Manitoba Hansard — 25 March 1981 (Sitting 45, 31st Legislature, 5th Session)

31-5-45

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. Harry E. Graham (B irtle Russell): Presenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions . . . PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Virden. MR. MORRIS McGREGOR: Mr . Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted cert ain resolutions, directs me to report the same, and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Crescentwood that the report of the Commi ttee be received. MOTION presented and carried.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. HON. L. R. (Bud) SHERMAN (Fort Garry): Mr . Speaker, I wish to table a return to an order of the House, No. 7, and return to an order of the House, No. 8, both filed on the motion of the Honourable Member for Brandon East. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Mini ster of Finance. HON. BRIAN RANSOM (Souris-Killarney): Mr . Speaker, I would like to table a return to an order of the House, No. 11. MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion . . . Introduction of Bills ... INTRODU CTION OF GUESTS MR.

SPEAKER: At this time I would like to draw the honourable members' attention to the gallery where we have 51 cadets from the 44th Sarnia Squadron of the Royal Canadian Air Cadets from Sarnia, Ontario, under the direction of Captain Landry. On behalf of all the honourable members, we welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTIONS MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Leader of the Opposition. MR. HOWARD PAWLEY (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Consumer Affairs. Has the Minister of Consumer Affairs received a petition from a group of residents of the Southglen Mobile Home Community on St.

Annes Road, in connection with the levy of a charge against them by Winnipeg 2117 Gas as a result of the termination of service, and if so, what has been his response? MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Min ister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. HON. GARY FILMON (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I received that petition only this morning and I have not yet responded to it. MR.

PAWLEY: Then to the Minister of Consumer Affairs, does the Minister of Consumer Affairs as a result of obtaining that petition, and I am certain as a result of having already received information that charges had been levied as against the residents of the Mobile Home Park for the reconnection of service, is the Minister intending to undertake action to ensure that the Winnipeg Gas Company will not in fact receive the benefit of levying charges against the residents of the Mobile Home Park? MR. FILMON: Mr.

Speaker, it's indeed unfortunate that due to some vandalism or whatever action that the gas service to the Mobile Home Park was cut off and indeed I am sure that all of us are not happy to see the charges that the people have had to be faced with. On the other hand, as we discussed very fully with respect to this whole matter during my Estimates debate, the Greater Winnipeg Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the Public Utilities Board, not under the ju risdiction of my Mini stry or this Legislature.

The PUB is not responsible to me, it only reports to the Legislature through me. it's an arm's length relationship that it has with this Legislature, and unless members want to change that relationship, I am not in a position to force them to do anything. They have made a decision in this regard and their decision is appealable only to the courts. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that the Minister is ducking responsibility.

Can the Minister acknowledge that when indeed circumstances are normal, during a period when there is not a strike, that the company indeed does provide this service free of charge even if there is vandalism involved? MR. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, as I have stated on a number of occasions in the House, if that service was provided and to whatever extent it was provided in the past, it is not something that is required of the Gas Company under their relationship with the Public Util ities Board.

The Pub lic Utilit ies Board have sought opinio n on this from their couns el, I am informed, and they are of the opinion that the matter was a service that was provided under a customer relations policy, and is not somet hing that they are legally obliged to provide. The Public Utilities Board, as I repeat, has made a decision to this effect. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, is the Minister then indicating to this House that the application by Winnipeg Gas to the Public Utilities Board does not provide for the provision of a service such as this? Is

Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 the Minister then indicating that during normal times this service is simply provided gratuitously on the part of the compa ny and now, because there is a strike, that they have every right to discontinue this kind of free service because, according to the Minis ter, the service is not included within the original application? MR. FILMON: Mr.

Speaker, as I've said before, the matter is not covered by the relationship between the Gas Company and the Public Utilities Board and they are not in a position, as I understand it, to require the Gas Company to provide this service at the present time. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Boniface. MR. LAURENT L. DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Community Services, I'd like to ask the question to the Acting Minister.

If the reports we have are factual, there exists a situation that borders on scandalous, and I'm referring to children that have to walk for miles to get a decent meal, or a meal. Would the Minister be ready to do something positive immed iately; that is, either re open the school during the weekend until there is an investigation to see if these students have parents, and if their parents are fulfilling their obligation or what is wrong?

I mean something positive, I hope it's not going to be monitoring; monitoring would have the same effect at this time when people are starving, if it's factual I said, as Nero fiddling while Rome burned. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I'll take that question as notice for the Honourable Minister of Community Services who I expect will be here shortly. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mem ber for lnkster. MR. SIDNEY GREEN: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to direct another question to the Minister of Consumer Affairs and also to the Minister under whom the Pub lic Utili ty Act leg islation falls insofar as jurisdiction is concerned. The Minister had previously indicated that the Gas Company is responsible up to the meter and not beyond. Can the Minister tell us where the connect ion of service is, before the meter or after the meter? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mi nister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. MR. FILMON: I'm not sure which service the member is referring to, Mr. Speaker, perhaps he could clarify it. MR. GREEN: Mr.

Speaker, I'm referring to the fact that people have had, by some misadventure, their service cut off, and is the reinstallation of that service something that takes place before the meter or after the meter, and if it is before the meter, does the Minis ter's previous statement that the Gas Company is responsible to see to it that the service is supplied up to the point of the meter, does that 2118 still hold, and will he inquire from the Public Utility Board whether this is something for which the Gas Company would be responsible in accordance with

definitions that he previously gave the House? MR. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, the portion of the service connection upon which the Gas Company has jurisdiction and upon which it operated was on its side of the meter. The other action, which the independent cont ractors were called on to take, was on the other side of the meter, the side for which the Gas Company is not responsible acc ording to the Act. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, that's indeed what the Minister told us previously, and now I'm asking him whether the reconnection of the service takes place before the meter or after the meter?

I would also ask the Minister at the same time to see whether now is not the appropriate time for him to go, because he probably would have more influence, to the Minister of Labour and ask that there be an industrial inquiry into a dispute, not for the purpose of having the dispute settled, but for determining whether or not the consumers of the Province of Manitoba, for whom he is also supposed to have some concern, are being in some way unfairly treated, due to this particular industrial dispute?

Will he use his influence on the Minister of Labour to see whether the public can be better informed of the facts which are currently in dispute? MR. FILMON: In response to the first part of the mem ber's ques tion, Mr. Speaker, the shutoff occurred on the Gas Com pany's side of the meter. I can confirm that. I think, Mr. Speaker, there's no question that it's both shocking and reprehensible that this kind of action by vandals would take place in the midst of an industrial dispute, knowing that the Gas Company is not in a position to do anything about the situation because of the current industrial dispute.

But at the same time, I acknowledge that it would be better for all sides if the strike could be settled. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Johns. MR. SAUL CHERNIACK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask the Minister of Community Services how he can explain his acceding to the north office of the Income Securities Branch being located in the basement at 600 Main Street since the fire took place last January, when even temporary quarters ought to be habitable and not stuck in a basement without proper facilities? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mi nister of Community Services. HON. GEORGE MINAKER (St.

James): Mr . Speaker, I'd like to advise the honourable member that new quarters have been leased at 17 90 Main Str eet to acc ommoda te the services that were formerly located where the fire occurred. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Minister didn't answer my question, which is how he could not have been sure to find temporary quarters

I Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 that were of a more suitable nature, or acceptable, and probably according to standards. May I also ask him whether the address he gave is not very much at the north end of the district, way into West Kildonan and therefore accessible to the inner core, which is part of the north area, except by fairly long bus rides? Is that not a correct location he's just given us? MR. MINAKER: Mr.

Speaker, it's my understanding this was the closest location that we could get to rent at the present time and I'm not too sure whether or not some of the services that are presently being carried on in the one location on Main Street might be interchanged, but I'll have to take the question as notice. We may have further information I might say, Mr. Speaker, when we deal with our Estimates this afternoon, because we will be on the Social Security portion of the Estimates. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Johns with a final supplementary. MR. CHERNIACK: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

May I ask the member how long it will take to locate there and whether having it done that, it precludes any possibility of an office being made available much closer to the center of the district, such as a bank building I know that has been vacant for a long time at Bannerman and Main, or even further south at Dufferin and Main, and will that then be the one office that will serve the western end of the area, as well as all the way up to the CPR tracks? MR. MINAKER: Mr. Speaker, I' ll take the question as notice and we'll have the information for him at the time we deal with it in our Estimates.

I understand we're not going into Estimates thi s afternoon, so then I would presume it will be tomorrow. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker, now that the Minister is back, I'd like to ask a question.

I indicate that I was quite concerned with the report that some of the students had to walk for miles to get a meal, and I wanted to know, I'm asking the Minister if he's ready to do someth ing positive, such as maybe open the schools immediately to make sure that during the weekends these kids get meals, decent meals, while an investigation is going on to see if they have any parents and what the parents are doing?

I wanted to make it clear, and I made it clear earlier, that I wasn't referring when I said someth ing positive, I wasn't talking about monitoring, but do someth ing immediately while monitoring and investigating is taking place. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Mini ster of Community Services. MR. MINAKER: I was, like the Honourable Member for St. Boniface, concerned when I read the

article that has appeared in today's newspaper and not suggesting that all of the items reported in the newspaper are correct. I would like to advise the 2119 honourable member that I've been in contact with the Director of Child Welfare to have CAS Winnipeg Director contact the individual making the statements that this was occurring, to find out the names of the children that he says are having to walk to the soup line on the weekends, and if necessary to go down to these locations on the weekends to point out the particular children. Mr.

Speaker, I was quite surprised as late as last Monday of this week, our Director of Child Welfare was in contact with the Director of Children's Aid Society, Winnipeg, who advised us that the referral mechanism is still in place, which was put in place between the Salvation Army and the Children's Aid Society, if in case what the Director of Nutrition said was happening, that the Salvation Army would contact the Children's Aid Society immediately to advise that children were standing in line.

To my knowledge, to date nothing serious like has been indicated in the report has occurred, because we have been confirmed that referral mechanism is in place and communication is close between the Salvation Army, as well as the Children's Aid Society of Winnipeg. Further to that, I asked the Director of Child Welfare to contact Rossbrook House in case some of these children that have been referred to are going to Rossbrook House rather than the Salvation Army. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr .

Speake r, I thank the Minister for his answer and I am pleased to see that he is concerned; I never doubted for a minute, but my question went further than that. I'm not interested at this time to see if there's too much red tape or somebody from the Children's Aid Society is saying that this is exaggerated, or to find out the fault or something, if someth ing wasn't done that the Minister had ordered. I am suggesting that while this is being done, and there's no point in taking chances on that, that maybe certain schools should be opened for the next weekend or so to make sure that these people do not go hungry.

I want to admit that the information I had was only in reading the paper today, and my concern is that there seemed to be an awful lot; even if half of that was true I think it would warrant positive action from the Minister immediately while the investigation is going on. MR. MINAKER: Mr.

Speaker, I am awaiting a report back from the Director of Child Welfare, which I expect to get today or first thing tomorrow morning, with regard to what in fact is happening at the Salvation Army and Rossbrook House, and will make any necessary decision at that time if there are children that are being affected, as is suggested. I might point out, Mr. Speaker, that we have programs available for parents of these children, the CRISP program, which will give them $30.00 a month per child, if in fact, it's an income problem.

