ISSN 0542-5492 Second Session - Thirty-Second Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS 31-32 Elizabeth II Publlahed under the authority of The Honourable'D. Jame• Walding Speaker VOL. XXXI No. 65 - 2:00 p.m., WEDNESDAY, 11 MAY, 1983. Prrnted by the Office of the OUtlfNls Pr•nlef. Province of Manitoba

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty- Second Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation Name ADAM, Hon. A.R. (Pete) ANSTETT, Andy ASHTON, Steve BANMAN, Robert (Bob) BLAKE, David R. (Dave) BROWN, Arnold BUCKLASCHUK, John M. CARROLL, Q.C., Henry N. CORRIN, Brian COWAN, Hon. Jay DESJARDINS, Hon. Laurent DODICK, Doreen DOERN, Russell DOLIN, Mary Beth DOWNEY, James E. DRIEDGER, Albert ENNS, Harry EVANS, Hon. Leonard S. EYLER, Phil FILMON, Gary FOX, Peter GOURLAY, D.M. (Doug) GRAHAM, Harry HAMMOND, Gerrie HARAPIAK, Harry M. HARPER, &lijah HEMPHILL, Hon. Maureen HYDE, Lloyd JOHNSTON, J.

Frank KOSTYRA,Ho n. Eugene KOVNATS,Abe LECUYER, Gerard LYON, Q.C., Hon. Sterling MACKLING, Q.C., Hon. Al MALINOWSKI, Donald M. MANNESS, Clayton McKENZIE, J. Wally MERCIER, Q.C., G.W.J. (Gerry) NORDMAN, Rurik (Ric) OLESON, Charlotte ORCHARD, Donald PAWLEY, Q.C., Hon. Howard R. PARASIUK, Hon. Wilson PENNER, Q.C., Hon. Roland PHILLIPS, Myrna A. PLOHMAN, John RANSOM, A. Brian SANTOS, Conrad SCHROEDER, Hon. Vic SCOTT, Don SHERMAN, L.R. (Bud) SMITH, Hon. Muriel STEEN, Warren STORIE, Jerry T. URU9KI, Hon. Bill USKIW, Hon. Samuel WALDING, Hon. D. James Constituency Ste.

Rose Springfield Thompson La Verendrye Minnedosa Rhineland Gimli Brandon West Ellice Churchill St. Boniface Riel Elm wood Kildonan Arthur Emerson Lakeside Brandon East River East Tuxedo Concordia Swan River Virden Kirkfield Park The Pas Rupertsland Logan Portage la Prairie Sturgeon Creek Seven Oaks Niakwa Radisson Charleswood St. James St. Johns Morris Roblin-Russell St. Norbert Assiniboia Gladstone Pembina Selkirk Transcona Fort Rouge Wolseley Dauphin Turtle Mountain Burrows Rossmere lnkster Fort Garry Osborne River Heights Flin Flon Interlake Lac du Bonnet St.

Vital Party NDP NDP NDP PC PC PC NDP IND NDP NDP NDP NDP NDP NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP PC NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP NDP PC PC NDP PC NDP PC NDP NDP PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP NDP NDP NDP NDP PC NDP NDP NDP PC NOP PC NDP NDP NDP NDP

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, 11 May, 1983. Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. J. Walding: Presenting Petitions . . Reading and Receiving Petitions . . PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMIT TEES MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River East. MR. P. EYLER: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted certain resolutions, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the Member for St. Johns, that the report of the committee be received. MOTION presented and carried. MR.

SPEAKER: Ministerial Statements and Tabling of Reports . . . Notices of Motion . . . Introduction of Bills .. INTRODUCTION Of GUESTS MR. SPEAKER: Before we reach Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery where we have 29 students of Grade 5 standing from the R.F. Morrison School, under the direction of Miss Chick. The school is in the constituency of the Honourable Minister of Labour. There are also 19 students of Grades 6 and 7 from the Cormorant Lake School. The students are under the direction of Mrs. Peden and Miss Sematte.

They are from the constituency of the Honourable Member for The Pas. There are 18 students of Grade 11 standing from the Elm Creek School under the direction of Mr. Woods. The school is in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Morris. There are some out-of-country guests too. Luis Vargas from Ecquador and Andrez Lopez from Guatamala and Mr. Settee is the co-ordinator. They are guests of the Honourable Member for Rupertsland. On behalf of all of the members, I welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTIONS Abortion Clinic - Dr. Morgentaler MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G.

MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Attorney-General. In view of the statements by Dr. Morgentaler that abortions have been performed in his Winnipeg clinic contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada, will the Attorney-General request the police to conduct an investigation immediately? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: Mr. Speaker, I note from the news reports that Dr. Morgentaler's Winnipeg lawyer doesn't believe Dr. Morgentaler and I don't know why .I should. The statement made by Dr. Morgentaler may or may not be true.

We have, in the City of Winnipeg, an excellent police force. I notice they have made statements; they are fully cognizant of their duty and in due course they will carry out such investigations as are required when notice of a crime or an attempted crime is brought to their attention in a way they believe proper to commence such an investigation. The police are not derelict in their duty. I may be the Chief Law Enforcement of the Crown but I'm not "super cop" nor do I intend to take over the functions of the City of Winnipeg Police Force. They know perfectly well what to do.

They need neither direction from myself or from anyone else in the House. As I've said time and time again, and I just want to emphasize, I think that the law should take its usual and normal course. There no doubt will be, at some early time I would think, a complaint that will be made to the police. I would be surprised if the police were not indeed alert to the situation and appear to be keeping an eye on the premises in order to maintain peace and order, in any event. All of these things are happening as they should.

It needs no intervention on my part nor on anyone else's part and I think that the police would resent my issuing orders to the police. Indeed, if I were to overstep my authority and purport to issue directives over the head of the proper authorities managing the Winnipeg Police Force, then maybe there might legitimately be a call for my resignation. Those members opposite who live and dream and hope that they will see that event have got a long life and a long dream and an impossible hope in front of them.

I have followed, and I will follow my constitutional authority and, believe me, I will not resign on this issue because what I'm doing is correct. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, Dr. Morgentaler's also reported as saying that he has not kept his legal counsel in Winnipeg up to date. Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the Attorney­ General, when he thought it would be convenient and helpful to him and his party, directed an investigation into the identity of the person who burned the flag in front of the U.S.

Consulate and asked that criminal charges be considered; in view of that directive which he issued when he thought it was convenient and helpful to him, how long is he going to continue not taking any action, Mr. Speaker, before the police are asked to investigate? HON. R. PENNER: Indeed, I have treated this situation in the same way that I've treated previous situations, 2643

Wednesday, 11 May, 1983 namely. I have some time ago, met with the Director of Prosecutions and senior officials in my department and asked them. first of all, to brief me on what would be the normal and usual course to be assured that they as the senior officials in my department will be keep ing in touch with the police autho rities on developments and that they will take the appropria te steps. To suggest that I would have done otherwise, or have done otherwise is ill-founded and impr oper.

I have acted in this way consistently with any other step that I' ve taken when I've found it necessary to be in contact with the police. I do it ... A MEMBER: It's not acceptable. HON. R. PENNER: . . . well, it's acceptable to the people of Manitoba because what I am doing is right. It is legally right, it is constitutionally right and I will not assume the function of the High Sheriff of Manitoba. I am not that. At least the Mem ber for St. Norbert ought to understand that.

I doubt very much whether he purported to take over the functions of the police authorities in this province when he was the Attorney­ General, and I will not. But I have, as is appropriate for me, and it is exactly the way I proceeded with respect to the flag-burning incident with respect to the Jimm y Mann incident. I contacted the Director of Prosecutions through the Deputy Attorney-General, to make sure that they were on top of the particular issue and that when there was any evidence that might lead to the layi ng of a ch arge , then in the ap propr iate circumstances a charge would be laid.

There is no incons istency and I will not take the kin d of hectoring from the backbenches of the opposition that suggests - nor will I, Mr. Speaker, nor will I . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. HON. R. PENNER: . . . be pressured by the legal illiterates on that side for doing that which I cannot do. Abortion Clinics MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is to the First Minis ter. In view of the lack of action by the Attorney-General, Mr.

Speaker, and in view of his often stated personal opinion that he does not support the existing provisions of the Criminal Code with respect to abortions, would the First Mini ster, in order that the people of Manitoba might have some confidence that the law will be upheld, replace the Attorney-General with someone who will uphold the law? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Min ister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, I have no doubt, nor do the vast majority of Mani tobans have any doubt, that Manitoba has an Attorney-General that will uphold the law. Request for Tabling of Standard and Poor's Telex MR.

SPEAKER: The Honour able Leader of the Opposition. HON. S. LYON: Mr. Speaker, some few days ago, when the First Min ister got around to reporting about Standard and Poor's reduction of Manitoba's credit rating, he read from a telex which conv eyed that bad news to the Government of Manitoba. He was asked to table the telex at that time. From enqui ries with the Clerk, I find it has not been tabled. Would the First Min ister table the document as he undertook to do? HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, if it has not been tabled, then I would apologize to the Leader of the Opposition for not having done so and will arrange for the immed iate tabling of same. Manitoba's Increase in Spending MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Turtle Mounta in. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, there is a news item in the May 11 th edition of the Globe and Mail headed "B udgetary chaos must end - Pawley." The Premier of the Province is quoted in the

article as saying, "We can no longer afford the luxury of 11 governments working separately in splendid isolation, one from the other." In recent Budgets, Sir, Ontario has announc ed that their spending will be going up by approximately 7. 7 percent, New Br unswick by 9.4 per cent, Saskatchewan by approxi mately 8 percent, and Quebec by 9 percent, while Manitoba has a 19.2 percent increase in spending. Does this meet the First Mini ster's definition of splendid isolation? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minis ter. HON. H.

PAWLEY: The Member for Turtle Mountain conveniently is overlook ing the fact that there is no accurate comparison insofar as this year's printed Estimates in respect to last year's printed Estimates. Also, the Mem ber for Turtle Mountain is overlooking the fact that this Manitoba Budget includes a $200 million item pertaining to Job Creation. Mr.

Speaker, we are in fact discussing a thrust, which I believe and I think that more and more Canadians over a period of time will also accept, that it is time that governments in Canada work together co-operatively within the co­ operative federal system to resolve the problems that exist in Canada. That means, Mr. Speaker, not 11 different governments putting together their Budgets without discussions , without consultation, without the sharing of informati on, as inde ed is the case at the present time in Canada.

If we're to overcome the problems of an economy and trouble, if we are to overcome the problems of rising unemployment, Mr. Speaker, this is a must. Jobs Fund - allocation of funds MR. B. RANSOM: A supplementary to the First Min ister. Mr. Speaker, can the First Min ister confirm that of the 2644

Wednesday, 11 May, 1983 unpr ecedented $579 million deficit projected for Manitoba this year, that the $200 million Jobs Fund which the Mini ster refers to will really only have approxi mately $1 8.7 million of mo ney cont ributing toward that $579 million deficit? HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speake r, let me assure the Member for Turtle Mountain that we will not follow the lead of the Province of Alberta and im pose per diems in respect to stays in hospitals.

We will not be following the lead of the New Brunswick Budg et and be imp osing deterrent fees in respect to visits by out-patient care in the medical system in the Province of New Brunswick. Mr. Speak er, if that is the price to follow lead of other Conservative Governments in Canada, then I'm pleased that Manitoba's out of step. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Member for Turtle Mountai n. MR. B. RANSOM: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I had a question for the First Min ister which he didn't answer.

