Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 40B (31st Legislature, 2nd Session)

31-2-40b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, May 11, 1978 Time: 8:00 p.m. SUPPLY - MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS MR. CHAIRMAN: Gentlemen , come to order please . We're on Municipal Assessments, Item 4., on Page 61 . 4.(a)Salaries- the Member for St. George . MR. URUSKI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman . At the 4:30 Private Members' Hour, we were just getting into the area of assessment , and the Minister had indicated that there is no change in the level of staffing irrespective of continuing falling back of upping the re-assessment program in the province .

He indicated though, that he was doing some work within the department in consultation or liaison with the City of Winnipeg and I believe , the urban municipalities he was mentioning . I wonder if the Minister could elaborate on what direction he is taking in this area; I would like to question him a bit and find out which way he is moving and what his intentions are in terms of examining the Assessment Act and structure .

There is no doubt that there has been dissatisfaction expressed on both sides of the House and especially by members of his group when they were in opposition that there should be some drast ic course of action taken in the assessment field , and I am hopeful that the Minister is going to embark on some moves , but I certainly would like to have some indication as to the general direction that the Min ister is moving . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Municipal Affairs. MR. MERCIER: Mr.

Chairman , at this particular point in time , we are the branch over the last several years has been , in tueir reassessment program , gather ing and putting on record base data which could be readily upgraded to whatever changes might be put into the system without having to do an actual on-site check for future purposes. That has been going on , if I recall correctly, for the last number of years so that base data is in the process of being upgraded . But I'm certainly interested in the new approach and the areas that the Minister speaks about in terms of the changes to the Assessment Act.

We all realize that from time to time , whether it was our administration or your administration, we have done some patchwork in terms of the exemptions in the assessment field.

While we allowed exemptions in one area, we created a number of difficulties in another area resulting in delegations and complaints and other people saying , "Well , if you can do it for so-and-so group , why don'tyou do it for me?" So there certainly is ample information on record with respect to the dissatisfaction in terms of being able to, I think , understand the whole system by much ofthe general public to be able to appreciate what it involves and I'm hoping that the Minister might- and I might suggest to him -I don't know what type of in-depth study that he is looking at, maybe he can give us some more of his thinking in this light.

MR. MERCIER: No, I can't, Mr. Chairman . Really , we have just arrived at the point where the problem has been recognized and we're just embarking on the review and we don't have sufficient / data gathered in order to make any decisions at this particular point or in order for me to make any prognosis , if you wish , as to where we are and in which direction we intend to go. MR. URUSKI: Could the Minister indicate as to what groups he envisages being involved in this over-view in terms of looking at the entire assessment field? MR.

MERCIER: At this particular time , I see only in-house people being involved with perhaps some co-operation from City of Winnipeg assessment people. MR. URUSKI: You're really talking about initially a technical group from within both departments to examine the problem areas that they have been faced with over the last number of years and then look at the whole area so that's where you are really beginning . MR. MERCIER: That's right. MR. URUSKI: I would hope , Mr.

Chairman , that the Minister certainly would take cognizance of the speeches that have been made by his members , by his rural members, over the last number of years, and move as expeditiously as possible in the areas that they had recommended, without my even citing the areas to him . I think all he has to do is speak to some of his colleagues from rural areas who -(Interjection)- Oh , likewise . I think my former colleague , former Minister of Municipal Affairs, faced the same comments , and he may have had a tough hide and shrugged some of our comments off .

I'm hoping that the present Minister of Municipal Affairs will certainly move in this direction to at least indicate to the public that he is aware of many of the problems that have been raised, and that they intend to deal with the area in assessment , to re-evaluate it and see what areas can be overhauled or whether the entire system needs overhauling , whether the exemption systems should 2059

Thursday, May 11, 1978 continue as they are, or what innovations could be brought into the assessment field . Has the Minister given any thought to poss ibly setting up a short-term commission, rather than having the department deal with it as a department, whether he might want to put in or set up a commission of primarily , people who have had great experience in the municipal field, who have some knowledge of the assessment process, and some technical people that are involved in the assessment field to deal with this area. MR.

MERCIER: That's certainly one possibility, and maybe a format that we might consider when we have something concrete to work with as a result of our review, but the whole matter has drifted for so long that something has to be done . I certainly would be open to any suggestions from the member, or any other member here, as to how they would see a proper review of it being accomplished. MR.

URUSKI: The Minister, then, is pretty well moving along the lines that the Task Force has recommended in terms of the assessment area in a very nebulous way, and in a very indirect way, and the Minister himself is - well, on Page 121 of the Task Force Report , it makes the same vague statements as the Minister has been making to this Committee, that a need to review the basis for assessment, including review of exemptions, and the possibility of computer-assisted assessment, which I think has been known to the branch all along, to enhance effectiveness and efficiency.

The Task Force recommends that a comprehensive review of these areas would benefit both local government and the Provincial Government , particularly since local government pays the majority of assessment costs. It is further recommended that a longer range project of updating assessments by 1982 be established with specific annual objectives for each assessment office. In light of those comments, Mr.

Chairman , and in light of the restraint program on staff and the like, I wonder how the Minister himself and the department intend to accomplish some of the recommendations that have been set out by the Task Force or even attempting to not meet because I don't think it's possible because it hasn't been possible over the last 15 or 20 years to maintain the legislative mandate of doing the assessments on time but of at least keeping on par and not falling behind the assessment process, whether it is possible for the Minister to indicate to this committee that the assessment process will not fall even further behind than it already is without any increa~e in the Assessment Branch .

MR. MERCIER: Well , we had, in the department, decided to embark on this review of assessment prior to the Task Force Report having been made. Very early in my term as Minister it was indicated to be a serious problem . We intend to embark on this in-house review .

I would think that we will have some sort of report by the fall of this year and we'll have to make a decision as to the manner in which that is going to be followed through , whether there will be a commission, whether there will be public hearings, what sort of format will be followed, but it has to be done fairly expeditiously and it's a serious enough problem that I would think that if additional moneys are requ ired in order to accomplish a commission or whatever body is required to complete the review and to prepare any changes in legislation that might be necessary that we can do that by this time nextyear.l would hope that we will certainly endeavour to be in a position not to allow the assessments to fall further behind .

We simply can't stand that. MR. URUSKI: Well, is the Minister then indicating that even without any staff increase at this time , he will be able to maintain the same ratio of assessments as has been at least in the last number of years . I know we did fall behind and then we had a fairly sizeable increase in the Assessment Branch over the last year or two but this year there has been just no inc rease whatsoever. MR. MERCIER: Mr.

Chairman, I understand that although th e complement of the assessors was increased during the past few years , I think the member will reco gnize that they are at that early stage of employment in the Assessment Branch , are really tra inees and it requires a good deal of experience to be able to carry out their tasks sufficiently and probably by now, after a few years , hopefully their efficiency and productivity will improve sufficiently that we will not fall any further behind than we were allowed to in the past eight years. MR. URUSKI: Mr.

Chairman, all I will say now is that I will believe it when I see it and I look forward to the recommendations that the Minister has and will make and I will refrain from making any further comments now. MR. MERCIER: I appreciate that comment. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Selkirk. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Chairman, I would also wish to draw the Minister's attention to the worthy presentations that were made in the past few years by members of his party in the Legislature during Municipal Affairs Estimate review in regard to assessment.

I recall very vividly the contribution by the present Speaker of the Legislature, and I believe also other members of the now government contributed from time to time on the issue of assessment. You have gained your mandate, Mr. Minister , you are now government and I must say to you that I expect that you will carry out the 2060

Thursday, May 11, 1978 representations that were made by yourself and your members while you were in opposition . So I would ask you, Mr. Minister , if you have carefully read the positions taken by your members in the last three or four years and whether or not it is your intention to proceed along the lines as were advanced during that period of time because , as I say, you now have the mandate; you have the ball in your court. Let me say that the Member for St.

George and myself certainly received many gems of wisdom from your members and I suppose your members would say that we didn't accept those gems of wisdom. You are now in government and specifically I would draw your attention to the position which was repeated again and again that assessment in Manitoba should be based upon the productive value of the land , not on sales value . The constant criticism that was launched while we were in government , that we were failing in this respect , and I am asking you therefore, Mr.

Minister, whether you intend to undertake some major changes in this regard in view of the, as I indicated, the worthy contributions made by your colleagues in previous years? MR. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman , I haven 't had an opportunity to even read the pearls of wisdom that were offered in debate by my fellow colleagues but if it is reassuring to the Member for Selkirk, I am sure that they will not allow me to proceed without taking seriously and fully into consideration their comments and their proposals as they relate to assessment.

I am sure that they will be taken into consideration and now that we have the mandate , as you say, to carry out this review, I can assure you that it will be done. MR. PAWLEY: I would just mention to the Minister that it wasn't a review that your colleagues were requesting; they were asking for more specific effort in respect to some changes in assessment practice in the province . MR. MERCIER: I am sure that they will bring those to my attention . MR. PAWLEY: Well, I am awaiting their contribution during this debate .

Could I ask the Minister , in respect to the review that he made reference to , an in-house review, whether or not that review includes a reference to the existing situation pertaining to the mining companies in northern Manitoba and the fact that they are not assessed in the same manner as other ratepayers are assessed? Their agreements usually relate to some form of partial payment of taxes based upon various formulas , i.e. Flin Flon, Lynn Lake, etc. Are you reviewing the mining company assessments? MR. MERCIER: I believe , Mr. Chairman , that that is a separate matter than assessment.

I believe they are agreements as such and not directly related to assessment itself. MR. PAWLEY: Could I suggest that the Minister look to Ontario and the initiative taken by the Ontario government. I really do believe, if I can say so, that we would have, if we had continued in office , taken some initiative along these lines to bring mining companies into the same area of assessment as other ratepayers in the province, in the same way that Ontario, Saskatchewan - I believe all provinces, except for Manitoba- have. I am wondering whether the Minister is seriously considering this area at the present time? MR.

MERCIER: That matter will be considered in the review . MR. PAWLEY: Also, I would ask the Minister whether or not in his review he is weighing the inclusion of personal property as an area of assessment , in his review, fixed equipment and machinery in industrial plants and areas of that nature where now assessment is based solely upon the real property , the land and on the building - whether or not the personal property included within those industrial enterprises will be part of his review? I would refer the Minister particularly, and certainly Mr.

McNairnay is aware of it, to the Richmond Review which was done in respect to the inclusion of personal property in assessment. MR. MERCIER: Well, I understand that it hasn't been done anywhere in Canada, the assessment of personal property , and that where it has been done in the United States , they are gradually getting out of it. But it is something, frankly , that I am not familiar with and I will make some enquiries in order to get an understanding of it. MR. PAWLEY: I would suggest that the Minister look up a review which was done by Mr. Jack Richmond in this respect, for his consideration.

In respect to a review of The Assessment Act , I would like to just mention a precedent which was established, I believe some members recall it, where a legislative committee was formed . That was in 1972, I believe, and we received submissions from the public . I recall that we met in Brandon, Dauphin and Winnipeg and arising from that review , The Assessment Act grew.