If it's not an income pro blem, then we have couns elling available to parents to provide them with home economists or even counselling and guidance on how to budget their particular income that they have, or if they'r e on welfare they should have adequate funding. Now if they are not following through with these particular programs and the parents aren't looking after their children, then the last resort would be

Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 obviously to sit down with the family and Children's Aid Society and maybe, under contract, help the parents out in looking after their children. We hope that that would not be necessary. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Boniface with a final supplementary. MR. DESJARDINS: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think that the last resort would be sitting down with these people, but doesn't the Minister agree that the first resort, make sure that these people get fed before anything else is done? Mr. Speaker, the Minister is talking about CRISP and another $30.00.

Isn't it a fact that this is not going to mean much, because some of this will be deducted or charged as a revenue when you calculated the Welfare Program? Isn't that counted as a revenue, before you deal with Welfare? MR. MINAKER: Mr. Speaker, in indicating that CRISP was available, I was pointing out that there shouldn't be any need for children to be going in our city for the need of food with the programs that are in place, if it's a low income family or if the family is on welfare. There obviously is another problem, a social problem, with the family, and we, Mr.

Speaker, believe that the respon sibility of lookin g after children is still with the parents and we will do everything within our power to make sure that the parent has the opportunity to look after their child properly. If that fails, I would hate to see us have to go into a full-scale nutrition program in schools to look after child ren when it pri maril y is the responsibility of the parents of the children and we have programs in place which will assist those parents to look after their children. MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Mem ber for Burrows. MR. BEN HANUSCHAK: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to direct my question to the Honourable Minister of Community Services. Could the Minister assure a constituent of mine, whose child was promised a bicycle for a birthday present valued somewhat in excess of $10 0, that the acceptance of that bicycle will not be deducted from the mother's welfare allowance? MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Mi nister of Community Services. MR. MINAKER: Mr. Speaker, I'm confident that it will not be deducted. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. MS. JUNE WESTBURY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is addressed to the Honourable Minister of Health.

Expressing appreciation for the capital programs that have been outlined at the time of Estimates and the news releases, I'm wondering where there appears a description of the building program that is su pposed to start at the municipal hospitals this summer. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. MR. SHERMAN: lt doesn't appear in the capital program for this year, Mr. Speaker.

What is under way at the municipal hospitals right now constituted a program that was undertaken last year and announced last year, but the major renovation program that the Honourable Member for Fort Rouge is referring to was not included in the capital program announced for 1981- 82; it is still under consideration, Mr. Speaker. MS. WESTBURY: Mr. Speaker, the board and administration believe it's starting this summer and I wonder if the Minister can comment on the expected service building behind the Princ ess Elizabeth for which a zoning variation was being heard last night.

I don't know the outcome of the zoning variation but the understanding is that that was to be constructed this summer. MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I'll have to check on the precise details, but it's my recollection that renovation of what was formerly a nurses residence, which is still a very structurally-sound building on the municipal hospitals campus, was part of last year's program and that is proceeding.

I thought the Honourable Member for Fort Rouge was referring to the very laudable ambition, which I know she has and which I share, for a major, multi-million dollar redevelopment of the municip als, possibly including the construction of a personal care home on the municipal hospitals' grounds. That program has not been approved yet, but I would like to have the opportunity, in the next 24 hours, to check on the specifics of what she has just asked me about. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge with a final supplementary. MS. WESTBURY: lt becomes curi ouser and curiouser, Mr. Speaker.

In looking into this, I wonder if the Minister could also look into the report that I've had that the renovations to the nurses residence have been cancelled and instead there's to be a renovation to the King George Hospit al, accompanied by this new service building behind the Princess Elizabeth that's to be the first stage of $2.5 million building program. MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I can't confirm any of that at this moment, but I will take it as notice and attempt to report on it very quickly. MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Mem ber for Wellington. MR. BRIAN CORRIN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Consumer Affairs. Can the Minister advise whether he has yet determined if the Greater Winnipeg Gas Com pany is including repair servicing and other normal operational charges such as meter reading costs in the estimated billings which are now being sent to their customers? In this regard, I would remind him that the Public Utility Board takes all the com pany's operational costs into consideration prior to the setting of their rate. MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Minis ter of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. 2120

Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 MR. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated during my Estima tes review, the rates that are curr ently charged by the Gas Company are based on the 1979 actual costs of the company, and do not assume any future additional costs. They are only based on previous costs, not future costs. MR.

CORRIN: I wish to draw the Minister's attention to the fact that the meter readers are also out on strike at Greater Winnipeg Gas and ask whether the Minister will ask the Public Utility Board to impose an appropriate estimate formula which will govern the gas com pany's current practice of estimating customers' billings during the duration of this strike? MR. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, if anyone disputes the esti mated charges they are checked out and physically read at the meter to ensure that they are correct. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Memb er for Wellington with a final supplementary. MR. CORRIN: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to ask the Minister whether he will ask the Public Utility Board to conduct an inquiry in order to ascertain whether the Gas Company is inadvertently overcharging customers, and if so, whether their rates should be temporarily reduced to reflect their lower operational costs during the strike? MR. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, again we discussed that thoroughly under my Estimates review and the Public Utilities Board has its consultants reviewing matters on a daily basis with the Greater Winnipeg Gas Company to ensure that they are not over-estimating charges during the present circums tances. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Churchill. MR. JAY COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, my question as well is to the Minister responsible for Consumer Affairs, or the Minister who should be responsible for Consumer Affairs, and I'd ask the Mini ster what action he reco mm ends to those individuals who have signed the petition which was presented to his office yesterday in respect to dealing with the outstanding costs which they had to pay as a result of the disruption of the gas service to their facilities? MR. FILMON: Mr.

Speaker, as I indicated earlier in today's question period, I have not yet made any recommendation to those people. MR. COWAN: Well, I would hope that the Minister would be able to ma ke, in general terms, a statement as to what action persons, who feel aggrieved by this particular strike, should take in respect to payments which they have to make which they would not have to make had the strike not been on.

My question to the Minister therefore is, can he provide us with a general statement in respect to concerns which are brought forward to him, not only by these individuals but by all individuals in respect to the payments which they are forced to pay because of the strike, which would normally be given to them by Greater Winnipeg Gas? 2121 MR. FILMON: No, Mr. Speaker. MR. COWAN: Mr. Speaker, I think that one word answer says a lot more than the Minister intended it to say.

My final question to the Minister, and I'd like to give him an opportunity to answer a question that was given to him by the Honourable Member for lnkster, and that is: Is he prepared now to use whatever influence he may have to call upon the Mi nister of Labour and other mem bers of the Cabinet, in order to encourage them and in order to help them come forward with some course of action, which might provide a breakthrough in this particular labour-management dispute and that is, the calling of an industrial inquiry? Is he prepared to carry that message forward to the Minister of Labour at this time? MR.

FILMON: Mr. Speaker, I'll take the mem ber's suggestion under advisement and discuss it with my colleagues. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Education. HON. KEITH A. COSENS (Gimli): Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Honourable Member for St. Johns, in the process of asking a question, stated that the per pupil operating expenditures for the Transcona Springfield School Division were the lowest in Metro Winnipeg, and at that time, Mr. Speaker, I took exception with the statement and said I would provide accurate information today.

I have that information for the honourable member and contrary to his statement, the lowest per pupil expe nditure is not Transcona -Springfield, Mr . Speaker, it is Seine River at $2,395 expenditure per pupil. Transcona -Springfield is not the second lowest, Mr. Speaker, Assin iboine Sout h is at $2,404.00. lt is not the third lowest, Mr. Speaker, St. James-Assiniboia is at $2,405 per pupil. lt is not the fourth lowest, Mr. Speaker, River East is at $2,420.00. lt is the fifth lowest, Mr. Speaker, at $2,430.00. These figures are based on the budgets submitted by the school divisions to my department, Mr .

Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for St. Johns. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the information given by the Honourable Minister of Education, which is in contrad ictio n to the information given to us by the Transcona School Division and he must be aware of that. I won der if he is prepared to give us the correlat ion between the figu res prepared by Transcona, which he must have, and the figures which he has given us now, to indicate whether there's a difference in approach as to what the amount is.

Or is he prepared to state that the information gi ven to us by Tr anscona was an absolute lie? MR. COSENS: Mr. Speaker, I'm not aware of what particular information the Member for St. Johns may have received. The only possible confusion that could

Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 exist here perhaps is in the area of total cost per pupil. Perhaps that -(Interje ction) - We ll, Mr . Speaker, if the honourable member would like those figures, he'll find that Transcona-Springfield is in sixth place. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr.

Speaker, in view of the hilarity that is caused by the fact that we received figures from Transcona that were not as the Minister says, I am still asking him if he is prepared to give us an explanation, which he must have, of the difference in the figures stated to us, which caused me no embarassment, because I didn't prepare them, and to explain that on the basis, Mr. Speaker, that we were informed in caucus that the Transcona School Division had come from a meeting with the Minister, had presented him with the same information they presented to us.

That being the case, the Minister obviously must know the figures they gave to us, and must have the good sense and the knowledge to be able to explain the differential. If he can't, then we will ask Transcona to do that as well. But let me again ask the Minister to give us that understanding, so that we could be as knowledgable as he is on the figures given to us by the Transcona School Division, whose integrity I have no reason to doubt. MR. COSENS: Mr. Speaker, as I have mentioned these figures are based on the school board budgets that are submitted to my department.

I have every reason to believe that these are the most correct and accurate figures that are available. I have no way of knowing the figures that the honourable member is quoting from and perhaps he should check them rather carefully before he undertakes to quote. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Johns with a final suppleme ntary. MR. CHERNIACK: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, inasmuch as the statement I quoted was directly given by the Transcona School Division and contained in a brief, as I understand it, which was red coloured and I don't know whether it was rejected because of its colour by the Minister, whether or not he needs me to send him a copy of what was given to us in order for him to have the courtesy, rather than calling the Transcona School Division liars in their statement, to have the courtesy . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Member for St. Johns. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr.

Speaker, inasmuch as the statement I made was directly given to us by the Transcona School Division and reported to the Minister in almost the same words, is the Minister prepared to give us the correlation between what the Transcona School Division told us, and I assume him, and what he has told us, so that we could understand the method in which there is a difference in their calculations, so as to unde rstand why Transcona said what they did and why the Minister said what he did? Now is that too difficult a question for the Minister to handle? MR. COSENS: Mr . Speaker, it's a very easy question.

I suggest to the honourable member that 2122 he go back and do his homework and ask Transcona-Springfield who obviously provided him with the figures, how they arrived at their figures. I have just given him the correct figures. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Memb er for Brandon East. MR. LEONARD S. EVANS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, too, would like to ask a question of the Minister of Education. Mr. Sp eaker, the government announced a short while ago that moneys would be made available for the expansion of the School of Music at the Brandon University.

My question to the Minister is this, are these moneys that have been referred to in addition to those monies that were ple dged and earmarked by the previous New Democratic Party Government? In other words, are these dollars in addition to the $600,000 set aside, plus the $500,000, special 75th Anniversary gift for Brandon University, which was made available on a matching basis, for a potential total of $1. 6 million. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nis ter of Education. MR. COSENS: Mr.

