Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 43A (32nd Legislature, 4th Session)

32-4-43a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA TUeedaJ 7 May, 1985. Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. MA. SPEAKER, Hon. J. Welding: Presenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions . . . Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees . MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MA. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Business Development. HON. J. STOAIE: Mr. Speaker, it's my privilege to table the Annual Report of the Department of Business Development and Tourism. MA. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion . . . Introduction of Bills ... INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MA.

SPEAKER: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery. We have 27 students of Grade 9 standing from the Murdock MacKay Collegiate. They are under the direction of Mrs. Trush and the school Is in the constituency of the Honourable Minister of Energy and Mines. There are 18 students of Grade 6 standing from the Pinkham School under the direction of Mr. Sloan. The school is in the constituency of the Honourable Minister of Education. On behalf of all of the members, I welcome you here this afternoon.

ORAL QUESTIONS Teachers' Pension Act - distribution and second reading of MA. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MA. G. FILMON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Honourable Minister of Education. I wonder If she could indicate when she plans to have second reading and the distribution of the bill on The Teachers' Pension Act amendments. MA. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Education. HON. M. HEMPHILL: Very soon, Mr. Speaker. MR. G. FILMON: I wonder, Mr.

Speaker, In that case, why Indication and information about the proposed changes and, in fact, the letter that, as I understand it, was distributed to every teacher throughout the province yesterday, why all this was done prior to the bill having been introduced for second reading In the House and available for members on this side to scrutinize. HON. M. HEMPHILL: Mr.

Speaker, I did Introduce the bill for first reading on April 1st, and yesterday In the House I was asked what the content was of Bill 26 and whether or not some of the changes that were being announced on early retirement would be contained In the bill; and I wish to confirm to the House that the changes that are resulting to The Teachers' Pension Act, In relationship to the early retirement benefits, will require a legislative amendment. We are making a lot of substantial changes to The Teachers' Pension Act, Mr. Speaker, and I was unaware at the time that this amendment to the

section would appear in the bill. I am aware that the House should have been advised of this change and I regret that this oversight occurred and I have taken steps to make sure that it doesn't happen again. MA. G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker , I appreciate the Minister's apology, if that's what it was, for the lack of the normal courtesies of the House in doing that, and I would hope that that matter won't recur. I wonder If the Minister could indicate whether these amendments and these changes Involved or required special negotiations with any school divisions In the province. HON. M. HEMPHILL: Mr.

Speaker, we had a lot of communication with a lot of groups during the negotiations. In fact, I have received in my office letters of support for the amendments, for the early retirement benefit, from all of the educational Institutions, and I think, the trustees association and almost all the boards in the province. A great number of individual letters from boards, other educational groups, and groups outside of education wrote letters supporting this move. I think it's an Indication, Mr.

Speaker, that society and people are generally ready for progressive moves like this that allow people, at no cost to the taxpayer, to retire when they want to, to make up more openings and allow employment opportuntles for the young people who are being trained in our education institution s. I think the time has come when the people are ready for it, and since we negotiated a deal that didn't cost the taxpayers anything and was a tremendous benefit to the education system, I think we can all be pleased with the results. MA. G. FILMON: Mr.

Speaker, I wasn't referring to the discussions in broad general terms with the divisions as to their desire to bring in new teachers and the cost to them, because we were aware, having received copies of many of the letters that the Minister did. My specific concern was whether or not this particular bill and the provisions for early retirement will impact 1661

Tuesday, 7 Mey, 1985 on some specific collective agreements that have been drawn up that have provisions in them for early retirement, 55 to 60, and other things. HON. M. HEMPHILL: Mr. Speaker, I believe that there are two or three school divis ions out of the 56 school divisions In the province, that have an early retirement clause in their contract. MR. G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, has the Minister looked Into the effect that this will have on the specific provisions in the Winnipeg School Division contract with its teachers? HON. M. HEMPHILL: Mr.

