleading comparisons , which is what I heard last night. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Selkirk. Speeaker , my question to the Attorney "' MR. PAWLEY: Mr. -General.

Would the Attorney-Genera l confirm that last night's Federal Budget and the announcement in connection with the Amendments that would be introduced to eliminate all problems that might result from Capital Gains Tax as a result of marital property division -and which , by the way , was a request which was requested by the previous government of the Federal -. Government- does , in fact , elim inate any of the problems which he has raised in connection with tax implications in the marita l property legislation of last year. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. GERALD W. J. MERCIER (Osborne): Mr.

Speaker, I don't have the specific proposals that were brought forward last night but my understanding is that there were proposals to amend

Section 73 and 7 4 of the Income Tax Act which will ameliorate some of the tax penalties that had been raised by us in the last session of the Legislature. There was, however , to my knowledge no amendment dealing with the principal place of residence so that it is not possible, as it is now, for any income tax - relief for those people who have two principal places of residence under the Income Tax Act, usually a house and a cottage . While I'm on my feet, Mr.

Speaker , there was a question asked of me by the Honourable Member for Selkirk on March 22nd related to my accepting as notice a question as to whether or not my • department had been requested or instructed to prepare any legal documents pertaining to an agreement that was tabled the previous evening. The agreement was a document dated November 14, 1977, signed by the Deputy Min ister of Tourism and Mr. Jarmoc . Since that date, Mr.

Speaker, a solicitor on the staff of my department had been consulted from time to time by the Deputy Minister of Touris and members of his staff , but to date no specific request or instruction has been received by my department to prepare any legal documents pertaining to this agreement. • MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge MR. LLOYD AXWORTHY: Well, Mr. Speaker , I have a question tor the Minister of Education .

I wonder if he could tell us whether his department or officials are examining the incidence of new private schools or apparent schools which are emerging in the province catering to foreign students who wish to take a diploma in the Manitoba system in order to get into university. Can he tell us whether that particular phenomenon is being looked at and could he tell us if there has been any examination or investigation into this particular situation? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister for Education . HON. KEITH A. COSENS (Gimli): Mr.

Speaker, in answer to the Member for Fort Rouge, we are aware that there is some development in that area. We are not aware that it is taking place at this time but that there has been some exploration of the area as far as foreign students are concerned. We are monitoring this and watching it with interest. MR. AXWORTHY: As a supplementary , Mr.

Speaker, could the Minister indicate whether there has been any discussions with school board officials who are presently being approached, for the use of public school facilities for these kind of schools in off evening hours or weekend hours and whether in tact the department is making any effort to establish any kind of guidel ines or standards for the rent or lease of public school facilities for these kinds of schools? MR. COSENS: Mr. Speaker , we have had no communication from school divisions in this regard . 739

Tuesday, April11, 1978 MR. AXWORTHY: Well, a supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

I didn 't ask if they had had a communica tion , I was asking if the Department of Education had communicated to school boards concerning this particular issue and whether there is any effort to examine the particular educational standards that would be employed , whether the certificates of standards that would be applied in these schools would be sufficient to warrant a standing under the Manitoba system , and whether there is any investigation or discussion going on with school boards to determine whether public school facilities should be allowed to be used for these kind of purposes . MR.

COSENS: Once again , Mr. Speaker , I can assure the Member for Fort Rouge that to this point we have no evidence of any real development in this area and when we do get information to that regard that would indicate that there is something real taking place , then we will come forth with some policy . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Flin Flon. MR. THOMAS BARROW: I would like to direct this question to the Minister of Health, Mr. Speaker . Is it true that the manager of Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting is willing to meet with the government to discuss sharing the costs of a hospital for Snow Lake? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health . HON.L.R.(Bud) SHERMAN(Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker , I am not at all sure that it's true that he is willing to discuss cost sharing , but he is willing to , and is prepared to, and is intending to meet with the government and our intentions are similar . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rupertsland . MR. HARVEY BOSTROM: Thank you , Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Attorney-General. I heard part of his earlier answer to the House, I believe he was responding to a quest ion I posed to him some ten days or a week ago . In any case, Mr.

Speaker , I would like to ask for clarification . Has he or his department been requested to date to assess legal and financial obligations of the Province of Manitoba respecting the development agreement that was signed by the Department of Tourism with developers in the Whiteshell Lake area? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. MR. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker , the question that I answered previously was one from the Member for Selkirk . As I indicated in my statement , members of my department are consult ed from time to time by many departments . MR. BOSTROM: Well a supplementary , Mr. Speaker .

My question to him is very specific . Has he, or any of his departmental officials been consulted to date regarding the financial and legal obligations of the Province of Manitoba resp cting that particular development agreement that was signed by the Department of Tourism as per the Minister of Tourism 's instruction s. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. MR. MERCIER: The answer is yes, Mr. Speaker , and I'm sure that the Minister of Tourism and Recreation will comment on that when he presents his full review of the situation to the Legislature. MR. BOSTROM: A final question , Mr.

Speaker , to the Minister of . Tourism . Can he inform the House when we are going to receive this report which has been promised now for several weeks? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Tourism . HON. ROBERT (Bob) BANMAN (La Verendrye): Yes, Mr. Speaker . We are still checking the documentation going back to when the original negotiations started. It's gone back a little further than 1 thought it did and we're in the process of try ing to find all the documentation with regard to that particular event. As soon as we have it all compiled so that we can also file the correspondence we will do that. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition . MR. SCHREYER: Mr. Speaker , now that the Minister of Finance is in his place, I would like to ask him the following question . Can he confirm that the estimated budget deficit on current account of last year, which was in the order of $25 million to $33 million, which in November the Minister of Finance reported , or characterized , as being $125 million , is now in fact $80 million, and of that $80 million that the change in the Minister 's estimates of some $50 million-plus , positive , is the result , the 740

' Ill" .. • ,. Tuesday, April11, 1978 major part of it is a result of increased flow of funds, or receipts, from Canada? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. HON. DONALD W. CRAIK (Riel): Mr. Speaker , it was all stated last night and if the member has the Hansard he'll find it there .

It was stated last night that the federal funds- out of the $49 million, or whatever it was, roughly $49 million of recovery - about one-quarter of it was reduction in expenditures and about th ree-quarters of it was cost-shared receipts ' but it was not a regaining of position with regard to the shortfall on federal income tax of the 4$50 million that was relayed to the former government in early October of last year. There was no improvement in that shortfall. MR. SCHREYER: Be that as it may, Mr.

Speaker , I ask the Minister to indicate if it is not a fact that I asked him in this House two weeks ago whether he had any revisions to report in the anticipated collection of funds from Canada in terms of receipts from the Government of Canada and that he indicated at that time that there was nothing significant and that presumably, therefore, the estimated deficit and current account would be in the order of $125 million. Now we're told it's $80 million, an improvement of $50 million, $40 million of which comes from Canada.

I ask the Minister if he feels , in conscience , that he answered my question correctly a couple of weeks ago . MR. CRAIK: Well, Mr. Speaker , the question that was asked by the First Minister a couple of weeks ago was replied in the light of the knowledge that I had with regard to the information on the federal income tax or the income tax portion of it that caused the problem last October and that did not change substant ially . As far as the rest of the statistics are concerned, I understand that there has been a notice taken on this .

We can provide you with the detailed information on where the changes have taken place . MR. SCHREYER: Mr. Speaker , I would ask the Minister then if he is acknowledging the fact that whether it be having to do with tax collection , flow of funds, or whether it has to do with cost-shared programs , or with equalization payments , that there are revisions from time to time eminating from the Department of Revenue and Finance, Ottawa, that sometimes the revisions are down and sometimes they 're up.

But clearly in this case, is it not a fact , I ask is it not a fact, that there have been now positive revisions upward of some $50 million and that this was somehow not reported until last night , leaving an impression of $125 million defic it that I suggest they probably knew a month or two ago would be closer to $75 million . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Kildonan . MR. PETER FOX: Thank you , Mr. Speaker .

Can the Minister of Health inform the House whether he has confirmed that the Victor ia Hospital management has offered all the employees, by letter, a Hobson's Choice of taking a 3.3 percent cut or staff reductions at that institution, and whether he approves of that measure? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. MR. SHERMAN: No, Mr. Speaker , I can't confirm that. I've been told it by the pre~s ; I've been told it by the Honourable Member for Kildonan ; I've not been told it by the Victoria General Hospital board . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Johns . MR. CHERN lACK: Thank you , Mr.

Speaker. I want to address this to the Minister of Finance who has already been involved in discussing whether or not he knew certain facts. Can he clarify why it is that under the Revenue Estimates which he filed last night, he shows as revenue from individual income tax the sum of $41 mill ion which is a transfer payment to buy the Provincial Government's agreement to reduce sales tax? Is he trying to inform the public that this income of $41 million is Manitoba's share of income tax collections as would appear from this statement? • MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance . MR. CRAIK: Mr.

Speaker, the details of the agreement with the Federal Government with regard to the remuneration to make up for the shortfall on the sales tax of the $41 million is going to be made up ~ through tax points and at the printing of the revenue statement we were not completely clear on the exact technique and procedure that would be followed. It appeared that that was the best way of showing it in the revenues . It will be made up through making room in the federal portion of the income tax for additional provincial revenues. · MR. CHERNIACK: A supplementary question then, Mr. Speaker .

In view of the fact that the Provincial Government has made this statement through the Revenue Estimates that this will be income tax , is he now saying that the 2 percent will be paid, not by the federal taxpayers but by Manitoba taxpayers in a reduction of tax points , Mr. Speaker . By a transference of tax points, will not the dollars be prov ided by Manitoba taxpayers through their share of taxation and not by Ontario or 741

Tuesday, April 11, 1978 Alberta taxpayers? MR. CRAIK: Well , Mr. Speaker, it all boils down to the Canadian taxpayer but it doesn't all boil down to the Manitoba taxpayer. MR. CHERNIACK: Yes, Mr. Speaker . Since this is a vital point and a line which says individual income tax, is it not correct to state that Item 1 under Finance 7 .(

a) is the Manitoba income taxpayers' moneys collected under the Fiscal Arrangements Act , therefore, is money contributed by the Manitoba taxpayer to the Province of Manitoba's government? MR. CRAIK: Well , Mr. Speaker, I think that we can taketh is up in further detail in Committee . I don't have all the stuff here with me but I'll take it up with the Member at an appropriate time . MR. SPEAKER: I believe the member has had two supplementaries . The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. SCHREYER: Well , Mr.