Speaker, we haven't found any money that was earmarked, set aside or sitting in any special fund, for that particular purpose, but we have provided in this year's budget for the addition to the School of Music to take place. MR. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, I would hope the Minister will look again, because there were funds set aside for this purpose. I would like to ask the Minister then a suppleme ntary question.

Can the Minister advise now, approximately how many dollars, what amount of money will be made available to the Brandon Unversity so that it can now begin to plan for a possible expansion of their School of Music? MR. COSENS: Mr. Speaker, I don't have the exact figures with me. I'd be quite prepared to go into that in my Estimates with the Honourable Member for Brandon East. Adequate funds are provided to put that particular addition in place. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon East with a final supplementary. MR. EVANS: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary then, can the Minister assure the House that these moneys will be made available in sufficient time that construction may start on this facility more or less forthwith, certainly within the current calendar year? MR. COSENS: Mr. Speaker, there is no problem from our point of view. I understand Brandon University is rethinking the type of structure and so on that they may require there and that has been holding up the process to a certain extent. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Elmwood. MR. RUSSELL DOERN: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to direct a que stion to th e Mi nister of Econ omic Development and ask him whether he can confirm

Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 that the provincial economy is in a state of stagnation as measured in a record numb er of corporate bankruptcies in 1980, which is double the previous year and the highest in the last decade? MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Mini ster of Economic Development. HON. J. FRANKLIN JOHNSTON (Sturgeon Creek): There seems to be some confusion among people across Canada who is the worst, Mr. Speaker. Our economy is not in stagnation except in the hopeful minds of the members opposite who want it that way. Mr.

Speaker, we are in the middle of Canada as far as bankruptcies are concerned when you take the average of 10,000 businesses. MR. DOERN: Mr. Speaker, is the Minister seriously suggesting that the 154 registered bankruptcies in Manitoba in the past year are a figment of the imagination of the directors of those companies? MR. JOHNSTON: I would just say that the Leader of the NDP in Ontario was making the same type of statement and lost 12 seats. Mr. Speaker, I can tell you that on the average of 10,000 busi nesses we're right in about the middle. lt shouldn't be that high.

We have had circumstances that have caused bankruptcies across Canada, but also in Manitoba certain circums tances that have contributed to a higher number of bankruptcies. The percentage of increase has been the same as it has been in other years, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Hono urable Memb er for Elmwood with a final supplementary. MR. DOERN: Mr. Speaker there are, "none so blind as will not see." Mr. Speaker, I would like to also ask the Minister whether he can confirm that there is a record num ber of personal or consumer bankruptcies in the province which are up some 20 to 25 times over a decade ago?

Is that also a figment of the imagination of those people, or is it a figment of the imagination of the Minister? MR. JOHNSTON: No, it isn't a figment of the imagination, Mr. Speaker, and upon che cking on those particular bankruptcies, the largest majority of them are caused by marriage breakups, which are at the highest level they have ever been. MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The time for question period has expired, we'll proceed with Orders of the Day. ORDERS OF THE DAY BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. MR. MERCIER: Mr.

Speaker, firstly, I might indicate that after Communit y Services and Corrections outsid e the House, the · Depart ment of Natural Resources will follow Community Services. Inside the House, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Energy and Mines will be away on Monday and Tuesday on government business and should his estimates not be comple ted, and should we go into estimates in the House, then the Department of Education would be in the House on either Monday or Tuesday or both days. Mr. Speaker, would you call second reading of Bill No. 36, then Bill Nos. 11, 27, and 29. SECOND READING GOVERNMENT BILLS BILL NO. 36 -

AN ACT TO AMEND THE SECURITIES ACT MR. FILMON presented Bill No. 36,

An Act to amend The Securities Act for second reading. MOTION presented. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Min ister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. MR. FILMON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Bill No. 36 seeks to amend The Securities Act in two minor ways, Mr. Speaker. The act presently provides for an exemption from registration under The Manitoba Securities Act of two types of trades; firstly, the issue by a company of its securities as a stock dividend or other distribution from earnings, and a distribution by a company which is incidental to a bona fide reorganization or winding up of the company.

One of the proposed amendments would add a third category of exemption within that clause. This exemption would cover the issue and distribution of a company's securities resulting from the exercise of a right to purchase, convert or exchange granted to the holder at the time he acquired the initial security. Although the act presently does not specifically exempt this third category of trades, Mr. Speaker, it was the general practise to treat them as exempt trades.

When the conversion feature or right to purchase was granted pursuant to a prospectus filed with the commission, it was generally considered that the subsequent conversion was covered by the receipt issue. However, ... MR. SPEAKER: If honourable mem bers wish to carry on private conversations, I would hope they would do it elsewhere; either that or tone their voices down. lt is very difficult to hear. The Honourable Minister may continue. MR. FILMON: However, Mr. Speaker, because Bill No. 72, specifically exempts these transactions, doubt has arisen as to whether or not they are exempt un der the present act.

The proposed amendment would therefore remove any such doubt. The second amending clause, Mr. Speaker, the amendments to

Section 81, extend the types of conditions that an offer could attach to a takeover bid that would entitle him to decide not to take up and pay for the securities that had been deposited pursuant to the takeover bid. Under the present sub-clause 81(1 1)(

b) the offerer can withdraw his bid if the board of directors of the offeree company takes any action subsequent to the date of the takeover bid, which materially changes the undertaking assets or capital of the offeree company. 2123

Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 The amendments broaden this clause to include directors or senior officers of the com pany. The amendment also provides for additional rights of withdrawal if there is any prior undisclosed action by the offeree company, or secondly, if there is any und isclo sed action prior to and any action subsequent to the date of a take-over bid by a person or compa ny other than the offerer, including a govermental or regulatory agency; and thirdly, if the requir ed approval of a governmental or regulatory agency is not obtained prior to the expiration of the officer.

This amendment also allows for an extension of 90 days of the time in which the offer could take up and pay for shares where governmental or regulatory authority is required for the take-over bid. The above proposed amendments, Mr. Speaker, adopt provisions that are already in effect under The Securities Act of Ontario. Without these amendments take-over bids made persuant to the Ontario provisions are contrary to the present Act. Therefore, they are required to ensure compatibility with other provinces. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Logan. MR.

WILLIAM JENKINS: I beg to move, seconded by The Honourable Member for St. Vital that debate be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried. MR. SPEAKER: Bill No. 11,

An Act to Amend the Municipal Assessment Act, standing in the name of The Honourable Member for Logan. (Stand) MR. SPEAKER: Bill No. 27,

an Act to Amend the Highway Traffic Act, standing in the name of The Honourable Member for St. George. (Stand) MR. SPEAKER: Bill No. 29,

an Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act (2), standing in the name of The Honourable Member for Logan. (Stand) MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. MR. MERCIER: I move, Mr. Speaker, seconded by the Honourable Minister of Finance, that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Commi ttee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. That's Interim Supply, Mr. Speaker. MOTION presented and carried and the House resolved itself into a Commit tee of Interim Supply with the Honourable Member for Virden in the Chair. COMMITTEE OF SUPPL V INTERIM SUPPL V MR.

CHAIRMAN, Morris McGregor (Virden): Call the Comm ittee to order. The Resolution before the Comm ittee is Interim Supply. Resolved that a sum not exceeding $673,466, 010 , being 30 percent of the amount of the several items to be voted for departments as set forth in the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending 31s t day of March, 1982, laid before the House at the present session of the Legislature, be granted to Her Majesty for the fiscal year ending 31s t day of March, 1982. The Honourable Member for lnkster. MR. GREEN: Yes, Mr.

Chairman, we now have an additional situation with respect to the Minister for Consumer Affairs and the Minister of Labour relative to the industrial dis,pute affecting the provision of essential services now enfranchised to a company which has monopoly control over the distribution of the service. Mr.

Chairman, there's no doubt that members on this side by their questions and in debate, have tried to bring to the attention of the Minister for Consumer Affairs and the Minister of Labour the unique characterization of this dispute. lt is not a labour dispute which simply involves an emp loyer and an emplo yee arguin g about the amount of wages that shall be due and payable. In this case we have on the one hand a company which is in a unique situation with respect to the dispute, namely that it is the only provider of the service and that it has an exclusive franchise for the provision of the service.

The question as to whether or not the employees are being reasonable or the emp loyers are being reasonable is not, I submit, an issue. That's something that has to be resolved between the parties. What is an issue, Mr.

Chairman, is whether or not the com pany's unique position enables it to take advantage of a situation which cannot normally be taken advantage of by an employer, and we have brough t to the attention of both Ministers on numerous occasions, the fact that the compa ny could be in a position of saving money on the dispute and that indeed it has stopped providing services to its custome rs which were normally provided. Both the Minister of Labour and the Min ister of Consumer Affairs have in the past, indicated that this may be an unsatisfactory situation but they hope it will go away. Well, Mr.

Chairman, I suppose to some extent, and although it certainly won't disappear completely, the dispute is perhaps hoped by these Ministers will go away with the arrival of sunshine and warm weather in which case the Gas Com pany, I suppose, will be under less pressure to solve this dispute. Now, Mr. Chairman, I have consistently said that I don't want the government intervening in this free colle ctive bargaining situation but sometimes, Mr.

Chairman, - and I submit that this is one of the cases where intervention takes place by om ission and by an abdication of responsibility - and in this case the government has certainly abdicated its responsibility in two essential areas, Mr. Chairman.

First of all they have taken no steps whatsoever, indeed they have equivocated suggested that they might take steps then suggested that the steps are illegal - which I submit they are not and if they were they could be made legal - that they have intervened by not using governmental authority to deal with the provision of a service which the Gas Company has provided and which was part of their expenses when they established their rates. That, Mr. Chairman, is an intervention in the dispute. The second intervention, Mr .

Chairman, is the om ission to have an Industrial Inquiry Commis sion look to see what is happening. If the Minister will look at the powers of an Ind ustrial Inquir y 2124

• Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 Comm ission, he'll see that it has no power whatsoever to require either the employer or the employee to agree to any terms and conditions of employment, and I agree with that. An Industrial Inquiry Commission has no power to require one party or the other to abandon their free collective barg aining posit ion, but an Indus trial Inqu iry Commission, Mr. Chairman, would tell the people of this province two things, whether in fact the Gas Company is gaining dollars by this dispute at the expense of citizens of the Province of Manitoba who they are supposed to serve.

I have heard the President of the Gas Company or one of their officials get on television and say it's costing them more. We have indicated in the House that if they don't have to pay their maintenance staff and they don't pay the private contractors who they normally hire, they would be saving money. If they are saving money on the dispute then the only way we will know it is not by listening to what the Labour Union says, not by listening to what the company says, by actually getting out the figures, and the only way that can be obtained is through an Industrial Inquiry and an Industrial Inquiry, Mr.

Chairman, then need not intervene in the dispute but it certainly can pass laws as to what the citizens are entitled to expect from the provision of a essential service to which the state has gr anted a mono poly. The Minister of Consumer Affairs has in effect said that the government can do nothing; that the Public Utility Board is an independent organization, that it makes its own decisions and the government cannot influence them. Well, Mr. Cha irman, that is only a superficial assessment of what has occurred.