I asked him whether or not he would confirm that of his $200 million Jobs Fund that only $1 8.7 million of that fund will actually contribute to the record $579 million deficit his Min ister of Finance is projecting ? HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Spe ak er, the honourable member is basing his statement on presumptions that we'll be delighted to discuss during the appropria te time during the Estimates of the Jobs Fund. Mandan Interconnection MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Min ister responsible for Manitoba Hydro.

Could the Min ister ind icate whether a final decision has been made on the routing of the Mandan hydro line interconnection with the Uni ted States? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Energy and Min es. HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr. Speaker, there's a process being follo wed through the Provincial Land Us e Comm ittee, and that decision has not been made in the final form. MR. D. ORCHARD: I thank the Mini ster for that answer. Could the Mi nister ind icate roughly the time frame in which we could expect a decision to be made on the routing? HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr.

Speaker, I'll take that question as notice because I'd like to provide a very defin itive answer, in that that's not dir ectly under Manitoba Hydro's jurisdiction, it's under the Provincial Land Use Committee's jurisdiction. Press Releases MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for La Verendrye. MR. R. BANMAN: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker, I ask my question of the Premier who's responsible for the Communic ations Branch and would ask him, in light of the fact that the government is now using third-party quotations, that is to say they are soliciting responses from indi viduals, from people who received grants and then using them in their press releases, will the Mini ster inform the House whether or not this particular practice will be continued and is this one of the new thrusts of this government? HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'm not qui te sure what example that the honourable member is referring to.

It would, indeed, have helped if the honourable member had shared the basis for his question with me prior to the question period. The only time that I can recall any repeated and steady basis - and I'm not necessarily saying that in some cases it is not acceptable - was, I recall, frequent and repeated use of third-party recom mendations dur ing the Stay in Mani toba advertising campaign of a few years ago. I can recall those third-party quotations and comments very vividly. There may very well be some instances where third parties have spoken favourably in respect to certain government initiatives.

I don't know what the honourable member is referring to. It might have helped for him to have shared his concerns with me so I could have given him a more appropriate answer. MR. R. BANMAN: Well, Mr. Speaker, in a further question to the same Min ister with regard to the use of and soliciting of quotations from indi viduals to use in their news releases, has the First Min ister revised the longstanding policy of Information Services, which says that this type of release, the soliciting of third­ party quot&,lions and the using of the same is of a political nature and is not allowed.

Has the First Mini ster reversed that longstanding policy? HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speak er, there has no change in respect to the policies of the Information Service System in the Province of Manitoba. I would be pleased to examine, to check into, because I have found, Mr. Speaker, it's wise not to accept too quickly some of the premises from our honourable friends across the way. I would prefer if the honourable friend would share with me the clipping or the release that he's making reference to so that I can examine it and, hopefully, Mr.

Speaker, be able to offer some, I trust, objective response to the honourable member's question. MR. R. BANMAN: Well, Mr. Speaker, I would refer the First Mini ster to the press release put out by the Mini ster of Education dealing with the Small Schools Program Upgrading Oppo rtun ities in which a num ber of quo tations are· used. A further question to the First Min ister, since the former Member for St. Johns, the now Chairman of Hydro, described this type of press release, when he was in opposition, as propaganda, will the First Min ister now assure this House that these propaganda practices 2645

Wednesday, 11 May, 1983 which are now being employed by this government will be stopped right away? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Min ister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, again, I'm not on the verge of accepting the honourable member's word for an impli cation within his question that a news release that he's making to is propaganda. I will obtain a copy of the release and before I, for a moment, Mr. Speaker, would accept the honourable member's question, I would check it out very carefully because the honourable member's track record isn't frequently that good in givi ng a fair and objective appraisal. MR. R.

BANMAN: Well, in light of the First Min ister's comments, I wonder if the First Mi nister would inform the House whether or not the Hansard of Tuesday, March 3, 1981, in which the Mem ber for St. Johns, the now Chairman of Hydro, said that this v:as propaganda, whether or not that is factual. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, I would be very surprised, and I think the honourable member better clarif y his state ments. Is the honourable member suggesting that the former Mem ber for St.

Johns, the present Chairman of Manitoba Hydro, in Comm ittee of Utilitie s, denounced a release that was issued by the Min ister of Education of this government as being one of propaganda? If in deed that is the case then, Mr. Speaker, I might wish to have some discussions with the Member for St. Johns who I have a great deal of appreciation for his judgment. But indeed if he offered that by way of advice in the Utilities Comm ittee I will want, Mr. Speaker, to find out from the Member for St.

Johns why he, in Utilities Commit tee, is denouncing the press release that's been issued by my colleague, the Min ister of Education. I am now more anxious than ever to receive the information that the honourable member is referring to. MR. R. BANMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If the First Min ister would care to listen and maybe clean his ears sometimes, he would have found out I said 1981, so he doesn't have to ...

Since the Min ister of Education now has set up a Commun ications Branch with seven people in it, costing the taxpayers of Manitoba over $300,000 in money, how does this jib e now with the First Min ister's uttering several - about a year ago - that he was now going to be personally responsible for the Communi cations Branch and the things that happen? This policy that I referred to and the questions I'v e been asking today deal with some thing that fal ls dir ectly un der his responsibil ity. If he wants to be catty in this House, that's up to him, but he is responsible for it.

This is a policy that has been established many years ago, dealing with Information Services, and let him not get up and try to be cute with this side of the House. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, I regret very much if it appears that I' ve been catty when I questioned a statement by the honourable member that the former Mem ber for St. Johns had denounced a release issued by the Min ister of Ed uca tio n as being one of propaganda. Mr. Speaker, is it to be catty to question the valid ity, or lack of valid ity, offered by a member across the way?

If the honourable member can validate his statement that he made a few moments ago, then, Mr. Speaker, my colleagues and I would appreciate receiving his advic e, rather than his going into a harangue in this House, based upon some incorrect assumptions that he appears to have made but a few moments ago. MACC - loan Guarantee Program MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Roblin­ Russell. MR. W. McKENZIE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Honourable Min ister of Agriculture.

I wonder, can the Min ister of Agriculture advise the House and the farming community if MACC are prepared to remove or adjust the caveats that are registered against those parcels of land that were purchased through the Land Bank Program, so that these particular farmers can qualify or make application for operating loans from the lending institutions in our province. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mini ster of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to advise the honourable member that a decision has been made in order to peg the amount of capital gain that there will be on a land transaction.

Whereas under the old formula, it was an unknown amount that a farmer would have to try and estimate what one's gain would be. In that case, it was very difficult for himself or a lending institution to be able to agree upon what the value of equity would be, having stayed on the farm for a period of a year or more, or two or three, since the purchase was made. Mr. Speaker, letters are going out, are being prepared, to I believe approxi mately 500 clients offering them the option of a change in the caveat procedure.

They will have the opportunity to decide as to how they wish to deal with it, whether they wish to stay with the present procedure or they wish to have an amount pegged, and of cour se a change in the capital gain rate forgiveness from 5 percent a year to 10 percent a year for the length of time that they've held their farm. MR. W. McKENZIE: I thank the Honourable Min ister for that statement, Mr. Speak er. I'm not sure, as the Min ister said, that those letters are going out in the next week because the problems that were drawn to my attention are current.

Maybe could the Min ister further elabo rate and advise how he arrived at that amount? HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, the arriving at that amount - there was a difficulty and it has been in place for a number of years. The former admin istration were attempting to deal with the question. We took it in hand and arrived at the position to at least attempt to have a known amount as being the amount that would be determined as a capital gain.

So that whatever equity there was, by this calculation, a farmer would then be able to go to his lending institution and have at least something concr ete in terms of saying, "This is how much equity I have gained over the last numb er of 2646

Wednesday, 11 May, 1983 years since I' ve purchased the land." That calculation is being determined by - I believe there's a formula in place by MACC and letters will be going out. In fact, I believe some of the letters may have already been in the process of going out, but as the honourable member well kno ws, with approxima tely 500 clients and other pressing matters in the corporation, this would be an ongoing process. Farm lands Protection Board - Pricing of farm land MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I as well have a question for the Minis ter of Agriculture. Mr. Speaker, to the Minis ter of Agriculture, is it policy of this government and the Farm Lands Protection Board that the Farm Lands Protection Board is now becoming involved in the establishing of or getting involved in directing whether a farm is selling at a proper price, too high a price, or their decisio ns are being based on pricing of farm lands in Manitoba? MR. SPEAKER: The Hono urable Minis ter of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, I have not di rectly involved myself into the operations of the Farm Lands Board.

Any workings of the board would have been the work ings that would have been established by the former admini stration and would have been carried on. Mr. Speak er, we intend to as part of the legislation, as I'v e in dicated earlier, to set up rules and guidelines for the board and for citizens of Manitoba as to how we believe the procedures of the board should be followed. Those guidelines will be released in the next while so that people at least understand what the process will be, unlike what has been in place over the last number of years. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Speaker, will the government be establishing a policy

whereas farm lands will be priced, for example, like a catalogue or people will be allowed to buy and sell property only after the board makes a judgment on the value of that land if it is the right price, or if it is not? Is that one of the guideli nes that will be put in place by this government under the new Farm Lands Ownership Act? HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, to be very clear, no, that will not be the polic y.

But the honourable member should be aware as well that, I belie ve Canada Immi gration, in terms of granting legal status, does enquire of the applicant - and I am not certain I will have to check that out - who is purchasing a property or business, that the busi ness be a viable operation prior to granting tha t. I un derstand that Cana da Immi gration has those procedures, but I don't believe that is the workings of the Farm Lands Board or the Farm Lands Board should be inv olved in that whole area.

If an appr aisal is req uested by Canada Immi gration, those appraisals should be obtained from independent appraisal firms. The board should only be interested in whether or not the applicant is legal in terms of the

definitions of the Act. Farm Fuel MR. J. DOW NEY: Mr . Sp eaker , I ap preci ate the Mini ster's response in that regard. Another area, Mr.

Speaker, which I would like to ask the Min ister of Agriculture, in view of the fact that there has been very little action by this government dealing with the price of farm fuels and the request of a lowering of farm fuels by the federal taxation; in view of the fact that this government has not supported a resolution by the opposition requesting the Federal Government to lower the federal tax; in view of the fact that the Federal Government did respond to a request by the opposition to have a Min isters of Agriculture meeting dealing with the difficulties in the farm commu nity, and a telex which I have received today indi cating that the Deputies of Agriculture met yesterday on subjects such as farm fuel, the Federal Min ister of Agriculture has ind icated he has made representation to the Minis ter of Finance, requesting that farm fuels be consid ered exempt from federal taxation; will he now and his government get on side with the opposition and the farm commun ity, and support the resolution so that we can remove federal taxation from farm fuels?

HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to note that we are now debating Private Members' Hour during question period, Sir, and the resolution that is on the Order Paper will be debated later this afternoon. Mr. Speaker, the honourable member should be aware that, generally speaking, the debate in this House on this resolution, in terms of the amendment that has been put forward, have been generally supportive of that position . The Manitoba Government, Sir, has historically not impl emented a provincial tax on farm fuels. It has been the position and it remains to this day. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Speak er, a further question to the Min ister. In view of the fact that his Deputy as well as all the other deputies across Canada yesterday for the Departments of Agriculture, met to discuss issues such as the taxation on farm fuels, farm bankru ptcies, stabil ization pay outs from the Western Gr ain Stabi lization Program; will he table the recommendations from that Deputy Min isters' meeting which will be going to the Min isters? I, Mr.