Speaker, it certainly can be taken up in detail in Committee but I would like to ask the Minister at least for this bit of information in advance . Can the Minister indicate whether the revenue foregone as a result of the change in the sales tax will be made up by a federal payment that is based on the estimated revenues to be received from the two points of sales tax, or is the Federal Government transferr ing tax room with or without a floor guaranteed for six months? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance . MR. CRAIK: Mr.

Speaker, I'd have no hesitation in tabling the agreement as it now stands with the Federal Government ; I think that's the best way to answer the question . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Inkster. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker , would the Minister of Labour investigate whether the Victoria Hospital is engaged in threatening its emp loyees with an illegal lockout during the term of the collective agreement by asking them to take a reduction in wages as an exchange for remaining in employment at the Victoria Hospital , which is clearly a violation of The Labour Relations Act. Mr.

Speaker, the question is, will she investigate it? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour . HON. NORMA L. PRICE (Assiniboia): Mr. Speaker, there hasn't been anyth ing come to my .,._ attention . If there is a case we certainly will look into it, but I have heard nothing to that effect. -. MR. SPEAKER: Order please . Order please . If the Honourable Memb er for St. Boniface wants to carry on a conversation I suggest he do it outside the Chambe r. The Honourable Member for Inkster. MR. GREEN: Mr.

Speaker , as a Member of the Legislature I am asking the Minister of Labour whether she would investigate the fact that facts have come to my attention that employees of the Victoria Hospital have been asked by the hospital to take a cut in wages as an exchange for continuing their normal pattern of employment, and I would ask her department to see whether or not this is an unlawful lockout forced on Victoria Hospital by the Government of Mani toba which says there should be more lockouts of that kind. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Mines. The Honourable Member for Inkster with a supplementary . MR.

GREEN: I would like to know whether the Minister of Labour will investi gate abuses , violations of The Labour Relations Act , when brought to their attention by a Member of the Legislature elected by the public to do just that. MRS. PRICE: Mr. Speaker , I did tell the Member for Inkster , that I would look into it for him if he will just give me the facts. I've already said that I would do it. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Mines. Order please. Order please. -(lnterjection) At least I care . The Honourable Minister of Mines . HON . BRIAN RANSOM (Souris-Killarney): Mr.

Speaker , on Friday last the Honourable Member for Fort Rouge asked a question of me which contained a statement to the effect that Winnipeg had water quality that was sup posedly among the lowest of all major cities in Canada . He asked me whether I had a chance to review the report . My staff has indeed had an opportunity to review the report in question ; it in fact dealt with a nation-wide survey of Halomethanes in drinking water . There was one sample of water taken in Winnipeg . The sample showed in fact a fairly high level of 742

Tuesday, April11, 1978 Halomethanes resulting from the treatment of the water with chlorine . The level is considered to be quite acceptable , at least under the standards established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency . It therefore cannot be concluded that Winnipeg water quality is among the lowest in Canada ; it simply indicates that that particular spot sample of one parameter of quality happened to be a fairly high reading . I would certainly like it to be made clear, Mr. Speaker, that that in no way can lead to the conclusion that Winnipeg's water quality is among the lowest in Canada. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon East. • MR. LEONARD S. EVANS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . I would like to address a question to the Minister of Finance . In view of the fact that Statistics Canada has reported today in its Labour Force • Release that there are 17,000 young people unemployed in Manitoba, which is about half of the total number of unemployed in this province or a 13.7 percent unemployment rate, will the Minister reconsider and undertake greater or additional employment initiatives for the young people in this province than that announced in the Budget? -(Interjection)- Mr.

Speaker, I don't believe the Minister of Finance realized I was addressing a question to him, so if I might repeat the question. This is not a supplementary , it's a repeat. In view of the fact that Statistics Canada has today reported in its official release that there are approximately 17,000 young Manitobans, which comprise nearly half of those unemployed in Manitoba therefore making a total of 13.7 percent, a rate of 13.7 percent unemployed, will the Minister consider new and greater employment initiatives for the young people of this province than those announced in the Budget last night? .. • MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance . MR. CRAIK: Well, Mr. Speaker, I gather what the member is suggesting is that we should every day come out with a new program to satisfy his whims as we have already addressed ourselves to the problem . I indicated last night that there will be 2,000 direct jobs in government, there will be a program that provides incentives for jobs for young people , primarily in the private sector, in the cost shared arrangements announced in last night's Budget.

I indicated also that that was not a closed end program, that if the demand develops, and there's every effort being made through the Department of Education set-up for that to happen , then there will be more young people employed, and no young person that wants to work is going to be unemployed if there 's anything we can do about it. MR. EVANS: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. My first supplementary. I appreciate the Honourable Minister of Finance's concern, which I share, but I submit to him that 2,000 is a long way from 17,000 unemployed youths in Manitoba .

I would like to ask the Honourable Minister whether he is appreciative of the fact that Statistics Canada has also forecast a drop in total investment in this province in 1978. According to the figures, $1,916,000,000 were invested in Manitoba last year, and this year the forecast is expected to be $1,895,000,000 which is a substantial drop especially when you consider, Mr. Speaker, the element of inflation . So, in view of the fact that investment is dropping in Manitoba, will the Minister please explain how he is going to have those new jobs created? MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Order please.

May I suggest to the Honourable Member for Brandon East that debate on the Budget is very imminent on the Order Paper, and debate such as he is attempting to initiate now would better be done at that period in time. The Honourable Minister of Tourism. MR. BANMAN: Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was asked several questions by the Leader of the Opposition and the Member for Rupertsland with regard to the Thunderbird Lodge.

I am informed that the application for the purchase of the lodge will be dealt with by the Court on April 19th next, and that meanwhile the Officers of the CEDF have assured me that every step is being taken by them to protect the interests of Manitoba taxpayers. Further to a specific question with regard to the return to the Province of Manitoba, it's my understanding that one-third ofthe net proceeds that will be distributed come back to the Province of Manitoba. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for The Pas. MR. RONALD McBRYDE: Mr.

Speaker , I have a question to the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Telephone System. Sometime ago I asked him a question and he answered in regard to The Pas, but I also asked him about Selkirk and Thompson, about the number of layoffs that would take place in those two communities as a result of computerization. I wonder if he could answer that question? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Consumer Affairs . HON. EDWARD McGILL, (Brandon West): Mr. Speaker , I have no information relating to possible layoffs in either Selkirk or Thompson! at this time. 743

Tuesday, April11, 1978 MR. McBRYDE: Yes, Mr. Speaker, 1 wonder if the Minister could tell us what the legal obligation is to the Bell Canada subsidiary through Manitoba Telephone orders, whether or not they could get out of an agreement and delay their order with that company? MR. McGILL: Mr. Speaker, I believe the member is asking for a legal opinion from me. I'm not prepared to offer a legal opinion on the subject that he is quoting at this time. MR.

McBRYDE: I would rephrase that question, then, could the Minister tell us whether the Manitoba Telephone System is obligated to go ahead with that purchase for computerization equipment , and I would also ask the Minister if he would again consider postponing this implementation, and use the money he would save for employment creation instead of employment deleting job activity in Northern Manitoba? MR. McGILL: Mr. Speaker, the member's question is somewhat vague . He speaks of computeriza tion equipment.

I presume he's speaking of the telephone operator's position equipment that is now being installed and is part of a program that began as he probably is well aware, some two years ago, and that this modernization of our whole telephone system has been going on over that period. If he is asking me now whether we are prepared to terminate that modernization and provide, for certain areas of his concern somewhat less than the best service , then I would be somewhat surprised at his question. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition . MR. SCHREYER: Well , Mr.

Speaker , may I aik the Minister who has just replied , whether he would undertake to ascertain with officials of the Manitoba Telephone System whether they have done any study with respect to the possibility of , indeed, discontinuing what is admittedly a decade long- two decade long - policy practise of proceeding relentlessly towards the displacement of persons by automated equipment , given that the telephone system has been asked some year -18 month's ago -to consider the advisability of slowing , if not a measured pause, in the installation of automated equipment in lieu of human beings at telephone exchanges, particularly in rural centres?

Would the Minister undertake to ascertain whether such a study , that merits the name study, has been made, and whether there are any policy considerations that might then be followed-up? MR. McGILL : Mr. Speaker , I'm interested in the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition's statement that his government had asked MTS to re-examine their technology development and their improvement of the system' to perhaps pause, or even terminate, such change within the system.

As to whether or not the MTS should be involved in a pause or a termination, I would tell the honourable member that MTS I'm confident is constantly re-evaluating its programs, its policies, and the kind of service it's offering to the people of Manitoba . At this point, I believe that that service ranks amongst the best in Canada . I would hope that their policies would tend to preserve that lead, and that we will not hinder or inhibit the ability of MTS to maintain its position as one of the leaders in the telecommunications systems in Manitoba.

Nevertheless , I will be pleased to bring the member's concerns again to MTS and to ask them to again ensure that the policies they are now undertaking are in the best interests in the long run , of the taxpayers of Manitoba . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Churchill. MR. JAY COWAN: Yes, Mr. Speaker , I also would like to direct a question to the Minister to whom - ~ the Manitoba Telephone System reports .

It is a ques tion I was going to ask later in the year , but in light of the high profile in the inauguration yesterd ay of the $7 mill ion customer dialing service that enables Winnipegers to dial direct to 27 countries , my question to the Minister is then, what is the cause of numerous delays in completing basic pho ne service to many remote communities in Northern Manitoba? MR. McGILL: Mr.

Speaker , the Member for Chur chill I'm sure knows that a policy of modernization and improvement of telephone services in rural and remote areas of Manitoba was undertaken at the suggestion and perhaps more than a suggestion - at perhaps the direction of the Public Utilities Board - more than a year ago . This is proceeding on an announced time-table, it is quite an expensive program, it is not related to the kinds of revenues that are obtainable , but it is accepted and undertaken and is going ahead on

schedule on the undertaking that these phone services should be ~ modernized in areas of Manitoba where the revenues achieved by such changes do not in any way compensate for those costs . But , I tell the Member for Churchill that those programs and the timetables are obtainable , and if he would like me to enquire for him on any specific area of the province , I would be glad to do so. ~ MR.

