LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, 22 February, 1988. Time- 1:30 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER, Hon. M. Phillips: Presenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions . . . Presenting Reports by Stand in g and Special Committees . . . MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Finance. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'd like to table, as required by legislation, the Auditor's Report and Financial Statements for the year ended March 31, 19 87, of The Public Trustee of Manitoba.

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Energy and Mines. HON. J. STORIE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I have a ministerial statement. lt gives me great pleasure to announce that last year the value of mineral production in Manitoba surpassed the billion-dollar mark for the first time in our province's history. The mineral production and processing industry in this province experienced dramatic growth in 19 87 in both volume and monetary value. The value of last year's mineral production, at $1. 016 billion, was the highest ever.

This was a 33.1 percent increase over 1986, and beat the previous record level, $861 million, which occurred in 1985. The fortunes of the mining and mineral processing sector are important to Manitoba. They are particularly important to many communities in Northern Manitoba. The industry employs thousands of Manitobans directly; and, Madam Speaker, when we consider employment for those providing goods and services to mining and to mining communities, the "multiplier effect" raises this figure to approximately 15, 000 people. The industry accounts for about 5 percent of the gross provincial product.

In this sector, which was hit harder than most by the economic recession and the low base metal prices of the early 19 80's, things have improved dramatically over the past few years. Since 19 84, mineral production has surpas sed its pre-recession levels and now improvements in metal prices on world markets, combined wi th the increased efficiency Manitoba companies have achieved, along with the support of the Provincial Government, the mini ng industry is returning to good health. The most significant increases are in gold and nickel production and value.

The value of gold produced in the province is up by 70.3 percent, from a 1986 value 176 of $41. 95 million to $71 .43 million in 19 87. This, Madam Speaker, is a 46.8 percent increase in the volume of gold production. The value of nickel produced in 19 87 reached $386.11 million, a 55 percent increase over the $247.66 million in 1986. The volume of nickel produced increased by 34.7 percent, Madam Speaker. We can attribute these record levels to new mine start-ups and increases in average mineral prices.

In 19 87, the MacLellan Gold Mine experienced its first full year of production, and the new Tartan Lake and Puffy Lake Gold Mines started up. Both of these mines, Madam Speaker, will provide a welcome boost to the economy of the Flin Flon region; and exploration in these areas is also at record levels, which is reason for even greater optimism. Madam Speaker, it's interesting to note that these gold mines are the first to operate in the province for nearly two decades. MacLellan was brought into production with the help of a $2 million loan from the Manitoba Government in 19 86.

Continued production at MacLellan represents a healthy payoff for the Manitoba Government's successful initiative at that mine. This helped to preserve the economic viability of the community of Lynn Lake. We expect further increase in gold production in 19 88 with Tartan Lake in its first full year and with more gold mines coming into production. The improvements in nickel production in value are due, in part, to lnco's ability to boost production at its Thompson open-pit mine in response to increased prices. The increase in nickel prices is very good news. lt bodes well for the Namew Lake Nickel Mine.

This mine, Madam Speaker, is owned in part by Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting and is set to begin production in the fourth quarter of 19 88. Madam Speaker, the Government of Manitoba helped to preserve the production in the copper and zinc industry in 19 87 with an important initiative to keep the Ruttan mine open at Leaf Rapids open. By agreeing to refinance a 19 85 $10 million provincial loan when Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting bought the mine from Sherritt Gordon Mines, Manitoba ensured continued production at Ruttan.

If we turn our attention to minerals other than base metals, there is reason for optimism there too, as well. Although Tantalum production decreased in 1987, it will jump in 19 88 when Tanco's Bernic Lake Mine and processing plant resume production, following a $4.7 million refurbishment of its plant at Bernic Lake. Tanco is jointly owned by Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting, Cabot Corporation, and the Province of Manitoba. The mine and processing plant near Lac du Bonnet suspended production, Madam Speaker, at the end of 1982 due to the absence of markets.

The Tantalum market has impr oved signif icantly and Tanco has secured multi-year contracts for Tantalum concentrates. This resumption of Tantalum production will mean new jobs and a solid contri bution to Mani toba's

Monday, 22 February, 1988 economy. Madam Speaker, as I have outlined, we are pleased, as a government, to have participated in many of these projects. A buoyant construction industry, highlighted by the Li mestone Generat ing Station project, boosted international mineral production in 1987, especially that of cement. Better crude oil prices also meant a 17 percent increase in the value of petroleum produced in the province, despite a slight drop In volume. These Improvements, Madam Speaker, go hand in hand with an optimistic picture in the exploration industry.

During the recession, the search for gold kept exploration expenditur es In this province up. The positive results are now visible, such as new mines and new properties being investigated and a diversified mineral base in many northern regions. Exploration for base metals Is picking up as well. We all recognize that these statistics are more than just numbers. They have meant jobs, employment opportunities and stability for both individuals and communities in many parts of Northern Manitoba. Madam Speaker, let me conclude by saying that to prosper, the mineral industries in Manitoba must remain competitive.

This government recognizes its role in helping the industry strive for increased efficiency and increased productivity. We have fulfilled that role during and beyond the recession period with innovative and useful programming. The results have been satisfying, and we will continue to play our

part in strengthening Manitoba's mining idustry. Thank you, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I thank the Minister for bringing us this statement today. I know that all members on this side of the House are pleased to see the return of an up-cycle to the mining industry in Northern Manitoba. We're pleased that the economy of Northern Manitoba has a much stronger base as a result of the changes in world metal prices that have dramatically increased the incomes of all of our Northern mining companies.

We're pleased for the 15,000 people in Northern Manitoba who rely on the mining industry for their employment. We are very pleased that the mining Industry has had the positive effect of the changes that they've been able to work their way through after quite a down-cycle in the early part of the Eighties. Madam Spe aker, my col leagues and I join in congratulating the mining industry for their foresight, for their continued investment and their continued faith and confidence in Northern Manitoba. That makes it worthwhile and a very productive thing for all of us.

Madam Speaker, I congratulate the government for its participation in the various projects. I hope that the Min ister wasn't attempting to take too much credit for the government's

part in the whole issue, because definitely it was the mining companies and their confidence and their investment that made this upturn possible for Northern Manitoba. I would just remind the Minister and his colleagues that the mining industry is one example of a huge 177 industry in Manitoba that must have free trade in order to ensure a secure, positive future for it. - (Interjection) - Absolutely, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, last year, I believe lnco exported better than 70 percent of its production to the United States. it's absolutely essential not only to lnco but to all the northern mining companies that they have secure access to the American market, secure access that can and will be provided as a result of a free trade agreement with the United States. That is im portant to the people of Northern Mani toba - extremely important to the people of Northern Manitoba.

Madam Speaker, as well, of course, I just want to remind the Minister that his government and some of their policies have had a very detrimental effect on the competitiveness of these northern mining companies; and some of their difficulty in the mid-and early Eighties was as a result of the huge increases in payroll costs that were added as a result of the payroll tax and the skyrocketing Workers Compensation rates.

When I was up in Northern Manitoba and spoke to the senior officials at the mining companies, they were very concerned about the doubling of their payroll additive costs in a very short period of time as a result of the huge increase in Workers Compensation rates and the addition of the payroll tax. Both of those items threatened their viability to the extent that some of those mines were in jeopardy of being closed in the early and mid-Eighties as a result of this government's initiatives and this government's policies. Madam Speaker, I say to the Minister that he should not rush in to take too much credit.

The credit is due to the people of Northern Manitoba and the mining industry that had faith and made the investment that's allowed them to weather the storms and come out on a positive note. So we congratulate those people for what has happened. We're delighted with the progress and the economic strength that's being shown in the mining industry in Northern Manitoba. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Education. HON. R. PENNER: Madam Speaker, I beg leave to table the Annual Report, 1986-87, of The Universities Grants Commission. MADAM SPEAKER: Notices of Motion . . INTRODUCTION OF BILLS HON. W.

PARASIUK introduced, by leave, Bill No. 2, The Health Services Development Trust Fund Act; La

Loi sur le Fonds fiduciaire en vue de I' amelioration des services de sante. HON. V. SCHROEDER introduced, by leave, Bill No. 3, The Re-enacted Statutes of Manitoba, 1988, Act;

Loi sur les Lois readoptees du Manitoba de 19 88; and, by leave, Bill No. 4, The Statute Re-enactment Act, 1988; Loi de 1988 sur la readoption de lois.

Monday, 22 February, 1988 INTRODU CTION OF GUESTS MADAM SPEAKER: Before moving to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the loge to my right where we have visiting with us Mr. Steven Langdon, who is the NDP member of Parliament for Essex-Windsor. On behalf of all the members, we welcome you to the Legislature this afternoon. And may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery where we have, from Murdock MacKay Collegiate, 60 Grade 9 students under the direction of Mrs. Sally Swetz and Mrs. Nancy Trush.

The school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Minister of Health. On behalf of all the members, we welcome you to the Legislature this afternoon. ORAL QUESTIONS Opinion poll results MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is for the Acting Premier. lt's my understanding that, last week, Criterion Research of Winnipeg has been conducting polling throughout the province on questions such as opinions of the Provincial Government's performance, health care, issues such as job creation, pay equity, and many others.

I wonder If the Acting Premier could indicate whether or not this polling was being done on behalf of her government, or any of its departments, agencies or Crown corporations. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mini ster of Labour. HON. M. SMITH: Madam Speaker, we do polling from time to time. I don't think that we need comment on each specific one. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, I wasn't asking the Acting Premier for a comment on the polling. I wanted to know whether or not the polling was being done on behalf of her government, its agencies, or Crown corporations. HON. M.

SMITH: I'll take that as notice, Madam Speaker. MR. G. FILMON: In the last Session, on July 6 and on July 7, both the Premier and the then-Minister of Energy and Mi nes indica ted that they would be committed to release polling that was done on the ICG takeover.

At both those times, on the evening of July 6, it was the Premier who made the commitment and the next day in question period the then-Minister of Energy and Mines said: "I have indicated that in due course that material," referring to the polling, "will be presented to the public of Manitoba." 178 I wonder if she would now indicate whether or not her government is prepared to make that public and table that information in the House. HON. M. SMITH: Yes, in due course, Madam Speaker. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, two years ago, my colleague from St.

Norbert placed an Order for Return in this House for polling that had been done by this government. lt was then updated to include subsequent polling that this government has continued to do over the course of the last number of years. Again, on the evening of Monday, July 6, the Premier, in response to my question, said: "Mr. Chairman, there is an Order for Return requesting that information," referring to that polling. "We will be providing that shortly." "Shortly" was the term he used on July 6.

Is the Acting Premier now prepared to let the people of Manitoba and the members of this House have that polling information? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Co­ op Development. HON. J. COWAN: Madam Speaker, given that I had accepted that Order for Return on behalf of the government, as Government House Leader, I feel it would be appropriate to respond to the Leader of the Opposition's question. As he is aware, having sat in government for a short period of time, and, as other members on that side are aware, Orders for Return are often accepted, but it takes some time to return back to the House.