Speaker, am prepared to table the telex which I received today communicating that information that the meeting did take place yesterday, and I would appreciate and ask him if he will table the outcome of that meeting so as the farm community can be assured someone, somewhere is trying to remove some of the high cost of opera ting and allevia te some of the bankrup tcies in the farm community? HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, I thank the honourable member for his telex. Mr. Speak er, we will continue to do what we can in terms of concrete measures to assist the farmers of this province.

Any correspondence that is dealt with and distrib uted as between other Provincial Gov ern me nts and the Federal Gov ernme nt would receive the same kind of distribution as has been in the past in terms of requi ring concurrence from parties. 2647

Wednesday, 11 May, 1983 Crop Insurance Office - Minnedosa location MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Mi nnedosa. MR. D. BLAKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is di rect to the Honourable Min ister of Agriculture also. In case the Min ister hasn't heard, the Crop Insurance Corporation have reaffirmed their decision to relocate the office from Min nedosa to Neepawa at a saving of approxi mately $2,000 per year, they claim, in mi leage.

In view of that paltry sum compared with the some $300,000 we've just learned that was allocated to gussy up the Department of Commu nications' and the Mini ster of Educ ati on's Department or Mi n istry, wou ld the Min ister of Agriculture now, in view of that small amount of savings, would he now consider meeting with the board and interv ening and saving the expense and the anxie ty and the dislo cation that's going to be caused by moving this office at this particular time? HON . B. URUSKI: Mr.

Sp eaker , I should tell the honourable members as I did earlier, and I have just received a copy of the letter from the corporation, that the corporation's decision shall be maintained. In terms of admin istration, I have have left the corporation to try and provide the services to the farmers of Manitoba in the most efficient and least costly way. We have not interfered in the decision-making of the corporation, unlike that of my honourable friends.

I think the Honourable Member for Gladstone as well, should have her views known as to what farmers from her area were saying, because I do know that there were representations made to have another office located in that area because it was inconvenient for farmers of that area. As I understand it, Sir, the numb ers of cont ract holders in most areas of the province have generally been of relatively similar amounts between districts.

The corporation did try to make this move some years ago and the honourable member kno ws that there was interference at the government level and prevented the corporation from making that move. They have ind icated again, they have reviewed it, they have reviewed the submi ssions of the people who came to that and the decision was made by that board. MR. D. BLAKE: Mr.

Speaker, I realize that any time the government can save $2,000 they can put a couple or three more deals like this together and they'll have enough to pay off the sum that was necessary to bail the Attorney-General out of a predictment that he got himself into. Mr. Speaker, the Minis ter of Agriculture has just confirmed what I've been saying all along, that there is a ne ed for boun dary changes, and a whole real ign ment of bound arie s in the crop in surance districts. Trading patterns have changed; special crops have inc reased the work of various offices.

This is what I'm saying, why doesn't he undertake a substantial review of the whole crop insurance operation instead of piddling around and tinkering with moving one office which is going to upset the whole apple cart? Would he consider looking into the whole matter of realignin g bounda ries for the whole crop districts of Manitoba? MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Min ister of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, I'd be pleased to pass that advice onto the corporations for the directors, so that they would take those considerations into their deliberations.

As well, the honourable member should be aware that while there is a di rect saving to the corporation there is also a saving that cannot be determined in terms of the travelling distance of the numb ers of claimants and contract holders from the area of the Honourable Member for Gladstone, who I'm sure would like to see her farmers travelling a shorter distance to their crop insurance office. MR. D. ORCHARD: They're saving the old Crow. MR. D. BLAKE: Mr. Speaker, a final supplementary, I have two things to ask the Min ister .

When he's considering looking at the bounda ry changes, in the meanti me, would he consider leaving the Cr op Insurance office where it is in Minn edosa and functioning very well? Order for Return - Crop Insurance office Second ly, would he undertake to expedite the Order for Return that I filed some two months ago asking for the cost savings, the cost benefit analysis, how many complaints received, and how many meetings were held with farmers, because the First Min ister maintains that consultation and open government is his main thrust?

Possib ly, if we had some answers to that Order for Return, we may be able to try and justify in some way what is happening to the crop insurance office. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr.

Chairman, when I asked the Board of Directors specifically on representations made in this Chamber to review all the information that they had, as well as to take in to consid eration the rep resentations tha t were made to them by the Honour able Member for Min ned osa and other representatives of municipal councils, I will not and have not interfered in the decision-making of that corporation in terms of providing the services to farmers of this province. Request for tabling of Standard and Poor's telex MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Min ister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, further to the question from the Honourable Leader of the Opposition, I'd like to table the Standard and Poor's telex. Robert H. Smith School MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Tuxedo. MR. G. Fll l\ll ON: Thank you, Mr. Speak er, my question is to the Honourable Min ister of Education. Due to the fact that the Rober t H. Smi th School has been closed down for some five-and-a-half months, and a request for funds to repair that school has been placed by the 2648

Wednesday, 11 May, 1983 Winnipeg School Division No. 1 before the Publi c Schools Finance Board for qui te some time now, I wonder if the Mini ster can ind icate when we can expect a decision on that matter. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Education. HON. M. HEMPHILL: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I can tell both the member and members of the commun ity, who will be interested in hearing, I expect to be able to give an answer on the Robert Smith School very shortly. In fact, to be a little more specific, I'm hoping it will be within days.

Just to make a comment on the point that he made about the amount of time that their request had been in, I just want to indi cate that while the request was in for awhile that there was not adequate information provided ini tially by the school board on enrolment pro ject ions and needs for the scho ol. The Public Schools Finance Board required and asked for more information and received it very quickly from the school division.

Subsequent ly, there was one other slight delay that was caused by a motion that was brought by the school board suggesting they were going to review five schools in the school division including Robert Smith. That raised the question of whether or not their original request for renovation still stood. The school board has confirmed that it does stand; the Publi c Schools Finance Board dealt with it last Frida y. It perhaps could be on my desk today and I intend to deal with it very qui ckly when it arrives. MR. G. FILMON: I thank the Mini ster for that assurance.

I wanted to just reinforce the point that apparently the latest news today is that the principal has been moved to another area. There is some talk and concern about teachers applying to move elsewhere, so would the Minis ter check into it, because it is my understanding that the recommendation is on her desk? HON. M. HEMPHILL: Yes, he's seen my desk this morning and I haven 't. Yes, Mr. Speaker, I want to say that the school board has confirmed that their original letter of request still stands. In other words, they have not changed their position on either the need or the use for the school.

Ori that basis, the Pub lic Schools Finance Board has dealt with it and made their decision. If it is on my desk tod ay, I will be dealing with it the mi nute that I can get out of the House, see my desk and deal with the work. Thank you. Core Area Agreement MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek. MR. F. JOH NSTON: Mr.

Speaker, in view of the fact that it took two years of very hard study and research to finally - my question is to the Min ister of Urban Affairs - sign the Core Area Agreement, could the Min ister inform the House or produce to this Hous e all of the research and studies for the first plan that was presented by Mr. Axworthy that the Minis ter of Urban Affairs accepted? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Cultural Affairs. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would hope that the current discussions that will be starting immed iately with the Federal Government, the City of Winnip eg and representatives of the province to work on a further proposal on the north of Portage will not take as long to develop as the Core Area Ini tiatives took. I think it's very impo rtant, Mr. Speaker, that there be further activity in the City of Winnipeg that will help bring about the revitalization of the very imp ortant downtown area in the City of Winnip eg and provide much needed jobs. So I'm hoping, Mr.

Speaker, that we will be able to co-operate between the three levels of government and ensure that there will be construction activity and worthwhile work going on in the very near future in that area. MR. F. JOH NSTON: Mr. Speaker, I would ask, because the commissioners of the City of Winni peg examined the north of Portage plan that was presented by Mr. Axworthy and came up with all kinds of problems that it would cause the city from traffic and who knows what else, and the commissioners presented that to the city, does the Min ister have any research at all that would lead him to making a decision of Mr.

Axworthy's first proposal? Mr. Speaker, I think that's a logical question. Did the Min ister just decide or was there any research done to back up or verify what the commissioner said? HON. E. KOSTYRA: Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm not quite certain what the purpose of the questions are. I think it's been made very clear that the initial proposal that was suggested by the Federal Government is not the one that is specifically under discussion at the present time; that we are looking at specific activity north of Portage and is not on the basis of the specific proposal.

It's certainly going to be a part of the process that we are going to be dealing with the specific concerns of the City of Winnip eg with respect to transportation, with respect to planning issues, because they clearly have the greatest expertise in that area and that's so meth ing that's certai nl y isn't di sput ed by the government. However, Mr. Speaker, I'm concerned by the attitude of some members opposite, it seems on one hand we hear that same member saying that this government doesn't have the confidence of people in the business community is against any kind of development but yet, Mr.

Speaker, when we try to work on some development we get the nay-sayers like that member getting up and saying, well, what expertise do they have, what do they want to do. Mr. Speaker, we have the opportunity to have further developments in the City of Winn ipeg and one that I think, would be welcomed by all citizens of the City of Winn ipeg, indeed, the province, including the members opposite. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The time for Or al Questions having expired. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. R. PENNER: Mr.

Speaker, would you please call the adjourned debates on second reading. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. 2649

Wednesday, 11 May, 1983 ADJOURNED DEBATES ON SECOND READING HON. R. PENNER: Yes, Mr. Speaker, would you please call the adjourned debates on second reading on Bills 25, 35, 46, 60, 2, 3, 50 and 4, in that order please. Bill NO. 25 -

AN ACT TO REPEAL THE STATUTE OF FRAUDS MR. SPEAKER: On the propo sed motion of the Honour able Attorney-General, Bill No. 25. The Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, I adjourned this on behalf of my colleague for St. Norbert. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Memb er for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, I wish to speak only briefly to this bill and the next two bills that the Government House Leader has called, 35 and 46. The first comment that I make, Mr.

Speaker, is applicable to this and the following two bills and that is I would ask the Attorney-General to assure us that, particularly these three bills - and I believe all bills should be done this way - but I hope particularly these three bills because of their relevancy to the practice of law in Manitoba have been distribut ed to the Manitoba Bar Association and that the approp riate subcomm ittees in the Manitoba Bar Association will have an opportunity to comment, Mr .

Sp eaker , ·at Law Amend ments Commit tee with respect to these bill s which come from the Law Reform Commission on which, indeed, there has been some consultation to date but I believe they should have the opportuni ty, of course, to examine the bill in the form in which it is, if they wish to make any comments on it. Mr. Speaker, I note in respect to Bill No. 25, that the bill itself is fairly sign ificantly di fferent from the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission, in that the Law Reform Commis sion made additional recommendations over and above the repeal of the Statute of Frauds. Mr.

Speaker, I know that there are probably strong arguments for the form in which the bill is made. For the record, Mr. Speaker, and for the benefit of those persons who are interested in this bill, I would ask the Attorney-General to comment upon the reasons why the government chose not to adopt the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission in the form of which they were made particularly not to follow through with the other recommendations contained in the Law Reform Commission with respect to retaining some aspects of the Statute of Frauds. I would simp ly, Mr.

Speaker. in dicate that on this side we're prepared to allow the bill to go to comm ittee and we would hope that the Attor ney-Gene ral would comment on the deviation of the form of this bill from the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission. MR. SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? The Honourable Attorney-General will be closing debate? HON. R. PENNER: Yes, very briefly, I will not at this junc ture, but before it goes to committee, advise the Honourable Member for St. Norbert of the reasons for the difference between the original proposal of the Law Reform Commis sion and the bill as presented.