COWAN: I thank the Minister for the question , but I have been informed by several constituents that the timetables are not being followed that closely , and I would ask the Minister if he would undertake a specific study of those remote northern communities to ensure that that the timetables , those announced schedules, are being followed . 744

Tuesday, April11, 1978 MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day. May I call on the Government House Leader to see if there's any change on the Order . HON. WARNER H. JORGENSON, (Morris): Yes, Mr. Speaker, I would like to state that we will be proceeding in Committee of Supply this afternoon , pursuant to an agreement that was reached with the Leader of the Opposition , who I felt, after that last statement he made, posing as a question of whether or not he had exhaus ted his time on the Budget Debate .

But the Leader of the Opposition will be proceeding with the Budget Debate tonight , so we will be going into Supply this afternoon. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Opposition House Leader . MR. GREEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker , just on a point of order , I want to table with the Clerk for the benefit of the Minister of Labour, a letter purported to be on the stationery of Winnipeg General Hospital, purported to be signed by Derrick J. Legg , leaving out only , Mr. Speaker , the name of the person to whom it was sent, containing the

part iculars which she won 't deal with in the way in which a Minister of Labour generally does. MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Government House Leader . HON. WARNER H. JORGENSON (Morris): Mr. Speaker , I'm not sure whether we're not proceeding on the Budget Debate this afternoon but before the debate proceeds further, may I move that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the .. Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. I have that motion seconded by the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs .

MOTION presented and carried and the House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply, with the Honourable Member for Radisson in the Chair for the Department of Development Agencies and the Honourable Member for Roblin in the Chair for the Department of Agriculture . CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - AGRICULTURE MR. CHAIRMAN, Mr. J. Wally McKenzie: Agriculture Estimates, Resolution No. 14, 7.{b) (2)Marketing Board Salaries-pass- the Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR.

USKIW: Yesterday , when we were on this item, I am not sure whether the Minister answered the last question that was put or not , but let me again pursue the matter . There are a number of commodity boards in existence at the present time, some of which are provincial in nature, and others which are national in scope. I would like to ask the Minister whether it is to be expected that there will be no changes in the provincial arrangements with the government of Canada with respect to national marketing boards now in existence . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture . MR.

DOWNEY: Is the member asking for the coming year? MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman , all I am trying to get from the Minister is the policy statement as to how this government is going to relate to national marketing , the whole principle, the whole idea of national marketing agencies, because that is the direction we have been moving over the last five years' and as far as Manitoba is concerned , have we gone as far as we are going to go or are we yet to add other commodities to the national mix? MR. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman , other than the recent announcement of the desire of the Manitoba Broiler people and the conditions which were set out by myself, we don't intend to add any more commodities I believe the Manitoba Marketing Board is fully aware as to these requests, and I would like to know whether there are a hundred such people waiting in the wings in the milk area, in the egg producing area, the turkey board ... ? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture. MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr.

Chairman , I would say that I am quite aware, .and the Marketing Board is • quite aware of the numbers- not the total numbers- but we are quite aware of the individuals that are desirous of entering into the production of certain commodities. I can just think back to not too long ago there were approximately 70 broiler producers, I believe, that wanted to become broiler producers . That's an approximate figure- I don 't have the exact figures. And that is a concern of 745

Tuesday, April11, 1978 mine . I feel that to see the agricultural industry grow and develop and to see farm people produce they have to be able to have the right to produce, and as I said, we will be working in the area of expansion within the commodity groups that are controlled by supply management, and we're also working on a method of transferring quota from one farmer to another without causing any hardships to anyone . MR. USKIW: Well , Mr.

Chairman , I'm really puzzled now because we are not yet in a national marketing arrangement on broilers , yet the Minister keeps saying that there are 70 people who want to ger into production but somehow are precluded from getting in. What is holding them from getting into production right now? Why can't they get into production? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Emerson . MR. ALBERT DRIEDGER: Mr.

Chairman , in the learning process that I am supposedly going J.. through right now , I was wondering - to get a proper picture , the proper perspective of the whole thing - I wonder if the former Minister of Agriculture could indicate the purpose of the Marketing Board having to have an additional estimate done on farms with a cost that ran, in say the dairy area, anywhere from $300 to $500 additional dollars to the seller in order to be able to, you know , transfer his quota .

I wonder, just to get a proper picture of how things ran andthe possible changes that we're anticipating maybe in the availability of transfer of quota whether the member could maybe indicate what he had in mind at that time. I'm addressing this to the former Minister of Agriculture . MR. CHAIRMAN: The former Minister of Agriculture , of course , as you well understand members, does not have to answer the question . The Committee generally directs its questions to the Minister in this Committee, but if the Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet does wish to answer he can , if he so desires .

The Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman , there is no provision in the Estimates for this person to be responsible for anything that we are approving here today. MR. DRIEDGER: MR. Chairman , I was just asking that question in the process that I am going through , really. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture . MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , I'm quite pleased that the present Ministe/rOEo Agriculture is responsible for the Estimates that we're going through and quite prepared to look after with my responsibilities in that area.

I would also like to comment that there is effort by the marketing branch and by the board to certainly seek out markets for those individuals who are unable to produce for the local market , the domestic market. In fact we hope to be able to encourage consumption of Manitoba broilers and products that are completely under the supply management rules in Canada that we are able to produce in markets other than the one in Manitoba and Canada. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman , the Minister is not with it today, obviously .

There is no supply management program with respect to broilers in Canada to date, and in the absence of that I asked him why it is that new producers of broilers in Manitoba are not allowed to establish . There is no supply management program under way at the present time . MR. DOWNEY: I would just like to mention the fact that there is, in fact, provincial supply management control on all the provinces but one I bel ieve, and that is Newfoundland that do not have a supply management program in place.

National ly, there has been indication that they do plan to proceed with a national board , whether all provinces participate or not , in fact , there are plans to go ahead with it. We have agreed to enter into that plan , if in fact, we as a province are able to enter into a separate agreement with them to provide product for any export market which is created or developed by a Manitoba producer board , and we are also working toward an agreement with the Manitoba board for any individual producer to fulfill a market that they themselves individually happen to develop for themselves . So this , Mr.

Chairman , is the area in which we can expand within the industry . MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman . it appears to me that the Minister of Agriculture is indicating that there is no intention on the part of this government to allow anyone in this province the freedom to enter into the production of any of these commodities over which there are marketing board structures established to date -that in essence we will be continuing on in the same way that we have over many, many years- and therefore people should not build up their expectations that there are some new found freedoms with the change in administration .

That certainly is intriguing to me and I am not going to suggest that that is a wrong position to take. It is somewhat different from what some people were led to believe would happen . MR. DOWNEY: I think , the fact that we are desirous of creating and developing new markets with the producer boards and with the individual producers , I in fact , do look forward to the day when the 746 ...

Tuesday, April 11, 1978 individuals have freedom to produce the types of products without severe restrictions , in fact, with very limited restrictions upon them that they are able to enter and produce the products that they are desirous to produce . I feel that we have made great headway in the last few months .

I had a meeting with the egg producers marketing board and it was stated to me that that particular board had been tryi ng to meet the last Min ister of Agricul ture for some several - I don't believe it was months, I believe it was a year or two that they had not been able to get in to discuss certain problems they were havi ng within the indus try, one of those problems being that they had a double set of controls on the Manitoba egg producers .

They not only were controlled by the number of hens but also the number of eggs that they were able to produce -the only province in Canada that certainly had those kind of restrict ions- and it is our inten t to change that at the discussion with the producer marketing board and the Manitoba Marketing Board. They are anxious to have only one set of regulations on them and that, of course, being the hen count and they can then become efficient producers and compete in the Canadian market. MR. USKIW: Well , Mr.

Chairman , I suppose that I would have a lot more fun in this debate if we had one of the original opposition members in your Minister 's chair at the moment, because I can recall the debates in the House , Mr.

Chairman , with respect to the national egg marketing board, and the speculation on the part of the Member for Morris and the Member for Lakeside, as to the kind of control this province was going to put on the egg producers of this province, and that we were going to visit the chicken yards of all these farmers and we were going to count the number of chickens and should there be an excess of the allotted amount to any one producer , we would of course be obligated to wring their necks -so to speak in the words , as I recall it, of the Member for Morris. MR. CHAIRMAN: That was the Henaside program . MR.

USKIW: That's correct. Our Chairman remembers the debate very well, and quite frankly we decided that we were not going to do that ; that in fact , we are not going to restrict people in respect to their hen numbers , that we will allow the regulations to follow the same pattern as do the regulations with respect to all other marketing boards and that is to have the control in the marketplace, not in the question of how many chickens one particular ind ividual has in the barn at any given moment. It is intriguing to me that this government now is going to be wringing the necks of chickens, Mr.

Chairman , and indeed is going to implement the policy of Henaside, I believe that 's the term used by the Member for Morris when he addressed the Legislature on this very piece of legislation that was then debated , namely the National Egg Marketing Board under CEMA. It's indeed very intriguing and we shall have an awful lot of fun and games on this one , reading back to this Minister and to our friends across the way , their own speeches on this very issue. MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr.

Chairman , I find it quite amusing , the comments from the honourable member oppos ite to certa inly come forward with the real truth of how he certainly did administer the farm community , that he was prepared to play games with them and that is how he treated it. I think we have a game in the office that was certainly made to play games with the livestock producers and now he is indicating that it is time that we have fun and games in debate over a very serious , in fact , very serious part of Manitoba agriculture , and that is in the area of market ing.

I feel that when we talk of freedom and how people are going to be free , and when we have the people wringing the necks of the chickens on the chicken farms , at least the government has let go of the necks of the farmers , and they are once again able to be a little freer to operate, and in fact , it is the intent of the government with some market promot ion , it could be possible that we would be able to certa inly remove a lot of the restrictions by sell ing Manitoba product, and if it is Manitoba marketing incentives and creating of an atmosphere of certainly wanting to trade with Manitoba products , we will work towards freedom of quotas so that we can fill markets that are developed by producer boards or by producers individually or by the individuals already in the product ion of these products.