Speaker, when we made the decision to bring In this legislation, we made it based on a provincial need and provincial Information, and 1 think the impact on an individual school division that the school divisions themselves, and the teachers In those school divisions, will have to look at their contracts and make a decision on how to handle them. MR. G. FILMON: Mr.

Speaker, is the Minist er aware that the Winnipeg School Division put Into its collective agreement last year a two-year provision whereby Its teachers are given a bonus of up to one full year's salary for taking early retir ement, because they would be sub ject to the 1.5 percent per year penal ty, and therefore, in effect, by this legislation, the school division will have to pay a one-year bonus for retirement and its teachers will retire on full pension rather than a reduced pension. HON. M. HEMPHILL: Mr.

Speaker, I think that most of the people Involved are very sensible people and when they negotiated the terms of that contract, they clearly wanted to do what we are trying to do now, and that Is both encourage and allow those teachers that are ready to retire, who want to retire, to get reasonable benefits at no cost to the taxpayer, and I do not believe that they will carry on with something that was negotiated at one time when a bill has come In that covers the entire province that removes the penalty for early retirement. 1 think that the school division and the teachers are very reasonable people.

I think they negotiated a clause In good faith under completely different times and circumstances, and they'll look at it in a very reasonable way. MR. G. FILMON: Well, Mr. Speaker, then does the bill specifically exclude the Winnipeg School Division arrangements? Because if it does not, it will cost the Winnip eg School Division over $200,000 plus the teachers will still get their full retirement allowances, and that, it seems to me, should have been taken into account. HON. M. HEMPHILL: Mr. Speaker, no, they are not excluded. Mosquito Infestation MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G.

MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of the Environment. Could the Minister advise the House when the next mosquito Infestation will occur In the City of Winnipeg? MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. I believe that is asking for an opinion. Perhaps the hono urable member would wish to rephrase his question. The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Speaker, the Minister of the Environment in the May 4th Edition of the Manitoba Gazette has published regulations under The Clean Environment Act respecting pesticides, which require any person, including municipal corporations and the City of Winnipeg, to file an application form at least 30 days before the Intended date of the use of pesticide for the purpose of fogging for mosquitoes. That's why my question, Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of the Environment is when does he anticipate the next date of the next mosquito infestation in the City of Winnipeg? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister for the Environment.

HON. G. LECUYER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Obviously, the Member for St. Norbert has been bitten. After holding a head-to-head talk with the head mosquito toni ght, I will advise the member - (Interjection) - I was going to say I will advise them to buzz off, but ... SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please. HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Speaker, the City of Winnipeg has been largely complying by the proposed requirements of the regulation. In years past, in fact, they were, I suppose, the only municipality in that respect that was at least registering Its mosquito program for the coming season.

If the member were to read a little further, he would also find out because of the lateness at which the regulation was passed that the compliance with the regulation for the first year will be on a phase-in basis, therefore, basically on a voluntary basis, they will be required to register rather than to obtain a permit, but we will be requiring all of them to comply with the reporting mechanism that has been established as part of the regulation. The full compliance with all aspects of the regulation will then become enforced with the next spring season; that is, in 1986. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Speaker , the Min ister of Environment may think it's a funny matter now, but if his regulations prev ent the City of Winnipeg from fogging for mosquitoes later in the year, he will not find it so funny. Mr. Speaker, I take it then the Minister is indicating that the City of Winnipeg will be exempt from his regulations for this year. Would they also be exempt, Mr. Speaker, from the requi rement that the city would be restricted from fogging when the wind speed is 1662

Tueaday. 7 May. 1985 greater than 10 kilome tres per hour, which I suggest to him is a very restrictive condition? HON. G. LECUYER: I did indicate, Mr. Speaker, that the City of Winnipeg will not be exempt any more than other municipalities. In fact, what I indicated was the opposite, that the City of Winnip eg was already registering in the past years, its spray program -not only the spray program but it's larvaciding program. The City of Winnipeg, in fact, has already started this seaso n's larvacldlng program and has been carrying on with it for a matter of days, if not weeks alre ady.