I would say to the Minister that certainly I concur that internal review is important to begin, but I do believe at some point you have to open your review up to the public at large and ascertain the experiences of members of the public as to their opinions , their impressions in respect to the existing assessment system in the province. I believe our review was quite successful. We received many submissions and 2061

Thursday, May 11, 1978 different ideas from those submissions became actual legislation . I would therefore suggest to the Min ister th at he seriously give thought to, at some point during his term in office , a legislative comm ittee to examine the entire area of assessment. Certainly it should follow this internal review the Ministe r's referred to . Certainly there has to be a great deal of in-depth material before the public hearings are held.

But I do believe it belongs to a legislative committee and I do believe the Minis ter at some poin t should open this up to the publ ic for their op inio n and submissions . MR. MERCIER : Well , Mr. Chairma n, I appreciate the comments of the Member for Selk irk. I thi nk there is no question that because of the involvement of the municipal organizations , the unions , the urban associations in the City of Winnipeg, that at some point in time there has to be a form of public hearings . And , whether that 's by way of legislat ive committee or by way of a commiss ion that the Meer for St.

George refer red to will have to be decided in the future . But I apprec iate very muc h the suggestions , and any othe rs that any members might have for carryin g out a thorough review . MR. PAWLEY: One more short question if I could , and Mr. McN airnay might have to provide some input in regard to this and th is relates to , not reflecting upon our M inister, but this .. . MR. MERCIER: I assume the Membe r for Selkirk relates back to his expe rience as Minister when he required Mr. McNairnay 's assistance . MR. PAWLEY: That's right. Exactly .

The other day duri ng Public Works Estimates , I raised the issue of openness when lands are being exp ropriated , that all the available facts are placed on the table by the Crown , so that the owner and the Crown are able to waive facts and better determine the values of lands that are being expropr iated , and bettering the opportunity for the then appraisal commission to arrive at a fair value .

I particu larly raised the question of why field sheets, the assessor 's field sheets in the Department of Munic ipal Affairs are not made available to the accredited appraiser that is involved in the process of doing an evaluation on property for purposes of preparing material for the Land Value Appraisal Commission . I see no reason why fact s ought not to be opened up so that everyone has access to those facts . It's not a game , and yet it's my understanding that those field sheets are not made available , and it adds to delay and costs and uncertainty. MR.

MERCIER: Perhaps that's a matter we can take under cons ideration and advise the member later on. MR. PAWLEY: Good. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Fort Rouge. MR. AXWORTHY: Well, Mr. Chairman , I just had some inquiries about this assessment review really on two grounds . Can I assume that the terms of reference of this assessment study will include the notion of full market assessments similar to the system that's working in Prince Edward Island and that we can expect a report as to the feasibility of that?

I recall that the issue has been raised the last couple of sessions, and that there was some inclination on the part of the previous government to undertake that particular examination as testy and weighty as it may be in terms of what the record of success of that system in Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick bears out- the necessity of properly examining its feasibility for the Province of Manitoba . Can we assume, therefore , we are going to undertake that kind of study now in this province? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Municipal Affairs . MR. MERCIER: We're at the stage , Mr.

Chairman , where we're just getting an in-house study of assessment. The Member for Fort Rouge is perhaps suggest ing that we, as a result of that study, should be moving in a certain direction , and it would be premature for me to indicate in which direction we're going to be moving in any

part icular area. The study is just starting now and we haven't reached the point where I've been able to arri ve at obviously any decisions , any final decisions , because it's too premature. MR. AXWORTHY: Well , Mr. Chairman , if I may , I'm not suggest ing that the decision be made , I'm asking whether the study itself includes the examination of how to apply the particular system used in Prince Edward Island at the present moment , or others sim ilar to it, which I frankly consider the most important issue related to assessment of them all.

And , I would like to know whether that particular question of full value , of market-va lue assessment is going to be part of the terms of reference of the study? Is it included in it, and can we assume , therefore , that we will be undertaking a proper study in the province of that very important issue and , therefore , have some results available to determine how it might be applied in Manitoba if some government finally decides to screw up its courage and do so? MR.

MERCIER: Full value will be looked at as will the assessment systems in every province in Canada, and the department is familiar with all of those. That area will be looked at. 2062

Thursday, May 11, 1978 MR. AXWORTHY: Mr. Chairman , I'm pleased to hear that that will be part of the terms of reference . I'd also like to know whether this study will also include the issue of differential rates of assessment for areas in urban growth circumferences , and whether there will be any movement towards examining how the system might be app lied in those municipalities that border on large urban growth areas, particular the City of Winnipeg , provide some protection or retention of farm land, rural land in those areas when they are subject to a lot of development pressures?

Can we also assume that that will be part of the study , and that we will also be having some results available to us? I also assume, Mr. Chairman , that the Minister would be planning to release the results of the study for examination of the public and the members of this Legislature , so we would also benefit from its examination . MR. MERCIER: Mr. Cha irman , the review will deal with all aspects of tax exemptions. The one the Member for Fort Rouge raises is not one that I believe is in effect now . MR. AXWORTHY: No. MR. MERCIER: I'm not sure if it is in effect anywhere else in Canada .

It obviously is a unique concept , but the whole area of exemptions is one of the real difficu I ties in assessment and preferably, it's not something I don 't think that would come out of an in-house review of assessment that we're talking abou t. I think decisions like that would be ones that would result from public hearings and publi c discussion and involvement by municipal organizations. I'm not rejecting the concept and I'm not accepting it. I'm just suggesting that it's a bit early in the game to make a commitment either way . MR. AXWORTHY: Mr.

Chairman , I'd like to take some issue with the latter part of the Min ister's statement which is that it's too early in the game to take a look at it. I would suggest that perhaps ... MR. MERCIER : No, too early , excuse me, too early to make a decision to do either one of them . MR. AXWORTHY: Well , even if it's too early to make a decis ion, I would th ink that we should maybe have a more positive decision about examin ing that particular issue .

I would only remind the Minister , that in the rural municipalities that are bordering on the city of Winnipeg, there 's presently thousands of acres of qu ite good agricultural farmland presently being consumed, and one of the contributing reasons for that is the way the tax system operates to the detriment of maintaining or retaining that farmland in its original purpose , because of the way that the tax system works .

I am afraid that if it is left too much longer, we are simply going to find that many of the class one agricultural land areas around the City of Winnipeg stretching to a30 or40 mile radius, will no longer be available for farming , or for good farming . I would say that if this particular issue is not being looked at as part of his review of assessment, because I think it could very legitimately be brought into that, and he feels there should be some other means of doing it, perhaps a more public means, then I would encourage him to do so right away, because I really don 't think he can leave it much longer .

I would just recall a meeting I had with a number of rural municipality reeves and councillors just some six weeks ago ; perhaps two months ago. There was no question that that was one of the uppermost issues in their mind , is the way in which the tax system under which they operate, tends to bias the pressures in the rural municipality toward accepting large scale development with very little restraint , because of the way it works .

They were in fact , at that time , desperately asking for something to be done , so he doesn't have to take my word for it; I think I could recall from the word of the local officials in those areas. So I would really ask him to perhaps initiate something like that very soon . MR. MERCIER: Well , that's why , Mr.

Chairman , I suggested that there would have to be a great deal of discussion with the municipal organizations , people like the Winnipeg Additional Zone Association , and the Union of Manitoba Municipa lties , and the Urban Association, because they have asked for a review of assessment and the Assessment Act. I'm just advised there was a report by a consultant prepared for the previous government some two years ago dealing with assessment; I have just learned of that , it was not acted on , it provides some interesting comment and I'd like to have an opportunity to review it.

I would also say to the Member for Fort Rouge , because I think it comes within consideration of the Estimates of this department, that he was not present here earlier on in the meeting when I indicated that the Provincial Land Use Committee was reactivated early after our election ; we've had a considerable number of meetings . We're at the stage of adopting some interim policies which we propose to send out to municipalities - all municipalities - for their comments and we'll be arranging for regional meetings - district meetings - with municipalities in order to review the proposed policies with them .

I'm sure he will agree that one of the problems of the past has been the lack of provincial land use policy and that has to be done , more importantly probably than assessment , although I can see the possibility of tax assessment being an allied tool in the whole area of land use planning . MR. AXWORTHY: Mr. Chairman , I think that the Minister might be cautioned that it's not just an 2063

Thursday, May 11, 1978 allied tool. It's an integral part of land use planning. In fact , in some ways the way in which the tax system, the municipality biases or influences the direction of land use is probably far more influential than any paper plan and in many cases has far more impact than the zoning laws do because it does get back to revenue raising, which is the touchstone of most governments.

I would also ask the Minister if he is able to provide copies of the report that was done on differential assessments so that- I presume it's not something that would come in the area of great confidence or security , it's something that may be of some importance in enabling- at least it could be perhaps deposited in the provincial library or some other place where we could be able to take a look at it. MR. MERCIER: I haven 't seen it yet , but if the member wishes to have it made available to him, we will certainly do that. MR. AXWORTHY: Thank you . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. George, and then Selkirk . MR.

URUSKI: Thank you , Mr. Chairman . In listening to some of the discussions on the assessment particularly as it pertains to lands in the periphery or adjacent to urban communities there, there 's no doubt within the department analysis several different approaches are made that the Minister , I believe, should consider when he or his staff are doing the review , and that pertains to three major approaches which have been adopted , both in this country and in the United States. One might consider one , or a combination of these approaches , or possibly maybe some other alternatives .

But I would ask that in that review the Minister consider the approach of the possibility - like the Province of Alberta- of preferential assessment dealing with farm land which can be considered I'm not suggesting that it is the best method but it's one I think that should be at least examined and I know the department has background on it and it is, I believe , the simplest program of all. That is establishing a set value of assessment on all farm land throughout the province , or particularly adjacent to urban areas and leaving it that regardless of the value of the land .

The second- and we've tried it here- is the area of deferred taxation , where there are two rates of assessment , where if the land is used for other than farm purposes it is assessed at the rate that it would take on the open market. Secondly, if it was used for agricultural purposes it would be assessed a rate for that purpose , and the indiv idual would have the option of choosing which rate he wished to undertake .

If he undertook the lower assessment rate and continued farming, however, then wanted to sell for commercial or residential use he would , of course , be subjected to the payment going back for whatever number of years might be established of the difference in the assessment and taxation that he would be owing. The third approach would be the use of restrictive use agreements between the owner of the land and the Municipal Council and/ or the province, depending on the nature of the agreements .

That may be even more possible in areas where development plans are put into place and land is then zoned for its particular use- those types of agreements by owners that they will keep the land in agricultural use for at least a defined period of time . There's no doubt there are pitfalls in all of them , but I would hope that the Minister does consider at least these three approaches which have been reviewed and looked at by members of the department ; and also I believe , members of the university who have done some analysis on these three approaches . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Selkirk . MR.