So, I think that it is only fair to comment that in the short time that we certainly have had a chance to look at the marketing system that is in the province , the fact that the farm people are certainly looking forward to a lot of changes , I can assure them there will be some changes , and certainly they won't be to be more restrictive on the farm people but will certa inly be a lot more relaxed. MR. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman , I merely wanted to draw those points to the Minister's attention to impress upon him the obvious dishonesty of his own polit ical party on that very question, as between last year and this year . A lot has changed in the last five months , obviously. MR. CHAIRMAN: (b)(1) , Salaries $124,000-pass- The Honourab le Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. USKIW: I would now like the Minister to justify to the people of Manitoba the logic of going into a national broiler marketing plan .

What is in the public interest in thaf particular arrangement, or proposal , because I see no pub lic interest being served there whatever, and I would like this Minister to tell us how the people of this country are going to benefit from that particular marketing agency . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister of Agr iculture . MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , as I exp lained earlier , the intent of the Manitoba government in 747

Tuesday, April 11, 1978 proposing the type of proposal that we have to enter into the national plan , that we have certainly had representation from the producer marketing board , from several farm organizations that are also concerned about the stability of the individuals within the industry , even though there are not a large amount of numbers of individuals, but hopefully the type of a program that we have proposed; that there will be a chance for a growth of numbers of people into the industry; that in fact ifthe Province of Manitoba , if the Manitoba Producers Board and individuals in the province can seek out new markets, then in fact they are not compelled to just produce for that part of the market which is restricted to them within Manitoba and Canada .

In fact, with the requests and the position that we have taken the producers will certainly be able to go forward and produce product for a market, not necessarily the market that has been established and the share which has been traditional over the past five years for the provinces. I believe Quebec and Ontario certainly have some 70 percent of the Canadian broiler market and they are not prepared to give up any of that.

It is certainly a fact that one of the provinces in Canada feel that they have room to grow and we felt the same way , however the producers within our province that were unanimously in support of entering the national agreement , we , with discussions with them came to the decision that we have at this time . So we feel that we are certainly providing opportunities for the broiler industry to grow , we are providing opportunities for individuals to sell their own products either individually or collectively .

I will admit that we certainly will have a tough time to expand the Canadian and provincial domestic markets, however , we will be prepared to struggle toward more of that percentage, as the national consumption goes up , we will share the same rate as any other province at the same percentage rate . MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman , to go back many , many years , the whole idea of establishing The Natural Products Marketing Act was an idea to give farm people , many thousands of them , some bargaining position in the marketplace .

It was to bring a better balance between the seller and the buyer , designed to protect to whatever degree possible the interests of the legitimate , bona fide farmer . And here we have an industry that is completely dominated- not by farmers, Mr. Chairman , but by large corporations , national , multi-national and whatever- not farmers by any stretch of the imagination who dominate and control this industry throughout Canada , who dominate this industry in Manitoba .

Eleven producers producing 48 percent of our total broiler production, Canada Packers , Dunn Rite , Champs , Friendly Family Farms -that's an interesting one in itself , having a long Conservative history - these are the people that are asking for monopoly control cf the marketplace , Mr. Chairman.

People that are worth hundreds of millions of dollars who are in the broiler industry want the people of Manitoba to bastardize the existing legislation in their favour , because it was never intended , never intended to give already monopolistic people or corporations, a greater monopoly in the marketplace through that legislation . It's in fact a perverse thing that is now being suggested. It was designed primarily for the many producers , individual farmers, to collectively market their product. That's what that legislation was put on the books for .

And now we find that we have less than a hundred broiler producers in total ; out of that number we have 11 that are produc ing 48 percent of the product as of last fall 's statistics, that I can recall- mainly the large corporations in this province . And the only reason they want a marketing plan , Mr. Chairman , is not to do much about changes in marketing within Canada , within Manitoba , but indeed to keep out the imports from the United States .

They want to push up the price of poultry products to the consumers of this country, and they want to use the Natural Products Marketing Act of each province to accomplish those ends . Mr. Chairman, Canada Packe rs does not need any more power . They are a power unto themselves in the marketplace. They don't need to rely on the goodwill of this government , or any government , to give them muscle in the marketplace .

They certainly shouldn't have legislation provided for them to do just that ; in fact, if there was ever an industry or a commodity that should not come under the umbrella of this Act it should be this industry , because of the integr ation that has taken place over the years which has wiped out the farmers that were in that industry and has replaced them with hu~e , vertically integrated corporate structures . So th is is not in the public interest, Mr.

Chairman, and 1t's my intention to debate this issue from here to Kingdom Come in terms of what is desirable for the people of this province , for the people of this country , with respect to a marketing system for broilers or for whatever other commodi ty that we are dealin g with from time to time . There is no logic , there is no rationale, it's totally absurd to give people like Canada Packers and Champ Foods and a few other people , a monopoly , a control on the flow of poultry products interprovincially , internationally , so that they can push up their prices to the consumers of this province. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for St. George . MR. BILLIE URUSKI: Thank you , Mr. Chairman . When the Minister of Agriculture in his remarks about creating more freedoms and the like , in this very specific area that he has indicated , of the broiler marketing situation , is he prepared to allow producers to enter into the broiler field and take away some of the market position that has been gained by the 10 producers that control 50 percent of the market , to allow more producers int o the marketplace? Is he prepared to do that? 748

Tuesday, April 11, 1978 MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Emerson . MR. DRIEDGER: Mr. Chairman, since I am supposed to direct m: questions to the Minister of Agricu lture I will do so. I wonder if the Minister of Agriculture was aware that last year, prior to the election , the former Minister of Agriculture indicated at a meeting in Grunthal to the Broiler Producers that if he remained in power that he would be signing the Federal Broiler contract with them before the end of December? I just wanted to ask that as a question . I also have another question , Mr. Chairman , to the Minister of Agriculture .

I'm wondering - I personally feel that our present Minister 's concern is much more for the farmers than for the consumers, and it is my feel ing that the member opposite is much more concerned about the consumer end of it than the producer end of it. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture . MR. DOWNEY: Well ' Mr. Chairman , I have several questions and I guess I should start at the Honourable Member for Emerson .

I certainly was not aware that the last Minister of Agriculture before the last October election had, in fact , promised a group of individuals in Grunthal that if he were re-elected that he would sign the National Agreement on Broilers, and, in fact, to take a reverse position that he has today and come out with some of the comments certainly would help clarify the position that we have taken . In fact , that he is here to oppose the thing that not many months ago he was certainly in support of , and certainly has changed the position . As far as the Member for St.

George 's question , the fact do I see or am I prepared to make available some of the market for the producers wishing to enter the production of broilers, to break that particular quota that is now held by those individuals . It is a concern of mine that this type of situation was allowed to develop under the last Minister of Agriculture, that he saw this developing and certainly in the short time we that we have come into office , that this has not taken place.

This certainly took place during tue administration of the recent past, and would certainly work towards the releasing of some of that quota to individuals who I have said we hope to be able to develop a market for them .

To carry on a little further , that in suggest ing that the Natural Products Marketing Act was set up, in fact, to allow the farm producers an instrument that they could certainly form for themselves an organization wh ich they could operate under and operate by themselves , that, in fact , it would have probably worked except for the reason that the last Minister felt that instead of being a vehicle or tool for those particular individuals , those producers, but saw where it was an instrument that he could take and use as a tool of government to certa inly completely control the agricultural sector .

And in fact it did nothing more than to completely confuse the people in the area of production, these people who had formed organizations . We find ourselves in the position that we have a monopoly type of a situation that was not only set up by them , but it would almost appear in certain areas that it might have been encouraged with the intent of the last administration to set up a dairy processing plant known as Crocus Foods, that the monopoly would have not only been for the farm people but I think it would have been for the last administration of the province.

So I think that , in fact, the Natural Products Marketing Act as initiated was certainly a means in which farm people could have worked under to market their products, but in the hands of a government with a philosophy such as the recent one, it became a very wielding type method to certainly direct the agriculture people in the direction that that particular government wished them to go. And I think it is only fair that now we have the opportunity to turn the thing back to the Natural Products Marketing Act- back to an organization or

an Act that works for the producers and not for the government. I think it's just indicated that at one time in the Province of Manitoba the hog producers, operating under the umbrella of the Natural Products Marketing Act , and in fact the Hog Commission, that the producers had a choice to deliver their products to either a plant of their choice or to the Commission, and they had the freedom to certainly go either way.

The last Minister, as I've indicated, certainly saw fit to not give the producers a chance to make the decision whether in fact they wanted to go through that compulsory organization or whether they wanted to continue on a non compulsion basis, that in fact he felt that he would like to take complete control of as many commodities as he could. I would just like to say that it is the reverse direction , that we would like to certainly free-up some of the regulations and rules that have been placed on the farm people, particularly in the area of marketing . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Pembina . MR.

DON ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, I have a question for and I'd like to get a definite confirmation of opinion from the Minister of Agriculture vis-a-vis some very pertinent remarks that the Member for Lac du Bonnet has just given to us in the last few minutes .

Since the Marketing Board concept in broiler chickens has turned into a method by which some very large vertically-integrated producers and corporations - Canada Packers, Friendly Family Farms, and Chubby Chicken, I think were mentioned - and seeing as how this Marketing Board originally started out as protection for a group of smaller producers, quite a number of smaller 749

Tuesday, April11, 1978 producers, that the present Minister of Agriculture would assure this Committee, today , that in fact he will not , as Minister of Agriculture , continue along the policy development of the previous administration whereby they wou ld like to put beef under a Marketing Board and maybe invite the same kind of corporate integration into the beef industry . I want to be assured of that, Mr. Chairman. MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , that certainly does bring out another good point. I can assure the members of this Committee, and I'm certainly glad it was brought to my attention ...

In fact the last Minister, with some of the desires that he had , proposed a Marketing Board for the beef producers, and they told him explicitly to what extent they wanted to have with that type of a marketing organization . I can assure you at this time that I want to form an organization or have the beef producers form an organization in this province that will not fall into the very pitfall that the last Minister of Agriculture in the province allowed so many of the other commodity products to fall into. MR. ORCHARD: Thank you, Mr. Minister . . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for St. George . MR.