I would simply like to state at this time that consideration of the law reform proposal began, in fact, last year and was not presented at the last Session of the Legislature because there was ongoing consu ltation between Legislative Counsel, the Chairperson of the Law Reform Commission and Members of the Faculty of Law at the Un iversity of Manitoba. The form of the bill as it now appears has the end orsement of all of those persons, so that it was a further consultative process which led to the bill being produced in that form. I will provide more details to the Member for St.

Norbert and I would also like to thank him for his suggestion and I will follow it, that this and Bills 35 and 46, as well as certain other bills, be referred to the Manitoba Comm ittee of Canadian Bar Association so that should they choose to make representations at committee stage or even prior they will have that opportunit y. QUESTION put, MOTION carried. Bill NO. 35 - THE TRUSTEE ACT MR. SPEAKER: On the pr opo sed motion of the Honourable Attorney-General, Bill No. 35. The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker, again this bill follows a report from the Law Reform Commis sion of Man itoba, Mr. Speaker, and is a significant change in the law. I note, Mr. Speaker, in the recommendations from the Law Reform Commission, Recommendation No. 3, that they ind icate that a trustee's handbook and guide be prepared and made avai lable to the general publi c to assist and instruct trustees, Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the prudent man rule is certainly one which large trustees, corporate trustees in large funds will, no doubt, have no difficulty in complying with, Mr. Speaker.

I think that for trustees appoin ted to admi nister small estates for comm ittees, appoin ted to admin ister small estates, the fact that there is a fairly expli cit legislation with respect to the kinds of investments they make is of a great deal of assistance to them because they're not particularly kn owledgeable in investment of funds. I think, Mr. Speaker, this bill, while it can probably im prove the income-earning capacity of larger trusts, particularly those who have the expertise in investment of trust funds, I think for the smaller indi vidual trustees of small estates, Mr.

Speaker, a trustee's handbook and guide would be of immense assistance to them. So, I would, again Mr. Speaker, make that suggestion . to the Attorney-General that that recommendation be followed and I would ask him either in closing debate or in the course of dealing with this bill in commi ttee if he could ind icate whether any action will be taken on that particular recommendation. llll R. SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? The Honourable Attorney-General will be closing debate? HO N. R. PENNER: Yes, just to resp ond to the suggestion of the Member for St. Norbert and I thank 2650

Wednesday, 11 May, 1983 him for it. Yes, in deed, I will be di scus sing that sug gestion with the appropria te official in my departme nt who has a pr etty big pl ateful of informational handbooks that are in preparation and that certainly should be added to that list QUESTION put, MOTION carried. BILL NO. 46 - THE PERPETUITIES AND ACCUMULATIONS ACT MR. SPEAK ER: On the propo sed motion of the Attorney-General, Bill No. 46, standing in the name of the Honour able Member for St Norbert MR. G. MERCIER: We're prepared to send this bill on to commi ttee. QUESTION put, MOTION carried. Bill NO. 60 - THE HIGHWAY TRAFFIC ACT

(2) MR. SP EAKER: On the prop osed motion of the Honour able Minis ter of Hi ghways, Bill No. 60, standing in the name of the Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This bill was only int roduced by the Min ister of Hig hways and Transportation last Friday and I wanted to speak to this bill, Mr.

Speaker, not at length, but to attempt to point out some problems I have seen with respect to seat belt legislation across the countr y, and suggest what I think may be a possible solution to the di fferent interests and positions that have been expressed with respect to this type of legislation. Fi rstly, Mr. Speak er, the problems may very well arise with respect to the chi ld-rest raint portion of the legislation.

That is probably the aspect of the bill that would be most widely supported among members of this Legislature, but the requ irement to have a restraining device for every child under that age, I think, has been pointed out, in di fferent letters to the editor and by different commen tators on the bill. That may very well be impra ctical, Mr.

Speaker, and the different examples cited related to someone delivering a car pool of children to some activity, which goes on every day in this province, where there are, for example, more than four children in a car, and that's assuming of course that the child-restraint regulations would allow ordinary seat belts to be used, say, in the rear seat of a car. So there is some practical complaints that have been made with respect to this particular

section of the bill that I would assume that the Min ister and his staff are hearing about, and are perhaps reading about in letters to the editor, and perhaps in letters to his office, and I'm sure he will hear more from members on both sides of the House. It's a problem which the Mi nister, I think, should attempt to deal with and explain when he concludes debate on second reading, Mr. Speaker.

As I've said, I think it is the most defendable part of safety legislation; we've all seen presentations and are aware of the inju ries that are suffered by childr en in automobile accidents who are not secu red in some sort of restraining device. Mr. Speaker, there are, I think, some difficulties in the type of situations where the wearing of seat belts are not applicable and I think the Min ister and his staff, perhaps Legislative Counsel, are going to have to deal with this in commi ttee, Mr. Speaker.

The suggestion that the principle that a person who holds a medical certificate should not have to wear a seat belt, if he has a certificate from his doctor, I think requires that there be some guidelines and, although the Act does allow for the establishment of some exemptions and some guidelines, I'd like the Min ister to explain what sort of guideli nes, if any, will be issued to medical practitioners, what sort of consultation there would be with medical practitioners, on that point, and to the public, so both the public and the medical profession are aware of the basis upon which such certificates would be issued.

There also is rais ed , I think, the problem that supposing someone complies and is in the process of having arranged for consultation with a doctor, or perhaps has seen a doctor but doesn't yet have the certificate in his possession, what sort of leniency would be granted to a person in that particular circumstance? In the same way, Mr.

Speaker, the exemption for a person by reason of his size, build, etc., to the satisfaction of a peace officer; again, there have to be established some guidelines so, not only that driv ers and passengers know who is entitled to that exemption, but so that peace officers know on what basis they can grant a person an exemption from the legislation. It may be very difficult to build that detail into legislation and it probably shouldn't be done, but I think members, before they vote on this bill, Mr. Speak er, should be aware of the guidelin es in both of these areas. Mr.

Speaker, there is, I think, some difficulty in the principle also that a person who, while engaged in work and is required to alight and re-enter a vehicle at frequent intervals and who does not drive at a speed over 40 kilom etres per hour, again, causes difficulties. How great a distance does a police officer have to follow someone to gauge his speed and at how many intervals does that person have to get into and out of the vehicle in order to qual ify for this particular exemption, Mr. Speaker?

I think it really creates a great deal of law enforcement probl ems with that type of word ing and creates uncertainty for the police officers who will be required to enforce this bill and for passengers and drivers. Mr. Speaker, I would like also the Min ister to deal with a report and to comment on a report that was prepared, and I believe released, by the Member for Lakeside when he was Min ister of Hig hways and Transportation. It was a study of motorcycle accidents in the Province of Manitoba done by Mr. Gri nwich and the late Dr. William Parker, the former pathologist for the Province of Manitoba.

I think essentially what that report did, Mr. Speaker, was point out that helmets for motorcyclists are not the only solution to the health problem. For example, in that report, and particularly for the Mini ster's information, referring to Pages 8 and 9 which contain the recommendations, they ind icated that alcohol affects an indi vidual's visual acuity, muscle co-ordination, ability to interpret complex situations and reaction time s, even at low blood levels. 2651

Wednesday, 11 May, 1983 Motorcyclists are much more dependent on these particular parameters than an automobile driver. They suggested, Mr. Speaker, that consideration should be given to lo wering the legal im pairment level for motorcyclists. They point out, and this is one of their major recommendations arising from their study, that alcohol contributes to a large num ber of motorcycle accidents. They urged some consideration be given to this recommendation, and the suggestion is therefore made, what is the Min ister's position with respect to that recommendation and what, if any, action is he tak ing?

They point out also, Mr. Speaker, that consideration should be given to increasing the numb er of training programs avai lable to motorcyclists, possibly requiring a motorcyclist to successfully comp lete a train ing program prior to issuing a motor cycle op erator's licence. That would, in their view, contribute significantly to a reduction of accidents. But, Mr. Speaker, there are in that report recommendations related to helmets and motorcyclists that are worthy of consideration. Indeed, even if this bill passes, it will not be the cure­ all and the end-all for motorcyclist accidents and automobile accidents.

There are many other safety programs which must be instituted if we wish to cut down on the num ber of fatalities, accidents and injuries that result, Mr. Speake r. Mr. Speaker, over the last few years, I have taken a particular interest on how seat belt legislation has been handled in other provinces where it has been enforced. As you look at the reports, I know the Min ister has referred to some very high rates of compliance, Mr.

Speaker, but the fact of the matter is, I think it is my general im pression and conclusion anyway that if this bill is passed there will ini tially be fairly low - the rate of complian ce with the legislation will increase . . . but it will still be fairly low. What will happen then is the Min ister of Highways will probably ask the Attorney­ General, for a week or two or for a month, to ask the police departments in the province to enforce the legislation.

If he responds the way he did to me today in question period, then the Minis ter of Hi ghways is going to be in trouble because he's not going to get any action from him. But, Mr. Speaker, as a result of an increased amount of police enforcement, the rate of compl iance will increase to somewhere like 50 or 60, 65 percent perhaps at the most. Then the police departments will say we have other priorities; we can't continue on this basis. Enforcement will drop off and the rate of compliance will drop off again signi ficant ly, Mr. Speaker.

The history of this type of legislation, as I see it in other provinces, is that rate of compliance goes down. It is only when there is an overt statement, that the Act is now going to be enforced and the police are going to be requested to enforce the legislation, that the rate of complian ce will in crease. So there is a real problem, Mr . Spe aker , that has exis ted in other provinces with respect to compliance with this type of legislation. No doubt, the rate of compl ianc e will increase from the current rate, but the enforcement by police authorities in other provinces is sporadic.

Police, as we all know, and as we see and hear and read each day, have a large numb er of priorities. The enforcement of seat belt legislation will not generally be their highest prior ity. I believe it was a few weeks ago in the City of Winnip eg there was an

article by a retiring policeman, I believe it was Harry Forgie, who ind icated, Mr. Speak er, that there is now in the City of Winn ipeg only token traffic enforcement with our existing laws because of a lack of manpower and other prio rities, that's all they're able to do in the City of Winnipeg. So, Mr. Speaker, that only creates and makes worse the enforcement problem with respect to seat belt legislation. Mr. Speaker, we have to consider a number of factors in deciding how we're going to vote as indi vidual members with respect to this bill. I say for the record, Mr.

Speaker, I think it is a position that the opposition, that every member, will be entitled to vote according to his cons cience, unlike members oppo site. - (I nterjection) I believe, Mr. Speak er, the Min ister of Hi ghways said we don't have that luxury, but I believe the practice in the past on this type of legislation has been to allow for tree . . . In considering, Mr. Speaker, whether this bill should be passed, there are a numb er of factors that have to be taken int o consideration. One that comes out, Mr.

Speaker, in the reports, studies and surveys that have been done - and I ask the Min ister to correct me if I am wrong - is that approxima tely 98 percent of drivers are not invo lved in accidents involving injuries. It is a very high percentage, Mr. Speaker, of drivers, as a result of that, see no need to be compelled to wear seat belts. I believe that is a correct statistic, and I would be very interested to know if the Mini ster's department can confirm that. Mr.

Speaker, there is also the factor that a numb er of indi viduals claim that if they had not been wearing a seat belt, they would have lived or - pardon me, they don't do that because they wouldn't be around . SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. G. MERCIER: . . . they would not have suffered the injuri es they did. They refer to incidents involving usually fire or immersion in water. I believe even the Min ister himself said that he's not certain that in certain circumstances it may be that one would be better off without having worn the seat belt.