If necessary, Madam Speaker, we can go through the listing of the amount of time which it has taken for Orders for Return to be returned back to the House by different governments and I can undertake quite clearly that in some instances in the past, those Orders for Return were never returned back to the House.

But in saying that, Madam Speaker, I do want to make it clear that it is our intention to follow through on all the Orders of Return which have been accepted by this side of the House and return them to the House in due course, which Is the standard accepted practice of this House over many Sessions and throughout many terms of many different governments. MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Speaker, this past fall of '87, polling was conducted by Viewpoints Research Limited, on behalf of the government, into a variety of matters which included qu estions such as: Do Crown corporations, including Manitoba Telephone System, Manitoba Public Insu rance Corporation, Manitoba Hydro, and Petro-Canada offer good services? Would it be fair to increase telephone and hydro rates and boost Autopac fees 20 percent? Should Crown corporations be allowed to increase charges to create a surplus, to cover costs and to allow modernization? The president of the corporation who did that polling was Mr.

Ashley Blackman, who is also this government's appointee to the Manitoba Telephone System board. Does the Deputy Premier see a conflict of interest in that relationship? MADAM SPEAKER: That question seeks an opinion. Would the honourable member rephrase his question?

Monday, 22 February, 1988 - (Interjection) - The way the honourable member has worded the last part of his question, it seeks an opinion. Would you care to rephrase it, please? Conflict of Interest - MTS Board MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, during the fall, Viewpoints Research Limited of Winnipeg did polling, on behalf of the government, specifically into areas dealing with Crown corporations. They asked questions such as: Do Crown corporations, including Manitoba Telephone System, Manitoba Public Insurance Corpor ation, Manitoba Hydro, and Petro-Canada offer good services?

Would it be fair to increase telephone and hydro rates and boost Autopac fees 20 percent? They asked a variety of questions to do with projects of these Crown coporations and whether or not they created jobs. The president of that corporation is Mr. Ashley Black man, who is also this government's appointee to the board of Manitoba Telephone System. My question to the Acting Premier Is: Is this not a conflict of interest? MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Min ister responsible for MTS. HON. G. DOER: Madam Speaker, the matter of the employment of Mr.

Blackman and his private sector company is well-known to all of us; and, secondly, all matters are fully disclosed at the board; and, thirdly, he does not deal with any issues. In fact, there was an issue related to a survey which was conducted by the Manitoba Telephone System last summer, which has been made available in the library for lnterveners for the Public Utilities Board. lt's been made public.

Madam Speaker , the member of the Manitoba Telephone System board , who is also a telecommunications expert, disclosed fully at the Telephone Board any possible conflict and was not involved, in any way, shape or form, in any decisions around that survey. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, on March 4, 1987, in referring to the removal of one Mr. Bldhu Jha from the board of the Manitoba Telephone System, this Minister - the Minister responsible for the Telephone System - in commenting on the fact that Mr.

Jha had some relationship with the corporation, having sold equipment and also doing some consulting for the corporation, said he removed him because there was a perception of conflict, and that the conflict of interest guidelines had been changed so that members of the Board of Director s could not have commercial relationships with the corporation. 1 wonder if he does not see this as being precisely the same kind of situation. HON. G. DOER: Madam Speaker, as I mentioned last year, the Individual which the Leader of the Opposition referred to last year was asked to leave the board.

In fact, there was a mutual consent to leave the board because, on a regular basis - (I nterjection) - the cheap shots are not necessary. Madam Speaker, notwithstanding the fact that the individual had sold furniture at a higher level and had 179 more commercial accounts before he was put on the board than after he was placed on the board, I thought - and we discussed it mutually - that it would be an awkward situation for him.

Madam Speaker, he was selling furniture to Bell Telephone companies, he was selling furniture and other equipment to other companies across the country; and I thought, given the fact that he was selling equipment that was generally recognized as top-of-the-line - in fact, even in the business pages of our newspapers was recognized as one of the top-of-the-line - it put him In an awkward basis to be dealing on a weekly basis In a commercial relationship with the Crown corporation. He was in a position of being on the Board of Directors.

Madam Speaker, there's been no commer cial relationship between the individual referred to by the Leader of the Opposition and the Manitoba Telephone System; and, secondly, if there was, it was fully disclosed to the board, consistent with the act, fully on the record. Madam Speaker, I can bring you the minutes where it was referred on the minutes, just like there are members in this House who referred to certain situations pursuant to the conflict of interest acts, where they may potentially be in a conflict of interest. They have disclosed it and removed themselves from the meeting, Madam Speaker.

The same rules apply to the Board of Directors of the Manitoba Telephone System as apply to the members of this House. Madam Speaker, the individual in question has fully complied with those rules and regulations, disclosed and withdrawn himself from the meeting and yet has not had a commercial business, notwithstanding that fact. Thank you, Madam Speaker. WCB - Cormack Report release MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, my further question is to the Min ister responsible for the Workers Compensation Board, following again on the subject of open government.

Last Session, on April 27, May 4, June 8, June 15 and June 30, I asked questions of this Minister with respect to the tabling of the Cormack Report; that is the report of the Long-term Claims Disabilities Committee of the Workers Compensation Board, a report that was somewhat critical of the government and the gov ernment 's handling of the Workers Compensation Board and some of their in ternal problems. 1 wonder if the Minister is now prepared to table that report. MADAM SPEAKER : The Hon ourable Minister responsible for the Workers Compensation Board. HON. H.

HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, I have answered that question on many occasions, and we have done that since this Session has started, and I've told the critic that report is the responsibility of Workers Compensation Board. I have no difficulty with making it public. If they want to make it public, they can do so. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, in view of the fact that the new chairman of the Workers Compensation

Monday, 22 February, 1988 Board, Mr. King, has pu blicly stated that he wants to have an atmosphere of openness at the Workers Compensation Board, that he does not want to be seen to be hiding facts and information from the public; in view of the fact that at least one other member of that board has said she has no difficulty in having that report made public, will the Mini ster now indicate that he has no objection to the report being made public so that Mr. King will release that Cormack Report publi cly? HON. H.

HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, indeed, one of the recommendations of the Legislative Review Committee was that they would become a more open government. We have started participating in that way. We are more open with both the employers' groups and the labourers' groups. I have just told the Leader of the Opposition, if he wouldn't have been thinking of his next question, I said, yes, I have no objection with tabling the report. lt is the responsibility of the Workers Compensation. If they want to release it, I have no difficulty with them releasing it.

Autopac - premium reductions MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Mini ster responsible for MPIC. In a recent letter received last week by the various people in Manitoba, about 3,000 in num ber, I would like to quote from the first paragraph. lt says: "The Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation has recently reviewed its '88 premium incr eases which were announc ed In December. At the time the '88 premiums were established, claim results for the entire '86-87 fiscal year were not available. Premiums were based on estimated experience.

After examining these updated figures, however, it has been determined that reductions in '88 premiums were warranted for about 3,000 vehicles." Madam Speaker, this seems to be another example of back-door politics from this Minister. I wonder if he will now identify what those 3,000 vehicles were, and can other Manitobans, if they petition this Min ister, expect to receive similar treatment? MADAM SPEAKER : The Honourable Minis ter responsible for MPIC. HON. B.

URUSKI: Ma dam Spea ker, the vehicles involved dealt with a number of classes in which the experience, as noted in the letter, was not available at the time that the rates were In fact struc k. Th e corporation, once receiving its full rating impact for the previous year, made those adjustments. Madam Speaker, Manitobans did speak fairly loudly in terms of the question of increasing the rates to recoup the losses that the corporation sustained in the previous year, and said that in fact the rate increase should be ameliorated.

As a result, the government did move to bring in good driver discounts, both on the driver's licence and on the vehicle licence, to deal with merit drivers, Madam Speaker. 180 So we have in fact listened to Manitoba motorists and are having and will continue to have discussions with both the truc king industry, the taxi-cab industry and all segments of the industry to try and make sure that the insurance program is the best within the country for the best possible rates, Madam Speaker. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Madam Speaker, a supplementary to the same Minister. He did not identify which vehicles these were.

This particular letter was received by a tow-truck operator. I would like to know if that is being handled as a group or if this is a singular situation. Madam Speaker, it is my understanding, within five days of the close of the month, that Autopac has a running total and an update on its claims losses. Their year-end is the end of October. The announcement of the premiums was two days prior to Christmas.

Madam Speak er, will the Minister now make a new statement to clarify the policy of Autopac reg arding rate structure for 1988, and establish those rates so that everyone in the public can know what the rate structure is? HON. B. URUSKI: Madam Speaker, my honourable friend knows that the record claims number in the corporation, the highest num ber of claims, was sustained in the year previous - 249,000 claims.

There are, in fact, approxima tely 700,000 veh icles insured by the corporation , and the honourable member opposite Is attempting to be mischievous in his calculations that somehow 3,000 vehicles make up the large portion of the premium base of Autopac, Madam Speaker. That is not factual at all. Madam Spea ker, the honourable member will be able to come to committee. We will deal with all the vehicle classes. We 'll have all the vehicle classes brought forward to the corporation.

We'll come to committee and provide all the information that my honourable friend wishes to have on them, which are all those veh icles that he speaks of, and they will be brought to committee so that everyone can see. Autopac - renewal extension MADAM SPEAKER: The Member for Ste. Rose for the final supplementar y. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Madam Speaker, it seems strange that the Minister doesn't understand it. The letter goes on to say, "We have encl osed new renewal forms which reflect the revised premium." There's obviously a very firm decision made in the corporation.

Madam Speaker, will this Minister explain to the people of Manitoba and to this Legislature why the Autopac agents were not informed of this change in policy? They were faced, Madam Speaker, with a completely unknown situation, when people appro ached the counter with this letter. Madam Speaker, will this Minister explain that slip-up, along with the many others that are going on in this corporation? Why is he dealing through the back door? HON. B. URUSKI: Madam Speak er, the honourable member should know that the average increase in terms

MondaJ, 22 February, 1988 of total revenue, premiums earned, as origin ally announced, was some 24 percent across the board when we announced the rate increase. Madam Spea ker, we listened to Manitobans. Manitobans said that the increases were too high in the short period of time and that If the corporation was to rebuild its reserves, it should take a number of years to do that, notwithstanding comments made by the executive assistant of the Leader of the Opposition, in Toronto, who said they did not campaign against the rate increases, Madam Speaker.

They did not stand with the seniors and with the Consumers' Association that the rates were too high. They did not want to interfere in the rate question. But, Madam Speaker, that's fine on their side. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition, with a point of order. MA. G. FILMON: On a point of order, my executive assistant did not travel to Toronto and make any statements on the record with respect to Autopac. I'd like the Minister to withdraw that comment. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. A dispute over the facts Is not a point of order. MA.

G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, you've said before that a member has to take another member's word for what happened. I ask the Honourable Minister to withdraw the statement, because my executive assistant did not travel to Toronto and make any such comments on the record. HON. B. UAUSKI: Madam Speaker, I regret that I may have said that it was his executive assistant. I know that the gentleman represented the Conservative Party of Manitoba. He is the research director, Madam Speaker, if that's his correct title.