PAWLEY: Mr. Chairman , if I could just follow along the lines of the Members for St. George and Fort Rouge . There 's no question that when the reassessments are published in the municipalities surrounding the City of Winnipeg, that there's go ing to be considerable anguish, and that is because of the rapid change from a rural to an urban type of environm ent that has taken place in those areas in the past few years. Unfortunately , assessment sometimes tends to work contrary to the interests of proper planning development ,

whereas we want to maintain land in agricultural use, as mentioned earlier, it's very difficult for the farmer in an area 25, 30, 40 miles from the ity of Winnipeg to maintain his land in agricultural use when he's faced with soaring assessment. Now , we have in the area surrounding the City of Winnipeg the development of the District Planning B"~ards and district plans , and I do believe that the municipal leadership in the area 40 to 50 miles around the City of Winnipeg is showing tremendous drive .

I believe it's much more progressive, certainly much more progressive than it was ten years ago , because of experience with sprawl type of development. They wish to do something .

Now , I say to the Minister that I am concerned that if the reassessments are allowed to proceed in such a way that the re is a radical change in assessment despite the efforts that are made to freeze certain development, to insure proper planning development which is taking place with the District Planning Boards , that your municipal leadership may very well face considerable backlash from farmers that are trying to eke out an existence and find themselves with doubled and tripled assessment , and at the same time find themselves with district plans that freeze residential development, prevent them from selling their lands quite properly, but all this good intention isn't very conducive to support if they 're faced with a doubling 2064

Thursday, May 11, 1978 and tripling of their assessment burden as a result of reassessment which doesn't consider the fact that in the last two or three years there has been the implementation of district plans and District Planning Boards .

So I'm asking the Minister whether or not the insertion under the Planning Act of District Planning Boards , district plans will be conside red and weighed by the assessors , or will we continue to go our merry way , based upon assessment practice of the last number of years without considering the fact that there is developing a tighter control in respect to this type of rapid urban growth. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thde Minister of Municipal Affairs . MR. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman , this was a problem for the last eight or nine years.

No changes that I am aware of were made by the previous government to help solve this particular problem. We've been in office for six months , we have already embarked on this in-house review , and I think we're moving as quickly as we can to review the problems , and th is no doubt is a problem , and I appreciate the concern of the Member for Selkirk with respect to this particular area. But we are moving ahead in th is area, and hopefully we will be in a position by the next session of the Legislature to make some changes, if that's possible at that particular time. MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Chairman , I must take exception to the Minister 's comments that nothing was done . It was the previous adm inistration that passed the Planning Act which meant that there could be some tighte r control of urban sprawl into areas surrounding the City of Winnipeg , despite , let me say to the Minister , so that he's aware of the record, despite day after day of the most strenuous opposition from his colleagues in the Legislature . Let the Minister not think that our Planning Act received a standing ovation in the Legislature from members of his Party .

If the Minister would read Hansard of those days, he would find out that the introduction of that Planning Act was considered as something which was just a little below the level of Karl Marx's Das Kapital being introduced into the Manitoba Legislature . I say that in all seriousness to the Minister , so that when he suggests that noth ing was done by the previous government , let the Minister be aware that it was a bold, courageous step that was undertaken by the previous government to control unplanned development.

We introduced that legislation against fantastic opposition from his colleagues in the Legislature . We had support from the Membe r for Fort Rouge , and I credit him for it, but let him not think that it was an easy situation to introduce that legislation and pass it through the Legislature at the time. So we did pass the Act. We did pass, therefore , legislation that could bring about the technique of controlling some of this growth, and I believe that growth thus should be planned in a more orderly fashion from here on in. However , I'm saying to the Minister there is now a ball in his court.

We've given him the planning technique, now what is he going to do in respect to the assessment side of the coin? Is he going to just ignore the fact that there has been a momentous development insofar as planning is concerned , and hope that everybody is very happy with the planning developments and ignore the assessment pressures in the municipalities surrounding the City of Winnipeg. MR. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman , I could facetiously say that that fantastic opposition will be just as fantastic in government , but I apprec iate this is really an important subject to the people that it does affect.

In fact , as a member of city council , there was a question that was raised through our consultation with the additional zone people. I've had a couple of opportunities to meet with the additional zone people already and it will be one of the matters that will be considered in the review of the assessment legislation . MR. PAWLEY: Yes, though I want to point out to the Minister the areas that we're speaking about are outside the additional zone , in the outer zone . MR. MERCIER: Yes. Right. MR. CHAIRMAN: 4.(a)-pass ; 4.(b)-pass.

Resolution 89: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $2,560,100 for Municipal Affairs-pass . 5. Municipal Services and Research . 5.(a)- The Member for Selkirk , then St. George . MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Chairman, if I'm in the wrong area here , please indicate . A year or two ago there was a tremendous shortage in the Secretary- Treasurers that were entering the field, young men and women prepared to go into the field of working in the municipalities as Secretary-Treasurers.

Pension plan legislation was introduced- a plan has been now put into effect, I believe- and it was hoped that this pension plan would encourage young men and women to take unto themselves a career in municipal offices . I'm wondering if it's too early for the Minister to indicate to us whether or not there has been any positive results . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Municipal Affairs. MR. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman , I believe there has been a record increase in the number of people 2065

Thursday, May 11, 1978 enrolled in that particular course . The member also referred to the municipal employees ' pension fund which I dealt with in my preliminary remarks and in which we have already tabled the first report of the Manitioba Municipal Employees' Fund . . He must have received a copy of it and it is a pretty thorough review of the first year's operat8ion of the fund, which has been successful. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. George . MR. URUSKI: Thank you , Mr. Chairman .

I would like to ask the Minister whether the Municipal Services Branch still handles all the work for municipalities dealing with water billing and sales and updating, improvement informat ion and the Tax Credit Program and other workloads connected with them? Are they still handling that workload? MR. MERCIER: There has been no change in the duties of this

part icular branch . MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman , the area that I would Ike to commen t on is the area deal ing with the Department of Municipal Affa irs in dealing with the Munic ipal Services Branch in their liaison with the municipal councils and bringing about more autonomy to local gove rnment and particularly the areas dealing with the Local Government Districts .

We have in the last several years had Legislative Committees examine the local government district struct ure both in rural areas and in industrial northern areas, and we have been what I would cons ider successful in bringing about into full municipal status- in the last year we have had the commun ities of Snow Lake and Leaf Rapids that were moved to full municipal status - I am wondering what moves the Minister is contemplating in respect to other LGD areas?

I would like him to give me some comments , especially in light of the Task Force Report that the Department of Municipal Affairs be directed to effect the transition to full municipal status for the identified local government districts and advise on the feasibility for remaining areas. In other words , some of those districts sho uld be transformed very soon . MR. MERCIER: Mr.

Chairman, this is again a matter that was discussed by me with officials in the department early on and it is a policy which we intend to cont inue to fo llow to attempt to persuade local government districts to move to full municipal status as quickly as possible . But I am sure the member will appreciate that it is a slow process and does take some time and effort but it is the direction in which we wish to move . MR. URUSKI: Mr.

Chairman , there were discussions and directio n given to the Department of Municipal Affairs, I believe , in co-ordination with the Department of Agriculture and Renewable Resources, dealing with the issue of the transferring of Crown lands that were tax sale lands but were handled by the province for administrative purposes on behalf of the local government districts .

There was a conscious policy decision made by the previous government to have those lands negotiated or in effect, a policy to return those Crown lands to the local government districts , either directly or a cash difference in terms of negotiations , or some combination of both , or an exchange for other Crown lands that may have been given up because I do know some Crown lands in some areas were used to negotiate flooding settlements with Reserve lands .

I am wondering whether that policy is continuing and if the Minister could give us an indication where in the process of negotiations are the departments at this point of time? MR. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman , it would be a few months ago that the Ministers affected , the Minister of Agriculture and the Minister for Renewab le Resources and I met to review the policy that had been approved by the previous government , and we resolved at that ti me that we wished to continue to pursue that policy . As a result of that decision , discuss ions and negotiations have been ongoing with LGDs . MR.

URUSKI: Have there been any agreements conclud ed to date , in a preliminary or in a formal way? Any tentative agreements? MR. MERCIER: No, there have been basic understandi ngs reached with some of the LGDs, but no formal agreements have been arrived at yet. MR. URUSKI: Could the Min ister indicate whether all the rural LGDs which would have some Crown lands that would be affected, have they all been visited to this point? MR. MERCIER: They all have been visited to date , Mr. Chairman . MR. CHAIRMAN: 5.(a)-pass ; 5.(b)-pass .

Resolution 90: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $873,600-pass . 6. Municipal Planning Services, 6.(a)-pass- the Member for St. George . MR. URUSKI: Thank you , Mr. Chai rman. I would like to ask the Minister , there is a slight, and however slight , increase of some $1 ,300 in the budgets dealing with Planning Services. The criticisms , especial ly of members of your party in the last several years dealing with The Planning Act, ranged from the most serious being from the Minister who is now the Chairman of the Provincial 2066

Thursday, May 11, 1978 Land Use Planning Committee, the Member for Morris, where he indicated that the new Planning Act was regional government via the back door. I would like to have the Minister's comments, whether he shares that kind of sentiment as his colleague, the Member for Morris, has towards the Provincial Planning Act and the Provincial Planning Services that have been brought in, or whether he is in support of the basic concepts of the Act? I would like to have some indication from him how the Act has been working in the last six months. MR. MERCIER: Mr.

Chairman, our government has not , and I expect will not, certainly in the near foreseeable future, take any steps towards any form of regional government outside the City of Winnipeg . MR. PAWLEY: . .. members had said this was. MR. MERCIER: Well, Mr. Chairman , I think if you have any questions to the Minister without Portfolio, the House Leader, you will have to direct your questions to him.

I am not familiar , frankly, with previous comments that he may have made about The Planning Act but if those comments were correct, he obviously has been converted because in the meetings we have had on the Provincial Land Use Committee with the House Leader as Chairman , he has been a strong advocate of establishing provincial land use policies as a method and the quickest method of returning virtually complete autonomy for planning decisions to the local municipalities.

I must agree with that statement that it is only by virtue of establishing the provincial land use policies that a local municipality is able to make the planning decis ions at their level. I am certainly in support of that committee.

With respect to the operation of The Planning Act in the past six months, I will indicate that we will be introducing some amendments of a housekeeping nature to improve the administration of the Act because planning is the kind of thing , in my experience as a City Councillor, everyone is in favour of planning but the real difficulty is in the proper administration of The Planning Act and there are always difficulties, human error and human nature being what it is, where certain things aren't done and where certain prejudices may be taken by certain people that reflect on the operation of that kind of

an Act. So, any government must be continually alert to ensure, as much as possible, that the Act is administered well and administered efficiently , and that must be our role. MR. URUSKI: Just on that line, Mr.

Chairman, I would like to ask the Minister whether there has been any significant change in the administration of the subdivision process under The Planning Act as it related to, say, last fall when, if I recall correctly, there were approximately 1,300 applications approved in the first six or seven months of the operations of the Act and there were still, I believe, in active consideration, I think possibly maybe another thousand. Has there been a drop-off of applications? What has been the experience to date?