He went on to say that he wasn't going to make the argument that under no circumstances will you be worse off because of the provision in this bill that requires one to wear a seat belt. So the Mini ster is acknowle dging that in a numb er of cases, which neither he nor I nor anyone else here can predict in detail, but in a certain numb er of cases the use of seat belts will not be of assistance, and may inde ed be a hindrance. Mr.

Speaker, at the same time you have to take into considerati on, I think, the fact that virtually all of the studies and all of the surveys in dicate that in most situations, at least the majority of situations, it would be safe to say that there is a safety value in wearing a seat belt. Mr. Speak er, I wouldn't want to argue any other way because I've attempted to look at studies across Canada and I think that's a conclusion that would not be questioned by any member of the House; that in most instan ces, or at least a majority of instances, the studies and surveys show that the wearing of seat belts is of value.

So, Mr. Sp eaker, the real qu estion we have to consid er, in considering this bill, is whether or not all 2652

Wednesday, 11 May, 1983 mem bers of the public should be compelled, by law, to wear seat belts and not be left to make that decision by thems elves. Mr.

Sp eak er, we've seen, and the Mini ster surely has seen, that there are many indi viduals in our society today who are making the argument very strongly that they should not be compelled, by law, to use either seat belts or helmets; that they are fed up with government making decisions for them; that there is a risk, albeit a small one, that seat belts or helmets may not help them them or, in fact, hinder them in accidents, and they want to make the decision for themselves. They want to be able to take personal responsibility for their own action, Mr. Speaker. Well, Mr.

Speaker, I'm going to propose that, in the view of all of those factors, that there is a solution to this situation whereby the interests of both sides can be taken in to consideration which wou ld be a compromise solution. I ask the Min ister of Hig hways and Transportation to examine this proposed solution with his department, and with perhaps Autom atic, and with Legislative Couns el, Mr. Speaker. The solution would be this, Mr.

Speaker, would be to, in the place of this bill, to enact legislation that failure to use an available seat belt or helmet constitutes a failure to exercise reasonable care for one's own safety and amounts to contri butory negligence, unless that person, failing to use the seat belt or helmet, can demons trate that the failure di d not contribute to the resulti ng inju ries, da ma ges or conseque nc es, Mr. Speaker. So the result of that would be that in the place of this legislation which we have before us we would have a legislative sanction for the value of wearing seat belts or helmets.

We could preserve an in dividual's freedom of choice; at the same time, in dividuals would be responsible for their own actions and the consequences. Mr. Speaker, I believe with proper notice to all drivers it would be an effective law in the sense that people would know what the law is and be able to make their own decisions according ly. It would have the impo rtant advan tage, Mr . Sp eak er, of elimin ating the law enforcement problems that I've referred to.

The fact that police forces simply do not have the resources at this time to enforce this law, and that enforcement in those jurisdictions where this kind of legislation has been brought in has been very sporadic. Mr. Speaker, it would allow for more stringent action against bad drivers, for example, impair ed drivers. The Atto rn ey-General some time ago anno unc ed a commi ttee to study that particular problem. I refer, again, to the statistic that I used, that about 98 percent of drivers are not involved in accidents with personal inju ry, Mr. Speaker.

It's the bad drivers that the Highways Department should be attempting to deal with and the Attorney-General, Mr. Speaker; that is where the real problem is. Mr. Speaker, there could, at the same time, I point out and I believe it is available from Autopa c, whereby if a person chose, in the face of this type of legislation, not to wear seat belts, or. not to wear helmets, but to take the risk of being deemed to be found contributory negligent because of that failure to wear helmets or seat belts, he could take out insurance through Autopac for a nominal sum that would cover him in that situation.

In that way, Mr. Speak er, the financial loss that the Min ister of Hig hways and Transportation refers to, of about $1 million in health costs, could be recovered, not from the taxpa yer but through the insurance that would be available to a person who wished to take that risk and wished to take out insurance. There's a solution, Mr. Speaker, that I would like the Mi nister to examine. I think it takes into consideration all of the factors and all of the various arguments, and is a fairly reasonable solution to this problem, and I would ask him to consult with his staff, Legislative Counsel, Autopac.

In summing up deba te on second read ing, Mr. Speaker, perhaps he could comment on that solution on whether or not he believes it would be an acceptable compr omise to the bill we have before us. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Elmwood. MR. R. DOERN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, all this material here on my desk is most of the material that I have accumulated on this particular issue in the past three or four years. A MEMBER: No helmet. MR. R. DOERN: Well the honourable member says I don't have a helmet.

In fact there are some helmets around that I'm hoping to obtain to bring forward, at some point, by way of illustration of the value of wearing them, but I'll get to that a little later. Mr. Speaker, there are three components to this bill; the child restraints, the question of seat belts, and the question of helmets. I believe that when we consider what the public's opinion is on these particular matters, and compar e it to what the opin ion of the members of the opposition are, I think there's a very wide discrepan cy, ind eed. Mr.

Speaker, I believe that the public is probably over 90 percent in favour of child restraints. I don't know what the view of the members of the Conservative Party are, but I would suspect, given their general attitude on this question, that it might be considerably lower than that, perhaps of the order of 50-50, but we will see as the debate goes on. Mr. Speaker, in terms of seat belts I think the publi c is probably 60 or 70 percent in favour, at this point in time, and yet there is very little support coming from the Conservative Members of the Manitoba Legislature.

I recall very clearly a couple of years ago their former Min isters of Highways, the Mem ber for Lakeside and the Mem ber for Pembina, both oppo sed the wearing of seat belts which was a strange position, indeed, for a Min ister of High ways whose resp onsibil ity is to concern himself with safety, the safe operation of motor vehicles and the protection of life and limb on our highways. (I nterjection) - Well, Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Ste. Rose says that the Member for Pembina wants to be leader but, of course, he will never achieve that dream if he pursues policies that are folly. Mr.

Speaker, when it comes to helmets I believe that 90 percent of the publi c, this is my estimate, is in favour of helmets. Yet the Conservatives have a position which seems to be between 0 and 10 percent. Now, of course, the members opposite think that certain segments of the motorcycle riding publi c is the entire publi c, but I 2653

Wednesday, 11 May, 1983 have to remind them that there are many people who ride motorcycles and there are many people who have opinions on whether or not there should be helmets worn by them. Mr. Speaker, when you look at the research on this particular issue, if you look at all the work that has been done by the univ ersity professors and the medical profession and all sorts of inde pendent organizations, it is overwhelmingly in favour of the kind of legislation that is being intr oduced by my honourable colleague, the Min ister of Hig hways. Mr.

Speaker, Aristotle the famous Greek Phi losopher once said that the object of all kno wledge is action and that is what concerns me. What are we getting to counter, what are we getting in this Chamber, what are we getting outside of this Chamber by the members of the Con servative Party to counter the massive amount of research in favour of safety legislation? We're getting, Mr. Speak er, two things, nitpicking - we just saw an example of that by the Member for St.

Norbert - or we're just simply getting an irrational position, no, I'm against it and they're going with some vague notion about, it's better not to wear a seat belt, better not to have a helmet; the right to fly through the air with the greatest of ease and land on the conc rete highways of Manitoba and in that way somehow or other come out ahead of somebody who is well protected. Mr. Speaker, I just look at two brief points made by the Mem ber for St. Norb ert in passi ng. He was concerned about enforcement. Mr.

Speaker, surely you don 't expect - you know, the members of the opposition can try to whip this up but surely you're not going to see a tremendous crackdown of cruiser cars zipping up and down the streets arresting, yanking citizens out of their cars for not having their seat belts on. Mr . Spea ker, there will be a public education campaign; there will be legislation passed; there will be a lead time before the legislation is impl emented and there will be law enforcement, but it will not be the heavy hand of law enforcement. I think the approach will be that of law enforcement agencies in other provinces.

They will tend to clamp down and issue tickets to people in the case of other infractions. So if somebody gets themselves into an accident and the officer on the scene talks to them about that, he will also note whether or not they are buckled up and if they're not they will then have two tickets for their problem for the price of one. Mr. Speaker, I want to deal briefly with helmet legislation and then go on to seat belts themselves.

I also want to say to the Minis ter and I've said this to him outside of the House, I also say this to him inside the House that he needs money to conduct a proper public education campaign in regard to this legislation. I had to attend a funeral yesterday, Mr. Speaker, in Morden, and I noticed that as we were driving on Hig hway 3 one of the signs about using your seat belts.

There's also some exc ellent radio and television advert ising that was used in Saska tchewan and probably in Ontario and the Min ister has booklets and brochu res but I've said to him before, I say again that he needs high quality material. I look at one of these booklets and I don't kno w about all of it but some of it, it seems to me, should be greatly impr oved. I seems somewhat amateurish and I think that we need a first-class program to educate the publi c to some of the advantages of using these safety devices and some of the dangers of not. Mr.

Speaker, I believe that seat belt legislation is an idea whose time has come and, I agree that it is sometimes uncomfortable to wear a seat belt, that it is probably much more convenient not to wear one in terms of the way it feels when you're sitting in your car and the same holds true for helmets. I'm sure that most motorcyclists when they think of their motorcycles and they look at their magazines, the newsstands are now full of all kinds of biker magazines, you inevitably see somebody without a helmet although I guess occasionally in those magazines there's somebody with one.

We have seen examples, the heaviest helmet you could get was brought to us in our caucus room as an example. Now, Mr. Speaker, it is im portant, I think, to note that riders do not always wear helmets on days when it's 90 degrees above, sure in the heat of summer and in the hottest, most humid time of year it will feel somewhat uncomfortable, hot and stuffy, but that's not always true. In the sum mertime people riding motorcycles today, for example, probably feel a lot more comfortable wearing a helmet than without since it's qui te cool out or cold out.

When a person is riding on the highways and so on they need the protection of clothing and helmets and whatever they call those visors, or whatever they are at the front of the bikes, the screens that cut the air traffic flow and some riders, in fact, wear goggles, of course, because of the powerful amount of air that hits them in the face. So, it's true, Mr. Speak er, that helmets can be uncomfortable, hot and stuffy but so is a coffin; so is a hospital bed; so is a plaster cast; and so is the idea and the notion that a person could be paralyzed from the neck down. Mr.

Speaker, I think that when people consider these factors, when they consider the fact that a motorcyclist is, in fact, totally unprotected ordinarily when he's using his ma ch ine that anybody who considers the matter will come to the conclusion that they should be well-protected.

I want to tell you right now that over the years I have voted three times on this issue, and in every instance my starting position was that there should be mandatory helmet legislation and on two of those three occasions I listened to the bik ers and I listened to the presentations and I saw the demonstrations and I read the mail and I talked to people on the telephone. In two of those three instances I changed my vote and I decided that if they want the freedom and if they want to kill themselves and if they want to risk their lives and so on, so let them. Who am I to make this decision for them?

But this is the fourth time around, Mr. Speaker, and I intend to fully support and fully argue for this particular legislation and I suppose it's been a process that has taken place over the years. I think of some personal examples that come to mind. I remember a few years ago, on the Osborne Bridge where those planters or pots that have been put there, large con crete ones, and some poor motorcyclist came zooming across Osborne towards the Legislatur e, something happened, he flew off his bike and hit his head on one of those conc rete dividers and that was the end of him.

That was a death right near the grounds of the Legislature. 2654

Wednesday, 11 May, 1983 I think of a woman I know in Elmwood who had to go two or three years ago to a city morgue to identify her brother who was around 20 years old and who was killed by a motorcycle. He was riding a motorcycle; he was killed in an accident. I think of a Shriner who was driving in a proce ssion from here somewhere to Brandon and went off the side of the road and slid along the gravel. Hi s bike went down; he went head­ first along the gravel. I'm trying to see his helmet.