I apologize to the Leader of the Opposition, but their research director for the Conservative Party went to Ontario and said that they did not stand with consumers to interfere in the rate question, Madam Speaker - Mr. Bessui, who was the representative of the Conservative Party - they said that they were not opposed to the high increases, that they did not stand with the seniors and with the consumers in this question. In fact, the Leader of the Opposition now is indicating that he's changed his mind on the whole question of the rates and the rebates that they promised in '86. Madam Speaker, I'm not . . .

SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Minister has the floor. HON. B. UAUSKI: Madam Speaker, at least on one segment of this question, the Conservatives have been consistent. Through whatever means they can find, they will try and get rid of the publicly operated insurance 181 system in this province. That's what their agenda is, Madam Speaker, and they intend to carry it on in whatever political means they intend to, Madam Speaker. That's their agenda. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose, with a short supplementary. MA. G. CUMMINGS: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Obvious ly, the Minister says that Manitobans have been speaking. They've also been telling him that not everybody ... MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a question? MA. G. CUMMINGS: . . . who has a question has to be politically Identified. The question, Madam Speaker, is there's a line-up at Autopac counters right now, with all of the type of changes we see here unknown to the agents. There simply will not be a possibility of having all the renewals completed by the end of the month. Is the Minister now considering an extension? HON. B.

UAUSKI: Madam Speaker, many of those 3,000 vehicles that we spoke about earlier are handled, In fact, directly through the Motor Vehicle Branch. Those changes will be handled and are not handled by agents. Specifically, Madam Speaker, with respect to the question of extension, there have been extensions in the past and we are monitoring the situation in consulation with the agents. Up to this point, Madam Speaker, the Agents Association have indicated that they will be able to handle the process in time.

However, Madam Speaker, if an extension of some period of time is necessary, we will monitor that and an extension will be granted, given the circumstances at the end of the month. At the present time, Madam Speaker, agents have indicated that they in fact can handle the business. Senior citizens protection program MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights. MRS. S. CAASTAIAS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the First Minister. In the Speech from the Throne over a year ago, this government toted the idea of a program dealing with seniors and the abuse of the elderly.

They said, "We will initiate a process respecting a protection for vulnerable adults, particularly the elderly." Manitobans have waited in vain for any announcement about this program, Madam Speaker. Would the First Minister tell us when they can expect to get this kind of socially active program? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, that particular program is under review at the present time. In view of the many other programs that we've had to institute in order to ensure that we maintain and sustain our

Monday, 22 February, 1988 health care system, our community programs, that program is under review, and it may or may not be forthcoming in this Session. Home care services - review MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Madam Speaker, a new question to the Minister of Health. People involved in the Home Care Program continue to wait for the establishment of an appeal mechanism for home care services. I ask the Minister when, in his view, will they finally get this much needed service? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honou rable Min ister of Health. HON. W. PARASIUK: Could I ask the member to please repeat the question? MRS. S.

CARS TAIRS: My question is to the Minister of Health. Vulnerable people who receive home care services have been asking for five years for an appeal board process. When will this Minister give it to them? HON. W. PARASIUK: Ma dam Speak er, we are conducting an external review of the home care system. When that review is completed, I'll look at it, and certainly I believe that there should be some mechanism. I'll take the member's question under consideration and report back in due course. MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: Can the Minister tell the House why, in this Price Waterhouse review of the Home Care Program, those delivering the Home Care Program have indeed been questioned, but those receiving the Home Care Program have not? HON. W. PARASIUK: That is a fair enough question. I became Minister just as the review began to be undertaken. I had met with some home care workers. I, in fact, sent a letter out to all the home care workers indicating that if they wanted to contribute to the review they were certainly free to do so.

They could either contact my office anonymously or by letter and I would pass that on directly so that they would feel very free in terms of their comments, criticism or advice. I think that was a very valid process. lt didn't extend in a systematic way to the consumers, although I believe that there was a process built into the review whereby, on a selective basis, a random basis, consumers were in fact interviewed. I think that the member's suggestion and hindsight is very good, and I will look into how well that process of consumer identification in terms of causes or concerns was done.

I understood that there was a process whereby it would be looked at, at least in part, but I certainly accept the intent of the member's questions in terms of consumer input, and I'll look into whether in fact it was done well or how it might be improved if we still have the opportunity of doing that. 182 Bill No. 2 - Health Trust Fund MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Health. Madam Speaker, the Minister introduced Bill No. 2 today, which presumably will develop a trust fund in health.

Can the Minister indicate to the House whether this trust fund is the same trust fund that was announced in the Throne Speech and by his Premier on Thursday, 10 days ago, the same trust fund at that time the Minister had no knowledge of its existence? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honou rable Mini ster of Health. HON. W. PARASIUK: Madam Speaker, this is a bill that I'll be presenting very shortly to the House. I indicated that I understood that it wasn't in the Throne Speech.

I, in fact, have very good knowledge of the fund and I know, in due course, that the Member for Pembina will also be enlightened with respect to the fund and its purposes and objectives. Since the fund will be so innovative, I hope it will get the unanimous support of all the Conservatives to improve our health care system, and I look forward to that support, Madam Speaker. Crown lands sale policy re Zarecki MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I have a question for the Minister responsible for Crown lands.

Madam Speaker, last week it was disclosed in question period that one Waiter Zarecki, who is the chairman of the Highway Traffic Board, and vice­ president of the New Democratic Party for Lac du Bonnet, received a $1 0,000 grant from the Tourism Department. Madam Speaker, could the Minister responsible for Crown lands indicate to this House and to the people of Manitoba how that same Waiter Zarecki achieved getting a piece of Crown land in the Lac du Bonnet community? Did he go through the normal tendering process or was it handed to him like the $1 0,000.00?

MADAM SPEAKER : The Honourable Mini ster of Natural Resources. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Madam Speaker, the Member for Arthur has chosen to get into the gutter again on this issue as he has on most other issues on that side. Clearly, there is a policy established for the sale of recreational Crown lands in this province. This policy was adopted in May of 1987. it's a matter of public record, minutes of Cabinet, and that outlines in detail the process and eligibility criteria for the purpose of recreational Crown land under The Crown Lands Act that is in place in this province, Madam Speaker. MR. J.

DOWNEY: Madam Speaker, the question was: Was the property handed to him or was there a process

Monday, 22 February, 1188 by which Mr. Waiter Zareckl got through on a point system as do those people in the agricultural community have to go through to achieve a Crown land lease? They have to go through a point system. Was this land handed to Mr. Zarecki, who is a government employee, who is an NDP second vice­ president of Lac du Bonnet, Madam Speaker, and who donated to the NDP Party, was it handed to him or was there a selection process that he had to go through to achieve that? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Madam Speaker, a number of premises are mistaken again by the Member for Arthur.

He is referring to the agricultural Crown lands policy that is in place when he talks about a point system. Under that system, farmers who have leases for Crown land for agricultural purposes can apply to purchase that land , and If there are a number of competing interests, they go by a point system that is in place. We're talking about a recreational Crown land policy that is in place. lt was adopted just about a year ago, about nine months ago, last year in 1987.

In this case, the Individual that the member is referring to is not an employee of the government but is a member of a board of the government, which is incidental, Madam Speaker, because this gentleman has been working for a number of years in putting together a proposal for the use of this particular Crown land in that area. He has undertaken a study that I understand was financed through another department which acquires the Crown lands. Madam Speaker, insofar as The Crown Lands Act is concerned, he will have to meet all of the criteria that are In place for purchase of Crown land.

They involve eligibility of the applicant, general conditions, land suitability; there are a number of points there. The member can come and discuss this with me at any time. lt's a legitimate detailed policy that is in place that is the same for all members of the public when coming forward to government, if they wish to purchase Crown land for recreational purposes, Madam Speaker. MR. J. DOWNEY: Madam Speaker, I have a final supplementary for the Premier.

I would ask the Premier if he would have his Ministers, the Minister of Tourism, the Minister responsible for the Crown lands poli cy, table all documentation dealing with Mr. Waiter Zarecki and the $10,000 grant, all the letters of application and the process that he went through as well, Madam Speaker, and the study; and, as well, the Minister responsible for Crown lands, to table all documentations and the total process that was proceeded through for Mr. Zareckl to get the Crown land gift on top of the $10,000.00. HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, the honourable member's question obviously - (Interjection) - proposes ... MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. HON. H. PAWLEY: I'm prepared to take this under review, that we table all documentation pertaining to all application for Crown land lease, and that would include, in various times in the past, applications for Crown land leased by honourable members across the way.

Madam Speaker, there is a criteria that is followed, there are standards that are adapted, and in the past, generally, Crown land leases have been given on a fair basis to applicants that may or may not follow a number of various political pursuits. Madam Speaker, if the honourable member wants me to file one particular group of documents, I'm not saying that can't be done; then I think we must do it for all applicants so that all applicants are treated alike before this Legislature. Doerksen - custody action MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Community Services and Corrections.

SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. HON. M. HEMPHILL: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I would like to make a correction to a point that I made when answering a question in the House on Friday about visitation rights of grandparents. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! 183 MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. HON. M.

HEMPHILL: Madam Speaker, I notice that in the first part of my answer I was indicating that the grandparents would have full visitation rights; but when I get down to the bottom of my answer, I inadvertently said that the parents were in daily contact with the child - had daily visitation rights. They have not had daily visitation rights with the child . There Is a procedure that has been set up that allows them regular visiting with the child and it requires them to make contact with the social worker of the agency.

The agency has guaranteed that when they make contact, they will try and set up the meeting within a few hours. So the opportunity is there, Madam Speaker, but they have not at this time had daily visits with the child. U.S. mineral tariffs MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for lnkster. MR. D. SCOTT: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I have a question for the Minister of Energy. Early this afternoon in response to his ministerial statement, the Leader of the Opposition Indicated that free trade was necessary for the development of the mining industry in Manitoba.

I am wondering if the Minister could indicate to the House what the tariffs in the United States are against the minerals that we ship from Manitoba into the United States. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

Monday, 22 February, 1H8 MADAM SPEAKER: The Honou rable Mini ster of Energy and Mines. HON. J. STORIE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Yes, the members opposite want to belittle the question. Madam Speaker, it seems to me that this is one of the keystones upon which the Mulroney trade deal is being sold to Manitobans. Madam Speaker, for the information of the Leader of the Opposition and members opposite, there is currently no tariff, no tariff on nickel, and virtually no tariff on any other base metal produced in the province.

So I think the members opposite who have no familiarity with mining or Northern Manitoba should recognize that HBM and S and lnco have been in this province for 50 and 30 years respectively and have been operating without the so-called benefits of the Mulroney trade deal. Financ es - 3- or 5- year projection MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Madam Speaker, as the Free Press Saturday

article so aptly pointed out, social service expenditures as a percentage of the total Provincial Budget has fallen unde r the term of this NDP Government. No doubt, Madam Speaker, the primary reason for this is the fact that the government has had to direct such a larger amount of its expenditures towards servicing the debt, servicing the debt rather than supporting social service expenditures.