Is the Minister really saying that the Public Utility Board and the laws and the franchise to the Greater Winnipeg Gas Company, that there is no control over them? That this is solely in the hands of the Public Utility Board? That nothing can be done? Because if the Minister is saying that, he is saying that there is an entrenched statute of rights for the Greater Winn ipeg Gas Company, and that it's the Public Utility Board that will make the decision and the Legislature can't do anything. I thought that the members on the other side don't agree with such an entrenched position.

Surely here is an opportunity for them to say not what the situation is, but what the situation should be, and that's what legislators should be doing, Mr . Chairman. If they recogn ize that a situation has occurred which is not in accordance with what represents their view of the good and welfare of society, they should change it. Unfortunately, today we do not have an entrenched Bill of Rights that prevents you from changing it.

But the Mini ster takes the position that he's entrenched, that the Legislature can do nothing, that this has been abdicated, that all authority, all powers so to speak, is in the hands of the Public Utility Board, and no matter what they do the Minister can do nothing. Well, Mr. Chairman, that is not the case. An Ind ustrial Inqu iry Comm ission could provide the Minister with the facts as to whether the company has taken advantage of this situation. There has been reference to vandalism. I don't know whether this cutoff of power resulted in vandalism; I don't 2125 know what allusions are being made, Mr.

Chairman. I do know that once I represented a trade union in court and tacks were strewn on the street in front of the company premises, and the lawyer for the company got up and said that the union threw tacks on the street, and not a word was said, Mr . Chairman, by the court before whom we were sitting. The statement was accepted. When my turn came, I got up and said, the company has thrown tacks on the street, and everybody objected. They said, how can you make such a statement?

I said, my lords, I make that statement with the same authority as the lawyer for the employer who said that the union threw tacks on the street, and I was put the question. Well, Mr. Green, but who is benefiting from this? I said, my lords, if we are determining who is benefiting from it, then my case is much stronger, because who is suggesting that the tacks on the street are put by the union and therefore seeking a benefit from that particular event? Well, Mr. Chairman, I don't know how this vandalism occurred.

But I would like the Minister to use means available to him, which are not available to me, to find out. The second thing that the government has done to intervene in this strike, they have intervened in this strike by

an act of omission, and the act of omission has been the act of the Minister of Labour refusing to call an Industrial Inquiry Commission under the guise of non-interference in the dispute. The naming of an Ind ustria l In quir y Comm ission is not an intervention in the dispute. There have been Industrial Inquiry Commissions appointed and I'll name one, it was even a judicial inquiry, the Tritschler Inq uiry was appointed, the previous Roblin administration got - I will put into quotation marks - "facts" but it never affected the dispute.

The parties to the dispute were left to commence a continued collective bargaining and to solve their problem. As a matter of fact the Industrial Inqu iry, Mr. Chairman, came after the strike was settled. Was that not a fact? The Member for Kildonan will probably remember. The Industrial Inquiry was set up and was in the process of being set up and the em ployees settled the dispute, but the Industrial Inquiry went ahead. This Industrial Inquiry, Mr. Chairman, is necessary whether or not the dispute is settled, and in my view will not really assist in the settlement of the dispute.

What we may find, and what I suspect that we will find, is that as a result of an Industrial Inquiry the Minister would or should come in with corrective legislation to make sure that the Gas Company cannot avoid its responsibility by suggesting that the em ployees are on strike and therefore the service that is still available to you through private people, shall be paid for by yourself rather than by the people who have an exclusive franchise for the provision of this service. So in summa ry, Mr.

Chairman, I'm suggesting to both Ministers, who unfortunately are not here, but there are Ministers here and the Attorney-General is a good man to carry forth this message, that an Ind ustrial Inqu iry into this particular dispute is probably more justified than an Industrial Inquiry into any other dispute that ever took place. I will, Mr. Chairman, indicate what I believe the terms of reference of such an inquiry should be and it has

Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 nothing to do with the terms and conditions of employment. 1. Is the gas company during the occurrence of the strike, requiring its consumers to pay charges which were previously charged, which were previously paid by the Gas Company itself, with reference to services which had been provided by the Gas Company and which were included in the amounts that were shown as expenses in the submission made by the Gas Company to the Public Utility Board when they obtained their rate increases? That should be the first term of reference. 2.

Can witnesses be found who will be able to deal with those questions which arose during the strike, relating to what the Minister refers to as vandalism without any evidence on his part, with respect to vandalism - and there was a second malfunction at one of the facilities some weeks ago - is there evidence obtainable as to how these things occurred so that there will be not an unfair innuendo about how they occurred? 3.

Is the present legislation sufficient to see to it that consu mers who are tied to this exclusiv e provision of service, is the present legislation satisfactory to see to it that they continue to get the service? Now, Mr. Chairman, let me also point out that whether it is good or bad, and I'm not going to go into that question at the moment, whether it is good or bad the Gas Company is not going to lose by being required to pay for those services that they previously paid for. They have a captive audience and they will add it to the bills. Ultimately it's going to be paid for by the consumers in any event.

Who are being treated unfairly are those consumers who happen to need that individual service, because they won't get their money back; the Gas Company will get its money back; each of the people who buy gas will probably have to pay for whatever services are provided; the Gas Company will add it to its account and it will be spread out amongst the consumers of Winnipeg, but that won't repay the person who had to pay $90 or $50 or $25 for that individual service. So if this comes as some type of an attack on the financial position of the gas company, it doesn't.

I make this as a criticism of the very scandalous way in which the gas com pany has behaved, not essentially to its employees. The employees when they go on strike they know that they could be out for a long time. The gas company has essentially copped out or double-crossed the consumer, and they are using that consumer as a patsy to assist it in an industrial dispute. So, Mr .

Chai rman, I've given three terms of reference - I see that the Minister is now here - I will try briefly to indicate that an Industrial Inquiry Comm ission has no effect or, I want to not exaggerate, need not and legally does not affect the rights of the parties with respect to the dispute. I indicated earlier that the Brandon Packers Industrial Inquiry came after the dispute was settled. What we are interested in, from the point of view of an industrial inquiry, which I consider the failure to set up as being an omission and an intervention in the strike by the government, on behalf of the employer.

The Minister is shaking his head and disagrees with me, I didn't expect otherwise, Mr. Chairman, but that's what I consider it to be and I'm 2126 suggesting that, whether I am right or wrong, the Minister can't answer any more than he can answer that the gas was cut off by means of vandalism. The way in which these questions will be answered is not by asking the chairman of the gas company; not by asking people to give innuendoes as to how it occurred; but by setting up a commission which will have the power of subpoena and the power to gather evidence. Mr .

Chairman, I have absolutely no guarantee, indeed I don't have much optimism, that this will cause a settlement of the strike. The strike will probably be settled when the normal forces of collective bargaining take their place, which are not taking place at the present time, because from the surface, and I submit that the surface speaks loud and clear, the emp loyer is using a preferred position granted to them by this government to not settle that strike.

So the third term of reference, and I go back to it and I gave the first two, is the present legislation satisfactory and can an Indus trial Inqu iry Comm ission ma ke rec ommendations, not with respect to strikes in the gas industry, but how the consumer is to be protected for the contin ued deliverance of a service when there is a problem of this kind. Now, Mr. Chairman, the Minister softened up just a little bit. He said he will consider it and, if I could have got the floor again, I was going to stop using him as a conduit pipe.

I wanted to go back to the Minister of Labour who is not here and say, okay Minister of Labour, you've been saying that this publicity is going to do a good job; this publicity is going to be used by the union to end the strike; and that my questions were very valuable in this connection.

Now he will realize that my questions did not have the value that he attributed to him; now he's no longer going to rely on me or any other member in this House who wants to ask a question; now he's going to rely on the elected representatives of the people who have formed a government, that majority group, to do what they can, Mr. Chairman, not to end the dispute, but to enquire into the special circu mstances of the dispute. Mr.

Chairman, I say that if ever an Industrial Inquiry Commission was warranted this is the case and I ask the Minister, not merely to consider it but to move positively to have such a step taken. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Wellington. MR. CORRIN: I hadn't planned, Mr. Chairman, to join this discussion or debate, but I think that it's one that merits the attention of all mem bers. lt's one, as the Member for lnkster has said, that certainly in this afterno on's question period warranted considerable interest on the part of a variety of members on the Opposition side. I don't, Mr.

Chairman, agree with the premise of the Member for lnkster, relative to the endowment of special status on this particular employer. I believe, Mr. Chairman, that there is, within the law of this province, adequate protection to assure that Greater Winnip eg Gas Company will not enjoy special privilege during times of labour dispute. And I'm referring, as I did, Mr. Chairman, during the course of my questions in the question period, to The Public Utiliti es Board Act. Mr. Chairman , there are

I Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 provisions in that Act which allow the board to make either partial or interim or permanent orders which, in effect, will govern the rate structure which sets the price at which the gas company can sell its product. I want to talk a bit about this and I want to elaborate a bit about this, Mr. Chairman, because I think it's worthy of consideration and this is the point that I tried to make during question period today.

I would suggest that there is no need for an industrial inquiry because the Minister simply can ask the Public Util ities Board to enqu ire into all the circu mstances that are now pertaining, that are flowing from the strike situation. And the Public Utilities Board, upon making the necessary inquiries - I'm referring specifically, Mr. Chairman, to

Section 44 and 45 of the Act - can make orders which will ameliorate the situation that is currently existing with respect to the possible profiteering - I don't like to use that word, because it ma y be that it's inadvertent - but certai nly can ameliorate the situation that the Member for lnkster is concerned and justifiably concerned about. I think it's a concern that's shared, I would hope, by all Members in the Chamber. There is substantial evidence, Mr.

Chairman, to indicate that the gas company is making a profit, and I say that because of course, at the last rate review hearing the operational costs of the company were taken into consideration, as is prescribed by the regulations in the Act, in the course of deliberations on the subject. So the Minister if he believes that such things as meter reading charges and repair costs and so on are not taken into consideration when the rate is set, is simply in error. And I tell him that in a respectful way because, Mr.

Chairman, he should be fully aware and be fully apprised of the circu mstances by which and through which the Public Utilit ies Board deli berates and ma kes decisions. So the Member for lnkster, Mr. Chairman, is quite correct, and it should be noted. I suppose my concern, if I was to specify an emphasis, Mr. Chairman, would be not only with the current imbalance with respect to the labour dispute, and that I think has been quite adequately dealt with by the Member for lnkster, but also the position of the consumer during the course of the dispute because you know, Mr.

Chairman, it's one thing I suppose for the government to say as a matter of philosophy that they don't want to get involved in the labour dispute, that they don' t want to try and intermediate or concilia te the differences between the parties, I don't know, Mr. Chairman, perhaps the Member for lnkster is right, perhaps this government has a sort of bias in favour of the employer. lt would appear on the evidence at this point that may well be the case because the government seems completely unwilling to take any affirmative action that we would remedy the current imbalance between the parties.

But more impo rtant, Mr . Chai rman, or equally important, they are not doing anything to ameloriate the lot of the consumers who are being affected by the strike. There are well over 100,000 households I belie ve in the City of Winnip eg who use that particular utility service and during the course of this strike over the past - I guess it's about eight weeks now, it must be approximately two months we have had this strike, that's a long time - we've had a situation arise where there haven't been any meter 2127 readings, the meter readers are out, so that people are being sent guesstimated or estimated bills.