Maybe I was oversensitive, but there were complaints and in some areas justifiable complaints about delays in the processing of applications. I would like to know whether there has been any dramatic change in the approval process and approval mechanism? MR. MERCIER: No, there has been no change in policy in that approval process. I suppose it is something for which there will always be complaints from people who don't get what they want.

I think in defence of the Planning Department itself, and the member will appreciate, that where there are many significant delays, those are often caused by other departments who are asked to comment and for some reasons and in many cases very worthwhile , they have a certain interest in an application that they wish to protect , and the adoption of the land use policies is going to resolve that a great deal. MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman , I understand that there has been a fifth district or a new district formed since last fall, I believe.

Yes, there were four formed and the Thompson one has come in, I believe, since then. Could the Minister report to us as to the present status- well, we'll go in what order he pleases- as to the funding, because those districts have already been formed. Could he give us a review of where are those districts in terms of their development plans, funding, how far they have reached and what might be the anticipated costs of the funding required for each district? Also, I would like to know how many other municipalities are on the verge of being formed?

As well , I would like to know, within the budget of the Planning Services , what funds have been allocated out of the $1 .3 million, specifically for development plans of these five districts, and are there funds committed for any new districts , within the budget? MR. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman , since we have been in government, the five agreements have been approved with the districts I indicated earlier. The boards have been formed and just this past week, I believe I sent the initial cheques to each of those five boards .

I can only assume, I am sure it is correct, that they are now well started on their way to formulating their development plans. I don't recollect the exact amounts that we have sent to each planning district. In many cases it was a partial payment to get started. We certainly have sufficient funds to complete those districts. 2067

Thursday, May 11, 1978 MR. URUSKI: You have sufficient funds? MR. MERCIER: Yes. As indicated earlier, there are a number of municipalities indicating interest in forming more planning districts. Whether we will be in a position to fund all of them during this fiscal period is questionable in view of the financial restraint program. But I see no reason why we can't do things within the department to get them started and on their way and working at some of the preliminary matters they will face as a properly constituted planning district and board.

So in spite of the fact that we may not have sufficient funds to meet all of the interest, we are going to have to establish some priorities within the department; we are going to have to do some things internally in the way of assisting them and servicing them, to help them get started and look at the problems they will be facing as a planning district. I see no reason why they can't, through representatives of each of the councils in the areas, start that process .

But it has been a successful program, obviously , because of the interest and if the member wished, I could read out a full page of municipalities who are interested in forming planning districts. MR. URUSKI: How many , in total, would be on the verge of coming to the government and saying, "Will you sign an agreement with us to form a planning district," in rough forms? I would like to go on . The Minister indicated that he has sufficient funds in his budget to complete those five districts .

Could he give me an indication as to what the provincial contribution is, the total provincial contribution might be, of this 1.3 million to those five districts in terms of expenditures? MR. MERCIER : The money that was paid out this week to the five districts was money appropriated from last year's budget that was set aside. -(Interjection)- We're trying to recollect the figures. It is about $60,000 for Selkirk ; $26,000 for Cypress River . I'm advised that the $400,000 that the member refers to , Mr. Chairman, was in their budget process cut to $200,000 and then to $75,000.00. MR.

URUSKI: So the Minister is indicating that the cost of these five is from last year's ... MR. MERCIER: We're in the process of getting the actual figures , but the initial payments- and I'll advise the member later- were from last year's budget. We have in this budget $113,000 to provide for the formation of planning districts this year . MR. URUSKI: Out of the 1.3 million, $113,000? MR. MERCIER: Yes. MR.

URUSKI: Could the Minister indicate, in terms of staff in the Municipal Planning Services, whether there are any staff increases; whether the staff has held; whether there was any elimination of any positions and /or people from the Provincial Planning Branch? MR. MERCIER: There has been no increase, Mr. Chairman, in staff man years in this particular area, and no reduction, the same manpower .

Of course the member will remember the decision of the previous government to start moving the Planning Services away from municipalities and toward those areas that had formed planning districts , the direction that has been continued. MR. URUSKI: You are continuing in that direction . MR. MERCIER: Yes. MR. URUSKI: . .. to assist municipalities who wish to get into planning and provide less assistance , if any , to those who do not wish to proceed in the area of planning districts? MR. MERCIER: That is done on a contract basis with municipalities, if staff are available. MR. URUSKI: Yes, I understand that.

I'm not even sure that many contracts were signed last year with municipalities in that we were trying to hold off signing any commitments because of the lack of specific staff to deal with certain areas. We were trying to indicate that it would be much more feasible if two or three municipalities were to get togethe r and join into a district , then they would be assured of having the advice and help that they required to do proper planning for their areas. MR. MERCIER: There were only about five or six municipal ities who contracted for planning services. MR.

URUSKI: Are there any municipalities , to the Minister 's knowledge , that have contracted out private consultants to do planning advice to the municipalities, particular municipalities? MR. MERCIER: Not to my knowledge , Mr. Chairman , but that could be happening without our knowledge . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Selkirk. 2068

/ Thursday, May 11, 1978 MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Chairman, the Minister has indicated that there have been five district boards that have been formed . I would ask the Minister , in this year 's allocation , how much money would be paid to those five district boards? MR. MERCIER: We are in the process of attempting to get the figures , but in the main I would say that the money we have paid out this past week to the five districts, I would expect would virtually get them through this fiscal year. I th ink that in about three of the five cases, we paid the full amount , because it is not a large amount. MR.

PAWLEY: What I would want to know from the Minister is how much money would he have left over for other districts that might be interested in being formed during this fiscal year? MR. MERCIER: $113,00.00. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Chairman , that is the area that concerns me, because $113,000 is not going to respond to very much of a demand and the difficulty is that there are certain mun icipalities where this type of situat ion is desperate .

Certainly with in the 40 to 50-mile area around the City of Winnipeg , it is important that when the local people illustrate a desire to form a district board and enter into a development plan , that the department be in a position to respond to that willingness on the part of the local municipal people to so form . Let me say to the Min ister that I suspect that the costs of not doing so, in not responding , will be greater to the provincial economy than through a tunnel-like approach to restraint which appears, unfortunately , to have spilled into the Estimates in this particular

section because the prov incial costs will be, where there is unplan ned development , where a horse and buggy type of approach is allo wed to continue , even though there is leadership shown on the mun icipal part to change the pictu re, that you are going to face all types of addit iona l costs from unplanned development. The Minister is as familiar with those extra costs as any one of us.

So when the Minister indicates that he only has $113,000 left in his budget to handle requests from munic ipalities for new District Plann ing Boards , I must express my concern that he is not- and I don 't blame the Minister , obviously he has been chopped down during the preliminary discussions in Cabinet on th is

section - but he certainly is not going to be able to respond to the requests for new District Planning Boards . He is not go ing to be able to deal effectively with the problems that may very well be occurring and at the same time , there being leadership at the local level wishing to correct those problems , the province will be dragging its feet.

We have an entire fiscal year and what the Minister is really ind icating is that he might be able to take on one or two more districts , but he had indicated that he had a whole page of mun icipalities that were sympathetic to entering into District Planning Boards but obviously he would be able to accept a very small portion of them . Or if he did accept them , he would be requesting them to drag their feet and not move too quickly because the money isn't available to assist them in moving faster.

I must express some reservation about the ability of the Minister and the department to respond to what I am sure will be a growing area of requests from the local level. MR. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman , the department feels reasonably certain that with the moneys available in the Estimates this year , that they can respond to the requests for planning districts . Many of the municipalities that have indicated , are not of the urban-oriented type, which are the most expensive , like Selkirk, which is a very expensive planning agreement to which we have paid out an initial payment of $60,000.00. MR.

PAWLEY: That isn't a full year , so there would be about $120,000 or $130,000, I believe . MR. MERCIER: That is only our share of the initial fund ing, so that they have to put up additional funding and we feel reasonably certa in that they will not go over that amount during this fiscal period. Many of the municipalities are smaller rural towns and R.M.s which are not nearly as expensive as an urban area like the Town of Selkirk .

We intend to certainly establish priorities and, if necessary , if there are important areas which can't be met within the current Estimates , then we will have to very seriously consider Supplementary Estimates . I appreciate the concern of the Member for Selkirk but he can rest assured that we consider this an important matter and if it is necessary to appropriate add itional funds , we will. The init ial grants that we have paid out were : Selkirk , $35,500; Cypress , $43,700; Brokenhead, $26,000; to the Morden-Stanley District , $61 ,000.00. No grant has been made yet to Thompson. MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Cha irman , if I could just ask the Minister about a related area. He had indicated that policy was being reviewed in respect to a provincial planning policy . Did you indicate that decision had now been arrived at as to a provincial policy? MR. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, I believe the exact number of policies are 13, and the Chairman of the Provincial Land Use Committee and the Honourable House Leader are in the process of arranging for the distribution of those policies . They are in fact I think at this particular time in the process of being printed , after which they will be distributed to all municipalities.

The Chairman 2069

Thursday, May 11, 1978 plans on arranging for regional meetings with the staff of the provincial Land Use Committee and the municipalities concerned in the fall after they have had an opportunity during the summer months to consider those policies . Not only will discussions be held with the rural municipalities and towns and villages, but with other associations and groups that have indicated an interest in being involved and having an opportunity to comment on those policies. MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Chairman, I'm just wondering if this would not have been an opportune time for the Chairman of the Provincial Land Use Committee to have outlined those policies so that we could deal with them at this committee at this point. We may not have another opportunity during this Session of Legislature. MR. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman , I believe all members of the Legislature will have an opportunity to discuss those at regional meetings in their area if they wish or to make their comments known to the Chairman of the Land Use Committee .

They are policies which are interim in nature , have not been adopted in any way as final policies . They are policies that are merely being approved by the committee for discussion with the municipalities etc. and other groups who may be interested in making their comments, and it is only after those discussions and consultat ions have taken place that final policies will be approved . MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Chairman, I must again though pose the question : as I understand it these are policies of provincial nature .

They don 't relate to a particular region or a particular municipality but they 're land use policies of provincial-wide nature . Now , surely then those policies are of such a nature that they ought to be discussed with provincial representatives and as well certainly, in the long run, with municipal representatives, but I must say, Mr.

Chairman , that I do feel that in all fairness to the provincial members of the Legislature that provincial policies relating to land use, should be made available , if they have already been okayed and ready for distribution and discussion , to municipal people, because of the very fact that we are dealing here with provincial representatives, that there is no need surely to hold them close to one's vest, but rather to open them up to discussion . I would have hoped that the Chairman of the Provincial Land Use Committee would be present so that we could enter into a worthwhile discussion on these policies .

Why would they not be distributed at this point so that we are able to enter into a worthwhile discussion? MR. MERCIER: The first and easiest answer , Mr. Chairman , is that they haven't been printed so that they are not available for discussion . The second point is that they are not the policies of the government , they are papers wh ich will be used as a basis for discussion with interested groups and associations and municipalities . I would think it would be- if they are finally adopted by the next Session of the Legislature , that it would be very much in order to discuss them .