URUSKI: Thank you , Mr. Chairman . I would just like the Minister to elaborate a little bit on the question posed by the Member for Pembina as to what method he intends to use and employ in allowing or not allowing the producers in the beef industry to fall into the pitfalls that were so expressed by himself and by the Member for Pembina . Could he elaborate on his remarks- what does he intend to do? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture . MR. DOWNEY: Well, Mr.

Chairman , it will be the intent of the government to remove the beef cattle from under the control of the Natural Products Marketing Act , and if it were to be placed under a market control by government that it would have to be debated through the Legis lative Assembly . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman , we've just received an excellent lesson in dictatorship .

The last words of the Minister of Agriculture tell us that while he is condemning the previous government's activities in this field , that he is in fact going much further in terms of controlling the rights of Manitoba producers of agricultural commodities . He is telling us that even ifthe beef producers want to go into a marketing board , that he is going to legislate so that they cannot have one. Mr. Cha irman, I just can't believe my ears, that any Minister in Canada would go so far as to say that we are going to preclude the possibility , in the event that the producers might decide to do it.

It's a discriminatory suggestion , it suggests that certain commodity groups will be allowed to avail themselves of existing legislation which was put there for that purpose, but that in his mind , he is going to determine in advance that we are not going to allow certain commodity groups to use that act. If that is not the most extreme pos ition , a dictatorial position that we have heard in many decades in this Legislature, in this House, Mr. Chairman , I have yet to find something much more in its extreme. MR. DOWNEY : Yes, Mr. Chairman . In reply to the Member for Lac du Bonnet.

In the area of the removal of the beef cattle from the Natural Products Marketing Act , in fact , I did make the statement if the beef producers of the province were collectively desirous of having a marketing board for their product, that they would be able to recommend to government that it in fact go back under , or be taken back in the Natural Products Marketing Act , and certainly be debated in the Legislative Assembl y.

I think it has certainly been indicated to the people of the Province of Manitoba that these types of regulations such as the Natural Products Marketing Act in fact are very dangerous in the hands of the wrong administration , and as I pointed out , can certainly put into play a number of regulations or rules that whether they are desirous of them or not , if the government oft he day feels in fact that they want to implement them, they could have put them in even though the producers of the province had the choice of wanting to go in or not. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for St. George . MR.

URUSKI : Thank you, Mr. Chairman . We have now just heard the Minister of Agriculture indicate and go around two circles and where he stops , nobody knows . First of all he indicates on the matter of beef marketing that the provision in the Marketing Act is a very dangerous provision depending on who is in office .

He is not prepared to allow the producers of this province to decide collectively whether they wish to form a position in respect to the marketing of their product in an orderly fashion, in no way at all , and he is prepared , and he indicates that he is going to take that provision completely out of the Natural Products Marketing Act.

While on the other hand , he is prepared to say to the producers of Manitoba , even though in 1974 you voted against the provisions of having a beef checkoff , I'm going to slam it down your throat , this session , because I have brought in, and I intend to indicate that I have the support of the beef growers ' organization of this province, and 1 am a member of their organization, and I will bring that in whether you beef producers like it or not. The Minister of Agriculture has demonstrated a callous disregard and a total arrogance towards 750

Tuesday, April 11, 1978 the intelligence of all the producers, especially the beef producers of this Province of Manitoba . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, the statement that the Minister makes astounds me. He suggests, and I appreciate , Mr. Chairman , that he hasn't been here very long , and I'm sure he's not going to say those things a year or two from now. I regret that he has already done so.

He suggests that he is going to change legislation that would preclude a group of producers from using the Natural Products Marketing Act if they so wish, by whatever majority , but furthermore he suggests that it's important to do that to prevent a subsequent government so that they indeed couldn't pursue that course of act ion. Now , who is he trying to kid , Mr. Chairman?

He knows , or he should know, that whoever the government is, and whatever legislation is on the books , that it doesn't have to staythere.lfthere is a desire to change law, and we do it every day, that's the purpose of this Assembly, is to change the law from time to time and to create new ones. And for him to suggest that we must do this because this Act may fall under a bad administration some time in the future, he doesn 't know what he's talking about , Mr. Chairman . It's absolutely absurd.

How are they going to tie the hands of any future administration by any legislation that he is going to pass today , or at this session or in the next two or three sessions . Mr. Chairman, he is presuming , he is presuming that when the people of Manitoba make a decision to change the government, that he may not agree with that change , therefore he is somehow going to try and preclude whatever programs that might be promised or anticipated because of that change of government by

an act of the Legislature today . Grow up, Mr. Chairman , I say to this Minister, because that's not the way the world waggles . The laws change every year. They will continue to change in accordance with the times . People will have different desires four years from now , five years from now , ten years from now . It's not going to be the same as it is today , and the government of that day is going to have to respond to those desires , those wishes , those pressures of the community of this province . We cannot predetermine that in advance ; I couldn't do it and I'm sure , Sir, that you couldn't do it. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Emerson . MR. DRIEDGER: Mr. Chairman , I would like to direct my question to the Minister of Agriculture. Is it not true that the various commodity groups that we have in the beef industry right now, the cow-calf operators , the beef growers , and the various registered organizations are the ones that have banded together and are requesting a voluntary checkoff system at the present time? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Gladstone . MR. JAMES R. FERGUSON: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I think that the central part of the argument should be that we have already gone through an election that has quite a huge bearing on the matter under discussion and I think the former Minister of Agriculture received the word loud and clear when he lost the referendum by 77 percent to 23 percent. Is he saying if and when the government changes they certainly will have the option of bringing in any legislation that they want to -(Interjection)- That's entirely up to the Minister . And the commodity grops have requested as the Member for Emerson said.

So consequently the Minister for Agriculture is only following a promise possibly made during the election and he feels that he has a mandate and I'm quite sure that that vote signifies that he does have. MR. USKIW: A mandate to take away the freedom of people . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Dauphin. MR. USKIW: I thought we were going to have a freer Manitoba, but not according to this Minister. We are going to restrict further. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order , order please. The Honourable Member for Dauphin . MR. JIM GALBRAITH: Thank you , Mr. Chairman.

It is my understanding that this checkoff is to be voluntary. This is being directed to the present Minister of Agriculture, and it amuses me as to how this can be turned around by the members opposite and put in such terms as to say it's compulsory . These people, the commodity groups , are asking for a voluntary checkoff and I see nothing wrong with it, and anyone that doesn't want to stay within the program can easily get out. Is this not true? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I would like to answer the member opposite .

First, I believe, it was indicated that I was certainly trying to control the government several years down the road, in fact, I stated earlier in the debate this afternoon , that by removal of the beef cattle from the Natural Products Marketing Act , in fact , to put it back under the control of the Natural Products Marketing Act , that it could be debated through this Legislative Assembly . And that, Mr. Chairman, was the statement that I made and that is giving the producers of the province an opportunity to certainly become aware and have their say in legislation that takes place in Manitoba .

As it is now , the government of the day have 751

Tuesday, April11, 1978 the right by regulation to certainly implement , not at the request of the producers , but implement at their wishes. So this , Mr.

Cha irman , is the reason and the main philosophy that we have as a government that we feel that the producer should have the right to certainly help develop and work towards a type of organization which they are desirous of having . . 1 would also like to say, that in fact , we are not implementing a checkoff , we are implementmg an organization that is controlled by the producers of that organization , that they in fact will ha.ve a producer elected board and will determine their future- that the government will not have the d1rect control that they have had in all the other commodities that they have certainly put into a turmoil in the past few years and turned monopolies into the system that the last Minister has indicated.

It is not my feeling that we have all the commodity groups turned into monopoly type production units and handled by corporations- we have family farms which this government are certainly pleased to see operating a lot of these units , we look forward to more family farm units to get into the production of the commodities that are controlled under supply management.

I do not say that it wi ll be completely possible to completely free the producers from any form of supply management, but it is our desire to have the producers in this province work towards a freer type system of marketing their products , that they have the opportunity to produce , and the opportunity to grow and expand and to transfer their farm units to one another and government do not have to sit in as the great referee which they did in the past, that in fact, if they wanted to completely control who did what in the province , they had that power to do it. This, Mr.

Chairman , is the reason we are going in the direction we are going . It is because , in fact , the majority of the producers of the province of Manitoba supported this government , that they elected us and we are certainly working towards the fulfillment of some of the wishes. We are not hung-up with a dogmatic idea that we have all the answers such as the last Minister , that we are r governing- that we are governing, Mr.

Chairman , with a minority of the people of the province , the rural part of the province , supporting the types of things that created some of the problems that the last Minister has brought out here this afternoon . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for St. George . MR. URUSKI: Thank you , Mr. Speaker . We have had another lesson from the Minister of Agriculture and the Members for Gladstone and Pembina , on the issue of freedom .

I think we may as well recall and bring back , since the last election has been raised here, the matters- it's history now, matters that were raised by the government now , the official opposition then - about a free Manitoba, great freedom in Manitoba that was going to occur. Now here we have the Minister of Agriculture and the member , especially the Members for Pembina and Gladstone , indicating that if you give the producers a vote on to something they wish to do and they are going to vote on it- that's dictatorship. That is what the Member for Pembina indicated .

If you give somebody a vote- that's dictatorship-(lnterjection)- MR. CHAIRMAN: Order , gentlemen . Order . MR. URUSKI: That's the freedom they are talking about , Mr. Chairman , but then we have the Minister of Agriculture , gets up in this Committee and again says that he intends to take out the matter of producer choice as to whether or not they wish to organize in orderly marketing in the form of beef- he intends to take that out so that Legislature . Well , this matter can be debated in future days in the , what prevents , Mr.

Chairman , the Minister of Agriculture , or whoever the Minister is of the day , to before the agreement is signed or any agreement , or any marketing agreement that may be organized is signed, to bring it into the Legislature and have that matter debated without changing the legislation? What prevents the Minister of Ag riculture from doing that today without taking that matter out of the Legislature? It reminds one of the time that the producers of Manitoba were organizing the turkey marketing board of the day .