Now, as I understand it, there is a formula that also prescribes how es tima ted bills are to be calcula ted but when the Public Utilit ies Board determined that subject when they deliberated on the question of estimated bill formulas, they never contemplated a strike situation. That wasn't on the table before the board. They were thinking in terms of normal business practices; they were thinking in terms of the concern of the utility about the rising costs of affecting meter readings every month.

I believe - and I'm subject to correction if I'm wrong - that they were given an order that allows them to estimate the bill over a two-month period so that they don't have to do a monthly reading. So it's really every other two months they have to do a reading, I think that's how it works.

But I draw members' attention to the fact that we have a situation where people are being asked - and I have received at least a few calls on this subject from irate constituents - consumers are being asked to pay estimated billings that are not necessarily in accordance with the real operational costs that are being borne by the utility. Now some of the people that have phoned me have suggested as a matter of principle that they don't like that. I don't know, perhaps they are supportive of the employees; perhaps they feel that government or the utility should be more responsible.

They feel that the utility shouldn't be allowed to profit as a result of a strike situation but be that as it may, Mr. Chairman. The fact is that if they don't pay within the prescribed payment period they are then penalized and are required to pay a penalty which I believe is now set at - and I'll just check my figures because I looked this up - 1. 75 percent per month which is an extraordinarily high rate of interest.

So the customer who agrees with the Member for lnkster, or the customer, and I've had other phone calls from people who are in this other position, the custome r who feels that the gu esst ima te is inordinately high and I've received calls from two senior citi zens who have sug gested that the estimated billings are simply out of line with the normal gas costs that are reflected in their meter read billings, those people are put in an invidious position. If they don't pay their guesstimated bills on time, then a 1. 75 percent per month penalty charge is levied against them and they are forced to even pay more.

Now I ask you, Mr. Chairman, is this just? In all fairness, is it just? Why should the consumer pay for the lack of attentiveness and responsibility of the uti lity? I suggest that they shou ld have gone voluntarily back to the Public Utilities Board, realizing that they shouldn't profit from a strike situation, they should have volunteered to go back and had a revised rate hearing, but this is what we're facing. This is what our constituents are up against, so I think it's worthy of consideration.

I would suggest, as I suggested during the course of the question period, that the Min ister has a responsibility to ask the Public Utilities Board to impose an appropriate formula which will govern estimated billings during the course of this strike. In doing so, I would hope that the Public Utilities Board would be asked that whatever formula is set, is set in

Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 such a way that all profits that have accrued to the utility during the course of the strike action, would be recouped by the consumer. So if the strike lasts four months I would like to see an order rolling back pric es that would extend for four months, notwithstanding when the strike actually ends. As the Member for lnkster has said, with the end of the heating season we don't know if and when it will end. So, Mr. Chairman, that's the first thing I've asked.

I've asked that they look at those estimated billing formul as and they scrutin ize them closely and evaluate whether or not they represent the true cost of delivering the gas with an additional increment for a fair profit. Secondly, Mr. Chairman; I want to know whether there have been any advertent or inadvertent overcharges to the consumer and the Minister can ask the Public Utilities Board to enquire into that subject. I'm not one who is standing here shouting for an Industrial Inquiry and all that it entails, Mr.

Chairman, I'm not asking that the government show favour to the union over the employer, but I'm asking the government to take steps to create a balance, not only between those two adversaries, but also as between the utility and the consumer, because in the long run for all I know the utility is able to take a profit of many hundreds of thousands of dollars per month at the cost of the poor consumer, and I suppose at the cost of the union if it's true, without any review of that. So what have we done?

We're in fact, allowing the laws to be used inequitably to legislate an inordinate profit and to put an employer in an obviously superior position vis-a-vis the employee group. That's not right, Mr. Chairman. I would like to think that we could convince all members, government members as well as the commit ted position of the opposition members, that that is simp ly untenable and intolerable. Reason dictates that the government has to do something so if they won't move on the Industrial Inquiry, Mr. Chairman, I suggest then they have to move on the Public Utility Board inquiry.

When the Mini ster stands in his pla ce and suggests that Public Utility Board officials are daily monitoring practices, that's ludicrous. The Minister knows that the legislation prescribes a format for the board being able to do that. The board can't simply independently intervene. Somebody, some interested party must apply, must do something to set the wheels in motion. The Public Utility Board is not made up of legions of investigators and inspectors, Mr.

Chairman, that's a sort of misrepresentation. it's made up of a few appointed persons from around the province who, when a matter is properly brought before them, are required to sit in review of certain su bject matter and these matters under the legislation can be brought to the board's attention and we can compel, the public or the government can compel the Public Utilities Board to evaluate the situation. Mr.

Chairman, I fear to say that's not what's going to happen but rather the government is going to wait till the union's position is inexorably hopeless, when the heating season is com pletely terminated and the way the weather appears to be going, I guess one could suggest it could even be as early as May 1 this year - I should have said April 1, excuse me, April 1 - I look to government to be more affirmative. 2128 Sometimes I think that I'm too repetitive in that respect because I know that I say that with respect to so many matters but it seems to me that it bears repetition.

I think government has a responsibility to act as a pub lic advocate; I th ink government has a responsibility to try and not only conciliate interest but to balance interests in society, emplo yee , emplo yer, consu mer; I think it's impo rtant the govern ment play that sort of assertive and affirmative role. I think that's in keeping with simply the modern state of society. I think it's necessary the government perform that sort of responsibility but there seems to be a real entrenched reluctance on the part of this government to take that sort of position. I'm very disappointed.

Frankly, I would have thought with the change of Min ister, we wou ld have also seen an altered phi losophic al position vis-a-vis consumer, well, certainly consumer affairs. I was hoping that we would see a bit of a new wave; we would see a much more reform-oriented government Minister but that hope has not been realized. Indeed, Mr.

Chairman, I can say that we on this side are disappointed in the lack of diligence, the lack of aggressiveness, the lack of compassion because that I think is what, in the final analysis, is most moving as far as deficiency goes, the lack of compassion and humanity on the part of this government. I'm not - and it's a matter of record that the Member for lnkster and I often disagree - but with respect to this issue, there may be a difference in emphasis but it's very difficult to disagree when the me m ber presses for strong government, when the mem ber wants government to act.

He's really jus t asking for res ponsible democratic government. it's pretty basic. So, frankly I think the Minister of Consumer Affairs should have been in his Chair to respond. He listened to the Member for lnkster. He began to listen to my remarks and I suppose he became bored but I think it behooves him to participate in this sort of debate. There are over 10 0,000 homeowners who are involved. it's not ju st a question of several hundred empl oyees and their famil ies, it goes muc h further than that, Mr . Chairman. We're also talking about over 100,000 homeowners.

So, today I just want to express my deep dissatisfaction with the approach of this government again and put on record the fact that the govern ment has, with some degree of intransigence, once again refused to act on behalf of the people they purport to represent. Thank you very much. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Minnedosa. MR. DAVID BLAKE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. want to just add a few words in this debate just to keep some balance on both sides of the House. I can't let them share all of the debate over on that side. Mr.

Chairman, I don't want to get into the debate of the last two speakers with the Gas Company, the workers and who is right and who is wrong. Just as an outsider looking at the situation, I think that the union representatives or the union leaders were doing a great disservice to their people by taking them out on strike at a particular time because they appear to have them in a box where it looks like a

Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 no-win situation, and any union leader that would take his people out on strike over an issue such as that I don't think is being respons ible to his mem bership. I'm not going to get into it because I'm not familiar with either side in the situation but it would seem to me just as an observer looking at some of the newspaper articles, that the workers aren't going to win very much by this particular strike. For that reason, I think it was an unwise move to take them out at this time. However, we'll leave that debate to those that are more involved. Mr.

Chairman, there have been quite a number of speakers so far on this particular issue and I hope I don't take long, but I was here the day the first two speakers opened debate. The Leader of the Opposition who among other things, said that I am going to speak about the issues of the economy and I'm going to discuss the lack of economic growth, job creation and the diminishing population in the Province of Manitoba among other things. Well, the population of Manitoba doesn't appear to be diminishing. The latest statistics that have come forward indicate that the population has indeed increased in Manitoba but, Mr.

Chairman, the Leader of the Opposition went to great lengths to carry out the job that he appears to be dedicated to do as Leader of the Opposition and that is to tear down the Province of Manitoba in order to discredit the government. The doom and gloom creatures on that side don't seem to get the message that there are a great number of good things in this province that should be suppor ted and should be built upon. They're content to tear everything down whether it have some positive aspects or positive advantages to the people or whether it hasn't.

The message that they got from the last election to the east of us, Mr. Chairman, should illustrate in no uncertain terms that particular tactic just is not going to get them elected in Manitoba to this side of the House. There has been no doubt in my mind about that in any case but the statistics, Mr. Chairman, bear down to the number of seats. The weak link in the chain has indicated what the labour movement has done and the labour movement obviously didn't deliver too much of a vote to his party in Ontario. So the message is there, Mr.

Chairman, that the people are proud of this province and they would like to hear about some of the good things and some of the things that can be built upon rather than have them tear everything down. -(Interjection)- The great statistician from Brandon East that is feeding his leader all this great information, Mr. Chairman, people in my part of the province are well on to him. He's still taking credit for the building of the First Street Bridge into Brandon, and that contract was let before he was even elected, but let that be as it will, Mr. Chairman.

He continues to make those utterances when he's out in our constituency and the great fuss that he kicked up when he got up to speak about the hog barn out at Shilo, Mr . Chairman, about the environmental problem and what not, that it was creating, well I don't blame him for not knowing that that hog barn was closed and the hogs had been removed because he's living in Transcona now and he really can't smell it all the way to Shilo from Transcona. The leadership responsibilities, Mr.

Chairman, that �he Member from Selkirk undertook when he won 2129 the Leadership, I suppose that's the word to use, we were looking for great things from him. He came on with a great deal of fluster and bluster and we at that time, Mr. Chairman, referred to him instead of heavy Howard, as powder puff Pawley and that really hasn't changed too much, Mr. Chairman. We still consider him in that light because he wanders around. The Me mb er for Burr ows the other night mentioned something about us locking the barn door after the horses were gone and the Leader of the Opposition, speakin g of horses, Mr.

Chairm an, wanders around a great deal of the time and he doesn't know whether he's lost a horse or just found a halter. So many simple little things, Mr. Chairman. We've all been trying to get office space in this side of the House and he can't even get the people on that side together long enough to decide what offices they want. We might have been in them by now if they would have been able to get together over there. Now he's got an additional problem, Mr . Chairman, because we've got to find space for two or three weak links in his chain. The chain gang over there, they're just increasing every day.

The hands are going up and the numbers are increasing. We may have to revamp that whole office set-up that we had designed a few months ago because we're not too sure how many parties we're going to have in Opposition. So, Mr. Chairman, I think that the Leader of the Opposition and members of the Opposition could really do their party a little more credit if they would be a little more constructive.