Now the full compliance with all of the clauses of the regulation will be in effect for next spray season, and as part of the permit which the City of Winnipeg, like other municipalities or government agencies or Crown corporations, will have to comply with the requirements as indicated on the permit that will be allocated to them. Grasshopper infestation - Proposed control program MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Speaker, in view of the answers given by the Minis ter, will all rural municipalities be treated the same, if, in fact, there's an infestat ion and an outbreak of grasshoppers, as the Mini ster of Agriculture is indicating this year, will they as well be exempt from having to apply 30 days in advance before the use of any pesticides? HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Speaker, if the members on the opposite would give themselves the trouble of reading the regulat ion, they would not ask nonsense questions, because there Is indeed, as part of that regulation, provision to deal with such Incidents.

There is indeed a provision within the regulation to deal with all emergency spray programs and that would address the grasshoppers or any other pesticide that you want to name. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Speaker, why was the regulation needed to start with? HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Speaker , the regulation was clearly pointed out as a needed mechanism In Manitoba, was recommended by the Clean Environment Commission in Manitoba. lt was part of the ongoing reco mmendations received as a follow-up of the monitoring that was done during the last aerial spray program for mosquitoes in Manitoba.

There was extensive consultation on this regulation, Mr. Speaker . Generally spe aking, we had overall agreement with the regulation. We want, Mr. Speaker, as overall protect ion to the environment to have a better handle of what Is being sprayed; when it is being sprayed ; what is being sprayed in what quantities; where in Manitoba, because we indeed know that In years to come - and we already are experiencing on an ongoing increasing basis -the problems, especially in the run off period, with water that is contamina ted in the by ways and the ditches of Manitoba.

We think one good way to start is by the various levels of government indicating that they are concerned and we'll certainly monitor closely what they are doing by building the base data of what it is that we're putting out there in the environment. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Speaker, can the Minister confirm that the Union of Manitoba Municipalities throughout Manitoba opposed the very regulation that he is imposing on them? Can he not confirm that, Mr. Speaker? HON. G. LECUYER: On the contrary, the executive of this body approved it, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, as part of drafting regulations, we believe in carrying on extensive consultation with all those that might be affec ted, and on this particular regulation there were three drafts. When we sent out the first draft, Mr. Spea ker, there were inde ed some more stringent requirements to which many of the municipalities, some of the weed districts, were opposed.

When we revised the regulations and sent it out again for consultation, we had very few municipalities -we did indeed get some who still believe that we did not have to implement such a regulation, but by and large most of the municipalities either did not respond or agreed with the proposed regulation. The primary objection came from the weed districts, Mr. Speaker, because they felt they already had the necessary qualifications. We agreed.

One of the problems that they saw Into it was that they would have to report, because they already report to the Department of Agriculture, and the requirements of this regulation Is that they would have to report to the Department of Environment on forms that we will be supplying. So to accommodate that, Mr. Speaker, we worked out an arrangement with Agriculture that they shall report to both our departments, through one department, on the same forms. Indeed, Mr.

Speaker, we all gain In the process, because the forms on which they were reporting before had no specific criteria, so some indicated where they were spraying, others when they were spraying, others what they were spraying, but there was no uniformity or consistency about it, so at least we're going to get that out of it, Mr. Speaker. Hudaon Bay area - Oil and gas exploration MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Culture. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Ye sterday, some questions were taken as notice with respect to offshore oil devel opment in the Province of Manitoba.

I'd like now to answer the questions raised by the Honourable Member for Lakeside. Firstly, as has been reported , there are two separate consortiums that are involved with seven different companies on planning on drilling two separate oil wells offshore this summer at a total cost of $40 million. lt's expected that this will commence on approximately August 1st, depending on ice conditions. For members' Inter est, I will table a two-page synopsis whic h summar ize these activities. With respect to the question of jurisdiction in the offshore area of the Bay, when this issue was first raised 1663

Tueeday, 7 May, 1885 in the early 1970s, the then Premier, Ed Schreyer, stated to the Federal Government that there should be some princ iples established with respect to offshore development. One is that there should be an adm inistrative line drawn six miles out, offshore, roughly parallel to the offshore, with the responsi bility for the adm inistration of that area under the Province of Manitoba.