When the government of the day then was dragging its feet in the Legislature because of some fandangling with the corporate sector who were in control- Mr. Chairman , after an 85 percent overwhelming vote that the producers wanted to form a marketing board , it took, I believe , at least six months . MR. USKIW: No, two years . MR. URUSKI: Or two years , before the government of the day would approve the plan that the producers voted in favor of.

This is the same type of restriction that is being imposed on the producers of this province , because even if the producers voted and wanted to vote in favor of some orderly marketing, this Minister and this government , because he now says that it is such a dangerous provision in the Act , that he wishes to take it out of the Act because if some future administration comes in, it will be dangerous in their hands . That's the kind of freedom that that Minister of Agriculture is talking about. The Member for Dauphin talks about a voluntary checkoff . Mr. Chairman , the producers voted on that very issue in 1974 .

The fact of the matter is, Mr. Chairman , when you take off funds without the consent of the producer at the time of sale, someone better convince me that that is voluntary . There is no doubt that that producer can opt out of that plan , Mr. Chairman . But I venture to say, Mr. Chairman, what will be the end result of that producer opt ing out? I venture to say, that that 752

Tuesday, April 11, 1978 producer's name somehow will escape , and I venture to say that that producer will have a terrible time m th~ ~arketplace . He ~il! be discrin:inated ag?inst because of his -(Interjection)- because of the prov1s1ons of that proviSIOn. That IS what w1ll happen, Mr. Chairman , that's exactly what will happen-( lnterjection)- MR. CHAIRMAN: Order . Order, gentlemen . MR. URUSKI: That is the freedom that they are talking about. -(lnterjection)- MR. CHAIRMAN: Order , gentlemen . Order please .

May I remind you that we are transcribing the debates of this Committee and I just wonder how they are going to transcribe that muttering that was going into the recording system a moment ago . The Honourable Member for St. George, carry on. MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman , the Minister of Agriculture has the gall to get up in this Committee and say that members on this side are dogmatic ; that the members on this side of the House are dogmatic in their approach . Mr.

Chairman , I submit to you that this Minister of Agriculture is the most dictatorship oriented dogmatic Minister of Agriculture that this Legislature has known in the last two or three decades . MR.

CHAIRMAN : Gentlemen , in accordance with Rule 19(2) , the hour of 4:30 having arrived , I am going to interrupt the proceedings of the Comm ittee to move back into the Legislature for Private Membe rs' Hour and if there is not sufficient business in the Chamber for it to complete that hour, the Committee will meet here again, so I ask you to interrupt and we move back into the Legislature for the Private Members ' Hour . SUPPLY - DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES MR. CHAIRMAN, Mr. Abe Kovnats: I would direct the honourable members to Page 52, under Development Agencies , Resolution No. 77. Item 1.

Manitoba Development Corporation . The Honourable Member for Inkster . MR. GREEN: Mr. Chairman , the Minister has just got his information and is coming back into the House . I'll just wait until he gets settled . Mr. Chairman, yesterday the discussion on this matter was closed by a talk given by the Highways Minister who felt that he had to come to the rescue although I thought the Minister was doing a good job . The Highway Minister was disturbed lest any Conservative be persuaded by logic and fact and said so, Mr. Chairman .

He was of the opinion that if he did not come to the rescue , then there would be a problem with regard to members on his side who might , when faced with the facts, have some understanding of what the Manitoba Development Corporation was, have some understanding of what public investment means , not only to the economy of Canada but to the economy of the Province of Manitoba in particular , and gave , Mr. Chairman , the House to understand that I had not properly put before it the true facts or a true position , vis-a-vis the necessity of public investment. In order, Mr.

Chairman , to sustain his position and in order to demonstrate how weak it was, the Minister of Highways said that ,

(1) I told the House that if the Support Program for Saunders was continued, it would wipe out a $40 million Saunders ' debt. Now even the Minister responsible for the Development Corporation shook his head in dismay when the Minister of Highways made that remark because no such statement was made. But the Minister of Highways, because he was unable to defeat the propositions that were advanced and was in a desperate condition to defeat something , invented the argument that he proposed to then shoot down . That one was rather irrelevant, Mr. Chairman .

The next position that he put forward is a little more of concern to me because he now suggests that the manner in which the Development Corporation was handled under the New Democratic Party administration, was responsible for a far greater degree of public losses than that for which the Conservative administration was responsible and he blamed that on our ideology. Well, Mr. Chairman, the arguments have passed back and forth on numerous occasions, and it's not going to be of great value to repeat them here this afternoon , except with respect to one point.

The Minister of Highways said that the Churchill Forest Industries Inquiry was set up as a political instrument with which to whip the Conservative administrat ion. Now the truth of the matter is- and everybody said so at the time, Mr.

Chairman , including the Conservative Party- the truth of the matter is that when Churchill Forest Industries was put into receivership, the Conservative Party immediately cried , "Foul" ; said that this was not a valid receivership , it was an attempt to nationalize the industry and the reason for the inquiry was not to raise political arguments about the Conservative Party, the reason for the inquiry was to see whether th is take-over by receivership had anything to do with an ideological take-over or whether it had to do with something that the people of the province had to do. And as a matter of fact, Mr.

Chairman, the Conservative Party lawyer at the inquiry continued to ask questions , not suggesting that we had done something wrong in continuing to advance moneys which is now the line of the Minister of Highways , but suggesting that we had no 753

Tuesday, April 11, 1978 right to put in a receiver . that this was a political move an.d th~t it was desi~ned to dispossess Messrs . Kasser and others of the ir proper ty. It was only after the mqu1ry had contmued tor some months that it became apparent that this was not the nature of the argument and the Conservatives had to do a 180 degree turnaround . At that point , instead of saying that we had natio nalized an industry because we were trying to take it under public owne rship , they said that we had been paying out too much money all along . Well , Mr.

Chairman , the only reason I bring that out is because the Conservatives h~ve had a peculiar attitude toward judicial inquiries . The judicial inquiry found that at no time, up unt1l the very last few months , was there any reason to have the government step in , that in not stepping in we were following the advice of Arthur D.

Little ; we were following the advice of our solicitors ; we were following the advice of Stothert Engineering , that not a single person including the late Walter Newman- who should be a god to the Conservatives , a passed-away person but nevertheless- not a single person suggested that we move earlier than what we moved . And the Conservative Party 's first position- talk about two speeches- was that we moved too fast and when the facts came out, they started to say we moved too slow . And the member said , "We advanced $100 millo ion ." Well , it's true , Mr.

Chairman , but the fact is that at no time until we did move in cou ld we have moved in without subjecting the people of the Province of Manitoba to tremendous la w suits , damages and an incomplete project. The Member for Lakeside in a statement which makes him appear to have less business acumen than even I thought, said that when we gave the $92 million to Kasser, and he also got the complex and also got X dollars , what I fai l to appreciate is that he would have to pay back the $92 million . Now , Mr.

Chairman , how the Minister of Highways could make that remark , that somebody who loans money has to pay it back , is someth ing which he should know better on. That there are many people who borrow money and cannot pay back . And with regard to the complex, if it was paid back , it would be paid back out of profits ; that's the only way it would be paid back . And if it's to be paid back out of profits then those profits rightfu lly belong to the people who put up the money in the first place , and therefore he has paid back nothing . Nothing has been paid back; it was heads he wins , tails we lose .

If it was good , he paid us back with our own money ; if it failed , we lost everything and he walked away with X dollars. And that , Mr. Chairman , fortunately- you know , I don 't have to rely on hindsig ht- fortunately , this is exactly what I said in 1967 when I spoke on this project , that's three years before we came into government , and we talked about whether this is a good deal or whether this is a bad deal. And I want to read into the record what I said at that time , Mr. Chairman .

"Those who believe that private enterprise should develop the resources of a province or should be responsible for the economic growth of a country ," - that's what we're talking about today , interestingly enough - "say that where there is a group of people who have the acumen and the imagination and the foresight to see that by undertaking a particular venture they can have a profit accrued to themselves , then if they undertake it and risk the cap ital and use their imagination , they should be entitled to the profits ." But there is no economic theorist who said that these people should be subsidized from the point of view of creating that development, and then that they should keep the profit.

So I can't accept that fact , the fact that the question of whether it is a good deal or a bad deal is an answer to this question , Mr. Speaker , I suggest. And this party has all along suggested that if private enterprise has to be subsidized to the extent that it is not really risking the capital for the purpose of investing in the venture , then it should not be subsidized to do so. If it's necessa ry for this province to have its forestry , developed , if we see that it's a good thing , if we are to put up the money then I say we should reap the benefits .

If the people of Manitoba collect ively make the investment , then the people of Manitoba collectively should accept the returns , and in th is respect I am not a doctrinaire socialist. If it will make my honourable friends opposite happie r, I am a greedy, money-grubbing capitalist. That should make you happy . I want to make the invest ment and I want to get the profits , and that 's what I say that this province should have done with regard to th is parti cular deal. Now I want to indicate , Mr.

Speaker , that where ver private enterprise doesn 't have the initiative to go into something, and if it's considered that it is necessary to have this type of development for the good of the people of the Province of Manitoba , I say that it should be done publicly. It can't be a good deal , it just precludes it from being a good deal if private enterprise has to be subsidized to do it. And I indicated , Mr. Chairman , that if it was a good deal beca use it was a good forestry complex , then we were the ones who should get the benefi t of it. And if it was a bad deal , then we were going to suffer by it, and Mr.

Chairman , it has turn ed out very much in that way. However , before we just leave that point as to whether it is do ne differently by Conservatives , and I see that there are some Conservatives in their seats, then let them swallow the fact that a Conservative government in British Columb ia put $20 millio n into an automob ile factory, which was lost . That a Conservative government in Nova Scotia , led by the Leader of the Conservative Party up until a short while ago , put $100 million into a heavy water plant and it was lost.

That a Conservative government in the prov ince of New Brunswick put well over a mill ion dollars into a pleasure cruise boat - Nova Scotia , Nova Scotia , a Conservat ive government , it was Smith that did it - (Interjection)- Pardon me. I t was Conservative when they built the Bluenose . MR. BANMAN: There 's another one in Florida right now . MR. GREEN: Oh , you 're talking about that new one , I'm talking about the Conservative cruise ship. 754

Tuesday, April11, 1978 There is a Conservative cruise ship and there is a Liberal cruise ship -(Int erjection)- Mi Ken Azoy, Mi Ken Azoy, that's right- and the Liberal cruise ship cost much more money and they lost money on that. But the Conservative cruise ship, the Bluenose, loses much more than $300,000 operational expenses per year . It will not be sold by the government of Nova Scotia for $250,000, it will not be sold by the government of Nova Scotia for any price.