My question to the Minister of Finance, Madam Speaker: Will the government in the forthcoming Budget be presenting to Manitobans a three or a five­ year forecast of finances, such that Manitobans will know that there will be social services in place in the next three or five years, such that a larger amount of their scarce tax dollars are not directed towards servicing this massive debt? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Finance. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

There are a number of assumptions that the member made that are incorr ect in terms of the costs and the benefit of services for Manitobans. Firstly, the reality is that we have been spending more and more money on the social services, Madam Speaker. And if you look at some of the major spending areas like health and compare it to the cost of living, you'll find that costs are going up at a pace higher than the cost of living, at the same time that the support from other levels of the government are shrinking.

The support from the Federal Government for health and higher education, as an example, and other support payments to the province has decreased from some 42 percent down to some 31 percent, which is having a major impact on a province like Manitoba, and not only a province like Manitoba but other provinces in Canada.

Just last week the Treasurer in Ontario, the Liberal Government in Ontario, when explaining the fact that 184 his recent quarter report indicates that their deficit is going up in a fairly significant way in Ontario, indicated that the major problem in Ontario was the continued decline in federal support payments to that province. There's a province that is relatively affluent compared to most other provinces in Canada. The same was true in New Bruns wick, Madam Speaker, when the Conservative Treasurer in that province Indicated the same problem when he brought down his Budget last year.

So the member should look at where the problem is in terms of causing the continued stress on our Budget. In regard to public debt costs, yes, Madam Speaker, public debt costs are increasing. The fact is that we took deliberate action during the very difficult times of the recession to maintain exp enditur es, Madam Speaker, to maintain the social and economic and educational infrastructure in our province, which I think is paying dividends today. Yes, we have to work to bring down public debt costs, and we have continued to do that, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has expired.

The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Would you consider one more question from me? That was not at all fair, Madam Speaker. My question was very precise. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The only way that I could entertain another question would be to have leave of the Ho use. Does the honourable member have leave? (Agreed) The Honourable Member for Morris with a question. MR. C. MANNESS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I thank the members of the House for granting leave. Madam Speaker, the Minister is so addicted to his own rhetoric, he didn't even answer the question.

He didn't even indicate, didn't even come close to addressing the question. The question, Madam Speaker, was: Would the government be bringing forward a three- or a five-year forecast? Madam Speaker, prejudging the Minister's answer, I wonder why the reluctance to do so. - (I nterjection) - Well, Madam Speaker, I won't prejudge it. I'll save my response to his answer for tomorrow's question period. Will the Minister be bringing forward a three- or a five-year forecast of provincial finances in the years to come? HON. E. KOSTYRA: Now that the question was more direct, rather than the long

preamble that the member raised in his first question, I will answer it directly. He'll have to wait for the Budget. But I can tell him, as I pointed out when we reviewed this matter in Public Accounts, the experience of other governments in Canada is to not do that kind thing. In fact, one of the problems we face is the fact that the Federal Government no longer gives those kinds of projections, and the fact that the Federal Government has a very significant impact - (Interjection) - the fact, Madam Speaker, that the Federal Conservative Government,

Monday, 22 February, 1988 to be a bit more direct, is pulling back on any long­ term forecast which affects the province's ability to make those kinds of forecasts makes it much more difficult for other provinces. As I indicated to the member in Public Accounts - and I'll repeat my answer - I intend to review this matter with other Provincial Governments, with other provincial treasurers, to see what their experience is and why they in other provinces and the Federal Government are going in the opposite direction from what the member is suggesting.

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Business Development and Tourism. HON. A. MACKLING: Yes, Madam Speaker, by leave, I would like to withdraw some remarks in Hansard. I referred to the Honourable Member of Lakeside in a manner which I ought not to have. I indicated that . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. I recognized the honourable member, assuming he was going to make corrections to Hansard, which is appropriate. Withdrawing - changing Hansard is not quite appropriate. The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. J.

COW AN: Madam Speaker, I appreciate your comment In Intervention, but I believe I heard the member ask for leave to withdraw those comments. If, in fact, leave is not forthcoming, then I would agree entirely that it would be inappropriate for him to do so at this time. Perhaps we can test the Chamber to see if, in fact, leave is forthcoming. MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honou rable member have leave? (Agreed) Ok ay, the Honour able Mi nister of Bus in ess Development and Tourism. HON. A. MACKLING: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

What 1 wish to do is withdraw the reference that I made to the Honourable Member for Lakeside during the course of the Throne Speech Debate, which was found in Hansard on page 155. There was some provocation to my remarks. Th ere had been an intervention, but I accused the honourable member of being more familiar with innuendo and smear than fact. For those words, I regret using those words, and I apologize to the Member for Lakeside. I had determined at the outset of this Session that I wouldn't reduce myself to that kind of debate and so, therefore, I want those words withdrawn, Madam Speaker.

SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Minister of Government Services. HON. H. HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, I ask leave to make a non-political statement. MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have leave to make a non-political statement? (Agreed) 185 NON-POLITICAL STATEMENT HON. H. HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker , Northern Manitoba's Trappers Festival was held in The Pas in the past week, from February 17 to 21.

I'd like to cong ratulate the Board of Directors for all the work they did in organizing the annual event and for the countless number of volunteers who have given of their time so others could enjoy the festival. There are four main parts to the festival for the spectators' events. The first is the world championship dog races. The winner this year was Richard Beck, and the Manitoba champion was Brian Pullen. Miss Northern Manit oba Trappers Festival Qu een was Vanessa McLean. The Queen Trapper was Diane Buck and the King Trapper was Robert Ducharme.

There was a tremendous response from tourists all over the country who came out to celebrate with us in this annual event. Thank you. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Just on a small matter of order, I was somewhat taken aback by the apology, the drawled remarks, by the Member for St. James. I was just wondering whether, if not In the same spirit, I could not have a special arrangement with you, Madam Speaker, that anything that I may say about the Honourable Member for St.

James that would be parliamentary during the course of the Session would be deleted from the transcript. MADAM SPEAKER: As the honourable member well knows, he is not to ask the Speaker questions. The Honourable Minister of the Environment. HON. G. LECUYER: Madam Speaker, I wonder if I can also beg the indulgence of the House for a non-political statement. MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have leave? (Agreed) The Honourable Minister of the Environment. HON. G. LECUYER: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Seeing we are in the festival mood, Madam Speaker, I would also like to bring to the attention to the members of the House that yesterday was the closing of the 19th Festival du Voyageur. From here, Madam Speaker, I'll also ask their indulgence to say a few words in French about the festival. Qui a ete le plus reussi de toute l'histoire du festival avec une participation entre 350,0 00 et 400,0 00 visiteurs, qui sont venus de tout les coins de la province, et en nombres plus eleves des tats-Unis, et des provinces avoisinantes. 11 y a eu une participation de festivaleux plus elevee que jamais.

Et je voudrais, en cet occas ion, Ma dame la Pr esidents, felicite en particulier les 3,000 volontaires benevoles, sans lesquels le festival ne pourait fonctione, et certainement pas avec le succes que nous avons connu, dans ce dernier festival. Je felicite aussi, les membres du bureau de direction et le personnel du festival pour avoir organize

Monday, 22 February, 1988 un festival de cet empleur. 11 y eu une participation aussi, de plus de 20,000 etudiants, done un programme scolaire reussi, et il y a eu, cette an nee, pour la premiere fois, on a lance le festival sur le boulevard Provencher. a ete aussi tres bien reussi, avec une participation des commen;;ants de St. Boniface. 11 y a plus de sculptures de neige que jamais dans le passe, et ils etaient aussi tres belle, selon le dire de tout ceux qui ont visite le festival.

La participation des visiteurs dans le pare du voyageur, et dans le pare Provencher, ainsi qu'au Rendezvous a ete aussi pluse levee qu'autrefois, et il y avait la au pare du voyageur, quatre tentes, alors qu'il n'y en avait que deux dans le pass er, ou ce so nt produit des sp ectacles de chansonnier, de danse, et des artisans de tout genres. 11 y aussi eu de nombreuses competiti01'ls sportives, tel que les courses en traine a chien, les courses en raquette, le tournoi de balon panier, tournoi de hockey, tournoi international de ringuette, et de hockey, et aussi une competition d'alterofili, et un tournoi, que j'ai mentionne deja, de hockey au niveau mineure, au Peewee.

Madame la Presidents, il y a eu aussi, �;;a ete un occasion pour les francophones de se rencontrer, de reserrer les liens d'amities dans la joie, et de rencontrer leur co-citoyen des autres cultures, et se faisant de pouvoir mieux se connaitre, et de participer dans plusieurs relais ou se sont effectues des artistes venant aussi bien du Manitoba, que des autre provinces. Merci, Madame Presidents. (English tr anslation to appear in a subsequent issue.) MADAM SPEAKER: I have a ruling to present to the House. The Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. D.

ROCAN: I wonder if I could have leave, Madam Speaker, of making a non-political statement. MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have leave? (Agreed). MR. D. ROCAN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I thank the Minister responsible for the Environment for bringing congratulations to all the organizers from the Festival du Voyageur. Nous avons aussi !'occasion d'etre parmi les autres la semaine passee, et puis nous aimerons felicites les 3,000 volontaires, tout ceux qui avaient donne a leur temps, for such a wonderful festival that we all have enjoyed.

So we would like to join with the Minister in thanking them. (English tr anslation to appear in a subsequent issue.) SPEAKER'S RULING MADAM SPEAKER: Now, I have a ruling to present to the House. On Friday, I took under advisement words spoken by the Honou rable Mem ber for Pem bina. I have reviewed the draft printout of Hansard and find that the honourable member said, and I quote: "My simple 186 question to this First Minister is when is he going to start telling the truth ...

"and subsequently, "When do we get the truth from the Premier." Both quotes contravene a number of Beauchesne citations, including 316 (f), 357( 1)( a), (h), (i), (

q) and (t), and part of Citation 322, which I quo ted to the honourable member on Friday. Finally, the words used also contravene Beauchesne Citation 359(7), which states, "A question must adhere to the proprieties of the House in terms of inferences, imputing motives or casting aspersions upon persons within the House or out of it." I, therefore, ask the Honourable Member for Pembina to withdraw those remarks. The Honourable Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Madam Speaker, not wishing to miss the vote tonight at which this imcom petent government shall be defeated, I withdraw those remarks at your request.

ORDERS OF THE DAY THRONE SPEECH DEBATE MADAM SPEAKER: On the adjourned debate on the proposed motion of the Honourable Member for St. Vital, and the proposed amendment thereto by the Honourable Leader of the Opposition, the motion stands in the name of the Honourable Member for lnkster. MR. D. SCOTT: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. it's a pleasure to get up and speak today when the House appears to be in such a festive mood. it's always good to start off the address, at least, with members on the two sides having a friendly banter back and forth.

Perhaps, Madam Speaker, many members of the House did as I did on the weekend, and were more glued to the television sets in watching this wonderful four-year phenomenon of the Olympics. I have just been amazed at the level of performances that are offered there by athletes from around the world. I'm particularly pleased by the number of Canadian athletes and more particularly those from our own province here at home in Manitoba.