With respect to the revenues from mineral developments beyond the six-mile limit, it was suggested that they should be shared 50-50 with the Federal Government and the provinces and the territories. lt also suggested that If there were any developme nts or agreements with provinces subsequent to that agreement, if there were terms more favourable, then the same kind of amendment should apply to the Province of Manitoba. That was outlined in 1972, on June 23rd.

We have continued to raise this same issue with the Federal Government over the last couple of years, since there has been some renewed interest in the development in the area in the Bay. With respect to the benefits to Manitoba, the responsibility for the offshore operations comes under the jurisdiction of the Canada Oil and Gas Lands admi nistration under the Federal Department of Energy and Mines. Under the federal act that governs their operations, there are provisions for a Canada Benefits Plan that has to be tabled prior to the commencement of any work.

They had reviewed with us back in 1983 their plans and we had suggested to them at that time, in a memor and um containing nine pages of detailed comments reflecting Manitoba's interests; specifically we were asking them that Churchill be utilized as the main base of operations, that as much suppli es and equipment be sourced locally and in Manitoba, and that there be priority for hiring residents resid ing of the 53rd parallel and within 500 mil es of Churchill. I'm pleased to note, Mr. Speaker, that many of those conditions have been met with the company.

With respect to the question on local business involvement and the environment, I would defer to my colleagues, the Min isters of Business Development and Tourism, and Environment. MA. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Busin ess Development. HON. G. STOAIE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I ind icated to the Member for Sturgeon Creek yesterd ay, I had not been made aware of this by the consortium involved .

As I delved further into the issue, I understand that my department or the then Department of Economic Development and Tourism, had participated in the development of an overview of what might be expected or what might be required on the part of that company to ensure that local businesses and local suppliers would be utilized where possible, and of course that has taken place. The department has contacted both the Chu rchill Development Corporation and the Cham ber of Commerce.

We have also sent a letter to the conso rtium. indicating our desire to ensure that there is co-operation and offering our assistance to ensure that, where possible, local suppl iers, local people take advantage of this particular activity. I would Ind icate as well, Mr. Speaker, that there was some concern expressed by local people that they had not in fact been aware of the announcements until they thems elves read it in the paper.

I know that that doesn't reflect the desire on the part of Canterra to co-operate and who will be doing everything we can to make sure that all residents of Manitoba benefit from this important project. MA. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MA. H. ENNS: Mr.

Speaker, I appreciate the information that the Ministers are providing in response to that question, belatedly. lt seems to me, though, the central question - in fact, it's two questions - that we have considerable concern about and should be of considerable interest to all Mani tobans - and that is the question of juri sdiction, both the question of jurisdiction as to offshore oil and gas exploration rights, and the jurisdi ctional question of boundaries. Mr.

Speaker, we don't have a Minister of boundaries in this government, but has the government assigned a specific ministry or Minister to negotiate with Ontario and Quebec, the extension of the boundaries? I ask this question specifically because I note that the Chairman of Manitoba Hydro has indi cated in his statements to the media that it will be of ultimately left up to Ottawa to decide those boundaries. I think the people of Manitoba have a great interest in establishing those boundaries. MA. SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister. HON. E.

KOSTYAA: As I indicated, the Province of Manitoba has been discussing this issue for many years with the Federal Government and we will cont inue to have those discussions in a co-operat ive and consulta tive fashion with respect to those matters, the jurisdi ction with respect to oil and gas development and how that im pacts on our boundaries and our sovereignty , with respect to the areas out in the Bay. Those discussions are being led by the Minis ter of Energy and Mines with his colleagues at the provincial level and at the federal level.