Apparently that gentlemen kept that helmet for years and showed it to people as an example of what his helmet did to protect him. Otherwise it would have been his head that was shredded by the gravel as he went along the shoulder of the highway. I think of a young man that I know who's in his early twenties, who was driving along from Portage la Prairie to Wi nnip eg and he had a blowout in his back tire at 60 miles an hour .

He went over on his bike, hit the pavement, banged his head, cracked his helmet - not his head - and slid two or three hundred feet down the highway in front of one motor vehicle operator and so on. The net result of that injury was that he, in effect, got up, was shaken up and walked away, but if he hadn't been wearing that helmet, he would have been dead . That's not only my opinion but that is his opinion and it certainly conv erted him. Mr.

Speak er, I also happened to catch somebody a few days ago and I will be mixing up some of my remarks, in terms of seat belts and helmets, but it's all on the question of safety. I heard somebody, on CJOB, phone in to Beefs and Bouque ts the other day and say the followi ng.

He said, "I was watching a race on American television this morn ing," and I don't kno w if this was at two or three in the morning, or what, and he said, "The driver in this car hit the railing, flipped the car over and rolled four times over on his vehicle." He said, "He then opened the door and got out of the vehicle; he had been wearing a seat belt and walked away from this wreck of a car." And this caller simply said, "If anybody says that seat belts don't work, they're crazy. " Tha t was hi s comment on that particular situation. So, Mr.

Speaker, I find it really kind of strange that when you look at the information - and I intend to give some examples from the excellent briefs that have been put together by the Manitoba Medical Association, the Canadian Medical Association, on these questions and so on when you look at these briefs and then you listen to some of the arguments that have been made over the years by Co nservative Min isters of Hi ghways, by mem bers of the Co nservative Party, by comments made about the introduction of the legislation, it's very peculiar indeed.

I went to the first rally where we had 1, 000 or 1, 500 motorcycle riders outside the Legislature and I saw the gr eat gl ee on the faces of the mem ber s of the Cons ervative Party who took this to mean that the government was in trouble and I think some of them are going to be unduly influenced by the fact that there have been some demons trations and some letters written to them. I hope they also got the letters written to them by the nurses and by the citizens in their area and I hope they have read the briefs that have been prepared by the medical profession on this particular question, because, Mr.

Speak er, I don't believe that this is, in fact, a question of freedom of choice. I believe that this is a matter of life or death or life and death and I think this is the way the issue has to be approached. But I find it interesting that some of the members oppo site are going to hitch their wagon to the position of some of the motorcyclists who have appeared here and are going to be influenced by that. It would make, in fact, a very peculiar, unholy alliance to have the bikers and the Conservatives together on this particular issue, especially in the next election campaign. I mean, can you see it?

Can you visualize it? Cons ervatives whipping around on motorcycles with a fistful of pamph.lets, not wearing their helmets, driving up and down the streets of St. James and Sturgeon Creek and Fort Garry like Shriners perhaps, throwing pamph lets around and so on - I was going to say swilling beer, but I wouldn't say that - but just whipping up and down on their bikes, trying to persuade the public that they are, in fact, on the right side of the issue. But picture this as well, Mr. Speaker, picture this.

Some of the bikers who were here, with a fistful of Tory pamphlets, knocking on the doors in those ridings, handing out the pamph lets and saying, "I want you to vote Tory in the next election." Can you imagine the response that they're going to get from the little old ladies and from the people at the door, from some very big, tough bikers coming around saying, "We want to defeat the NOP because they're forcing us to wear helmets." Can you imagine the response to that? MR. l. SHERMAN: Vote Tory and win a Harley. MR. R. DOERN: That's right.

The Member for Fort Garry is keen on this idea and he's going to ... imagine that though, being a former Min ister of Health. Mr . Sp eak er, I'm simply warn ing the member s opposite that they better think this through carefully. They better think through carefully their position on child restraints, which I don't think they will be against. They better think carefully their position on seat belts which I think there's a lot more support for than they antici pate, and they better be careful about their position on motorcycle helmets because I believe, Mr.

Speak er, that 90 percent of the public believes that legislation is necessary and desirable and the kind of support that the members opposite see out there, the fact that people don't like the idea of wearing seat belts at this point in time, I think that kind of publi c reaction and public support is going to melt away. It is going going to start out, there is resistance out there now; there's no question about that.

But when the legislation is passed and when the publi c education campaign is im plemented and people get used to the idea, it will become second nature, just second nature to put your child into a protective baby restraint device, to wear your seat belt, which I'v e been doing for several years. It's just automatic, you just get into your car, put on you r seat belt, and start the mo tor . Simi larly, motorcyclists will also become accustomed to wearing their helmets. Mr. Speaker, a couple of more points that have been made before, but I think need to be made again.

A few years ago it was considered very masculine not to wear a helmet in sports, particularly in hockey. There still are hockey players, I guess, who don't wear helmets, 2655

Wednesday, 11 May, 1983 who are, say, professional players. I see the odd one but amateur players, I believe, tend to wear them in nearly all the leagues and football players have worn them for God kn ows how many decades and almost all sports have something in the way of a compulsory helmet. Bicyclists, professional riders and racers wear them, rnotorcyle riders - go and watch the races that are on Saturday afternoon on television or whenever they are shown, you'll see all the bike riders are wearing helmets. Skiers wear them, bobsledders wear them, parachutists, etc. etc. etc.

It's very widespread and very common. Some will argue, Mr. Speaker, that in spite of that you're taking away the fun and the joy of riding and the fun and the joy of operating your motor vehicle unhampered and so on . There is a joy in riding along in a convert ib le and there is a joy in riding along on a motorcycle, but it is also very dan gerous, it's a very dang erous activi ty, and I don't bel ieve that the advantages of feeling free are outweighed by the danger that one faces when using such a vehicle in terms of what could happen to you in the event of collision.

In fact, when I see the new style helmets, I think they're, incidental ly, very attractive. I've talked to dealers and my im pression is that they cost between about $75 and $17 5, and when I see these riders corning along with those more expensive helmets with the visors and so on, I'm always reminded historically of the kni ghts in armour who wore those helmets and visors. They cert ainly aren 't un attractive, they're rather startling, I think, and certainly cannot be discarded for that. There is probably some romantic appeal, in fact, in wearing helmets.

Consider the following, consider that on a motorcycle there are attempts to make motorcycles safe and these are only a few that I've jotted down and there must be more. A lot of motorcyclists, or maybe all of them now, have roll bars which presumably help them in the event that they're upended that they won't have their legs crushed. MR. D. SC OTT: Crash bars. MR. R. DOERN: Crash bars, as my colleague from lnks ter says. The motorcyclists are smart in this sense they have their lights on during the daytime.

You'll see many motorcyclists driving in midday in the city with their lights on, and they have turn signals. Well, some things aren't automatic; you know, there are people who have automatic things on their car and then they get them discon nected, but maybe it is an automatic feature on moto rcycles and a good one.

You see the rear view mirrors, one on each handlebar; you see the proper dress, not always, you'll see people in short pants, occasionally somebody in a bathing suit, but you'll see many many motorcycle riders are wearing leather jackets or heavier clothing or boots or gloves because of the danger of falling and sliding, and of course having a severe injury. So it just seems to me, Mr. Speaker. that it's logical to go one step further and to say that they should, as well, be wearing helmets. There were a lot of injuri es last year and a lot of accidents last year.

In Pub lic Utilities I asked the question of MPIC and the answer was that there were 1, 000 accidents last year on 11 ,000 motorcycles that were registered in Manitoba - 1, 000 out of 11 ,000 bi kes, and that is 9 percent suffer some form of accident.

I simply say on that particular segrnrnent that, I think, there is a need for legislation, there is a need for driver education, there is a need for more motorcycle driv er education and some people have made the point, and I would support that point as well - this is an additional point, but they said there should also be a crackdown on drunk drivers and harsher penalties in regard to drunk drivers and I would certainly support that at any time. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Let's legislate that too, Russ. MR. R. DOERN: Well, why not?

I will join forces with my honourable friend if he's willing to support that kind of legislation. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Then we'll go after the smokers. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Speak er, I want to now turn briefly to seat belts and to the brief by the Manitoba Medical Associat ion. I found it rather startling in the first sentence of their main brief that they have released, which was September 1982, that the first patent for automobile seat belts was issued in 1885. It's taken us almost 100 years to go from that safety feature to the regular and consistent use of that particular safety feature. So, Mr .

Sp eaker - (I nte rjec tion) - Well my honourable friend thinks that the seat belt came before the car. I see what his problem is. I don't want to get into that chicken and egg type of debate, because that could go on at some length. MR. D. ORCHARD: You're chicken to get egg on your face. A MEMBER: Belt them, belt them. MR. R. DOERN: Well, my colleague suggests I should belt the Member for Pernbina. Mr. Speaker, in 1976, and I'll read this later, there were 16 countries that had seat-belt laws.

That number has now risen considerably and one of the most interesting and impressive documents, I think, ever read in this House, was a simple reading given by the Mini ster of Hig hways the other day when he read in his remarks the countries with seat-belt legislation tod ay. it's an ever-increasing numb er of countries. MR. A. DRIEDGER: The USSR for one. MR. R.

DOERN: Well, yes that's true.the USSR does have compu lsory seat belts, but so does Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bu lgaria, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Finland, France, Great Britain - going to the polls Cons ervative at this point in time - Greece, Hung ary, Ir eland, Isr ael , the Ivor y Co ast, Japan, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Puerto Rico, South Africa, Spain, Switz erland, Swed en. USSR, West Germany and Yugoslavia. Mr. Speaker, no matter what your political views are, extreme left or extreme right or the extreme centre, 2656

Wednesday, 11 May, 1983 if you are a lib eral, there is a country that will appeal to you, that will make you realize that there is this type of legislation in place all over the world. Almost all of Western Europe and much of Eastern Europe and countries in Asia, and so on, have this type of legislation in place. In Canada, seat belts became man datory in Ontario. Imagine that . . . A MEMBER: The "Tory Blue" Ontario. MR. R. DOERN: . . . Ontari-ari-ario.

They put in this legislation January 1, 1976; the Honourable Bill Davis - William Davis, Premier - he put this legislation in seven years ago; the "big blue machine." It didn't hurt them; but this opposition was afraid to put that in and they were defeated. I think there's a message there. Quebec, September 1, 1976 - so they followed by nin e months the lead of Ontario. But I guess that was a Liberal Government then, wasn't it? That was probably the Bourassa government. B. C. and Saskatchewan in 1977 - so there was a whole cluster at that time.

But could we persuade the Mem ber for Pembina who was the Hig hways Mini ster? No way, Mr. Chairman. He was worried about that instance where that one car in a thousand or a million, the driver whips off the side of the road, flies off a bridge into a river, he thinks that in that instance it would be better not to have seat belts on. He hangs his whole argument on one remarkable situation. Well, Mr. Speak er, if you want to give as an illustration a special case of a child restraint or a motorcycle helmet or a seat belt, you can concoct one.

There are, on occasion, peculiar circums tances under which "ma ybe it would have been better if ... " But let's take the standard and the most common types of accidents, and it's qui te obvious that in those conditions one should wear the proper equipment. Here's what the Medical Association says. They say on Page 2 of their subm ission that "Without a seat belt . . .

" - they give three points - ". . . the overall risk of injury is increased four times; second, the risk of serious injuries increased by 65 percent; and third, the risk of death is increased by an average of 50 percent." Then they talk about ejection from the vehicle. Now this will be of interest to the rural members of the Legislature who are concerned about their constituents and who, instead of trying to persuade them of the logic and the value of wearing seat belts, are simply going with them or maybe fanning the flames of resistance. Mr.