The figure skating competition and the men's figure skating, in particular, with Brian Orser against Brian Boitano, and the rest of the people participating as wel l, all of the com petitors ska ted just beautiful performances, and the two stars', I suppose - the two Brians - performance was really one fine - it's hard to describe in words, in sufficient sup erlatives, the accomplishments of those two individuals with the performances that they gave in that competition. There certainly were no losers.

They were both winners and they both deserve the highest appraise for performances that I believe most previously we would not have believed possible. We have seen many young athletes supersede the expectations that various observers of the Olympics had expected and, in particular, I would like to point out a couple of Manitoba athletes. it's with great pleasure that I saw Lorna Sasseville, formerly Lorna Daudrich of Winnipeg, who I had the honour, several

Mon day, 22 February, 1-* years ago, on a few different occasions, of presenting her with Manitoba medals for the highest of athletic accomplishment. This lady has has now gone on not just to do Manitoba proud but to do the nation proud to be our leading female skier in cross-country skiing. I'm sure that there is no one more amazed at what he's doing today than Greg Haydenluck from Emerson. Who would have believed that a person from a city in the middle of a prairie would be Involved In a bobsled competition and be doing as well as they were!

In the first run, I believe they were In third place after the first run, before the event was cancelled. Others yet to come - one young friend of mine, Paget Stewart, a young man who has dedicated the last four or so years of his life in preparing for this moment in participating for the first time with the Canadians in the biathlon event. Unfortunately, he missed the 20 km. biathlon due to an injury, but he's expected this week to compete in the 10 km., and I can assure Paget that the good wishes of Manitobans are behind him and very suppor tive of him in his endeavours in the Olympics.

Madam Speaker, moving on to the main text of my presentation today, I would like to first focus a bit on the role that members of the Legislature have, and the political parties as well, and the role that the political parties have played and do play in the House. (Deputy Speaker, C. Santos, in the Chair.) For the individual MLA, it is often somewhat of a Catch-22: you are a representative of your constituents; you are also a representative of your political party.

You are selected by your constituents to represent them in the House, and one would hope that the individuals in this House are chosen on the basis of their thoughtfulness, their knowledge, their honesty and integrit y, their record - either In office or In the community that they represent, or both, preferably - and, of course, as well, their party allegiances.

Within the political parties, our parliamentary system started out essentially with no political parties, or one, I suppose, would say that those who favoured the king were on one side of the king and those who started to question the rule of the king began or eventually evolved to sit on the opposite side of the Legislative Chamber in the earliest of days. People started to evolve according to political ideologies into their respective camps or inter­ respective allegiances and alliances were formed.

We see that happening still today in areas where there aren't necessarily formal political parties participating, such as City Hall, where we have 19 members of City Hall elected as independents but effectively functioning as an organized political party in the so-called group of 19. Political parties are generally made up of persons who believe in a general philosophy towards the role of government in society. They are a diverse collection of individuals, many holding opinions that are not necessarily consistent all the time with a leading party position.

Traditionally, constructive debate has been brought to the fore within parties and debate has been encouraged. Through debate, we gain a better understanding oal party in the so-called group of 19. Political parties are generally made up of persons who believe in a general philosophy towards the role 187 of government in society. They are a diverse collection of individuals, many holding opinions that are not necessarily consistent all the time with a leading party position. Traditionally, constructive debate has been brought to the fore within parties and debate has been encou raged.

Through debate, we gain a better understanding oal party in the so-called group of 19. Political parties are generally made up of persons who believe in a general philosophy towards the role of government in society. They are a diverse collection of individuals, many holding opinions that are not necessarily consistent all the time with a leading party position. Traditionally, constructive debate has been brought to the fore within parties and debate has been encouraged. Through debate, we gain a better understanding of issues and better decisions generally are a product of those debates.

A party that demands absolute uniformity is doomed to ideological suffocation and a resultant decline in relevance that always follows. The party that encourages debate keeps an openess to ideas, new, old and reformed. lt also keeps the party closest to the public, the mass majority of whom never get involved in political parties or particularly in joining political parties. New ideas were the essence in the formation of the CCF, and I'm proud to say that those ideas, and new ideas, are still welcome within the New Democratic Party . lt is with some regret that I noticed recently with Mr.

Donald Johnston, a federal member of Parliament from Montreal, a former Liberal Cabinet Minister, who has felt it is not possible for him to sit with the caucus any more in the federal Liberal Party because, essentially, he was excluded - he was shunned - from the party; and the leader, weakly attempting to show who was in control of the party, told him there was no room for him within the party. If that is the attitude that the federal Liberal Party will play, both for Its own members in the House of Commons and for other participants in the Liberal Party, the Liberal Party is doomed.

I am confident that my own party will never take that course and I think, traditionally, the Conservative Party has certainly not been a party of uniformity of ideas, although when it has had the emphasis put on uniformity of ideas and a lack of dissension, it has generally eroded in popular support, let alone having the active support of its own membership and the key members of . . .

Within the parliamentary process, it is not at all unusual to have mem bers of a political party differ in opinions and to state those opinions publicly, and even to vote according to their conscience or their particular opinions on a particular issue. I note with interest, just in the middle of January in the British House of Commo ns, there were some 19 Tory MP's voted alongside the opposition parties in favour of a bill to reform the catch-all Official Secrets Act. Dozens more abstained in that vote. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, because it is not unusual to have individuals speak - and there have been many instances of indi viduals that have spoken both eloquently and with determination - it has profound impact on the future of their political parties. Perhaps the best of our era, at least in this century, the most clear example of that, of course, was Sir Winston Churchill, perhaps the best known antagonist towards

Monday, 22 February, 1988 his own party, having left it twice before returning to lead it through a most difficult period of time, the Second World War. Disraeli, another eventual Prime Minister in the 19th Century, also differed greatly - frequently - with his political party, but eventually came to lead that party for the longest period, I think, than any Prime Minister ever has; and the longest period of political dominance of two particular people, being Disraeli and Glad stone, throughout some 40 or 50 years in the British House of Commons. The sad thing today, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, is that the media, driven by their editors' need for a story and the desire to create the issues and events of the day, play dissent as a prohibitive practice and a negative force. God help us, Mr. Deputy Speaker, when we and our political futures, for those of us who are MLA's, are afraid to speak their minds because they're afraid of being branded freethinkers, or in many words that the media plays or chooses to describe individuals who may have some differences with their political parties.

In Rousseau's words, as was quoted by the Member for Burrows, the Deputy Speaker last week, he said, "A man is born free and spends his life in chains." Let it rest with the media to make sure that the chains are not tightened in this Chamber by their decisions to play up any kind of dissent and for the desire to make a story. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, further along, the role that we as individual members play in this House, I would like to see - and I called for this a couple of years ago, as well - a much stronger presence and a much stronger role for us to play as individual members of the Legislature, particularly within the committee structures.

We need to strengthen the role of the individual member, we need to give them more initiative, and we need to give them more participation in the process of governance. lt will, unfortunately, require a revolution in our approaches within this Chamber, at least to the role of committees, for usually our committees have fallen into the trap of divisiveness based not on principles but of playing politics.

In the House of Commons, I am pleased to observe that they have initiated a very substantial number of reforms in this particular area and certainly the committees of the House of Commons , many of which or most of which, I think, are performing quite effectively. There are some committees of course that have been near-shows, such as the one that came across the country looking for

part icipa tion, or so-called participation, into the free trade arrangement. That I do not believe Is satisfacto ry, and I hope the Government of Canada will have learned something from that. Certainly, the members of the committeess who participated gained no great deal of satisfaction in participating in that particular forum because it was stacked politically and the outcome of the committee was written long before the committee had its first meeting. But, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I would hope that within this Legislative Chamber we can move beyond that and that our Committee of the Whole, as well as the individual standing committees, can begin to function in a far more effective way with the purpose that we're elected here for, and that is to get down to look for both difficulties, look for areas of success, reward 188 success, and work to change the areas, be it programs, Crown corporations or whatever, that are having difficulties to try, toget her, to present not only alternatives but also a path for a steadier and greater stability into the future. Mr.

Deputy Speak er, the evolution of social democracy, I believe, has been probably the most important single development in western societies during this century. In Europe, virtually every country has had a social democratic administration during at least a few of the last 40 years, and they have set the parameters within which all governments function. Social democracy to me is fundamentally concerned with the equality of opportunity - that is, working to develop a social contract between a state and the individual. lt is not a one-way street. Both must accept responsibility.

The state must guarantee the opportunity of access; the individual must accept the duty to take advantage of that access to the best of their abilities and of the opportunity presented. The essence of the relationship is that the product or service offered must be of value. lt must be something sought after and worth seeking. lt must build the individual's perception of their self-worth within a society. I'd like to give a couple of quick examples of this. Perhaps the simplest examples can be looked upon in education, health and social services.

In education, it's the state's responsibility to provide the best education possible from the earliest years to the highest level of academic achievement. For the individual, their responsibility is to take advantage of those offered facilities and programs and to perform the best that they are able to. They must also be aware of the investment the society is making In them and to treat that Investment with respect. In the area of health, the state must, of course - it is now accepted - provide the treatment to the sick and the injured through the best organization possible and within its financial capabilities.

The state has more recently also taken on the responsibiliy to inform the public of methods of maintaining good health, as well as Introducing regulations and practices, to regulate practices and substances which endanger the public health. The individual must accept responsibility for their own lifestyles and conduct themselves in such a way as to maximize their good health and not to abuse the health delivery system.

Within social security, the state must provide an income security net, which will enable the individual and their dependants the means to survive a period of employment loss, and loss of income along with that. The state must also provide a network of educational, social and job information services to facilitate the individual's return to the work force. The individual has a duty to use these services constructively so as to return to the work force as quickly as possible.

This is essentially how Canadian society has evolved, producing a society where there is concern for one another and a sense of civic duty and responsibili ty. In my opinion, our society is slipping from our sense of mutual responsibility both between ourselves and within our country. Through many years of relative prosperity and a profound ethos of liberalism, we are now, in my humble opinion, losing our sense of duty and responsibility and

Monct.y, 22 February, 1988 replacing it with one of Individual rights, a concept that has been quite foreign to the development of our nation. We, as individuals and as a society , are demanding far too much of government. We all have rights; we have lost our sense of our duties. Governments and political parties promise the sky and people have come to expect it, even if their institutions have to borrow from tomorrow to pay for their services today.

Individu ally, we, as Canadians, don't save as much as we once did, and many don't think twice about borrowing for vacations or borrowing for present wants rather than present needs, and hoping that the future will be rosy enough to pay for those debts that they incur. I would like to give a couple of recent "Letters to the Editor," one to the Brandon Sun where an individual by the name of Don H. SUmmon - I don't know the individual at all - but he wrote a letter to the Brandon Sun, and I'll just quote a couple of parts from it.

He said: "With wide open opportunities in a country where there is freedom to participate, we have become mentally irresponsible and lazy. Our entir e concept and effort see ms to have grown into a crescen do of the government can do this or the government should do that, all the time sitting on our duff while it becomes fatter. We drink coffee and ale and complain. "We only have to look at our provincial and national debts to awaken to the fact that we ask government to do for us, and it usually takes three times as long and three times as costly as if we did it ourselves.