And the Minister is unfair when he regards that particular project as a Manitoba Development Corporation project because he knows, because he questioned about it in Committee two years ago, that last year - all right, last year it was the questioning- when we indicated that the Development Corporation had written off that project, that it was taken over by the Department of Tourism, that it is not considered a business venture, that it was not considered as having commercial value .

And I agree with the Minister that if you're selling something for commercial value and it loses $300,000 a year then you can't talk about what it costs to replace it - but what would you then sell the Nonsuch for, for commercial value? You wouldn't get $200 for it. It would cost more to take it apart and take it out of the Winnipeg Centennial Hall than you could get for it; you'd have to pay people to do it.

So the Minister knows that the Lord Selkirk was not an MDC Development enterprise, that at the time that he took over the MDC, although it was still on the books, the papers as between the two departments were all ready and merely had to be transferred by Management Committee, and that it was to be operated by the Department of Tourism as a tourist development boat, Mr. Chairman.

And some day, somebody in Manitoba is going to say: Wouldn't it be terrific if we could make use of Manitoba's ocean-like lakes to attract tourists from midwestern United States where they don't know what a lake is, that they don't have a lake that they can't see across, and in many cases that they can't wade across , that here is a tourist attraction that will bring Americans to Canada that will rival ... Mr. Chairman , do much better than the Convention Centre. And I put it to the Minister - he's in charge of Tourism - what commercial value has the Convention Centre if you were selling it as a business?

It loses $600,000 a year, and I think I'm being modest. Well, it has been losing $600,000 a year, and that's without including 1 percent of interest on the invested capital.

Do you know that the Convention Centre loses more money than Flyer Industries loses? never calculated The Convention Centre cost $25 million to build ; they've interest on its capital to add for five years which would be $10 million; they 've never added the operational expenses which are paid by the province and the city of Winnipeg; and all of the free enterprisers on City Council talk about this great institution which by economic standards loses in addition to $3 million a year.

Now, would the Minister, on the basis of that type of arithmetic and on the basis of that reasoning sold the Convention Centre for $250,000 because its commercial value in terms of an operating business would not be that. One would have to pay somebody $30 million a year to get the interest of the $3 million a year that is being lost to continue to operate the Convention Centre . But, Mr. Chairman , it is only looked at in these obscure myopic terms when it is a New Domocratic Government that is doing it. But what is the relevant question?

You know, the arguments of Minister of Highways are not very crucial to this discussion. What is crucial to this discussion is that Manitoba and every other province in Canada requires public investment and public involvement, that that is not a socialist doctrine, that that is a doctrine that has been adopted by every capitalist government in Canada and in every province in Canada, including- and that it has been adopted , Mr.

Chairman, because of the failure of capitalism and private enterprise- the acknowledged failure, and as a result of this acknowledged failure the Federal Government contributes $100 million a year in addition to infrastructure and other things to direct social assistance to private enterprise , and governments in Canada throughout this country contribute millions of dollars every year to give social assistance to private enterprise. The Minister made noises and his colleagues made noises. The Member for Morris, the Minister without Portfolio made noises, the Member for St.

James made noises- was that no longer will this be done . We made mistakes with the MDF - we shouldn't have set it up, we shouldn't have been subsidizing failing industries, and it won't happen again, The Minister of Tourism said, "When those things happened I was in High School. Now I'm here and it won't happen ." First of all, Mr. Chairman, I don't believe them . Well, it's started to happen. CCIL was, Mr. Chairman, and I'm not objecting to it. I say that that kind of thing sometimes has to be done. I agree.

But the CCIL is the giving of money to industries in the province because one wants to give them the money rather than see them fold up. Yesterday I gave the honourable member a list of 300 private enterprise companies in the Province of Manitoba that owe their existence in whole or in part to the fact that the public was willing to make a financial investment. The Minister says that they're not going to do it any more, that they're not going to have the mechanism. I ask him, "What will be the mechanism? Tell me." And I make the same plea that I made yesterday.

I beg the Minister to tell me that it will not be what the Attorney General said during the election campaign, because the Attorney-General during the election campaign said that my covenant and the covenant of all the people who are represented by members of this Chamber is going to be given to banks, to give money to private industry when the bank feels insecure, so that the bank will always come out ahead and the only risk will be taken by the people of the province . The businessman can lose, the bank can't lose, and the people of the province can. That's what the Attorney-General says.

I beg the Minister to tell me that that will not be his mechanism . I also ask the Minister to tell me that the mechanism will not be the mechanism offered by the Member for River Heights which has now been adopted in Ottawa by giving lzzy Asper millions of dollars of your money and mine on the basis that Asper is a financial genius and will go out and invest 755

Tuesday, April11, 1978 it and I will make money on it. I know that there are different methods that can be used to invest my dollar , and I am asking the Minister to ssure me that that is not the mechanism it will use. And if that is not , Mr.

Chairman, then I want to know what is wrong with what were doing in the last four years , which did not cost the province money , which provided an investment opportunity either of an equity nature or of another nature, which did do it with regard to McCain Foods and several other programs, some of which were not accepted but , where the existence of the fund made the thing possible, and I will give the honourable member the names if he wants them .

There was a corporation agreement to invest in a peat moss operation which was approved , and which turned around at the last moment but facilitated the operation , and in a trucking business. So don 't say there was no business done . And in the CCIL with regard to $15 million if it was guaranteed by the parent organization, so don't say that the corporation did not play a significant role in development.

What we didn't do is do what has been the pattern of investment under the Conservative Administration , which we carried forward for four years after we were in office , and I agree that that was a mistake - we didn 't merely be the patsy for all of the problems which were insoluble in the private sector and which the public sector was expected to solve . Mr.

Chairman , the Minister 's problem has not been failure , it has been success , that by the time he became the Minister in charge of the corporation the problems had been substantially ironed out and it was moving on a course of sane, good , commercial development in the Province of Manitoba . When it became apparent to him that he was going to be saddled with public successes he could not live with that embarrassment.

The Honourable Minister could not live with the embarrassment of a public success , and therefore he wanted to get rid of them as quickly as possible . -(lnterjection) Well , the Member for Lakeside says no. Cybershare was a miserable failure under your private enterprise Task Force related people . It went bust , was taken over by the public , and within a few years it started to make a profit. And Mr.

Chairman , Morden Fine Foods could make a profit if it was only given , and the Minister ultimately will give it to them- either he will give it to some private firm , and then give them a far fair shake of public business- because we had a hint of it, Mr. Chairman . How did a statement get to the paper from the purchaser of Cybershare that , don 't worry , the government will not compete with you in the field of seeking private accounts , and you now have certain public accounts . How did it get out that that man said that the Minister told him so and then came back and said , "No, the Minister didn't say that.

" Well , he had a very good reason for saying that the Minister didn 't say it, because he's still depending on the fact that he will not be competed with by the Manitoba Computer Data Service . And I warrent that he will not , because I, Mr. Chairman , believe that he has reason to think that he will not be competed with . I ask the Minister is it not a fact that in the purchasing bureau there are many brand names given , and that sometimes -(Interjection)- Well , you 're cleaning that up, Mr. Chairman.

The fact is that not only is Morden Fine Foods , the publicly -operated company which has a significant role in Morden, not only is it not given a fair, given any preference- and I tell you that I would not hesitate to give it a preference , and we wanted to give it a preference- but it is discriminated against. It :,s discriminated against , Mr. Chairman , because I tell the honourable member that the private enterprisers deal much more sanely with their related companies than we do. And the Safeway Company buys merchandise not where it can get it cheaper ; it buys it from its wholesale.

And Loblaws buys merchandise from its wholesale, and I.G.A. provides its stores and has an agreement that they will not buy elsewhere , and the one that is left without a relationship where it has an in to these operations is the public company . So what we said , Mr. Chairman , is that where we are the operators , where we are the operators, and we know that the product is good and comparable quality-wise , and the price is comparable, we are going to buy our own product. And, Mr. Chairman , the Conservative Party will do the same thing . I assure you , Mr.

Chairman, that the Conservatives in the Province of Alberta will give a local industry a preference , and that the Province of Quebec, which was run by a Liberal government and a Union Nationale government , will not buy buses from Flyer , they will only buy buses that are built in Quebec by the local company. Where we start turning that around is when it's a public company . Suddenly we must discriminate , not only we must not discriminate for them , we must discriminate against them to show how pure we are. Mr.

Chairman , Morden Fine Foods could have a future in this province , profitable , viable , if it was only treated in the same way as private enterprise treats its related companies . It needs nothing more . It need be given no privilege . It needs to be treated with the same ground rules as private enterprise treats its related companies . And if he did that , Mr.

Chairman , he would have a portfolio which consists of Tantulum Mines , which is operating on its cash flow- and if you look at what they take off their profit ledger with regard to depletions and other things you will see that they are making a profit and doing very well , and the Province of Manitoba is doing ver well by Tantalum . Cybershare , which was making a profity Dormond Industries , which was making a profit ; Western Flyer Coach Industries , which made a profit three years running but which there is a problem with - and I acknowledge tha .

But the interesting thing about Flyer is that the consultant's report predicted a $3 million loss ending fiscal1977 , and what the Minister has not yet reported , officially , but what he and I know , is that Flyer Industries made a profit in 1977- a profit in 1977. Clare Publishing , Mr. Chairman , is a problem. No doubt that it's a problem, but we did the only thing that we could do with it, and royalties will be coming in from that program for years to come . He 756

.. Tuesday, April11, 1978 says - I don't know what he's signalling to me - oh, we're keeping our fingers crossed. Mr. Chairman, 1 appreciate that from the Minister- that we are hoping that the royalties will come in. And I will now say let us assume that they do not come in, but I think that Rand McNally are not stupid, that they have some knowledge of what they can market , and they have made a considerable investment in this produce , but , Mr. Chairman, that company has developed a series of modules, I think it is approximately 30 books .