Speaker, here is what they say about ejection from a vehicle: "It's a common catastrophe and occurs in both urban and rural accidents." The Manitoba figures for rural accidents are available. Here's the rural statistics: 1980, out of 127 fatal rural accidents in Manitoba, 64 persons were ejected, and 79 percent of those ejected in the rural areas were killed; so roughly 80 percent. The doctors say seat belts would have prevented most of these ejection deaths. Mr.

Speaker, I find it ·hard to believe that some members believe that in a motor vehicle accident or head-on collision, you're better flying out of your car, better landing on your head or being thrown free of your vehicle. What about being hit by somebody else inside the car? What about your head hitting their head? What about your head going through the windshield?

What about you being rolled over and crushed by the motor vehicles that are rolling around and spinning around on the highways, or being thrown in front of the next lane of traffic as the traffic is coming by and being hit by somebody who wasn't in the initial collision? What about that? I remember very clearly; I've made this point several years ago. As a teenager, a young man who lived in our area, a very good looking young man , who was then about 17 or 18 years old, went right through the windshield of his car. Now this is a long time ago; this is going back 30 years.

So you didn't have the type of gla ss on cars, but he went righ t through the windshield with his head and severed an ear. He had one of his ears cut right off, and from that time to the present he's had to wear a plastic ear. That's a penalty that he paid. Of course, there are far more severe penalties than that. But I think of the motorcyclists, Mr. Speak er, I think of the statistics, and the ones that I recall, and they may not be 100 percent right, but something like 8 or 10 deaths a year, maybe more, and about 8 paraplegics or quadri plegics caused every year by motorcycle accidents.

Now, surely, we have to concern ourselves with that type of serious injury. I mean, imagine a young man riding a mo torcycle, get ting th rown off the motorcycle and breaking his neck and winding up as a quadriplegic. Some people would say that is a fate worse than death itself, but it surely is something we cannot lightly dismiss and weigh against the joys of driving along with the wind blowing through your hair. Mr.

Speaker, on that very point, it says here in their brief, the doctor's brief, that the major cause of spinal cord injur y is motor vehicle acci dents, that the commo nest mechanism is a single car accident with roll and ejection, or a human second collision inside the vehicle. There is also a high incidence of ejection and second collision in two car crashes. I recall very very clearly my colleague, the Min ister of Agriculture, telling the story of some people he knew who were in a van and were smashed about.

I remember he made the reference to their heads - like eggshells - and being killed as a result of the vehicle going off the road or rol ling or being in a collision because they were smashed against one another and it was a frightful accident indeed. Mr. Speaker, in regard to the concern of the Member for Pembina, I note in the brief that the doctors point out that only 0.5 percent, a half of 1 percent of all accidents result in fire and an even lower fraction in submersion.

I was telling somebody the other day about this and this fellow, an average person, simply said what is somebody doing in the middl e of a river anyway in a car! Now, naturally, nobody's going to deliberately fly off a bridge or go off a road. It happens, but it must be under peculiar and unusual circumstances that somebody finds themsell upside down in a lake or in a river. Mr.

Speaker, it says, referring to this type of accident, " ... even then, the belted occupant having sustained less serious injury, is better able to extricate himself." That, of course, is the most powerful thing that one can say, namely, if you're unconscious you're not going to have the decision whether you're going to swim out, or roll down the windows, or leap out of the burning 2657

Wednesday, 11 May, 1983 car, you're going to be unconscious and that's it. You have a better chance of un buckling when you 'r e conscious than when you're not. Mr. Speak er, I gather that my time has just run out. I'll simply the conclusion of the medical profession in their brief.

It says: "In view of the overwhelming evidence that safety helmets reduce head injuri es and deaths, the Manitoba Medical Association urges the Government of Manitoba to enact legislation which would require all motorcycle riders to wear approved safety helmets." On seat belts: "Ba sed on all avai lable evidence, the MMA is convinced of the lifesaving value of seat belts, which should be renamed "safety" belts. Second, the government is strongly urged to introduce during the forthcoming Session of the Legislature, compulsory seat belt legislation for all occupants over six years of age.

Third, the MM A will lend its full support to aid in implementing such a program." Mr. Speaker, I simply say in conclusion that I think all of us will agree on child restraints, at least I hope so. If there's a free vote, I assume that at least a number of Co nservatives will have the intellig ence and the courage to support that kind of legislation.

I also think that in spite of the fact that there's a sort of mood in the Conservative Party to oppo se helmet legislation because it's freedom and all that sort of thing, but if the honourable members look at the statistics, examine the research, they will come to the conclusion that on all of these matters, this safety package int roduced by our government, that it should all be supported and that they should also support the gov ernment in exte nding the information and di sseminating that information so that we can have fewer accidents and healthier citizens. MR. SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question?

The Honourable Mem ber for Fort Garry. MR. L. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Tuxedo that debate be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried. BILL 2 - THE LAW ENF ORCEMENT REVIEW ACT MR. SPEAKER: On the propo sed motion of the Honourable Attorney-General, Bill No. 2. The Honourable Member for Tuxed o. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In addressing the contents of Bill No. 2, The Law Enforcement Review Act, I begin by acknowledging the fact that the Attorney­ General has ci rcula ted a rather extensive li st of proposed amendments and changes which he will be bringing, as I understand it, to comm ittee. I will say that in reviewing the bill and information which has been presented to the Attorney-General on the bill, perhaps some of what I am saying might possibly be intended to be covered by the changes.

I apologize if that has happened, but I say that the changes appear to be qui te extensive, and although I've read them, I'm not absolutely certain that some of them do cover the points that I wish to make or not. I'll proceed by add ressing the bill as it is, trying to incor porate some of the ideas that the Attorney-General has apparently decided should be wrought in the form of amendments.

I add ress the contents of Bill 2, speaking from a variety of viewpoints, one, as someone who has a number of close friends who either have been members of municipal police forces in the past, and many who are members of municipal police forces - principally in Winnipeg, I suppose - both as constables and as senior officers. I know how difficult a job they have to perform in upholdi ng and maintaining our system of law and order. I believe we're very fortunate in having them doing the job they are to protect our lives and our property in the course of their daily affairs and duties.

I also bring a perspective of being a former member of Muni cipal Gove rnment, having served on Winn ipeg City Council for a portion of two terms, and many of my colleagues were members of the Winn ipeg Police Commission. I know the job that they were charged to do and the sincerity and the commitment which they undertook to ensure that the job that was being performed by our police forces in Winn ipeg was one that we could all be proud of, and one that provided the kind of protect ion and assurance of fairne ss, impartial ity, and just all-round good practice in carrying out their responsibili ties. Mr.

Speaker, I acknowledge that there have been actions, there have been complaints that from time to time have given rise to perhaps a lack of confidence, a lack of assurance that the police forces under our municipal jurisdictions in Manitoba have erred; that the conduc t of some of the members has from time to time conflic ted with those princi ples, rights and laws that we stand by and uphold in our society. I acknowledge that there have been times when complaints have led to actions and discipline and charges, and so on.

But I believe, unless proven otherwise, that all of the things that have happened and all of the kinds of pub lic information and reports that have taken place about inappropria te actions on behalf of peace officers in municipal jurisdictions in the province still has not justified the bringing in of this type of legislation. I believe that, as in all thin gs, there is an onus on the government - in this case, the Attorney-General under whose jurisdiction it comes - to prove that there is a need for such legislation before going forward and imposing it on us.

In saying so, I acknowledge that like all of our institutions in society, the institution of our court system and of our system of maintenance and enforcement of law is coming under less and less public confidence as so many things are. I think we can all acknowledge that there is less publi c confidence in, say, the institution of our courts, of our education system, of our clergy, of government itself - politicians are held in less respect today than they were perhaps a decade or two ago.

So I say that altho ugh, say, poli ce and the maint enance of law and order and the job that they do is perhaps held in less esteem and confidence by the public today, it is not necessarily because the police have gone astray and have all of a sudden, become derelict in their duty, but because there is a loss of confidence in the public eye of all of these various things and people and what they stand for. I believe the fact that publi c opinion and respect has perhaps di mini shed for police forces per se across North 2658

Wednesd ay, 11 May, 1983 America, does not reflect necessarily that they are doing something much more wrong today than they were decades ago. I believe that's just a natural sort of evolution and it's one that I personally regret, but this lack of confidence, this sort of cynicism that pervades all of our lives today is perpetrated by all sorts of things.

Let's not just blame it on the media, let's not just blame it on the sort of open invitation that is given to people day after day to come forth with their criticisms to phone in to open-line talk shows and take a slam at everybody because it makes them feel good. It's there.

As I say, I personally regret it and I feel that it's one of the thin gs that we should all work very hard to try and counteract to ensure that we change around the sort of pervading attitude of cynicism to one of, instead, confidence in people's basic goodness, people's basic honesty and people's basic decency in their efforts to do their jobs properly.

That extends particularly to the police force, because as I said in introducing my remarks, I believe that theirs is a very di fficult job to perform and therefore I think that anything we do that sort of gives a message or im plies that we believe that our police forces need to have somebody else take a look at them or need to be policed themselves more stringently than they have been in the past, I think, takes away from their ability to do their job.

I know that the Attorney-General, although he has put forth this legislation, just said today, in response to a question in question period, that we have an excellent police force in the City of Winn ipeg. A MEMBER: Only if they behave themselves. MR. G. FILMON: He says, only if they beh ave themselves and I believe that holds true with any . . . None of us, carte blanche, should tar everyone with the same brush. We shouldn't, because someone stands up in this House and makes an irresponsible statement, say that all of us in this House are irresponsible.

None of us should stand up and, because someone performs an action that contravenes all of our good sense and the acceptable manner in which we behave, none of us should tar everyone and say, they're all a bunch of clowns; they're all a bunch of monke ys. That's the kind of thing that I think is difficult.

Therefore, for us to imp ly that because there have been instanc es in the past in which the police have overstepped their bounds, the police have taken actions which have not been in keeping with our best thoughts on their behalf and our best desires for the way in which we would like to see the law enforced and maintained in this province, in this city, we should not therefore say, well, we need to have

an Act and a super power to look over their shoulders and ensure that we are going to bring down the hard hand of justice on the police force, because I believe that it's very, very important not to destroy public confidence in our police.

So just the very publi city that this Act will give to the feeling that the message that's being sent out by this government and the Attorney-General, through this Act, of reduction of confidence in police and their ability to do their job honestly, effectively and efficiently and within the bounds of the laws that they are set up to maintai n, I believe just that very message is going to have a damaging effect on the public respect for police forces and the ability of police forces to do their job un der in creasing ly di fficult conditions and circums tances.

Just in quoting the words of the Attorney-General in introducing this Act, I say that there is an implicit move towards that viewpoi nt.

He says, and I quote, "The review process contempla ted in the Act will be initia ted by means of a complaint, defined as a complaint by a member of the public respecting the conduct of a member of the police force towards the complainant or some other member of the public." I'll talk more about the complaints and the way in which they're generated and so on, but this sort of publ icity that will be given to this Act and the almost impli cit solicitation of complaints from the public, I believe will lead to a great many more difficulties than it will cure.

It impli es that there are many complaints tha t cur rently go un regis tered, that curr ently go unrecorded and that we're going to sort of open up the publi c's attention to their rights and responsibilities to bring forth a complaint against the police force. Secondly he spoke in setting up the commis sioner and the commissioner's office, he referred to it as a clearing house where all citizens' complaints against the police - that is, for example, any complaint made to a police officer or to the Chief of Police - must immed iately be referred to the commissioner so it becomes a clearing house.