In the process, we have become even more lazy. "lt is with amazem ent," he goes on to say, "and with pleasure that I see that Mr. Len Evans has taken a highly unusual step for a politician and has acted as a catalyst to a local group in the gas price situation, instead of promising great things from the government. Would that more politicians adopt this attitude in putting the onus for constructive action back on those who are concerned and will be aff ected.

I'm not sure how far the gas bar idea will go, but how do we know if we don't try?" He goes on, and I'll conclude with this quote: "I'm just as tired as anyone of government promises to do for us many things we can do for ourselves. The more the y promise, the more we sit. To me, Mr. Evans' proposal is sound and it offers no government financing." Mr. Deputy Speaker, we are in a period in this country where I think that we're looking forward to a very uncertain future, and we are not in the least prepared for it and we have not been preparing for it at all.

We have huge consumer debt, highest levels ever, lower levels of individual savings, at the same time that our government deficits are at an all-time high. In Michael Wilson's federal Budget last week, it was noted that the debt of the Federal Government is to reach $300 billion this year. That is 53 percent of our Gross Domestic Product. The inte rest costs alone on this represent an annual obligation to pay over $28 billion, and we have to make those payments before we can make any other payments because they are statutory.

You cannot tell the people who have lent money to you that we're going to put off paying back the debts. When we come into that sort of situation, we'll be the northern Brazils and Perus of the world, and I have no intention of letting our society evolve and fall that far. Also this $28-plus billion that we're paying in inte rest repres ents 30 percent of the Federal Govern ment's budgetary rev enue. In other words, 33 1/3 cents of every dollar of taxes they collect has to go to pay interest for services that they offe red in the past.

Mu ch of thi s debt was accumula ted under the previous Liberal Government but, even with that, the majority of it has been accumu lated since the Conservatives have taken over in Ottawa. As bleak as this appears, it does not account for all the Provincial Government debts, both direct and guaranteed. When they are added, the national debt of the country rises dramatically. I believe it's up In the vicinity of $360 billion to $370 billion. We have got ourselves as a nation into the situation where we are the second largest debtor country in the world. We have approximately $17 2 billion, according to the C.D.

Howe Institute, in foreign debt in this country. More significantly, Canada is carrying almost half as much foreign debt as the United States with an economy one-twelfth their size. This is from an editorial in the Globe and Mail from February 3, 1988. In 19 86, Canadians paid $12 .4 billion in net interest to foreigners compared with only $3.1 billion in net dividends.

Indeed, the net outflow of dividends is generally decreasing as Canadians make more direct investments abroad than foreigners make in Canada. 189 In terest payments on Ottawa's debt have already been noted as being 30 percent of their budgetary rev enue. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we cannot continue in this vein. Essential ly, we have worked ourselves into a position where we have very little flexi bility left.

Perhaps the province with the most inexcusable large deficit is the Province of Ontario, where the Liberal Government there has continuously given in to additional spending, where the y, with the strongest economy in the whole country have continued to add large amounts to their deficit, that at a time when they have had the lion's share of the last six years of steady growth in the whole country. To me, the idea of a balanced budget is not some thing that belongs to any particular ideology. As a social democrat, I believe in balancing budgets.

When one looks at other social democratic admin istrations in Europe or to our sister province just to the west in Saskatchewan, we have seen that they have generally operated with budgetary surpluses. Tommy Douglas took over a virtually bankrupt province left by the Liberals back in 1944. He turned that Province around, balanced budgets and provided for services as they could provide the services; and he, in a relatively poor province, began to offer the most wide and broad

schedule of public services of any province in the country with far more fairness and equity than anyone had previously dreamed of.

Allan Blake ney followed In his footsteps and I am pleased to note that Roy Romanow, the new leader of the NDP in Saskatchewan, is again campaigning on the need for budgetary rest raint and balanced budgets. it is ironic that a right-wing leader like Premier Devine in Saskatchewan preaches fiscal responsi bility and has done the exact opposite for their short six years in office, have contributed virtually ev erything to the public debt of the Province of Saskatchewan. lt is much like south of the border with Ronald Reagan campaigning about the terrible deficits that they had in the United

Monday, 22 February, 1988 States under Jimmy Carter and now he has multiplied that by something like six-fold since he has taken office. The deficit in the Un ited States is just sim ply unacceptable and is one of the primary reasons that there is so little stability and so little confidence in the financial markets before us today. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I would like to give you just a bit on my own philosophy of the need for flexibility and the need to maximize our elements of flexibility within our Individual budgets, our corporate finances, as well as government finances.

For individuals, we have to adjust our living standards and our cost of living according to our capacity to pay for them. The same applie s to corporations. For corporations, as with individuals, it means keep your fixed costs down; don't overload you rself with debt; allow you rselves for flexibility. In corporate terms, they talk about liquidity, and liquidity is needed for some flexibility when they get Into a situation where their revenues are dropping. If their revenues drop too far, they'll be bankrupt in no time if they have a very high level of fixed interest and other fixed costs.

For governments, it means for us to maintain our expenditures at a level that enables us to have a good enough credit rating and sufficient reserves so that if the economy turns downward, we'll be able to take money from our reserves, and if none are available, at least to borrow money because of our fiscal responsibility in previous years. In a downturn, the government needs to inject money into the economy.

Unfortunately, for the past number of years, since 1982 at least, within the North American and essentially the Western World, I believe we've lived in an economy that I call a "heroin economy." lt has constantly needed huge injections of additional money to keep it afloat. The question now that's being raised Is whether or not the Injectors are willing to keep injecting that amount of money and are still going to loan those vast amounts of money to our governments to be able to p<ty for the services of today from tomorrow's money.

We have allowed ourselves to consume so heavily today that we have borrowed from a very unpredictable future. Tom Wolfe, a major U.S. social commentator and writer , I would like to read a couple of quotes from an

article that he wrote, and it was excerpted in the Toronto Globe and Mail on January 14 of this year.

In talking about the future, he states: "The next century, I predict, will compound this century's notion of a future as something exciting, unexpected or radiant, as progress to use an old word." He goes on to say about what the people in the 21s t Century, when they look back at us and how we have conducted ourselves in the 20th Century, he says: "But above all, they will look back upon the 20th as a century in which their forebearers had the amazing confidence, the Promethean hubris to defy the gods, to try to push men's power and freedom to lim itless, godless extremes.

They will look back in awe, without the slightest temptation to emulate the daring of those who swept aside all rules and tried to start from zero." Mr. Deputy Speaker, one of the worries that I have, being a relatively young person of my generation and not quite reaching the fourth decade of my life, is that my generation Is the first generation that I'm aware of in recent times at least which has threatened today to 190 present our heirs and future generations with less of a future to look forward to than we have had.

No doubt, they will still be paying off our debts well Into the end of their generation, unless we can bring more control into how we are dispensing and putting obligations upon those people into the future. We have to get our own houses far more in order. I for one believe that we, not as individual members of the House alone or not in any particular political party but we're in this as a country together - it's our responsibility to get ourselves out. We're not going to get ourselves out by going into election campaigns like we both did the last time and promising more and more and more.

We have a Federal Government who, it looks by the last Federal Budget, have given up on fighting the deficit and trying to - (Interjection) - Well, I give the Federal Government credit for stopping the growth in the federal deficit. I don't give them much credit for giving up on trying - (Interjection) - I don't give them much credit for eliminating the prospects of further reducing it. They have now put it off for the next three years at the same levels, and you can't project what's going to happen in the next three years any more than I can.

But I don't believe that in the next three years they are going to be any more capable of paying back these huge accumulated deficits that we're accruing in this country any more than we are today. So, Mr. Wilson, due unf ortun ately to political pressures - and this comes into the public itself where it must accept some deal of the responsibility, because it continually Is bought by the people who offer the most money.

So the individuals who are voting, the indi vidua l citizens of our country have a shared responsibility in where we are today, because they do not emphasize when they go to the polls and do not emphasize, between going to the polls, sufficiently the need for governments of all stripes to reduce the obligations that we're putting on to future generations. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I've only got a few more minutes left and I would like to spend a couple of minutes on Crown corporations because it's something that's near and dear to me.

I believe very strongly in the role of a public sector in the economy, particularly in the areas of utilities, in providing of essential or compulsory services. We have Crown corporations because they have historically been able to provide a better, a more efficient service to the recipients of those services. That is why we have a government-owned hydro utility, and that's common virtually across the whole country.

Similarly, several provinces have telephone util ities - one municipality, and some small municipalities, as well, have their own telephone services - because they collectively could provide a better and less costly service than could the private sector. We now have I believe a responsibility, and it's not unique to ourselves, but perhaps one of the biggest weaknesses we have in running our Crown corporations is the lack of the need for Crown corporations to generate profits. The profit of a Crown corporation is not something that just disappears or is something that Is taken out of the ratepayers' pockets.

The profits enable, In all instances, to reduce the amount of borrowing required by the utilities for their future expansion, and their future

MondaJ, 22 February, 1988 expansion and upgrading is necessary in all of our utilities. lt's an ongoing thing; you cannot escape it. For every $10 million of profit we earn, that's $10 million less we have to spend to maintain a similar level of Capital expenditures. lt gives us greater flexibility; it gives us, I believe, a more responsible attitude toward the running and the responsibility of our Crowns to be self-sufficient.

Recently, just in the month of January, the Manitoba Telephone System, of which I'm very proud to sit on the board, adopted a new mission statement, and as soon as the Page returns, I would like to pass this mission statement out so all members of the House can receive one. I would like to read it to you because I'm proud of the document. I think not only is it well stated, but it provides a good direction for that firm for the foreseeable future.

The MTS mission is stated as: "To serve the province and its people, by overcoming the barriers of time and distance, to telecommunications solutions, outstanding service and superior products. Our corporate goals to achieve this mission are, to provide customer satisfaction; to be financially responsible and self­ sufficient; to pursue agressively market opportunities; to provide equal opportunities and to develop dedicated, well-trained emplo yees; to be a good corporate citizen; and to keep the public well informed." Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I believe that those as general guideline s would be well to be adopted by any corporation In this country and in this province.

We have, in our corporations - in our Crown corporations in particular - a responsiblity to become more accountable and to become more open with the public who are our ultimate owners, and through the establishment last year of the new Crown Investments Corporation to act essentially as a holding company for our major Crowns, will, I believe, facilitate the improved access and the Improved accountability of our Crown corporations. lt necessitates the corporations to get out Into the public to have more direct public consultations.

Something I would like to add to the already growing list of requirements for our public Crowns Is the generation on a regular basis, perhaps one month after each quarter, of quarterly financial statements. I say that because I believe that if we are offering quarterly financial statements there would be less room for surprises. We wouldn't be a year-and-a-half or a year after the fact, or six months after the fact, before we realize or the public realizes as well that their public corporation Is having some difficulties.

The people would be able to respond more quickly and be able to, as well, In the management of the corporation, be at greater liberty, I suppose, not only to discuss but also have an obligation to discuss the viability of the corporations. I believe that this idea of quarterly reports would be much stronger even than the request to go through the Public Utility Board process. For the PUB process In itself, while it can be beneficial, is also an extremely costly enterprise. I believe, In general, it has been beneficial.