I think there will be nothing in the interim that will prevent any member of the Legislature from making known to the Chairman of the Land Use Committee or the committee itself any positions or comments on those papers that they wish to make. But until they are adopted by the government , I wouldn't think that it would be a proper matter for discussion before this committee at this time . MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Chairman , surely it would be much better to discuss them during this Session than to circulate them to regional meetings of municipal leaders and in fact, say, as the Minister earlier had said , that if one is interested as a provincial member . then intrude upon that meeting of municipal representatives I just don 't feel that that would be the proper approach .

If we are going to have a hand in the development of those policies surely we, as provincial members, ought to through our arena discuss those policies, if I might say so, because they are provincial in nature rather than municipal or regional in nature even before they are discussed at the municipal level because we are dealing with provincial-wide policy proposals as I understand it. I don 't think it's good enough to say that we can intrude or push our way into a district municipal meeting to find out what they are and to participate in the discussion .

I believe that's a meet ing for municipal people and not a meeting for provincial MLAs to intrude themselves upon . So, I just wonder if it is really too late for those policies to be indicated to this committee so at least we know what we are dealing with and the Minister, and I would hope the Chairman of the Provincial Land Use Committee could have hopefully some benefit of the views of provincial members. MR. MERCIER: Mr.

Chairman , I appreciate the concern of the Member for Selkirk, in this matter , but I have to repeat again , these are not policies of the government , they are papers that have been developed with . A MEMBER: Discussion papers. MR. MERCIER: Discussion papers , that have been approved by the committee for discussion with the municipalities, but they're in no way final policies of the government. The direction that the government wishes to move is to involve as many people in consultation and review of those papers before any final decision is made.

I don't know the exact date when the printing of those papers will be completed . I'm sure it will be completed before the end of the Session , and I would feel certain that 2070

Thursday, May 11, 1978 the House Leader would be disposed to distributing them to all members of the Legislature. I think that would then certainly give members an opportunity to question him if they wished , or to discuss the matter in a review of his salary under the Execut ive Council , if you wished . MR. PAWLEY: I'm prepared to accept that suggestion . Could the member advise us whether or not there are any municipalities in the addit ional zone that are indicating a desire to withdraw from the additional zone and to join a distri? ct planning board within the outer mun icipal ring MR.

MERCIER: I've attended one or two meetings with municipalities who have made some enq uiries about that. You are talking about municipalities wanting to move out of the additional zone? MR. PAWLEY: Yes. Like I know West and East St. Paul discussed it from time to time . MR. MERCIER: One of the difficulties I understand is they haven't found partners to form planning districts . One made a suggestion , Spr ingfield I guess it was, as to whether they could form a planning district on their own. Just one municipality . I don't think that was the intention of the legislation.

That's basically where those inquiries stand now. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman , I think some of the questions that I had were already put by the Member for Selkirk , so I'll let this one go . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. George. MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the Minister in view of his comments dealing with the Municipal Planning Services Branch . You know , they were in the process of implementing the new Planning Act , regional offices were established throughout Manitoba, and there were increases in staff into those offices.

Has there been any redundancy in staff and activities in the central office as a result of those regional offices and has there been any realignment of staff of a major nature? I would like his comments in that respect. MR. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman , as I understand it, the six regional offices were developed prior to implementation of the Planning Act , and there was at one time a suggestion that there would be two more . We have not yet developed those two additional offices. MR.

URUSKI: But has the development of those offices resulted in any redundant activities by the central office , meaning the office in Winnipeg? MR. MERCIER: I think that, depending on your viewpoint of planning, would bear upon the answer to the question , but as far as I . MR. URUSKI: As far as you're concerned . . . MR. MERCIER: As far as I'm concerned no, it hasn't occurred . MR. URUSKI: I would tend to agree with the Minister 's comments in those terms . There is no doubt specific expertise within the Winnipeg office to deal with specific area and problems that the Planning Branch might encounter .

I was relating my comments to the Task Force Report again, wherein it came to certain conclusions about redundant staff and I'm pleased that the Minister does not agree with the analysis made by the Task Force in this respect. I wanted to make sure that possibly I had missed something in the months of September or October . I knew that there were shifts being made on a regular basis and re-evaluation of performances and functions of various staff, but that there was inherent a redundancy in the staff , I wasn't aware of any, and I'm pleased that the Minister agrees with that position . MR.

CHAIRMAN: 6.(a)-pass; 6.(b)-pass . Resolution 91 : Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $1 ,674,300 for Municipal Planning Services-pass . 7. Provincial Planning . 7.(a) -the Member for St. George . MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman , I gather that the- and we've gone into both of these areas- Minister is acting Vice-Chairman on the Provincial Land Use Committee , as outlined in the Act. MR. MERCIER: Vice-Chairman . MR. URUSKI: Vice Chairman. I'm sorry , as Vice-Chairman . MR. MERCIER: In charge of vice. 2071

Thursday, May 11, 1978 MR. URUSKI: I Minister has also indicated that the discussion papers on proposed land use policies will be available to members of this Assembly likely in the next month or so to be perused and then they will be distributed more widely for comments and suggestions by municipal leaders and councils throughout the province . I would indicate that I think the approach to this would be certainly concurred with by myself that there be some comments and some analysis made by provincial members prior to firm adaptation by the government.

I know that they were left with numerous proposals to be considered by the Provincial Land Use Committee and I'm pleased that they have embarked on it and will be in the process of giving some more firm direction to municipal councils who have now embarked on planning schemes of their own within the districts that they have formed , so I'm pleased that they are moving along these lines . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Winnipeg Centre . MR. J. R. (Bud) BOYCE: Mr. Chairman , perhaps the Minister could help me.

There are four departments that are involved in dealing with the affairs of people : Municipal Affairs; Northern Affairs ; Urban Affairs; and Agricu ltur e. Now in reconciling this , I see over on Page 63 there was $544,600 transferred to Municipal Affairs from Northern Affairs. The Reconciliation on the bottom of Page 63. I wonder if the Minister could tell me where these funds appeared subsequent to the transfer . MR. CHAIRMAN: Perhaps , to the Member for Winnipeg Centre, he could wait a moment and we'll be at the item he is discussing . We're currently on 7. Provincia l Planning . MR.

BOYCE: I real ize that, Mr. Chairman . We're talking about planning . I have some more r' questions on this , but I just want to know where best to direct these q uestions . The next item is not MR. CHAIRMAN: Item 8. Northern Planning? MR. MERCIER: Oh, I see. Maybe just by way of explanatio n, if I'm correct in interpreting the question, Mr. Chairman , on Page 60 in the Reconciliation Statement , the amount that is shown as a transfer of function from Northern Affairs is the item that shows up on th e next page , Item 8. Northern Planning.

It was the Northern Planning function that was transferred from Northern Affairs to Municipal Affairs . Is that the answer to the question? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Winnipeg Centre. MR. BOYCE: .. . thousand on this , so I guess that's . .. on Page 62 it's 534,000, on the Reconciliation it's 544,000.00. MR. MERCIER: Yes, that's right. MR. BOYCE: But on this Planning , Mr. Chairman , throug h you to the Minister, there are many things occurring in which people are getting apprehensive and wondering just exactly where the government's going as far as planning .

For example , prior to the supper hour , we met with some of the officials of Polar Gas, and they advised that they have already spent some $600 millions of dollars and they are allocating another $200 million through the consortium for the advancement of the timetable in the delivery of Polar Gas. Now , in this overall planning, what is the philosophy of the government? I know we came out with what we thought should be an attempt to assist people to stay in their communities rather than all move into the City of Winnipeg.

Now is it the philosophy of the government- I know they took great umbrage at the stay-option for example- now is it the policy ~ of the government in Provincial Planning that they are plann ing for 90 percent of the population of the province to live in the City of Winnipeg? MR. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman , that question ranged over a number of subjects . The first one was the Polar Gas matter . Just as an aside , that type of que stion should be more properly put to the Minister of Finance , the Minister in charge of the Energy Council , who is co-ordinating the province 's position with respect to that matter .

What we're dealing with here under Item 7- which I thought is what is what we're dealing with , the Provincial Land Use Committee- is provincial land use policies . The member appeared to talk about matters which are not really the subject of this particular item, Mr. Chairman . MR. BOYCE: Mr. Chairman , I'm a little bit at a loss. This seems to be the policy of the government . For every Estimate that's under cons ideration , they say that this isn't the app ropriate place to discuss it. This is Provincial Planning , and this provides technical and administrative support to the interdepartmental planning board .

I realize P!.UC is involved also, but nevertheless , every time we ask the government for an enunciat ion of policy relevant to anything , they say, discuss it with the Finance , or wait for the Task Force reports or something else. MR. MERCIER: I never said that. 2072

Thursday, May 11, 1978 MR. BOYCE: I'm asking the Minister, what is the philosophy of this government, relative to the disposition of people in the province? Does he not see that this is a role of Planning, where the people are going to be located throughout the province, whether it's in the north or south or east or west, or the City of Winnipeg, or wherever? What is the intention of the government as far as Planning is concerned? What is the philosophy? This is the only place we get a chance to question the Ministers in this regard. MR.

MERCIER: Again , I can appreciate the member 's concern that those kind of questions be answered , but what we're dealing with here, Mr. Chairman, is land use planning, not people place planning , but the use to which lands of all types should be put and the kind of zoning that should be allowed . I think perhaps prior to the member entering the room, I had indicated that we expect in the next while that some papers will be released by the committee . . . MR. BOYCE: Mr. Chairman, I can 't hear the Minister , I'm sorry . . . MR.

MERCIER: . .. expect that in the very near future some papers will be released by the Land Use Committee that will be distributed to members of the Legislature and all interested organizations for discussion as to land use policies. But this committee has not dealt with the kind of subject that the member is referring to . MR. BOYCE: Is the Minister telling us that the interdepartmental planning board has no function in this government? He is referring to this item as if the only thing that was in existence was the Land Use Committee . MR. MERCIER: The answer is no . MR.

BOYCE: This item says, "provides technical and administrative support to the interdepartmen tal planning board." What is the intention of the Minister in this regard . MR. MERCIER: It's all land use planning. MR. BOYCE: The Min ister is telling us there is no relationship to people and the use of land . MR. MERCIER: Pardon me? MR. BOYCE: The Minister is telling us that there is no relationship between people and the use of land . MR.

MERCIER: Well, the kind of thing we're talking about here is: should people be allowed to live in a flood plain reserve; should subdivisions be allowed on agricultural land; should natural resources not be protected ; what sort of land use control should you have with relationship to the development of highways? It's that kind of land use planning that it is concerned about , the purpose for which land is to be used in the protection of the natural resources of the community . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman , the Minister had indicated that the government is not yet in a position to tell us very precisely just what their policies are going to be, and I don't fault them for that. It's merely to raise one point in connection with that that I want to put one or two questions .

In light of that , the fact that we may be a year or more away from definitive policy decisions, what is the policy of the government with respect to the interim period, where it involves people who have either submitted applications , have been on a waiting list for a long time , are we just stopping everything, waiting for the grand design to show up , or are we going to use some judgment and discretion along the way , so that we don't unduly frustrate people until we are ready with our new policies? MR. MERCIER: The procedure , Mr.