The Leader said that he was going to talk about the economy and how he was going to get the economy back into a growth position, then he went on to spend a half an hour as did the Member for Brandon East, just comple tely tearing down Manitoba and making it look like the worst place in Canada for anyone to live. The people were moving out; the wages were poor; there were sweat-shops and, Mr. Chairman, that is just not good enough from the Leader of the Opposition and members opposite, There are a great many things in this province that can be built on. Statistics aren't all doom and gloom.

There are many of the statistics that are favourable. We hear today about the bankruptcies; take the bankruptcies across the country and then take Manitoba's. -(Interject ion)- Certainly do that. The Member for Ste. Rose says "let's do that" and he should know all about bankruptcies. Mr. Chairman, there are great economic problems in the country and there's no doubt that Manitoba is suffering along with the rest of them.

There's no question that high interest rates are affecting a great deal of the business people in this country today, but we're not alone with economic problems and you can't settle them overnight. We knew when we came into government in 1977 that we weren't going to turn around eight years of misma nagement overnight, it takes time. The Conservative Government in England is finding that, that it took after some 20-some years of problems, that they ju st can't turn it around overnight. Our friend to the south of us is going to find the same thing. lt takes time to change an attitude.

People have got used to abundance and to have great expectations and it's very difficult to turn t

Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 that around, but I maintain that has to be turned around. We're never going to get this province into a strong economic position unless we change our thinking and increase our productivity. People have got to go to work with a good attitude and really start producing and taking our rightful place as an exporting province and not only as an exporting nation, as an exporting province because we can't consume all that we produce in this province and there has to be ways found to get it out of here. I know some of the problems that they're facing.

I had a call from a constituent the other night that had been in the dairy business. He sold the farm to his sons and after a couple of years, as the members that might have some agricultural background on that side of the House, it's not really the nicest job running a dairy farm. You have to be there seven days a week, night and morning, to do that particular chore to those animals that have to be done and obviously, the Member for Ste. Rose knows what has to be done, twice a day. The boys decided that there was a better way.

Grain prices weren't that bad so they sold the dairy cattle - kept the equipment mind you - now they realize that monthly cheque was pretty nice for their cash flow and they want to get back into the dairy business. There's no quota; they can't get a quota back. So I get a call from the father who was worried about his investment, of course, because I guess the mortgage payments have to be met and blaming the government for his boys not being able to get back into the dairy business, and you know that's not an easy problem to solve.

There are complexities there, and naturally he can go out and buy a herd and buy the quota with it which they're going to have to do; it's the only way he can get back in, then try and pick up some quota later. But what I'm indicating, Mr.

Chairman, is that when you get all of these controls on, they create great problems and there has to be some way that if somebody wants to go in to produce a broile r chicken or milk or whatever, there should be some way for them to do that and there should be a market for it when there are so many countries around the world that are looking for food and looking for things to buy. I know they don't always have the money to buy it but there must be some way that could be looked at in a little better light.

The Leader of the Opposition went on at great length to enlarge on some articles that appeared in the paper about the Enterprise Manitoba Programs whereby the small businessman was having it stuck to him and that just doesn't wash, Mr. Chairman. I think you can go around the province to the small business sector and find out there are a great many things that have happened to their business and to their operation in the past three years that have been pretty beneficial to them and I'll list some of those a little later.

Going back to the Member for Brandon East that was so long in the praise of what his party had done for business and the questions of the members opposite flailing the Minister for not bringing this so called Helicopter Plant in here as quickly as possible, Mr.

Ch airman, we remember the Me mb er for Brandon East who was the Minister responsible at that time when we criticized Saunders Aircraft - or Squanders Air - that he stood up and it's in 2130 Hansard, we can dig it out, where he stood and thrashed the Opposition for criticizing that plant and he went as far as to say if it hadn't have been for the good efforts of his department and this government, that aircraft plant would have gone to the Province of Quebec. Well, my god, don't we wish it had, Mr. Chairman, don't we wish it had.

These are the dangers and the signals that the Minister responsible now is watching for to make sure that this doesn't happen again and I mentioned in my remarks earlier that this has had some effect on the Leader of the Opposition's constituency, who has a very fine Industrial Park there that's not enjoying the growth that was anticipated when that park was developed, because the plant at Gimli had been closed and it presented a pretty competitive feature because that was a problem in that particular area that had to be looked at.

So trying to put industry into both of them has maybe had some effect on his particular area. But the Member for Brandon East, it doesn't seem to matter what you announce there. You announced multimillion dollar care home facilities just the other day and he says oh, it's not enough, it's too late and this is wrong and that's wrong, he should have welcomed that with open arms for his constituents, because we all know that we can't build them fast enough as the economy and finances just don't permit you to build them as quickly as you would like to put every person that would like to be in a care, in a care home.

They had an opportunity there, Mr. Chairman, and it's well known with the Hydro Development Project that was on in those years, that General Electric would have set a plant into Brandon that would have been functioning today with a few 100 employees. That was turned down in a short-term gain of a few dollars on a contract that picked up the Russian generators and we all know what a disaster that particular move was. Kraft Foods would have had their crushing plant. There's going to be another crushing plant probably go into that area now. lt could have been in there long ago, Mr.

Chairman, but the agricultural arm of the NDP Party, the Farmers Union were boycotting Kraft at that particular time and there were bumper stickers and whatnot all over the place and the Kraft people, when they came to negotiate just didn't like the atmosphere and felt that well, we're not going to impose a plant on a communi ty that doesn't want us. The Member for Brandon East can jump up and defend that and say it's documented, Brandon Sun defended me, I did everything I could.

Well, he might have done what he thought he was doing to bring that plant there but he wasn't convincing the other people in his Cabinet that it should be there because the Minister of Agriculture was governed by Red Willie and the strong arm of the Farmers Union that were dumping on Kraft at that particular time and the plant went wanting or went elsewhere. There was a great deal of time spent on the outmigration of people, Mr. Chairman, that I referred to earlier.

There's no question that the Provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan have enjoyed a great deal of economic activity lately due to their potash, their oil and gas wealth that we don't have here. There's many many young men from my particular area have gone out there. But I'll tell you they're coming back

Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 now just as fast and as long as there's jobs here, they'll be back. This is not a phenomena, it's gone on for years. People will move back and forth across Canada seeking jobs and seeking to better their position. The Member for Churchill is well aware of that. I mean, he arrived up here looking for a better way of life and a way to improve his position. So let's not criticize people because they happen to move around looking for employment or looking for a change of environment, Mr. Chairman.

There was a great deal of time spent on the campaign that indicates, in a little more graphic form, some of the benefits of this province that we should be proud of. This was criticized strongly by mem bers across the way, as well the hiring of several people that were left jobless when the Tribune newspaper closed down. If we had not taken some of those people on they'd be screaming that we weren't provi ding emp loyment; we wer en't looking after these people that had been thrown out of work. So you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't, Mr.

Chairman, by members opposite. -(Inter ject ion)- That's right, you just can't win, Mr. Chairman, and if they're capable people and there's a job for them to do, regardless of where they might have worked before, we've taken them on. Governments aren't that hidebound, I understand that one of the governments has maybe offered a position to the Member for St. Boniface that he's maybe considering and we can only live and hope that he might take it. I just wanted to make one or two of those comments, Mr.

Chairman, in connection with the remarks that have been directed towards the Minister in the Estimates that are before the House right now. There is no question about it, the problems that they're havi ng internally, Mr . Chairman, is going to grow and I feel for the Leader of the Opposition because he has such a rift in the party there and when they refer to, someone over there the other day referred to the weak links of the chain that had left them and now they were stronger and it didn't take long for someone to point out that those weak links were three former cabinet members of the former government, Mr.

Chairman, and if they are weak links, I don't know what he's got left to form a government with if he hopes to take over the reins of government after the next election. We, God save us, we could Pistol Pete there as Minister of Agriculture. I don't know whether that would do much for the productivity, Mr. Chairman. I want to tell the members opposite, Mr. Chairman, and also get it on the record, that if they're going to associate with their members that are going to continue to show disrespect for Her Majesty and what she represents, that this is not going to do them any good at the polls either.

The wearing of black armbands when the President of the United States visited the House of Commons, these things are filtering around the country and those that won't stand up when God Save the Queen is played, it's well-known who they are, Mr. Chairman. I say to the Leader of the Opposition, this is not going to do his party any good if he continues to associate with people like that. He may take a lead from Mr.

Nystrom and a few of the others that have the good foresight to take a leaf out of the Conservative Book in Ottawa and vote against some of the Constitution 2131 nonsense that's going on and, as you see, Mr. Romanow now and a few others have taken the same route. I would say it's time that the Leader of the Opposition got off the fence that he's been on for some time, Mr. Chairman, and told us just where he stands on the problem of the Constitution question. Mr. Chairman, there are a great number of things that are going to happen in Manitoba that are going to embarrass the members opposite.

I'm sure that there are members on that side that when they look out and see it raining today are wringing their hands saying, oh my God, we were hoping there would be another drought and we could blame it on the Conservative party. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Boniface on a point of order. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, on a point of privilege. Are you going to allow statements like this? That there's members of this House who would want to see misfortune on the citizens of Manitoba? Are you going to allow that? I've asked a question of the Chairman of this comm ittee. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Member for Logan on the same point of privilege. MR. JENKINS: Mr. Chairman, imputing motives in this Chamber, or in this Assembly, is definitely a breech of the R les of this House. Now the member is making a very fine distinction and he's treading a very fine line, and he's trying to instill in the minds of the public and impute a motive that members on this side are disturbed because there's moisture falling outside today. Mr. Chairman, I think you should take the point under consideration very seriously. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Rock Lake on the same point of privilege. MR. HENRY J.

EINARSON: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to rise on the same point of order and I'd like to say, Mr. Chairman, that I have listened over many many weeks to comments from the Memb ers for the Opposition, which lead to one's impression that they are of that thought, that it's doom and gloom for the Province of Manitoba.

I don't think it's a matter of motivation whatsoever, I think that the Member for Minnedosa is expressing a viewpoint that is ascribed because of the kind of comments he's heard from mem bers opposite over many weeks, in regard to the economy and the progress that Manitoba has made under this government for the past three-and-one half years. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Boniface on the same point of privilege. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, on this same point of order and I'm ask ing you to rule .

A statement was made in the House that certain members would hope that there wouldn't be any rain so the farmers could be trouble, and this was a direct statement that was made and I'm just asking you to rule. MR. CHAIRMAN: I thi nk, in decency to the Legislature and what we stand for, it would be in

Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 order if the member would just rephrase that line or withdraw it, because we do not add any dignity to our mem bership here with those terminologies. The Member for Minnedosa. MR. BLAKE: Well, Mr. Chairman, I'll rephrase that, it might appear that some of them over there would be happy to see that happen. Let me put it another way, Mr.

Chairman, if the economy of this province is just bustling and hustling like it has never been in history, are they going to be, as far as getting re elected, are they going to happy with it or are they going to be happier to see it the other way, where they can attack the government. How are they going to attack the government if things are going great guns, which they're going to be going in very very short order. So, Mr. Chairman, that . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Boniface on the same point of order. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr .

Chairman, on the same point of order, I would like to put it on the record that this doesn't satisfy us at all and the last statement would indicate that this is the way he feels that all politicians should be; that he feels if you're not going rejoice are you going to get back in office, that you wish that people should have misfortune, and I think it is very wrong and is starting a precedent if this is allowed.