Sometimes I won der, when one looks at the presentations and some of the presentations that have made to the Public Utilities Board recently on the hydro rate request. People making statements before the 191 board are essentially saying that present-day consumers have no obligations toward funding up front a portion of future major Capital requirements such as generating stations.

I do not think it is at all irresponsible to go ahead and to bank some money so that when you start into a major new enterprise, be it a transmission line from the north down to the south, or be it constructon of a new plant, that we should have some money up front to cover the first couple of years of construction of that plant. lt would reduce dramatically the amount of int erest that is requir ed for the funding and the construction of that plant; and the interest costs are even greater than the cost of construction in the long term on any of our major utilities, at least within Hydro, on any of the power generating stations.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, in regard to Autopac, I have been somewhat distressed at some of the arguments that have come from members opposite and some of the media in attacking our Public Insurance Corporation for the provision of automobile insurance. I think it has been highly irresponsible in many istances. I don't mind whatsoever having constructive criticism, but I fear that much of the criticism that has been labelled and levelled against Autopac has been an effort to destroy the corporation.

If that corporation does not get back on its financial feet and generating profits to reduce not only last year's losses, but also to eliminate this year's losses which are still expected, even with the substantial rate hikes that we've had, the corporation is still expected to lose money unless there is a profound decrease in settlements on personal injury claims and a decrease in the number of accidents in this province. We, as drivers, have to share some responsibility there as well.

Let us not live on cloud nine thinking that we can have the ultimate in services and coverage and not pay for those services and that coverage. lt is just not possible. it's not possible in a private corporation; it's not possible in a public corporation. For us to run our Crown corporations, even in some instances having Legislative requirements, virtually, for them to run as break-even operations, you build no level of flexibility when you are continually - just barely - meeting your cost.

One bad year puts the corporation in a very difficult situation not simply in a financial status, but more importantly perhaps, for some of the corporations in the public trust. For when the public trust disappears for a Crown corporation, no matter how legitimate that corporation may well be, the future of the corporation is grossly in doubt.

Perhaps most distressing is that if that corporation or if any particular Crown was to go down, in a Crown offering in a utility sector, you can bet your bottom dollar that whatever company comes in to replace that and pick up, providing those essential services, will be doing it at a much higher level of cost to the individual ratepayers than our utilities now, or expect to be charged in the future. One concern I have for the other Crown corporations, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, Is that because of the amount of media attention and the amount of outrage that has been manipulated around the Autopac issue, we will run some risk in the future of not providing sufficient rate inc reases to enable our other major Crown corporations to finance ongoing major reconstruction and new construction projects.

Monday, 22 February, 1988 We have to be able to fund those as we go along, at least partially, and we have now been relying far too much on the major capital programs, be it financed totally out of debt equity or our depreciation allowances. I believe that we have to start generating far more cash flow in the corporations to reduce the amount of borrowed funds that are required. If we go into any type of recession whatsoever, all the corporations will be at substantial risk, not only the Crown corporations, but I believe all of our governments across this country.

There is not one right now that is running on a balanced budget, and that is after we have had six years of substantial growth. I call on members not only on my side of the House but members opposite as well to work together through the committees of this House, through debate in this House, to build and to bring a greater degree of expend itur e control in particular, in the future expenditures of our province and that we, working together, can build a better future in the province.

Working apart and just with a constant small narrow political bickering, we are not going to accomplish anything because we have failed to accomplish what is expected of us in the past number of years. Thank you very much, Mr. Deputy Speaker . MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. lt is again a privilege to address the Chamber in this one of our more important debates that we have in the Chamber, the other one being, of course, the Budget Debate. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I extend my customary and usual congratulations to all of us for having survived yet another year and being prepared to conduct the government's business once again. That includes the Speaker's staff and other people who serve us in this Chamber. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I had some specific advice for the Member for St.

Vital, which I'd like to dispense with later on; although allow me to say that listening to speeches of the kind that we just heard from the Member for lnkster, which I believe was probably if you had to go back and research the speeches that he has made in the House, by far one of the more responsible, common-sense, intelligent speeches that we've heard from the Member for lnkster for many a year and I congratulate for him that. Recognition comes slow on the part of members opposite but I, for one, am somewhat buoyed by the thought that if it can come at all to a member like the Member for lnkster, then, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, there surely must still be hope in this province of ours that responsible, sane government can prevail. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I try to make a point of listening to many of the speeches in the House. I seldom go back and reread the speeches - I mean that is asking a great deal on the part of anybody - but I did so In the case of the Honourable Member for St. Vital when he addressed the House a week ago Friday as Mover of the Throne Speech. Mr. Deputy Speaker, it is certainly not unique or uncommon for a member of the Opposition to be at 192 variance with his government from time to time.

That has happened. Certainly, it has happened within the ranks of the party that I have been long associated with. 1t has happened within this Chamber that I can recall. Members opposite won't, but certainly a member from the North, Mr. Gordon Beard, who was less than pleased with the performance of the Conservative administration in 1969, took considerable time of the House to make the Government of the Day aware of the fact that as far as he was concerned, his government wasn't performing in the way that he would like it to perform. Indeed, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, if I may recite a bit more history, he then went on to win that election in 1969 and came back into the Chamber and sat as an independent and became very influential in terms of that period of time, when the then newly elected New Democratic Party formed a minority government, prior to the time that my now departed friend and colleague, the Member for St. Bon iface, chose to make his move, but it was a Conservative member, Mr. Gordon Beard, who at that time played a pivotal role in the affairs of the Provincial Government. So Mr. Deputy Speaker, simply for the Member for St.

Vital to un burden himself and to criticize his government is in itself not so unique. But Mr. Deputy Speaker, what is perhaps unique about his situation is the occasion that he used to do it with. He was after all, the Mover of this government's Throne Speech. By and large, the whole idea of a mover or seconder - we do that everyday in our House. If I'm asking my colleague to second a motion for me, as we often do, I'm assuming that he is supportive of that motion that I am presenting, or else he distances himself from me and refuses to allow his name to be used to move or to second that motion.

So it is a rather unique situation that we have a former Speaker of the House, senior member of the party of the Government of the Day, unrecognized, I might add, by the Government of the Day, but taking the occasion to make the kind of speech that he made while moving the Throne Speech. However, Mr. Deputy Speaker, for those of us who listened to the Throne Speech, for those of us who have read this Throne Spee ch, we can understand that too. We can understand that too. I do have some specific advice for the Honourable Member for St. Vrtal. I give this advice in all seriousness.

As I mentioned, I did take the time to reread his comments of Friday last. I interpreted his speech as not so much of a long-time party faithful party worker, sitting party member, elected member, of a betrayal or of a decision that he had already come to with respect to his future with the Government of the Day, but one as using his position and using that occasion right at the start of the Session in moving the Throne Speech to issue a pretty clear warning, a pretty clear signal, some pretty sound common-sense advice to his party colleagues who form the Government of Manitoba today. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, when he suggests, as he does, on page 22 of his speech last Friday, the government will probably turn around and say that's nothing new, we know all about that - referring to some of the criticisms that he had in his speech - we've heard all those problems before; we're dealing with them, they're

Monday, 22 February, 1988 in hand; we really don't need any more criticism from you; we're getting enough from the Conservatives opposite; then the Member for St. Vital goes on to say: "If they take that point of view then my remarks would have been wasted, and I might as well not have said that. But if they take them as they were meant, as a constructive assessment, if you like, of the present situation in the province, maybe the topic once defined can be addressed and maybe it can be cured." Mr. Deputy Speaker , it's on this, I think, reasoned observation made by the Member for St.

Vital that I now offer this very serious advice to the honourable member. I inter pret it as an expression of hope on his part, that his colleagues, his government, does take seriously, does take the heart of the affairs of state in this Province of Manitoba. I take it that he, in his speech, does hope to Influence them In their decision-making over the course of this next Session. He says that by the way he places his remarks. I, of course, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, speaking in support of the motion that we're speaking to, name ly, the resolution of my leader, would In the first Instance encourage him to support that resolution. But, Mr. Deputy Speak er, I am also only too keenly and well aware that the move to do so, to contemplate doing so, is a very difficult one for anybody who has served a political organization, who has dedicated himself to a political organization, particularly for the number of years, and I might add, with the style and class of the Member for St. Vital, Is indeed a great deal to ask and very difficult. I offer him this advice.

I suggest that during the supper hour adjournment he takes his lovely wife, Valerle, out for supper and contemplate the affairs of state in the Province of Manitoba and not show up for the vote at 9:30 p.m. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I am offe ring him this opportunity. He knows that action will not defeat the government. I want the government defeat ed, and I'm asking him in the first instance to come and join us and help them defeat the government. That of course is the advice that I am giving him; that advice is being given In a straightforward, forthright manner.

We are honourable gentlemen In this House and from time to time we have to make hard decisions. The kind of speech, the kind of sentiments that the honourable member expressed in this Chamber would surely lead one to believe that that is the right course of action, that is the decision that he should come to. But, Mr. Deputy Speaker, If that decision Is too agonizing for him at this moment, there is of course that other decision at this point In time still to make and that is simply to allow him some time to see whether or not this government has accepted his advice.

Have they thrown away the words that he uttered last Friday? Su rely, Mr. Deputy Speaker , that his first clear indication perhaps will be as early as Friday next when the Budget Is brought down. In other words, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I know that the Member for St. Vital has a great deal to contemplate on this particular day.

I want him to know that he has certain ly, perhaps in a way that hasn't happened too often in this Chamber , certainly not In the kind of heated, partisan debates that we've had during the course of most of his political life and mine in this Chamber, that an individual mem ber, a single member can, In fact, fundamentally alter the 193 destiny of the affairs of state in this province.

And I say without hesitation - without hesitation - to bring about the kind of improvement and respond to the kind of hope, to respond to the level of anticipation that is out there, the general public, that somehow this government and this government's life will be brought to an end. And I reach out to my colleague, the Member for St. Vital, and ask him to join us in seeing that happen. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I appreciate that members have over the years - and traditionally - used the Throne Speech Debate to allow themselves the widest possible latitude in discussing all manners of conce rns that they may have, or that indeed their constituencies may have, and that of course is a much valued tradition which I have no objection to. Te chnically, of course, we are supposedly directing our comments towards the Throne Speech. Mr.

Deputy Speaker , I have not seen a Throne Speech that has so debased Its currency in terms of what a Throne Speech ought to be, because a Throne Speech does have a very serious and important purpose in any Legislature, any parliamentary system. A Throne Speech sets out, agreed In broad and general terms, the directions of a government. A Throne Speech also has a rule that includ es the specific commitments of a govern ment. Common term inology in a Throne Speech is: "My Mi nisters will; my Minis ters will do this; my Min isters will undertake that." Mr.

Deputy Speaker, you can read through most of this Throne Speech and find all of that missing. We have, in effect, a propaganda document here on free trade. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we're going to be debating that Issue. I don't know precisely in what form. I suggest, though, I suspect it likely will be in some form of a res olution. We'll certainly be debating it on a daily basis, you know, every other day in question period.