Chairman, will be that these policy papers will be used as a guideline for dealing with plans of subdivision , etc. You simply can't hold up the whole process , I appreciate that and the department appreciates that , and we have to simply hope that common sense will be used in dealing with the applications. MR. USKIW: Could the Minister then indicate to us just where we are at with respect to the backlog of applications for whatever purpose, whether it's lots , subdivisions, separations of one sort or another. Are we still holding a substantial backlog, and where are we at? MR.

MERCIER: I have checked on this a number of times in the past few months, Mr. Chairman, and the indication is that there are more applications , that they are in general being handled more quickly than they were before, and that the number of applications turned down is staying relatively constant at about, I think it's about three percent, four percent, which is about the same as the number of applications turned down by the local authorities , local municipalities. 2073

Thursday, May 11, 1978 I think if any member has any concern about a particular matter that might develop in their own constituency, we've certainly been able to deal quite easily with the departmen t to attempt to resolve where the matter has been held up, and in many cases when it has been held up for , say more than six months, it's been at the instance of another department who have a major concern . MR. USKIW: I wonder if the Minister could indicate to us whether there are 500 on the waiting list , or 1 ,000, or are we reducing that backlog , or is it still building? MR.

MERCIER: The number of applications is going up, so the proportion , I suppose, that are still under review is going up, but in general , they are being handled faster. It's just that they are dealing with more applications. MR. USKIW: Okay . Perhaps I could then find out just what a normal turnaround period is on a given application in terms of months , days , or . . . MR. MERCIER: It certainly shou ld be less than six months and could be as low as three months to four months . MR. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman , the reason I raise that is because we had attempted to, and I don't believe we were very successful , but we, I believe, attempted to try to turn around these applications in 90 days . I think I'm right , Mr. Minister . The Deputy is nodding his head . I kno w I raised this question before when we were the government , and out of some frustration over certain applications and municipalities . My hope was that the process would be ironing itself out so that we could turn that , around a little faster than we were.

That's really what I'm concerned about , that we don 't have undue r delays , caused in particular because we keep piling up more work that can't be handled by the staff that we have allocated . In that connection , it's somewhat bothersome that I don 't see much more money here . My fear is that we're going to be dragging our feet here because we are afraid to spend another $50,000.00. You know , I see a very minute increase in expenditures forth is coming year over last year , you know. Well , no, there 's $102,000, over $92,000 last- oh , no, that's right.

Oh , yes, there is less with respect to the other function, and that's 1.674 as com pared to 1.799. But in any event , that's the point I want to bring to the Minister 's attention : That is it because of restraints that we're going to be ... Or are we, because of restraints , going to be faced with greater volumes of applications , being piled up in the offices of the Planning Districts and that they would not be able to handle them just for lack of manpower and money? MR. MERCIER: Well, we have the same number of people that we had last year. It's still a relatively new procedure . . . MR. USKIW: Well , I know.

MR. MERCIER: .. . that a lot of people are not very familiar with, including I'm sure , lawyers on the outside who deal with the applications who require a great deal of assistance- and I say that as a lawyer- who require assistance in getting the first few applications through. So it's a procedure in which the people within the department and outside the department are gaining experience and slowly but surely , smoothening out the administrative procedure ; and we will , I indicated earlier , be introducing some housekeeping amendments to the Act which we hope will improve and expedite the procedure . MR.

USKIW: Mr. Chairman . the other point I have is the often mentioned comment by lawyers , that they are totally frustrated because there seems to be a lack of consistency in decision making with respect to planning; that in handling their clients , some of their applications go through without any difficulty whatever . Others in similar circumstances - might even be the next door application- has a whole host of added criteria requirement thrown in and there doesn't seem to be log ic to it.

For example , if one particular applicant is required to do a number of things , whether it's putting in roads for a subdivision or whether it's doing ground water stud ies or a whole host of things that can be asked for under The Planning Act , and another applicant in the same area doesn't have to do any of those things- no conditions at all- raises the question of why the inconsistency ; is it because , is it because . . . -(lnterjection)- MR. MERCIER: On the example that you cite , it obviously is an inconsi stency, and if it it happened I would want to have a very clear explanation as to why that occurred .

But it's very easy to cite them without being specific and I appreciate that you might not want to be specific at this meeting. MR. USKIW: Well , Mr. Chairman , let me explain . It seems to me. at least the impression that I have. is that where a person is extremely co-operative in filing his application with the municipal people and the Planning Branch , we tend to clobber that person .

We tend to say, "Okay , since you 're willing to do everything we want . we want you to do these ten things ." Then along comes his neighbour who says, "Well, but why should you do those things, they're not necessary ." You get a different application . a different kind of a letter from his lawyer who argues each point , so they say, "Well , all right , we don 't need ground water studies . We don't need this and we don 't need that. " So you have 2074

Thursday, May 11, 1978 the anomaly of two applicants , side by side , one having to spend tens of thousands of dollars to do these things , and the other one not having to spend a penny . MR. MERCIER: Well, it just doen't make sense. MR. USKIW: That has occurred, and I raise that to your attention. MR. MERCIER: I would appreciate it if you could maybe some time after the meeting . MR. USKIW: I'm not condemning anyone for it. MR. MERCIER: If you could point out where that has actually happened then steps have to be taken to make a change, because that's obviously not correct. MR. USKIW: Well , in the event ... MR.

MERCIER: The problem is we have to have the specific cases and look at them because they 're all individual cases on their own merits . MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman , in the example that I have illustrated, it's in the same neighborhood , but the difference was that the one that is required to do all these things had his lawyer say, "We are prepared to do anything you want us to , to get our approval." Hence they threw the book at him , so to speak, and said, "We want all these things done ." So I raise that in that context. MR.

MERCIER: Well , perhaps you could give us, after the meeting , where that occurred and we . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Selkirk . MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Chairman , I have two questions relating in the same vein that the Member for Lac du Bonnet raised. One , I would be interested in hearing the Minister 's comments in connection with single lot splits , where- not dealing with the larger form of subdiv ision but single lot splits- where municipality approves that lot split.

Are there many instances where the Municipal Planning Branch has overridden the approval of the municipality appealing it onto the Municipal Board in the past three , four months? MR. MERCIER: I can 't make a statement with respect to that particular category . But the overall percentage that are not approved by the department , is about 3 to 4 percent. But I would think those would be mainly subdivisions . I would think that the number of single lot splits would be extremely small. 8MR.

PAWLEY : I would just like to place on the record my view , if I could , to the Minister, that I do believe that in single lot splits- not dealing with large subdivisions- that it ought to be a very very unusual and rare incident , indeed , where the Planning Branch appeals to the Municipal Board. I think that the municipality could be advised where it's going wrong ; that when we're dealing with a single lot split I would think that advice , yes; but to override on a single lot split would be- I would hope generally unnecessary - and I believe that the Member for St.

George, when he was the Minister , had developed a policy by which it was advice and some minor exceptions , possibly , but where you 're dealing with single lot splits. Yes, in those municipalities that had a development agreement. So, I'd just like to mention that.

Secondly- and I don 't want this to be taken as an area of criticism because I mentioned it to the Minister and the Deputy Minister earlier- but when we discussed backlog and paperwork , and I will be bringing a letter in connection with this to the Deputy Minister , but some way or other- and I thought this type of problem was cleared up some time back- where you have a lot split in a town where five or six feet are being added to a lot from the adjacent lot, surely that can be processed at the local level without the necessity of being referred to the Provincial Planning Branch ; without the need for circulating it as you would a normal large scale subdivision , to all the various departments and agencies of government.

Just think of the paper and the time consumed in that. I do believe that the Minister and the Deputy Minister are both sympathetic to this situation . I just raise it, though , because I thought the problem was cleared up a couple of years ago and it seems to keep slipping back into the system . It's so burdensome to all involved . These little types of irritants , all that they do is generate the backlash to the central theme of proper planning . People get upset over some little irritant like this and they turn against the very concepts that you're trying to develop through your provincial planning. MR.

MERCIER: Mr. Chairman , the member and I and the Deputy Minister discussed this earlier. We'll certainly have a serious look at it. MR. CHAIRMAN: ?.(a)-pass; ?.(b)-pass . Resolution 92-pass . Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $102,000 for Municipal Affairs Provincial Planning-pass . 2075

Thursday, May 11, 1978 Item No. 8. Northern Planning , 8.(a)- the Member for St. George first and then Winnipeg Centre. MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman, I would like some explanation into greater detail the role of the Northern Planning Department. I believe the Minister indicated there were some 12 staff there , presently eight staff dealing with that branch, working in that branch in northern Manitoba.

Could the Minister indicate whether that branch also includes the services to northern and remote communities in the promotion of local government for those areas, besides the planning function or is this specifically related to planning matters in northern Manitoba? MR. CHAIRMAN : The Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs . MR. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, this department was just transferred into Municipal Affairs in January of this year. We operate, basically , as just a service department to the Department of Northern Affairs for Land Use Planning. MR.

URUSKI: Could the Minister elaborate on the specific functions that are undertaken by this group as a service department to Northern Affairs? In the footnote it says, "Provides community planning services to northern and remote communities including subdivision design, development planning and administration of

Part IX of the Planning Act. " MR. MERCIER: That's exactly what it does, as described in that footnote . MR. URUSKI: Could the Minister indicate what communities have been serviced in, say, does he have information, been serviced directly by the Planning Branch, remote communities , or have all of them been to one degree or another , been serviced by this branch in remote areas? MR. MERCIER: Approximately sixty remote communities in northern Manitoba are serviced by this department. MR.

URUSKI: Could the Minister indicate - okay , I gather that that branch was set up approximately a year or two ago and is being funded under the North lands- or partially funded under the Northlands Agreement, the specific duties. Were there specific planning services of subdivision and town, or town or local government planning provided for any specific or complete community plans, for any specific communities?

If there were, could the Minister indicate which communities received, say, extensive services and assistance from this branch in terms of subdivision design and layouts of community structures , and the like? MR. MERCIER: Well , Mr. Chairman , as far as this department was set up about five years ago it has provided the kind of services the member referred to in Manigotogan and Norway House . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Winnipeg Centre . MR. BOYCE: Yes, through you , Mr. Chairman , to the Minister . Could you give me the job description of the eight people that are left in this particular component? MR.

MERCIER: There is in the department eight staff man years and unfortunately the sheet that I have before has a number of positions listed but does not indicate exactly which eight staff man years are included in the Estimates. There is a Director of Planning, Chief Drafting Technician, Administrative Secretary, Senior Planner , a Planning Assistant, a Regional Planner, a Drafting Technician, basically composed of the eight staff man years, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: 8.(a)-pass- the Member for Winnipeg Centre . MR. BOYCE: That makes seven. MR.

MERCIER: Yes, there is one other , there may be another Administrative Secretary. MR. BOYCE: On this, Mr. Chairman , we have to go through the Estima tes department by department, nevertheless in looking at the totality of the government's proposal, and there is precious little in Planning . . I mentioned earlier about Polar Gas.