We will continue to work in a co-operative fashion with the Federal Government to bring about a resolve with respect to those issues. MA. H. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, I'm aware that this issue has been around since, as the Mi nister indicated, the early '70s. When was the last meeting held on this specific issue with those officials that the Mi nister referred to 7 HON. E. KOSTYAA: I don't know the date when the last specific meeting was held on this issue.

I know there has been considerable correspondence that has been going with respect to this issue over the last couple of years and has been continuing, so there has been ongoing involvement by the province, by the Minis ter and Provincial Government officials with the federal counterpa rts on this issue. 1664

Tuesday, 7 May, 1985 Churchill, Port of - Sufficient grain shipments MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Highways and Transportation. He has made a lot about Churchill the last few days and agreements. Why has he failed to be able to encourage the Canadian Wheat Board to have sufficient grains there for ship ment out of that Port this year? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Highways. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Speaker, it's good to see the member of the opposition at least concerned enough about Churchill. to ask a question about this very important matter. I can say clearly that we are very concerned and distressed about this latest move by the Wheat Board with regard to Churchill; and their total dis regard for getting the best deal for the producers of Manitoba and Saskatchewan with regard to the use of the Port of Churchill. lt is totally inconsistent, Mr.

Spea ker, with the meeting that we had In Ottawa just four or five days ago, with a number of Ministers, including Sinclair Stevens, who has expr essed a great deal of support for the Port of Churchill and for Don Mazankowski; and meanwhile, the Minister responsible for the Wheat Board, Charlie Mayer, sits on his hands and does nothing, when we have an announcement by the Wheat Board that they are not going to ship through the Port of Churchill. lt is time that he stood up and made a commitment to the producers that he's going to ensure that the Wheat Board exercises its mandate to get the best deal for the producers and for this country. it's clear that there's a tremendous cost advantage, Mr.

Speaker, from moving grain from the Churchill catchment area through the Port of Churchill - $14 to $20 per tonne. lt Is In the best interests of the producers in that area that this grain be shipped through Churchill, and all this nonsense about it being unvlabie Is not the case, Mr. Spea ker. we want to ask this opposition to stand up and ensure that they talk to their member, the Manitoba Minister, who is not standing up and giving direction to the Wheat Board. MR. J.

DOWNEY: Last week, the Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board was here giving the Provincial Government assistance and the sugar beet growers assistance for the production of sugar. Did the Minister of Highways and Transportation . SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. MR. J.

DOWNEY: Did the Minister of Highways and Transportation, when the Minister responsible for the Wheat Board was in town last week, did he ask him specifically about getting grain for the Port of Churchill and does the Minister of Highways and Transportation have support of the pool organizations to move grain to the Port of Churchill? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Speaker , the Mini ster respo nsible for the Wheat Board had to be dragged kicking and screaming into a deal with regard to the sugar beet industry in rec ognizing and exercising his resp onsibilities.

I spoke to the Minister responsible for the Wheat Board in Ottawa last Wednesday night with a number of my colleagues and we heard that he's not prepared to direct the Wheat Board; and that is exactly what I'm talking about here. The producers have an opportunity to get the best deal for their grain by shipping it through the Port. There's no excuse for it, Mr. Speak er.

The fact is that 10 to 15 years ago Churchill received about 3 percent of the total export grain shipments from this country and when the season was around 20 million tonnes, which they're projecting now for this coming year, there was a season of 500,000 to 700,000 tonnes going through Churchill. There's no excuse now to drop the season down to zero at Churchill, because the total shipments are going down to what they were 10 or 15 years ago. If it was viable then, it's viable now. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, ohl MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Order please.

Oral question period is a time for see king and giving information and not for making speeches. Falcon . Lake Resort - Privatizing of MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question Is to the Minister of Natural Resources. Can the Minister indicate whether any activities or arrangements are being contemplated to privatizing the provincial ski resort and the golf course at Falcon Lake? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. HON. S. USKIW: Mr.