If the Minister doesn't withdraw, without any qualification, if this is allowed to go along, well then you'll see how much respect, and there's so little respect in the House now, no wonder the people of Ma nitoba don't respect politicians if we don't respect each other. MR. CHAIRMAN: I think, to the commi ttee, we are on Interim Supply and the sooner the members address their remarks to the Interim Supply, the sooner we'll get the supply motion passed. The Member for Minnedosa. MR. BLAKE: Mr. Chairman, I stand by my earlier statement that I hope the Member for St.

Boniface takes that job that he's been offered, so-called by Ottawa. Mr. Chairman, any time that we get embarrassed by the Member for St. Boniface . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Ste. Rose on a point of privilege. MR. A. R.(Pete) ADAM: Mr. Chairman, on a point of privilege, because the Member for Minnedosa in his comments imputed motives to members on this side of the House, that we would hope that there would be another drought, then we could attack the government. That I believe is just about the words that he said.

He was asked to withdraw by you, Sir, he was asked to rephrase those comments and he did not do so, and we're not satisfied with his answer. He has not withdrawn those remarks and I would hope that you would see that he does, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Finance. MR. RANSOM: On the same point of order, Mr. Chairman, I think perhaps the issue could be cleared up if the Honourable Member for St.

Johns will withdraw the allegation levelled from his seat, that the Member for Rock Lake was lying, and I think that the Member for Minnedosa would probably be willing to withdraw any inference that the members took exception to. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Johns. MR. CHERNIACK: On a point of privi lege, deliberately called that a lie because I wanted to make sure that it was withdrawn, and of course I would abide by parliamentary procedure to withdraw the statement that what the Member for Minnedosa said was a lie the moment he withdraws the lie from the record. I will withdraw, of course I will, Mr.

Chairman, but the moment he withdraws. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Rhineland on the same point. MR. ARNOLD BROWN: On that same point of order. I did not hear the Member for Minnedosa imputing any lies to anybody whatsoever. The Member for Minnedosa was expressing his opinion as to what he perceived that the Opposition stance was and he is perfectly entitled to say so. Now if the members on the Opposition object, they can say so, they can say this in debate, but I would say, Mr. Chairman, that there was no point of order. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Inasmuch as the Chairman has to recall many statements in the last ten minutes, I'm not certain of exactly what was said, and the Chair would certainly like to have a right to look at it in Hansard in order to rule if there is an overstep of our parliamentary procedure, then it will be ruled on. The Member for Minnedosa. MR. BLAKE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I hope it continues for several days and several nights, Mr. Chairman, being a man who tills the soil myself, Mr. Chairman.

Those in power send it down on us with great abundance in order that this land and the crops may flourish and add to the economy of this great province of ours, to quote the Honourable Member for Roblin. Mr. Chairman, I don't like to create ruckuses such as that. If my remarks have been considered by members over there as a little intemperate or ill considered, that's fine, this happens in this Chamber from time to time, as you well know.

That was just a way that I perceived the situation to be and it may well be that members on this side of the House don't agree with me at aiL lt wouldn't be the first time in my life that people have disagreed with me, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the Member for Burrows the other night talked about an incentive-oriented system that we were going to create, that was going to do great things for the Province of Manitoba. There's just one or two facts, Mr. Chairman, that I would like to maybe run through before I finish my remarks, the things that this government has done, Mr.

Chairman, that create that incentive-oriented tax system. Firstly, there's a reduction of personal income tax, Mr. Chairman, from 56, the record opposed by his government, to 54 percentage points; there' s the expiry of the personal income tax surtax; there's 2132

Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 been a reduction of 15 .4 in Manitoba Corporation Income Tax for Small Business, from 13 percent of taxable income to 11 ; there's been the abolishing of the succession duties in the gift taxation, I think one of the greatest incentives, Mr. Chairman, that we have had; and there's been over a sevenfold increase in the exemption of corporation capital tax from $1 00,000 in capital tax to $750,000, Mr. Chairman; there's been a replacement of the two-tiered Mining Royalty Tax system which penalized the industry with a single rate system. I might say, Mr.

Chairman, to do with the mining industry that was so heavily jumped on the other night in the Minister's Estimates about the productivity being down. That may well be, but exploration is up so substantially since this government came to power with their incentive tax systems, Mr. Chairman, and how are you going to keep a strong, healthy minded economy going for years and years and years if you cut out exploration, and that's what that government over there did. Exploration dried up, ask anybody in the north.

The Member for Churchill will know it; the Member for Flin Flon, who unfortunately isn't here, they will know how many mining and exploration companies have been in the field in the last couple of years and how many were in the field the last year that they were in power. These are the things that the incentive tax system has done, Mr. Chairman. The Incremental Royalty Tax of 50 percent and 35 percent, that's been repl aced with a single 18 percent rate and that has lead to a great deal of the expansion in that area, and the so-called informed or reformed legislation this government has brought in, Mr. Chairman.

There was a termination of taxation of small quarry operators, by terminating the taxation . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: Order. Order. The Member for Ste. Rose. MR. ADAM: Mr. Chairman, the member is reading from a document. I would ask that it be tabled, as I tabled a document the other day when the Member for Rock Lake has asked me to do. I would ask him to table it. He's reading from a document and I ask that it be tabled. (lnterjection)- MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Ste. Rose. MR. ADAM: I read from a document last week, Mr.

Chairman, and I was asked to table it. lt was not a pu blic document, it was notes that I had and I agreed to table it and I would ask the member to do likewise. MR. CHAIRMAN: I think my years around here, Commit tee, that many people read from guidelines and I here have no idea if that's a printed note or if it's the member's rough notes. The Member for Rock Lake. MR. EINARSON: Mr. Chairman, on the same point of order, the Member for Ste. Rose referred to myself as asking for a document, the day that he spoke.

I would like to inform the members of this House that was an official document, namely the Comm onwealth, and that was an official document that the Member for Ste. Rose spoke from, which is different to what my colleague from Minnedosa is 2133 merely saying, he's using speaking notes and that's a vast difference, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Minnedosa has approximately two minutes left, if my calculations are reasonably right. MR. BLAKE: Deduct all the interruptions I had, deduct the interruptions. Mr.

Chairman, I assure you these are spe aking notes, it's not a publis hed document or a publication such as the Member for Ste. Rose was referring to. There's additional sales tax exem ptions, Mr . Chairman, in addition to the abolotion of the mineral acreage tax, and I won't go into them all. The sales tax was abolished on insulation material, safety equip ment, purchased by emplo yees, farm water systems, farm buildings, trapping, tractor mounters, snowblowers and granaries. There's a whole list of things.

We've doubled the sales tax commission paid to the merchants of this province, that provide a great service to this government by collecting that sales tax, Mr. Chairman. The gasoline tax exemption - and I'm sorry that I haven't got any more time - Mr. Chairman is giving me the finger, I hope he's signalling time. Mr. Chai rman, the gasol ine tax exemptions for gasohol plants that I won't go into, that's a whole other speech there, to encourage the production of gasohol to relieve the serious energy situation that we have. I'll get into the income tax side of tax deductions on salaries paid to spouses, Mr.

Chairman. I could go on for a great amount of time yet, but I'll get an opportunity a little later I know to finish this. So with that I'll just await the comments of the next speaker, because they've been furiously making notes while I've been delivering this thrashing address to them, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. George. MR. URUSKI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In rising to take

part in this debate, Mr. Chairman, I specifically want to draw attention to one major area in this province and that is dealing with the agricultural policies of this government, rather the lack of agricultural or co-ordinated agricultural policies in Manitoba, over the last three and one-half years of the Tory administration. Mr.

Chairman, the farm sector over the last several years has been faced with extreme difficulties in terms of weather conditions, in terms of market conditions, in terms of being able to meet the rising interest rate costs, in terms of meeting the increased costs of energy, just being able to, as one could put it, keep their heads above water, Mr. Chairman. In fact, many of the producers in this province have not been in a position to do so. Mr.

Chairman, before I go into my remarks, I heard the Member for Minnedosa while I was out of the Chamber and in the caucus room, speaking about the hiring of staff from the now defunct Winnipeg Tribun e and using them in my opinion, as the politic al advert ising arm of the Conservative Government of Ma nitoba . For the Mem ber for Minnedosa to get up and indicate that some of these people that were hired on were people who would make good civil servants, Mr. Chairman. I imagine the odd one in terms of doing the work that they've

Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 been hired to do, won't do a bad job, Mr. Chairman, but the jobs that have been given to them are really P.R. jobs to try and salvage the unsalvageable, in terms of propaganda and the downward slope that this government has taken in this province. They won't help you.

The fact of the matter is, even though you have hired them into Civil Service positions, rather than appointing them, as they should have been done as a political P.R. person for the Minister responsible, that at least when you leave government, which it'll depend on when you have the courage to call the election, whether it will be in June, whether it will be in the fall or whether you'll wait until the end, and we will wait to see, Mr. Chairman, those people really should go out with you, do not try and bury them; especially people, Mr.

Chairman, people who have been in the media, and if you look at their articles and their comments historically, have berated the public service and the public sector as being some terribly inefficient, terribly wasteful group of people to now come to the public trough and slop at it, I really don't know how those people could stomach, could even look themselves in the mirror, to come to the public sector now to bail them out, and come here for a job and to have the Tories attempt to hide them within the civil service, oh my goodness, talk about political patronage, Mr. Chairman.

Talk about political patronage in terms of the hiding of staff. Mr. Chairman, talk about a double standard, and we had it in Commit tee just the other day. The Min ister respo nsible for the Ma nitoba Public Ins urance Corporation said that sinc e this government came into power, the Autopac's General Insurance division, which was to be competitive, had to bid against other companies for the general insur ance business in terms of the government sector; so they did, Mr. Chairman, they got some contracts and some others. But what did they do with respect to accounting, Mr. Chairman?

Did the accounting firms - that they wanted the Crown agencies to have their acco unting done by private firms - did those firms bid for the busi ness of the Crown agencies? Oh no, Mr . Chairman, there was no bid. lt was an assignment by the Minister of Finance to say, this company does Autopac, this company does the Telephone System, this company does Hydro, Mr. Chairman. Is this the free enterprise bidding system, Mr. Chairman? Is this what they have been talking about? No. Even though Autopac accounting costs doubled in the first year that they changed acc ounting firms, did that make any difference?

Did any of them blink an eye, Mr. Chairman? Did they give competition to the industry in terms of at least bidding for that accounting? Did the Provincial Auditor, let's put it in true perspective, did the Provi ncial Auditor at least have an opportunity to bid on the accounting of the Crown agencies that they were not taking away? Oh no, Mr. Chairman, that's a bit too much. But, Mr. Chairman, if it's the public, we cannot in any way make the public sector look as good as they really are because the public sector in the Conservative eyes has to be inefficient, has to do things more expensively.

The only way and the only reason that it does so, is by design and by policy of those members opposite. Mr. Chairman, I believe they operate in a double standard. If you talk about business acumen, why 2134 would you want to double the costs of accounting in a corporation, Mr. Chairman, for nothing else but idealogical reasons that you do not want the accounting to be done at the public purse? And it's done, the figu res were there, from $30,000 to $70,000 in one year, Mr. Chairman, that was the increase in costs. Does Wawanesa ask for bids for insurance on their building, on their large building on Broadway?