Commitments are being made at the present time which will affect Manitoba for years to come I think , they were telling us before supper that with 1976 dollars , we're talking about 6 billions of dollars , and the consortium is of the opinion to their interest that the pipeline should just touch on the shore of Hudson Bay by Churchill , nevertheless, there's many people who are of the opinion that if Manitoba is to expand that pressure should be brought to bear to shift this somewhat west so that it would go down between the lakes.

And I wonder, on projects such as this, where in the government's Estimates - this is in northern planning - where in the government's Estimates have they got the capacity to deploy people to make Manitoba's case relative to anything, specifically with reference to Polar Gas? 2076

Thursday, May 11, 1978 MR. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that that matter comes under the direction of the Minister of Finance, responsible for the Manitoba Energy Council , and that is where he will be able to have these questions answered . MR. BOYCE: I will take note of the Minister 's suggestion , but having gone through all the Estimates, there is noth ing that would lead me to believe that moneys are being allocated to this important area. So, for the moneys that they are asking us to vote , $264,000, what does theM in ister see as the role of these eight people , or seven-plus? MR.

MERCIER: Well , I indicated the function that they perform' and again we've had a very short exper ience with this department , and they totally service the Northern Affairs Department , and I hate to suggest to the Member for Winnipeg Centre that he direct any further questions to the Minister of Northern Affairs, but I think I have to . MR. BOYCE: Well, on th is, the Minister responsible for Municipal Affairs, what does he see the relationship between the municipalities , the LGDs , the community organization, as far as planning in the north?

Is he suggesting that that should be left to the Minister of Finance or some other area, or should it not be dealt with relative to people , because in looking over Northern Affairs there 's a cut in that Minister 's Budget in this regard also? MR. MERCIER: Aga in, the function of this department is to provide community planning services to northern and remote communities including sub-division , design , development planning and administration of part of the Planning Act. That is the function they perform at the request of the Northern Affairs Department.

The Northern Affairs Department have advised us that this number of people which we have in the Estimates is sufficient to carry on that function for them . MR. BOYCE: Well, Mr. Chairman , if the government's not going to do anything then we don't need anybody . I don 't want to be facetious , but nevertheless to understand when people are talking about planning , you have to understand the puilosophy against which they are going to plan . All we get is technical answers from all of the Ministers. Most of us are well aware of what these organizations do. They provide the book work , the paper work , the

interpretations of the Act , but what is the philosophy of the government as far as developing the north is concerned when you are talking about the communities in which people live? MR. MERCIER: That is a question you'll have to ask of the Northern Affairs Minister . MR. CHAIRMAN: B.(a)-pass- the Member for Winnipeg Centre . MR. BOYCE: Well , Mr. Chairman , you get th is answer from every Minister, you have to ask some other Minister , so it's not something new . MR. CHAIRMAN: B.(a)-pass ; B.(b)-pass ; B.(c)-pass .

Resolution 93: Resolve that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $264,200 for Municipal Affairs and Northern Planning pass. 9. Provincial Job Office : 9.(a)-pass- the Member for St. George . MR. URUSKI: We have a provincial job office , could he indicate what the work the job office is presently undertaking in light of the cutbacks of the Provincial Municipal Loans Fund Program and other provincial Job Office employment programs that were previously under their administration. Could the Minister indicate what are the present levels that that branch is carrying out? MR.

MERCIER: I indicated at the beginning that the Job Office formerly was under the Executive Council and was transferred to the Department of Municipal Affairs. It has 13 employees , four permanent civil servants and nine contract or term employees . They are basically monitoring the Job Creation projects that were approved under the previous government and those which have been approved under our government. To monitor them they are basically in the area of the local government and local groups projects, the ISEP projects and the SNEP projects . MR.

URUSKI: Could the Minister indicate what funds are available under those programs that he mentioned for continued funding in the 1978-79 fiscal years? Could he give us an indication? MR. MERCIER: I indicated to the Member for Seven Oaks when he asked the question about the capital carry-over that there was $1 .66 million in carry-over capital authority , and that there were sufficient applications on hand to cover all that authority , but the programs have not yet all been approved. MR. URUSKI: There are applications totalling that amount . MR. MERCIER: The money is committed but not spent. 2077

Thursday, May 11, 1978 MR. URUSKI: . not committed as yet, or the full amount been committed but yet not disbursed as per the projects that are under way. MR. MERCIER: Committed but not disbursed as yet. MR. URUSKI: Not disbursed. MR. CHAIRMAN: 9.(a)-pass; 9.(b)-pass. Resolution 94: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $180,000 for Municipal Affairs, Provincial Job Office-pass. Back to Item l.(

a) under Resolutio n 86 - Member for St. George. MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman, just a few words to the Minister . I would like to first congratulate him on his appointment as Minister of Municipal Affairs and the inheritance, I believe, of a very competent staff within his department, and the six months in government has certainly, I believe, stood the Minister well , especially in the area which I believe the Conservative party has made a complete reversal from past years of criticism of the previous administra tion , and that is in the area dealing with planning.

They have completely reversed their position for the need of proper planning, or at least they've indicated- maybe I'm a bit too harsh- the members previously indicated that there was a need for planning. Some members indicated that the Planning Act, as it was brought in by the previous administration was regional government coming in the back door.

And certainly the now Minister of Municipal Affairs has rebuked the comments that have been made by his colleagues and has indicated that there is a need for proper planning within the province of Manitoba and that he is a staunch supporter of the Act , he will be only making minor revisions in terms of the administration of the Act. Included in his functions he has put on the member , the Minister without Portfolio, who accused the previous government of bringing in regional government , the Member for Morris now, who is an avid supporter of provincial land use policies and sits on that committee as chairman.

This certainly brings forward the complete reversal of the Tory position of last fall. As they say, what a change six months makes in government. The Provincial Planning Branch, which was accused as being a bureacratic mess by Members of the Conservative Party of the day , I listene d to the Minister very intently this evening, and I asked him whether he concurred with some of the comments made within the Task Force Report about the redundancy of staff , and he indicated that there were none .

He would be making administrative changes as the need arose and that there was no inherent bureaucractic mess as his colleagues had alledged last year , because he is continuing on the policies of administration that were brought forward. He will , as time goes on , make the changes necessary which would only be logical, but in these Estimates this year it certainly goes to show you what a difference six months makes when you are on one side of the fence and now you are on the other side of the fence .

I'm certainly pleased in any event that the present Mini ster , and even the Chairman of the Land Use Committee is in the process and is go ing ahead with proposing provincial land use policies and that these will be brought forward to the Members of the House within short order so that guidance can be given to Municipal Councils in determining theirfuture policies for proper land use within this province.

I will look forward to the Minister 's assessment and investigation into The Assessment Act and procedures within this province and I will await what changes he may propose, especially, I hope he takes into consideration the comments made in previous years by members of his party and that those recommendations will soon be forthcoming , as he has indicated that he hopes, prior to the next session . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Lac du Bonn et. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman , I don't want to spoil the Minister's evening, but I just wonder why it would not be appropriate to reduce his salary to zero on this department?

The reason I say that is because I gather that there are salaries in three departments for this Minister, unlike other Ministers who have only the privilege of receiving one salary even though they may have two or three departments. I am wondering if there is any explanation, Mr. Chairman? MR. MERCIER: To put the member's mind at ease, Mr. Chairman, I only receive one salary. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman , I presume we have to chalk that up to an error in printing because we want the Minister to have his bread and butter ; we are not going to deny him that this year but we're not going to vote three times on it. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Resolution 86: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $446,100 for Municipal Affairs General Administration-pass . That concludes , gentlemen , the Estimates for Municipal Affairs . Committee rise. SUPPLY- EDUCATION 2078

Thursday, May 11, 1978 MR. CHAIRMAN: I would direct the honourable members to Page 28 on the Department of Education . We are on Resolution 47, Clause 7.(a)(2 ) Other Expenditures- $22,000. (a)(2)-pass The Honourable Member for Logan . MR. JENKINS: Thank you , Mr. Chairman . I wonder , on this item , if the Minister could give us the reason for the increase in the Expend iture from approximately $15,000 to $22,000. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister . MR. COSENS: Mr.

Chairman , the increase relates just to the increase in staff, as I mentioned before , the Student Aid Appeal Board is transferred to this particular department and as a result some moneys came with it. I believe that covers the reconciliation there. MR. CHAIRMAN: (2)-pass - the Honourable Member for Burrows . MR. HANUSCHAK: Could the Honourable Minister indicate who is the Chairperson ofthe Student Aid Appeal Board now? MR. COSENS: Mr. Chairman , the Chairperson is a Mr. Wayne Brewer . MR. CHAIRMAN: (2)-pass - the Honourable Meer for Ste. Rose. MR. ADAM: Mr. Chairman , are we stil l on (a)

(1) Salaries Administration? MR. CHAIRMAN: I'm on (a)

(2) Other Expenditures . MR. ADAM: Well, before the Private Members' Hour , I was discussing immigration , and I'm just wondering if I could continue on . I had a few remarks to conclude in regard to that problem that I see existing in northern Manitoba , and it also affects many other constituencies in the province, and it does affect mine . I believe that our immigration policy could be improved , as I mentioned before we adjourned for Private Members ' that we are allowing people to come in and to perhaps take up employment that should otherwise go to our own people here who are unemployed .

We seem to take the attitude , Mr. Chairman , that if we turn our heads the other way the problem will somehow disappear , and it is not go ing to disappear. I think that we just cannot allow this type of dependence of some of our citizens who are living in remote areas, and who are, I am sure , if they were able to come out and work and to see themselves displaced by immigrants from other countries , I think that the MIB has set up some type of a committee to address itself to this problem , and I'm just wondering what direction the Minister is going to take , because I notice , by looking at the Estima tes, Mr.

Chairman, that most of the programs that affect the north- and we have been debating this for quite some time- but many of the programs that affect the citizens of the north , tra ining programs , Continuing Education , have been either severely cut back or phased out entirely and these are some of the programs that have been established by the previous administration to try and reverse the trend that is taking place in our remote areas. I would like to hear some comments from the Minister if he could reassure us that we .,/ might take some serious and progressive steps in this direction . MR. COSENS: Well , Mr.

Chairman , I have some difficulty just understanding the point of the Member for Ste. Rose. At one time he was talking about immigrat ion and then he was talking about programs that are being offered and if he is suggesting that immigration is interfering with job opportunities for local Manitobans , then I would tend to agree with him that that is a serious situation , if in fact that is what has been happening over the last few years .

The matter of programs and so on, I think we will probably discuss as we come to them in the different items that are under this particular appropriation but I would share his concern if in fact there is evidence that native Manitobans have not been able to find work because that has been taken by people who have been imported from other countries to fill those particular vacancies . If that's been happening over the last few years I would suggest to him that is a situation to which we should address ourselves . MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.- pass- the Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. SAMUEL USKIW: Mr.