The government has already debated this at considerable government expense through various meetings throughout the width and breadth of the Province of Manitoba, and so have we, although any meetings that we've held, of course, have been at our expense or at our sponsor's expense, and not on the backs of the taxpayers. So what is this that is filling up five pages of the Throne Spee ch with respect to free trade? Where are the commitments? Where are the signals? Where is the direction that this government intends to take during the course of this Ses sion and those Sessions still remai ning to this gove rnment?

Or did they have a premonition, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that there were not going to be any more Sessions of this Legislature, that In fact this Session was going to be cut short and that they just had to fill up the pages, they just had to fill up the pages with some verbage? A MEMBER: They're groping. MR. H. ENNS: Because, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that's what it Is. That's what it is.

Where were the kind of commitments and promises made in previous Throne Speeches by this admin istration, or have they learned from the misr epresentation that they contained in previous Throne Speeches that it's best not to say anything in any Throne Speech?

Monda�. 22 February, 1888 Mr. Deputy Speaker, some years ago a Throne Speech promised a Freedom of Information Act. We've actually passed it. A MEMBER: Yes - two terms ago. MR. H. ENNS: But do we have freedom of information in this province? No.

Three Throne Speeches ago, a Throne Speech specifically mentioned three major hydro sales, export sales to the U.S., that would safeguard us from the kind of rate shock that Hydro ratepayers are now facing - a fact that the vice-president of Finance just alluded to in the last weeks in front of the Public Utilities Board hearings, saying that Hydro is going to be short $40 million. But three years ago, three Throne Speec hes ago, this First Min ister and his Cabinet Min isters had the audacity to put into a Throne Speech that they had concluded three major export sales to the United States. Where are they?

Where are they, Mr. Min ister of Energy? A MEMBER: Surely we can be forgiven for talking about the truth. MR. H. ENNS: Mr. Deputy Speaker, this is perhaps the reason this present Throne Speech is so bereft of any substance. They realize that some people do take the time to read them; some people do recall what was In past Throne Speeches, and so it's best not to be specific. lt's best not to show any signals; best not to give any indication at all as to where you're going. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I'll show you how generous the Opposition was prepared to be.

In dis cussion with our caucus, not breaking caucus confidentiality, but the general impression of caucus was not only of course what would be in the Throne Speech, but - well, we might even be persuaded to applaud them if they suggested in the Throne Speech that they would now be ready to proclaim The Freedom of information Act. What kind of answers have we received In the course of this short Session so far? in due course; In due course. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, that kind of track record leaves you with little confidence In what little substance there is in this Throne Speech, certainly gives Manitobans little encouragement for their immedia te future and certainly encourages all of us to do all we can, starting tonight, to replace this government. Mr. Deputy Speaker, the reference, and the major reference in the Throne Speech with respect to the free trade issue, and in particular its reservations about what a potential free trade deal with the United States of America can do with respect to our energy sources is expressed in the Throne Speech.

I suppose, Mr. Speaker, that the kind of distortion - well, I'll even be stronger - the kind of fear mongering that this government has embarked on with respect to the free trade deal has seldom been seen before in the annals of this province, If indeed in the annals of this country. That's what it is - blatant anti-Americanism - blatant anti-Amerlcanism at its worst. But we should have expected nothing less from this government. They, after all, are that group that rejoices at the burning of an American flag.

They are, after all, that group that has successfully driven out the American Consul 194 representation that we for 65 years had here in Winnipeg, servicing not only us but visiting Americans. They are the government that won't even finish double­ lanlng a highway that leads to the border because they don't particularly want Americans to come to visit us and they don't want us to go and visit them. Well, that's just about how foolish it is, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I see the Min ister responsible for Autopac gets a chuckle out of that.

He was in the House when his Min ister of Highways, one Honourable Joseph Borowski, stood up in the House and gave that as a reason why they did not want to double lane No. 75. They did not want to encourage north-south tourist traffic. A MEMBER: And he was there. MR. H. ENNS: And you were there. You were part of that Cabinet, Billie. Pardon me, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I should not be referring to him by name. But, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, the fear and the distortion that Is now being paraded by this government and they are spending taxpayers' money on - and I will restrict myself strictly to the energy field - the fact that somehow or other, under the free trade deal, the Americans will be able to seize our energy sources or take our energy when they want it. That, of course, prompted that infamous remark from the Member for St. James about if we did not give them everything they wanted, the United States Marines would come marching in. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, they know better because in 1973 and 19 74 a mino rity Liberal Government, supported by New Democrats, Mr. David Lewis, all voted in favour of an international energy accord which has far more onerous obligations on our energy resources than the present free trade deal. it means that we share our energy, not just with the Americans but with the other Western indus trialized nations as well. That bill was brought about because of the crisis after the immediate energy situation, the OPEC decision in 1973.

Wha t really caused un necesary harm to western economies was the kind of, you know, grab while the grabbing was good, the hoarding of whoever had what energy was available to them. That caused a great deal of turmoil in the western democracies. So to avoid that, in what I call a laudator y, complementary bit of international statesmanship, the western ind ustrialized countries each agreed to pass legislation which would, in the event of another energy crisis, empower an international board to in effect ration, to in effect provide mandatory controls on how energy was to be used, Including those of Canada's, Mr.

Deputy Speaker. Every New Democrat, including Mr. Broadbent, and every Liberal, from Mr. Trudeau down, supported that in the House of Commons in 1973. That act was further amended in 1974 and it was further amended in 1979, which sets out the mandatory oblig ations that we have under these pieces of legislation in the case of an energy crisis. But, Mr. Deputy Speaker, it is the Mul roney-Reagan free trade deal that is now, all of a sudden, going to jeopardize our energy. What hypocritical nonsense! What disho nesty, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Why are they doing it? Why are they doing it? it's only somehow to

Monday, 22 February, 1988 colour our American friends in the worst possible light. I can't understand, and I will not forgive them for doing that. That Is not in the interests of Manitobans. That is not in the Interests of Canadians; that Is in the interest of small mean-spirited ness, balkanizatlon of one country. And you have the audacity to talk in your Throne Speech here about Olympian ideals of sportsmanship rising to the top. My good Lord! So, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, if they can be found so wanting on just one example of where a most extreme distortion Is taking place with respect to free trade, where they know that for some reason, particularly in a province like ours, in Manitoba, with the climate that we have, on a cold winter's day with the wind blowing like today, of course, the ordinary citizen would be concerned if he thought for a moment that Uncle Sam could all of a sudden turn off our energy switch, all of a sudden turn off our base heaters, turn off our stock waterers on our farms. Mr. Deputy Speaker, that Is never going to happen. You know that.

What's even worse, all of them know that, but they're prepared to use that on the hustings. They're prepared to use that at their tax-paid sponsored meetings to whip up anti-Amerlcanlsm, and to whip up the anti-Americanlsm that they generally grovel with - hardly the subject matter for a Throne Speech which is supposed to be uplifting, which Is supposed to show us some light, some guidance for the future. So, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I find that so discouraging on the part of honourable members opposite. They are swimming so mightily up the stream of public opinion on this one. Well, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I'm not fooled. They will convince and they will scare a certain number of our citizens. But, Mr. Deputy Speaker, you travel through the rural parts of Manitoba. You talk at some of the meetings that we've had. You talk to the 69 percent of the 1, 500 businesses In Manitoba who enthusiastically support free trade. They do so knowing that there will be some hard adjustment. They do so knowing that there will be some jobs lost, but hopefully others gained.

They don't need this kind of distortion, this kind of fearmongerlng that is being handed to them officially and, what is worse, paid for by their own money, by their own tax dollars. So, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I look forward to the debate with respect to free trade, whatever form it takes in this Cham ber. I know that, without question, I have the substantial majority of my constituents supporting me in the position that I'm taking In it, as it is in the case with most Instances, in most communities, where everyone has the opportunity for a reasonable, rational presentation of the events.

The crime that Is being omitted by the government, because I find that so many of the people who are writing to me or phoning me about free trade do not know enough about it, and they need to know more about it. But what they don't need to know about it is government propaganda. Give us the facts and let the people decide. I should not really let the Li beral Party off the hook on this issue. You know, Sir Wilfrid Laurier surely must be turning over In his grave these days when you consider that he lost a national election on that issue. But, Mr.

Deputy Speak er, I say this with some caution, because it is critical of a party that I represent. lt's 195 critical of the traditional Conservative point of view which all too often in its history has opposed expansion of trade with the Americans, but then principally because they were also extremely concerned about maintaining the ties with the Empire which, of course, no longer is there. Mr. Deputy Speaker, let me assure all the members opposite, they will lose the debate on free trade and they will lose the support of many Manitobans, particularly if they continue to argue in the manner that they have. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, just to touch on one more topic before I conclude, it was a shocking headline in the government's favourite media source, the Winnipeg Free Press, the other day: "Tax rise triples inflation rate, records show." Mr. Deputy Speaker, I can recall earnest social democrats lecturing the House from time to time in the past, about saying there's nothing wrong to im pose taxations to provide a needed social or humani tarian service.

There's nothing wrong to put a sales tax or put a larger personal income tax, preferably a larger corporate tax, on the people of this country or the people of this province, and to provide the Medicare services, the hospitalization services, the other social programs and physical programs, whether it's hi ghway construction or enhancement of our parks and so forth. That's what governments are for. That's how the argument went. Of course, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, to some extent, we've all accepted that point of view, although I think that some of us are now recognizing that we have probably stretched the limits because there is a di fference between my socialist friends and Conservatives. I am not prepared to take away all a person's earnings and retain it as government taxes and just dole back to him what I, in my wisdom as government, think he ought to retain.

I still think it ought to be the other way around, that a willing taxpayer pays to the government a certain portion of his earnings to provide the services that he deems are necessary from time to time. But what do we find now, after six years of this glorious government? Taxation that is going out of sight, tripling in six years, well ahead of inflation. Have our benefits tripled? Are we tripling our hospital beds? What's the situation with psychiatric services in this province? Have Autopac benefits tripled? Their rates have or just about, but the benefits went down. The benefits went down!

This finally is the position that this adminis tration finds itself in, and it really is the worst of all worst situations, where you are forced into a situation where you have to tax more and more and provide less and less. That, in the final analysis, is going to be your epitaph and will cause your collapse. What a legacy you've left for somebody to try to straighten out, for somebody to try to resume control, to try to bring our fin ances back to some sense of order. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, if nothing else, this Session should be remembered by all Manitobans as a Session where a spendthrift New Democratic Government has so debased, so abused so many of our institutions, including our Crowns, have so pushed and prodded the upper limits of Manitobans' capacity for paying taxes, and, at the same time, expecting them to mutely accept diminution of services. If there's any advantage at all of having this government before us, it is hopefully

Monday, 22 February, 1888 that a las ting, lasting memory of their mismanagement will be remembered by future Manitoban voters. Thank you. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Elmwood. MR. J. MA LOWAY: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Before I begin, I would like to pay tribute to the former dean of the House, the former Mem ber for St. Boniface, who served the House as an MLA and as a Cabinet Min ister very well for a number of years. I listened to