Do they go out on the market and say, we will insure our buildings and we will ask MP IC, we will ask Portage Mutual to give us quotes on our property because we may be able to get a deal? What a bunch of nonsense, Mr. Chairman, what a bunch of nonsense. That is the type of administration we have in this province, backwards, backwards if one can put it in those words. Mr. Chairman, the Conservative Government in the Province of Manitoba in terms of agricultural policy or lack of it, has certainly left the farmers of Manitoba out in left field.

There's been no direction, no direction, no policy, no direction and certainly many farmers, as a result of their lack of action are being forced into bankruptcy. If they're not being forced into bankruptcy, there's such difficulties and there are examples in the Member for Dauphin's own constituency, and the members should know. The entire hog industry has been in trouble for almost two years, Mr . Chairman. They have practically come to this government on bended knee to say look, help us out, help us, we are in trouble, we are losing over $30.00 on every hog that we market.

They have received calls - I'm sure the members opposite have received calls, I've received calls, members on this side have received calls - I'v e received calls from constituents who have indicated that they did the returns that they received on the marketing of their hogs. They do not even cover their feed costs, let alone any utilities, any labour costs or any depreciations or anything. They don't even cover the feed costs. They announced a $40 million drought program in 1980, as late and as disjointed and as uncoordinated as it might have been, in terms of the act ual applic ation, Mr .

Chairman, they couldn't get along with the Federal Government, but they made that announcement and it did help many farmers. I don't want to berate them but approximately half of those that were commit ted were spent, less than half of those funds were spent in assisting the agricultural sector. Mr. Chairman, the government spent $20 million or thereabouts, I think it's even less than that. We talk about $10 million thereabouts, $8 to $10 million on the Greenfeed Program; $2 to $3 million on the Hay Transportation Program, well, Mr.

Chairman, the Hay Transportation Program was cost-shared by Ottawa, by the railways and by the Province of Manitoba. - (I nterje ction)- Well cert ain instances, which instances did they not share in? Which instances did they not share in the transportation of hay? Because they were shared three ways, Mr. Chairman. The Province of Manitoba made those announcements, before any consultations with Ottawa, with the senior governments. They thought that they would want to play orie upmanship and try to hit them over th head. Well, what happened?

Ottawa said look, you want to play your own game, we'll announce our ow program and so there we have a gee and haw. N program worked very well. The Ottawa one is still u

Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 in limb o where produ cers are still waitin g for payments and are having difficulties in collecting, Mr. Chairman; anomalies have crept into the Greenfeed Program where producers applied and lost their crops and could not gain compensation on their insurance; they were hit doubly hard. We raised them. Have we heard anything from the government whether they will look at those? No, we haven't, the Minister said he will take them under advisement. But, Mr.

Chairman, the point that I was making is that half of the funds that they made a to-do about were utilized but for the prime reason, for the prime reason for the Minister of Finance to be able to play the figures game so that he could announce a large deficit in the spring when the program was announced; then at the end of the year, although they made those announcements and those moneys they never spent those funds or commit ted those funds, they could say, look, our deficit went down, Mr. Chairman. That's the name of the game that's been played over the last three years.

The producers haven't been fooled at all, Mr. Chairman, they are going bankrupt. We had a fire in the constituency of the Member for Dauphin, suspected arson, Mr. Chairman. What kind of an operation? The farm, I believe, was on the verge of bankruptcy or if it wasn't on the verge it had already gone bankrupt, but all of a sudden it burned , Mr. Chairman. Am ongst other insur ers involved in that I understand that MPI C is involved in that package as well, as one of the insurers.

We know we have one of the largest and upstanding producers in Manitoba who has been in the hog industry a long time, has been indicating publicly and pleading with this government to assist them, while we know, Mr. Chairman, that right now there is no hope at this present time of having a national stabilization plan in the hog industry. Manitoba is the odd man out. The producers of Manitoba cannot ride out a fight against the treasuries of Ontario, Quebec, Alberta and Saskatchewan. All those treasuries are supporting their producers to maintain a level of production. Mr.

Chairman, the concern that we have on this side is that during this period of time we will have an upsurge, and there has been, especially in the Province of Quebec, an upsurge in production. Then what we will have is a push to have national market sharing, supply management, Mr. Chairman, that's what we will have whether the members like it not. That will be the tone and the tenure of discussions that there will be stabilization if there will be some balance in terms of production. Well, what I'm afraid of, Mr.

Chairman, we should have gone into national stabilization years ago because what will happen is that now there will be a move to go into that area with Manitoba being the loser because of the loss of production that we have witnessed over the last two years. We will be the losers in the long run in terms of being able to have a uniform supply or at least a historical relationship of supply in the hog industry, because right now our producers cannot withstand the losses that they have absorbed, have had to carry on their backs over the last number of years. So, Mr.

Chairman, that has implications throughout the entire industry. What about our processing industry that the Minister of Agriculture has toted so highly about that 2135 he wants increased production. Well, he encouraged hog producers to produce all they can because there will be all sorts of markets for them, Mr. Chairman; where is he now? Where is he hiding, in the manure pile? Where is he hid ing in terms of all the incentives, all the great encouragement that he gave the produ cers in Ma nitoba, Mr . Chairman? - (Interjecti on)- Or maybe behind the manure pile, Mr.

Chairman. (Interjection)- He's not falling into the pit, Mr. Chairman, because I doubt whether he'd make it out of there but I'm sure some of the hog producers would love to get their hands on him because, at the same time as they are suffering in the marketp lace, they are faced with double problems; they are faced with vertical integration in the hog industry, your opportunity to become a Manitoba hog producer, Mr. Chairman. Cargill Pork Systems may be the answer for Manitobans who are sincerely interested in becoming part of a vital hog industry.

Now isn't this a nice gesture to producers who have not been able to make ends meet over the last two years. Who is goin g to help them out, Mr . Chairman? - (Interjection)- Not the government, we will have Cargill Pork Systems. CPS will provide genetically superior stock; you provide your management skills and the production facilities; CPS will assume all market risk factors, including hog market price feed and health costs. Mr. Chairman, are they the new welfare agency in the hog industry? Are they doing this just for the health of the hog industry and the hog producers of Manitoba? Mr.

Chairman, are they feeling sorry for the producers of Manitoba? Are they more conscience-oriented than the Government of Manitoba? Do they have a conscience and you don't? Is this what you are supporting, Mr. Chairman, because obviously they are taking a chance, on what? On having a good chunk of the market while producers go belly-up. In the short run it may be an expense but a very good long-term investment if you are able to control a certain percentage of the market in the Province of Manitoba. That's basically the intent.

You know, they're not fools in the marketplace; they know that there will have to be stability in the hog industry, Mr. Chairman. Eventually there will be some stability, eventually when they have a share of the marketing ability in the Province of Manitoba they will have it enshrined in the long term if there is a national agreement. But that's really where we have had a clear lack of leadership, in fact, it's not only been clear in terms of lack of leadership, there has been a concerted attack placed upon all the orderly marketing systems within the province, within this country by that administration, Mr.

Chairman. The Minister of Agriculture, when he talks to farmers who happen to have had the opportunity to partici pate in an orderly marketing system in a marketing board, in a nationally organized marketing board, this Minister when he comes to speak to them he is in a real dilemma. They really have a hang-up about that because, on one hand, he says I support marketing boards; but on the other hand, he says they are not very good because producers are not able to do what they want to do, they are restricted and people can't get into the industry, so we really don't like that. Now where does he stand, Mr.

Chairman, where does this government stand ?

Wednesday, 25 March, 1981 Where does this government stand? I think they really have a hang-up because they don't want to rock the boat of those producers who are organized but yet, Mr. Chairman, they have to tell them that they really don't believe in what they are doing. And it's evidenced, Mr. Chairman, by every speech that is being made by members opposite, the Member for Gladstone, all the rural members; they are really hung up about that because they really are not supportive of orderly marketing within this country, Mr. Chairman.

They would rather let the hog industry disintegrate in the Province of Manitoba. If the members don't realize that it's on the verge now, Mr. Chairman, they will never realize. In fact, in many instances it will be too late. If the Minister of Agriculture is intending to make some announcement at the annual meeting, within another week, of the pork producers, Mr. Chairman, in many cases it will be too late. There are a lot of producers that have gone under. Don't they realize that? Listen to Albert Beilfor. You know, he has no axe to grin d , Mr . Chairman.

What about the producers that I told him about, that they are not even meeting the feed costs, Mr. Chairman? I'm sure the Member for Springfield can relate stories and calls that he's had from hog producers about their plight. 1 think the Minister of Municipal Affairs in the Swan River area, some of the producers could tell him what they are being -(Interjection)- One went under. (Interjecti on)- One spoke to you, Mr.

Chairman. 1 don't know what relationship the member has with his constituents but certainly I would think that they feel a great concern but maybe because there's certainly been no real concern shown. There have been meetings with staff, the Minister of Education in his area, the meeting was held in the Stonewall area, Mr. Chairman. The producers were told by staff that there would be some proposals for assistance last year yet, Mr. Chairman; the producers are waiting. I am sure that they have been very patient; they have been so patient they are on the verge of bankruptcy.

Can you imagine that kind of patience, Mr. Chairman? The patience likely in many instances will, and has, run out. This government, they should not want to play games with thei r bookkeeping system as they have done and get serious with the economic problems of this province. I've only hit upon one of them, Mr. Chairman, but the imp act of the loss of a vital sector of our economy, the hog industry, will have devastating effects on the rest of our industry. We've already witnessed that, Mr. Chairman. We've witnessed it in a closure of one of our processing plants in this province. Do we want another clo sure, Mr.

Chairman? Are we really serious about how we are going to assist the backbone of this province, Mr. Chairman, the agricultural sector of this province which is the backbone of this province? Why are we letting it drift? When will you learn, Mr. Chairman? MR. CHAIRMAN: The hour of 4:30 having arrived, the commi ttee rise for Private Mem bers' Hour. Call in the Speaker. The Chairman reported upon the Commit tee's deliberations to Mr. Speaker and requested leave to sit again. IN SESSION MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Virden. MR. McGREGOR: Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Portage, that the report of the commit tee be received. MOTION presented and carried. PRIVATE MEMBERS' HOUR RESOLUTION NO. 10 - CHILD CARE PROGRAM WITHIN PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM MR. SPEAKER: We are now in Private Membe rs' Hour, Wednesdays we deal with resolutions. The first resolution is Resolution No. 10, standing in the name of the Honourable Minister of Community Services. The Honourable Mi nis ter has eight mi nute s remaining. The Honourable Minister. MR. MINAKER: Mr.

Speaker, I had completed my remarks the last day when we discussed and debated this resolution. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Crescentwood. MR. WARREN STEEN: The Honourable Member for lnkster, Mr. Speaker, has asked me to say something nice. Well, I was going to refer to Hansard of Wednesday, March 4, which was the last time that we discussed this resolution, Resolution No. 10 , by the Honourable

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	31-5-45
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	31st 5th hansardpdf 45.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	116bdb1ea7532bc13d194878fc580f5be1a41869

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