Chairman , the Minister of Education and in this particular instance he's talking about immigration in the labour force , the labour training programs . If he's not aware that we have had a problem in this province over many many years, a problem of trying to employ the hitherto considered unemployables , a problem about that group that was not participating in the work force on a chronic basis. In a chronic way , then I would like to take this opportunity to remind him that that is a very serious problem and becomes more serious , Mr.

Chairman , when we have a high level of unemployment generally , that to the extent that we have a high percentage of unemployment of the normal work force it becomes that much more difficult for those groups that historically were not part of the so-called normal work force to place themselves in industry and indeed in job opportunities 2079

Thursday, May 11, 1978 throughout Manitoba . It's in that connection that the Member for Ste. Rose tried to seek from the Minister some answers as to what the department's policy is with respect to training opportunities for people who are, have been and continue to be, disadvantaged in one way or another, and then what is the policy of the Minister with respect to the bringing in of people from outside of the country to fill job positions at a time when we have record numbers of unemployed? I know that's probably simplistic in itself. MR.

CHAIRMAN: This line of questioning has preceded the evening adjournment and if you have something more particularly that you would care to bring up, I would allow you to carry on, but we have proceeded under this line , and the Minister has answered questions on thi s particular line . The Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, then , may I put the question , if I am out of order then I will take my seat, but are we not considering the Minister 's responsibility with respect to immigration? I thought that is part of this discussion . MR. CHAIRMAN: Carry on . MR. USKIW: Well, Mr.

Chairman , if the Chairman suggests to me that we have passed that item , perhaps I can take it up under the Minister 's Salary ; I have no problem with that , but if that item is part of this vote , then I would like to continue . MR. CHAIRMAN: Would the honourable member continue? If the Minister doesn't care to answer, or if it's different from the answer that he's given before we'll find out . MR. USKIW: Well , Mr.

Chairman , for a number of years in this province we have had pressure from two sides with respect to the employment of groups of people who were not normally considered to be in the work force , and in particular , the native groups within Manitoba. We have pressure from that side seeking government help, from the native group side , from the disadvantaged group side , asking government to assist them along in becoming involved in the work force .

A We have had pressure from the other side, the employers ' side, suggesting to the government over the years, at least during my period in government , that we should really allow numbers of non-Canadians into the work force here in Manitoba , and we have consulted on a number of occasions when we were the government, with these groups and indeed, with the Government of Canada, with respect to their pol icy.

And there was a consensus as between the two governments in the last two or three years, a consensus based on the fact that we have had degrees of unemployment that was unacceptable to both the Federal Government and the Provincial Government , that on that basis we would not want to bring in labour from other parts of the world, for whatever purpose . And we had agreement , and that was the way in which we had carried on in the last two or three years .

Now, my understanding is- and the Minister could correct me- that we are now reversing that policy and we are introducing back into Manitoba labour people from outside of the country to take up positions that should be taken up by Manitobans and by Canadians . Mr. Chairman, that's a very serious problem because just yesterday the Minister of Finance got up to tell us that we are somewhat worse off than we were a year ago with respect to our unemployment numbers , somewhat worse off , some .3 I believe it was, worse off than we were a year ago.

And here we are reversing a policy of a year ago , a policy which suggested that there shouldn't be any off-shore labour brought in, or out-of-country labour brought in until and unless there was a shortage of working people in this country , and that in its place government should do many things to introduce into the labour force people who were not part of the regular labour force to date- whether it's through training programs , on-the-job , off-the-job combinations. That's the policy that we had. How can this government, Mr.

Chairman, justify reversing that policy when just yesterday the Minister of Labour told us that we are worse off unemploymentwise this month compared to where we were a year ago? Now this is something that is not to be tolerated by the people of this province and by the people of this country, Mr. Chairman , and I think it's the respon sib ility of the Minister in charge of immigration to come down hard on that issue and to make sure that jobs are protected for people who need jobs who are residents of this provin ce. and we have many of them -more so today than we had a year ago, Mr. Chairman .

And if they are not suited to these jobs then let's put in the training dollars to make them suitable. This is something that has to be done sooner or later. Mr. Chairman , to the extent that we ignore that problem we are forcing future generations of people to cope with a problem much greater than what we have today because, in the numbers game , that particular situation is worsening . There are more of those people on the scene each year and we have to come to grips with that reality .

We can 't ignore the fact that there are tens of thousands of people in Manitoba that were not part of a regular work force and that they should continue to be so or that they shouldn 't. We have to deal with that problem realistically. We have to recognize that they are there , they are people .

And we have to recognize that they have to be fed, they have to have housing , they have to have certain basic amenities which have to be provided for by the taxpayers of this province and the taxpayers of this country , and that it would be much more desirable if they were productive people, not only for the position of the taxpayer but for their own well-being, for their own life style. For the sake of their own life style it's important that they feel part of the total community 2080

Thursday, May 11, 1978 and that they are able to participate more fully in the economic development of this province through the regular work force. It's not good enough to say that we've never included them in the manpower statistics and the unemployment statistics and therefore it doesn't matter. It matters , Mr. Chairman, because there are more of them each year and they have to be dealt with in an equitable manner . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Government House Leader . MR.

JORGENSON: Your initial instinct was correct when you suggested that this was the wrong item for the Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet to be pursuing this particular subject. I hesitated to interrupt him in the flight of his eloquence but I think that the subject matter that he is interested in pursuing could be better pursued under Items (d), (e), and (f).

What we're on right now is Item (a)(2), Other Expenditures ; we have passed the item under which he might have been able to discuss the question of immigration, but when it comes to training and the subjects that he appears to be interested in, then I suggest that he pursues it under Items (d), (e), and {f), and they are far more appropriate under those particular items, because they do deal with training at that particular point. And I think, Mr. Chairman , you were correct when you drew the honourable member's attention to the fact that he was out of order at that time . MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. USKIW: Well , Mr. Chairman , just on that point , I don 't believe that you can separate that question into two parts, training and immigration, because the two relate very well, to the extent that if you train , you don't need immigration, and therefore you cannot discuss it intelligently without tying the two together . I don 't believe that they should be discussed on two separate motions . MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please . The Honourable Government House Leader. MR.

JORGENSON: We might have had an argument if we had been on Item (a)(1 ), but what weare on is Item (a)(2), and therefore I suggest that he has gone past the point where he could have discussed this in the context in which he now suggests he could have discussed it. (a){2) deals with Other Expenditures, which is not the main item. MR. CHAIRMAN: To the honourable members , I have been allowing some latitude.

There was, in my opinion, some connection between imm igrat ion and the whole of Item (a), but I would recommend to the honourable member , if he could hold his time to ask his questions under Item (d), it would be more appropriate . The Honourable Member for Burrows . MR. HANUSCHAK: Yes, Mr. Chairman, the Honourable Government House Leader is no doubt quite correct if we are going to debate new, innovative training programs which may come under special programs which are not , or were not included under any previous item discussed in the Estimates. But, Mr.

Chairman, I listened to the Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet quite intently and his line of questioning was directed at immigration policy . Now -(Interjection)- but essentially at immigration policy . Now , if we're deal ing with that item , Mr.

Chairman , then I suggest to you that it's equally appropriate under (a){2) as it was under (a)(1) because really we do not know whether whatever expenditures this government is going to incur in matters relating to immigration are going to be incurred under Salaries or under Other Expenditures , because it may well be that whatever the government is going to undertake to matters related to immigration , might be under Other Expenditures. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, on the same point of order , I want to suggest that as I understand the presentation of Estimates, that Other Expenditures and Salaries relate to the same subject matter, but they 're broken down into two components: One is the salaries of staff, and the other one has to do with the expenditures of the program, and therefore it relates properly to the question of immigration, or the question of training if any moneys are spent in those two areas from other expenditures . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Government House Leader . MR.

JORGENSON: I simply recall when my honourable friend, the Member for Logan, was in the Chair that he would either allow us to discuss those items under one or the other ; my honourable friend could take his choice- not on both of them. Now , if he wants to discuss it under this one then he will not be able to discuss it under the second one . I would suggest that he has far more scope to discuss it under items (d) , (

e) and (

f) than he does under this particular, quite narrow

section . We are passed the item of Salaries ; we are on the question of other Other Expenditures, which is an entirely different one . It is quite a narrow one , and if one wants to use the very narrow

definitions that used to 2081

Thursday, May 11, 1978 be imposed by the Member for Logan then we would not be able to discuss in any way , shape or form the items that are being discussed by the Member for Lac du Bonne t at the present time . Now, I am simply suggesting to my honourable friends . I don 't care where they discuss it- either this item or the other one- but they are going to discuss it once . That was the dictum that was laid down by the Member for Logan , whe n he was the Chairman of the committees , and I suggest to my honourable friends if it was applicable in those days then it should be applicable today . MR.

CHAIRMAN: To the honourable members , it was my intention to allow the discussion , the debate to proceed because there was some connection with immigration and I felt that if we allowed the discussion or debate to carry on at this point that it wouldn 't be repeated again later. So I will recognize the Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. JORGENSON: . .. as long as we have a clear understanding that that subject is not going to be discussed under (d), (

e) and (f), then I don 't mind if it's discussed now . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Brandon East. MR. EVANS: Mr. Chairman , on the point of order , as a Min ister of the previous government for eight years , I can assure the members of this House that many items were discussed not under one particular topic ; many programs were discussed under various topics in the Department of Industry and Commerce and , indeed , my recollect ion is this applied also to many other departments . And I cannot remember inflexibility ; in fact the key word was flexibility .

I daresay that I recall answering many questions on a particular item and some honourable members would come into the House later and ask the same questions , and I had to repeat. Maybe the Honourable Minister feels a bit frustrated, but I can assure him that I, for many years , answered questions under not only one item but related on other items. Under other items , I answered questions on related matters and indeed, in some cases , the same matter .

Certainly , whether it be Salaries or Other Expenditures , as long as it's under that particular division or that particular subsection debate was permitted and that is my recollection for many a year . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Government House Leader . MR. JORGENSON: Mr. Chairman , my honourable friend from Brandon East was never in the House long enough to know just how the rules were applied in those days and I suggest to him that if you are going to discuss it under one item I don 't mind what item they discuss it under , as long as that's the only item you are going to discuss it under.

Now , it's up to the Chairman to determine under which item it's going to be discussed , and I have no objection to that. I just simply want to make it known and want to have the assurance that if it's going to be discussed once it is not going to be repeated in a later item -that's all. MR. CHAIRMAN: To the honourable members , order please . I think that this is the statement that I have made just previously, that I will allow the discussion on it and , if it becomes a repeat discussion or debate , I will , at that point , rule it out of order . The Honourable Member for Burrows . MR.

HANUSCHAK: Just a question of clarification , I understand that the Honourable Chairman is referring to immigration policy , not train ing programs . MR. CHAIRMAN: That's correct ; I am referr ing to immigration policy and there was some reference to immigration in the Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet's debate. I would allow the Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet to carry on . The Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. USKIW: Well ,

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	31-2-40b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	31st 2nd hansardpdf 40b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	09fe3ef5981b423827f3fc64f3fb2508578c2430

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