The cost to the Province of Manitoba at this stage is in the neighborhood of $2 million . I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that if you will look at the educational research on which we have spent $2 million that does not show up as a loss anywhere- and let the Minister correct me if I'm wrong- that if you will look at the educational research programs you will not find any on which we have spent $2 million , which has been considered money well spent, which can compare in ingenuity , in development , to what has been developed by Clare Publishing with regard to mathematical moduling . And , Mr.

Chairman, each of those modules show that this particular educational program was developed by Clare Publishing in the Province of Manitoba through the Manitoba Development Corporation, and I'm hoping that the royalties will pay for it. But if they don't, Mr. Chairman , it does not mean that it wasn't a significant program to go into. Well , Mr. Chairman, I'll conclude my remarks.

I want the Minister to tell me what is going to replace what has been a significant contribution by the public to over 300 businesses most of which are presently operating, employing people , and creat ing wealth in the Province of Manitoba? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister . MR. BANMAN: Well, Mr. Chairman , I think I briefly touched on it yesterday , and just to sort of reiterate my remarks that I made yesterday , as I mentioned yesterday, that we are right now in the process of examining the role of the MDC . I can't tell the Min ister that there are any definite policy patterns that will be followed .

The former Minister will appreciate that there was a staff of something like 18 to 20 people that are involved. The member also knows that in the last little while, even though there was a substantial loan like McCain's made, the activity in the last three years as far as new loans, I'm talking about new loans, new loan activity has been very minimal. Now, whether it should be sized and retained , whether we shut down the operation, that is a policy determination that will be made over the next period of time.

So I'm not getting up here and saying this is exactly what is happening with the company because I think that it will require some further studying on my part and on my colleagues to determine exactly which direction it will go. I should also point out that, in the meantime , the Federal Business Development Bank which has entered the field very aggressively,- and the Mmember knows the Federal Government has adopted a pretty aggressive policy with regard to that bank - is definitely picking up some of the- if you want to call it slack- that the Manitoba Development Corporation was assigned to do.

Also , we have had the advent of several other lending institutions such as RoyNat which is dealing with much higher risk loans than were available 3, 4, 5 years ago. So the direction has changed . So in assessing the impact of these different agencies , as well as the impact and experience of MDC over the last number of years, these things will all have to be taken into consideration in the formulation of the policy as far as the direction we go. So I'm not here to give a definite yes or no to any particular statements .

I know the member opposite will appreciate that having been here five and one-half months there 's only so much that you can do and so much you can absorb and given that, I think that we will try to move as responsibly as we can with regard to this matter . MR. GREEN: Yes, well , Mr. Chairman , maybe we're coming closetothewind-upofthequestioning . May I then take from the Minister's answers, and then I want to know if I'm right or wrong, what I derive from his answer is that it is not the policy , the present policy , of the Conservative administration to wind-up the Manitoba Development Corporation .

That's step No. 1. - that it is not the policy to wind it up. Secondly , that the present Conservative administration is reviewing what the role will be of the Manitoba Development Corporation . Thirdly , Mr. Chairman, that the Progressive Conservative administration realizes that there is a need for public investment in the economy of the Province of Manitoba in order to maintain a sufficient level of industrial and economic progress . And , fourthly, Mr.

Chairman , the Minister will not commit this government- his government- to do what was suggested by the Attorney-General , namely that the Manitoba Government will be the patsy for every problem that exists in the economic field by becoming the guarantor of loans made by private enterprise from the banks on that portion of the loan which the banks feel unsecure with. Am I right in making that assessment from my honourable friend's remarks? MR. BANMAN: Mr.

Chairman , first of all, let me say that we have asked the Manitoba Development Corporation , while we are reviewing the role and seeing what direction we're taking, to put a moratorium on any new loans as far as new loan activity is concerned, which they have complied with . Out of the loan portfolio that they were negotiating there were, I understand , two loans which have been turned over to FBDB, to the Federal Business Development Bank. That is where we are right now. With regard to a few of the other specific matters , the member mentions the realization for a need 757

Tuesday, April 11, 1978 of public investment and that's part of our review.! think that with the advent- and again I come back to the FBDB advent , that's public investment- but one of the things that I have always said is that I do not want to duplicate a service that is already available to the people of Manitoba, whether it be through the federal system or the provincial system. So right now I am not going to commit myself to any specific answers because I'm going to be reviewing the whole thing . MR. GREEN: Mr. Chairman , I don 't know whether I'm asking for specific answers .

I'm asking him whether I can take his answers and translate them in my mind as follows : - and if I'm wrong, I want to know -that it is not the present policy , not the present policy , of the Conservative administration to d~continue the Manitoba Development Corporation role . Is that your present policy , to discontinue lt. MR. BANMAN: Our present policy , Mr. Chairman , is to place a moratorium on loan activity and that's the policy right now . We're not loaning any money right now . MR. GREEN: Well , I'm go ing to have to pin the Min ister down .

Does the Minister exclude a future role for the Manitoba Development Corporation or is that under review? MR. BANMAN: Yes, Mr. Chairman , that's under review . MR. GREEN: So the Minister then does not exclude a future role for the Manitoba Development Corporation. It is possible , is that correct? I'm putting on the record that the Minister said , "Yes, it's possible. " The Minister recognizes a need for public investment to maintain economic activity in the Province of Manitoba and says that , in part , that is now being supplied by the Federal Development Bank .

Does he object to the philosophy of the Federal Development Bank in providing these funds? MR. BANMAN: Mr. Chairman , as I mentioned before with regard to the Federal Business Development Bank , the Federal Government has undertaken that particular policy . If they are going to be providing loans to enterprises on a higher risk basis than some of the other people would , that 's a matter for the federal people to decide . But let me tell you that given that particular advent of the Federal Government into this , the need for the MDC is questionable and that's part of the review. MR. GREEN: Mr.

Chairman , my honourable friend has not answered my question . Do you object to what the Federal Development Bank is doing in assisting private enterprise , through public funds , in the Province of Manitoba? MR. BANMAN: Well , Mr. Chairman , I'll reserve my decision on that because maybe that can be handled through other agencies also . MR. GREEN: If the Minister is reserving his decision , and he is apparently reserving his decision on that , well , let us get more specific. Has the Minister objected to the Federal Development Bank investing public money in private enterprises in the Province of Manitoba?

Has he registered any objection with the Federal Government? MR. BANMAN: No. MR. GREEN: Now, Mr. Chairman , then let's deal with the last question.

Will the Minister not tell this House- and this is the last question and I really am urging the Minister for an answer and I'm just praying to God , if I may adopt the practice of the Lieutenant-Governor , with perhaps more success , that he will answer that he is not going to do it- is it one of the considerations of this Minister that the Province of Manitoba is going to guarantee the banks for that portion of loans requested by private businessmen that the bank feels insecure in taking and therefore needs the guarantee of the Government of Manitoba?

Is he telling me that my covenant and the covenant of all of the people of the province may be used to that effect , or is he telling me that it won 't be? Can he now tell me that it won 't be? MR. BANMAN: Mr. Chairman , I can neither confirm nor deny that. MR. GREEN: So then you are telling me that you cannot deny that one of the features of the Conservative government , which they may do , which they may do and which you do not exclude as a possibility , is that we in Manitoba instead of investing on the thesis that we have been in the past, may be asked to guarantee banks to lend money to private enterpr ise.

Where the banks don 't feel secure the government will guarantee that they will be secure for that part of the loan that they don't feel secure about. What you're saying is that that is something that you may do. Well , I'm asking the Minister to please tell me that that is excluded and if he will not tell me that is excluded , then may I draw the assumption , which he is certainly leaving this House with , that that is a possible direction of the Conservative government. MR. BANMAN : Well , Mr. Chairman , the member can assume what he would like but let me tell you 758

... Tuesday, April11, 1978 this, that there are many avenues that we are exploring . There are a number of provinces and he mentioned one, the Federal Government getting involved in the venture capital thing. There's Ontario looking at a system; Quebec is look ing at a system right now which I haven't been able to sit down and look at properly , and what I am telling him is that we are going to be formulating policies over the next while and once we have formulated that- and I'm not going to stand up here and say I'm precluding myself from looking at any different options on them.

That's what I'm telling the member right now. MR. GREEN: Well then is the Minister telling me that one of the options that he is now looking at includes the option that the public of Manitoba are going to be asked to guarantee the banks forth at portion of the loan that is requested by a private individual or a private enterprise firm, which the banks feel they will not advance on the security that is there because they feel it is not secure? Is that one of the options that you are looking at? MR.BANMAN: Mr. Chairman, I have not looked at that option but I reserve the right to look at it. MR.

GREEN: What you are telling me is that to this point you have not looked at that option . May I, on behalf of some citizens in the Province of Manitoba, on behalf of some citizens- and I think that I have no difficulty in speaking for my party- that 40 percent of the people do not want you to exercise that option or look at it.

I suggest to you that of the other 49 percent, 45 percent would tell you not to look at that option and that the entire Liberal Party will tell you not to look at that option and that every Conservative that I have spoken to says, "Don't look at that option ." So I ask the Minister, and I believe that he would do himself some good by getting up .. . Well,let me ask him then, does it sound reasonable to do that?

May I ask the Minister who has some knowledge of business and has shown at least some ability to look at balance sheets which I cannot say for his previous leader, that at least he made some sense out of the balance sheets that were presented to him at the Economic Development Committee . Does that option make sense to you at this point? MR. BANMAN: Mr. Chairman, I am going to say that I have not had an opportunity to look at that particular thing . I will be looking at it. I appreciate the comments of the Member for Inkster and his feelings with regard to that particular way of pursuing the loaning applications.

I will be looking at it and I might arrive at the same conclusion the gentlemen opposite have. MR. GREEN: Mr. Chairman, I was almost ready to close this out on the basis that the member said that he is hadn't looked at it. Now he scares the death out of me by saying that he will look at it. I ask the Minister, in all seriousness, has he not thought about that suggestion? It's been mentioned several times in this House. As a man of reasonable intelligence , has he not formed any opinion? (Interjection)- That's right. I cann

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	31-2-18a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	31st 2nd hansardpdf 18a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	068c81cbcd638127c39c83c8e6cf4d5f29b9f9fb

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