Well, again I say that it's now taking over a procedure and setting it into practice in a way that seems to supercede everything that we've already done in the past. Again I think there's an impli cit ind ication of distress to the current system and maybe even so far as to say an opportunity to bring down a heavier hand on the actions of police. I'm not so sure that's warranted by the evidence of what has happened in the past, what we've seen.

I know, because I have a numb er of the presentations that have been made to the Attorney­ General, that it's viewed that way by police forces and adminis trations in the province right now. ,.I believe that police, the officers, the admin istration and the rank-and-file pol icemen thems elves feel threatened by this Act and I believe that that very state of mind, the fact that they feel threatened by it, will make it more difficult for them to do their jobs and perhaps will even discourage many worthwhile, good people from going into police work.

I believe that there is, implicit in this whole concept, the great opportuni ty for trial by media which none of us would choose to bring about.

I don't believe there's any overwhelming evidence that should say to us that there is a need for this type of legislation and the bottom line is that I believe that there is an onus on the Attorney­ General to demons trate that there is a need for this ne w legislati on, this new bur eaucr acy, thi s new mechanism to ensure that the police, at all times, are not only doing their job properly but - good heavens, perish the thought if there is an instance in which they have overstepped their bounds or done something wrong, that we will, through a provincial agency that superimp oses itself over all the existing mechanisms, to get at that police officer who has committed some ind iscretion, some undesirable action or in the extreme, a criminal action, and I say that there are those mechanisms in place to do all those things already.

I'm 2659

Wednesday, 11 May, 1983 not convi nced or persuaded that this legislation and this super power commission and board will have any better effect or any more positive effect. I say that knowing that the Attorney-General has some very good evidence at his di sposal in the form of an

article that was in Quest magazine, or one of those recent maga zine s, of the in te rviews of the two constables of some time ago, their heyday was . HON. R. PENNER: Vander Graaf and Taylor. MR. G. FILMON: Vander Graaf and Taylor, he says to me. Their heyday was probably a decade or two ago and the kinds of actions that they spoke of took place in that era, and I say that the actions that they referred to and descri bed were dr eadful, they were reprehensible, and none of us here would suggest, I believe, that that sort of thing ought to be countenanced or allowed tod ay.

I don't believe it is, and I believe that if it happens tod ay, it has been pro ven and demons trated through the actions of muncipal police forces, their admin istrations, the commissions - both the Winnip eg Police Commission, the Brandon Police Commission, the Manitoba Police Commission - that it will not be tolerated and that those who are found to have undertaken such actions that none of us support or agree with will not only be charged, but will be brought before a proper due process to ensure that they are punished by whatever means and to whatever extent they should be.

I believe that those officers who put themselves above the law in the past will not be allowed to today under the circumstances that prevail and so I don't believe that utilizing the example of Vander Graaf and Taylor, for instance, is a valid one in justifying this particular Act.

As we review what has happened and certainly, as I say, in my own experience in the past decade serving on muni ci pal council in the Leg isla tur e, in th e government, that there's no question that there has been a substantial increased numb er of investigations, a substantial increase in the discipli nary actions that have been brought about, and a substantial increase in crimin al charge s laid as a result of these investigations. So I believe that the structures that are in place are already doing the things that the Attorney­ General says will be done by the mechanism put in place as a result of this bill.

The main thing that I think is negative to this bill is the destruction of the confidence of the police forces in themselves, in their ability to do their work, and in the publi c in viewing the police force and the difficult job they have.

Here we have a new government with some new ideas putting forth what I consider to be very heav y-handed legislation coming do wn on municipal police forces, and saying we don't trust the admin istration; we don't trust the mechanisms that are in place through the police commissions - either the Winnip eg, Brandon or Manitoba Police Commissions - we don't trust whatever is in place to deal with its problems. I emphasize that there is a great deal of outside scrutiny as part of the process.

I emphasize that there are elected members of municipal councils who are on these police commissions; there are lay people, citizen members, on those police commissions; and that all sides in the investigation besides the police force senior admin istration themselves, all sides who are parties to any complaints and reviews, disciplina ry actions and so on, are represented by legal counsel and that through the whole process whatever can be achieved by this bill is already able to be achieved by the mechanisms in place.

But I believe that this bill goes further; I believe it strips police chiefs of much of their authority to govern, regulate and discipline those under their command, and I don't believe that it's justified. However, assuming that it is the government's intention to push forth with this bill, and I wonder at that because I kno w of the many many organizations that have presented briefs to the Attorney-General, and I kno w that municipal authorities, the police forces, both the rank and file and the senior officers, to a person are all opposed to this legislation.

However, it appears as though, looking at the changes that the Attorney-General has brought in, that he is not persuaded by a great deal of what has been said, other than in, perhaps. some of the comments on process. So he is intending to push ahead with it, and so I'll go into some of the specific areas of concern that I have with the bill itself.

I believe that presently there is a single rather di rect system for dealing with complaints, the disciplinary procedures, whether it be the internal ones through the department and then through the mechanism of the Winn ipeg Police Commission and the Manitoba Police Commission, and the interesting thin g is that this single system deals with both the peace officer component and the civilians,

whereas this Act will separate that and it will only deal with the peace officer component. I'm curious about that, because as I looked at the information that the Attorney-General put forward in stressing that it only dealt with the peace officer component, I wonde red about that becaus e the discipline code, for instance, as put forth in the Act, deals with such disciplina ry defaults as they are stated, as using oppressive or abusive conduct or language. It seems to me that could be a complaint that's brought against a non-peace officer component of a polic e department.

It seems to me that being discourteous or uncivil could also be a complaint brought against a civilian member of the police department, as well as the peace officer. Seeking improper pecuniary or personal advantage could also be a disciplina ry default that's brought against the civilian member as easily as the poli ce officer. Concealing or altering any official document or record - that very well could be a complaint brought against a civilian member of the force.

Imp roperly disclosing any information acquired as a member of the police department could also be something that is brought agains t a civilian member. Breaching The Human Rights Act to The Privacy Act could also equally apply to a civilian member. Assisting any person in commiting a dis cipli nary default or cou nselling or procuring another person to commit this offence. Those could equally be complaints lodged against civilian members and I wonder why they're not included in this Act. Why should they be dealt with differently?

There is also, as the Attorney-General well knows, the concern by the police department that there will be a plurality of proceedings that could occur. One, by 2660

Wednesday , 11 May, 1983 virtue of two officers having had the same disciplinary default, but in one case a complaint is brought against one officer by a member of the public, which therefore triggers a Law Enforcement Review Act proceeding. In the other case, it wasn't subject to a civilian complaint, but the same action triggered an internal discipli nary review, an action under the normal process of the int ernal di sci plin ary review, the Winn ip eg Pol ice Commission and/or the Manitoba Police Commission revi ew.

Why would you in troduce some thing that produces a plurality of procedures dealing with perhaps the same offence? Or the alternative is that the same complaint, could be lodged against two people, the same default could apply to two people, one of whom is a civilian member of the force, and the other is not. It could be in terms of revealing documents and that sort of thing, one goes through one procedure, the other has to go through the Law Enforcement Review Act procedure. I see that as a weakness and something that ought to be corrected if we're going to proceed with this kind of legislation.

More so than that, I believe that there is this possibility of triple jeopardy and we already have it in dou ble jeopardy in the sense of people who are charged with a criminal action in court and having satisfied them. We had the instance only a year ago, they are still not free and clear because the internal disciplina ry proceedings of the police department then apply to them even after acquittal, they go through another whole hearing and they go before the Winn ipeg Police Commis sion and Manitoba Police Commission.

That happened with one particular officer that I am sure the Attorney-General is familiar with. But we now bring a third possibility in here, where even though somebody may be acquitted in court on something, they still could have that same matter dealt with by the Law Enforcement Review Act proceedings and that same matter could still be dealt with by the internal pr oce edings and the exis ting pol ice comm ission proceedings. So, it seems to me that's an area that ought to be cleaned up, or else the police are not going to kno w where the next sort of action is going to come from.

They are never going to be out of a situation, no matter how many times they're cleared by how many different parties to this whole procedure. Ok ay, the matter of the complaint itself. Why cannot the commis sioner determine who can carry out the investigation? That I wonder. Why could he not choose to use the police department? In this case, according to the changes that the Attorney-General is bringing, I believe it is in dicated, that unless the complainant requests that the police department carry out the investigation , they will not carry out the inv estigation.

It seems to me that the commissioner should be in a position to decide, whether or not it is possible for the police department to carry that out, because it assumes that the police department themselves, members of the department will have a bias. I wonder why it can be assumed that lawyers, for instance, sitting on the board, or a lawyer who may be the commission er, whatever his backgrou nd, is not biased and yet an officer of the same department, would be biased.

It seems to me that there is as much interest on the part of fellow officers of the same police department to expose a rotten apple, since it reflects on their own reputation and the public confidence of their ability to do the job. It seems to me that there is just as much likelihood that they would be very much interested in carrying through a proper investigation, as some lawyer or some commissioner appointed because of whatever reasons, his political affiliations or his bias on certain issues or whatever. No one is totally unbi ased.

Why should there be less likelih ood of bias on the part of a lawyer who serves on the Law Enforcement Review Board, than there is on the part of the police department to investigate misconduct or complaints or so on? · So, Mr. Speaker, I am at the end of my time, and I'll conclude when this matter next comes forward. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The time being 4:30, when this bill is next before the House, the honourable member will have ten minu tes remaining. COMM ITTEE CHA NGE MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MRS. D. DODICK: Mr. Speaker, I have a commit tee change.

The Economic Development for May 12, the Member for The Pas will substitute for the Member for Thompson. PRIVATE MEMBERS' HOUR RES. NO. 5 - FARM FU EL TAX MR. SPEAK ER: Pr ivate Memb ers' Res olution, Resolution No. 5, on the proposed motion of the Honourable Member for Pembina, and the proposed amendment thereto by the Honourable Member for River East. The Honour able Minis ter of Housing has 11 minu tes remaining. HON .. J. STORIE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is a privilege to be able to continue today on the theme on which I began on this issue. Just to recap, Mr.

Speak er, I ind icated that despite the admonishment of members opposite, the resolution is presented by the Mem ber for Pembina, was amended by the Member for River East because I think there are a numb er of other substantive issues which need to be dealt with while we're looking at this particular issue of taxa tion, in particular, fuel taxation that effects farmers. Mr.

Speaker, we all acknowledge that we want our farmers to be as competitiv e as possible and we want farmers to be able to make a living, to make a profit and to be able to continue to support their particular commu ni ties and sup port the act ivit ies of tho se commun ities. Clearly, a strong farming community is a goal which we all have in common. What we need to decide, I suppose, is the best method of achieving that particular goal.

The Mem ber for Pem bina has chosen to introduce a resolution, calling for the removal ol the numerous and sundry taxes that have been from time to time levied upon fuels and fossil fuels in this country. In particu lar, he objects because of the level of taxation that occurs and compares that unfavourably to the level of taxation that occurs particularly in the United States. 2661

Wednesd ay, 11 May, 1983 Clearly, Mr. Speaker. all governments across Canada, all Provincial Governments and Federal Gove rnments, past. present and future will be levying taxes on fuels to accomplish a numb er of purposes. I don't think that we can remove ourselves from doing that. The question of whether the removal of farm fuel taxes is the most appropriate way to help the Canadian farmer and in this particular case the Manitoban farmer, is what we need to question. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, April 26th, the former Mi n ister of Ag