Speaker , the golf course at Falcon Lake is proceeding In a· way that it always has, with respect to its operations, there's no change there. The ski resort Is still up in the air; we're not sure just where we're going to come down, policy-wise, on that part of it. MR. A. DRIEDGER: To the same Minister, can the Minister give us a justification as to why the cottage lot taxes have Increased from $2 10 in 1982 to, at the present time, $390 per lot? HON. S. USKIW: Mr.

Speaker, I would have to assume that all of those questions have been put In Hansard more than once since 1982 and I don't have at my fingertips all of those occasions. I'm sure it's all relevant. We've all witne ssed the escalation of government costs from 19 69, when I first arrived, or '66, here, Mr. Speak er, till this very day, from $300 million of total government expenditur es to $3.5 billion. 1665

Tunday, 7 May, 1985 MR. A. DRIEDGER: To the same Minister, I wonder if the Minister could indicate why the increases are the same, irregardless of where these cottages are located, whether it's at Falcon, with all kinds of services or whether it's at a lake like Moose Lake where there are very limited services, the increases are the same all over. HON. S. USKIW: Again, Mr.

Speaker, I would have to assume that if the member has a particular situation in mind, that if he would convey to me that information, I could respo nd to him; but a general question with respect to rate increases can only be answered generally and that is. costs are going up. CGE -Protection of Limestone contract MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Culture. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Mr. Speak er.

A question was taken as notice on Thursday, May 2nd, from the Leader of the Opposition regarding Cana dian General Electric and its contract with Manitoba Hydro with respect to the contract awarded for turbines and generators. The Minister of Energy and Mines has discussed this matter directly with the Chairman and Chie f Executive Officer of Canadian General Electric and has been informed that the news reports with respect to CGE were ina ccurate and somewhat mislead ing. The company is not for sale; it is a profitable operation in Canada. In any ev ent, Mr.

Speake r, the contract that has been entered into by Manitoba Hydro and CGE ensures that CGE will be liable for any costs if they are not able to fulfill their obligations under the contract. Both this government and Manitoba Hydro are confident with the arrangements with CGE, which has resu lted, I might add, Mr. Speaker, in lower prices than was initially anticipated with respect to the cost of the turbines and has significant economic impact and benefits for the Province of Manitoba, more than double that which was the case with respect to hydro-electric developments in this province. MR. G.

FILMON: My question then for the Minister, and following upon that response, Is what aspect of the contract Indemn ifies Manitobans against the loss of jobs that would occur if CGE were closed down? HON. E. KOSTYRA: The agreement is such that any costs that are incurred with them not fulfilling the contract are incurred by CGE.

With respect to any industrial benefits for the Province of Manitoba, that would have to be the subject of any agreement or any contract that was put In place of that one, but we are confident as is Manitoba Hydro, that the terms of the agreement with CGE will be fulfilled, and there will be significant economic Impact on jobs in the Province of Manitoba. MR. G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, I'm glad to hear tha t the confidence is based on the company's strength, but not on any assurance in the contract. Mr.

Speaker , I wonder if the Minister has had an opportunity then to correct the information that was given by the Minister of Finance earlier when he said that there wasn't any connection between the parent company in the United States, and this CGE operated totally on its own, when we find that they now have a power over this Canadian company as to its operations here. HON. E. KOSTYRA: As I indicated , Mr.

Speaker, the Minister of Energy and Mines did dis cuss that matter with the President and CEO of CGE and he indicated that the company is not for sale and there is no threat of such things happening with respect to CGE in Canada. Manitoba Hydro - Northern travel arrangements HON. E. KOSTYRA: While I'm on my feet, Mr. Speaker, I'd also answer another question that was taken as notice from the Member for Lakeside with respect to northern travel arrangements and Manitoba Hydro.

I am informed by Manitoba Hydro that with respect to travel in the north, Manitoba Hydro has never been instructed nor have they ins tructed to make room available on any aircraft for any MLAs. The normal practice for Manitoba Hydro is that they charter an aircraft based on their needs, according to the number of people that need to travel to the destination. For this reason, Manitoba Hydro normally does not have any extra seating available.

With respect to accommodations in northern locations where Manitoba Hydro operates camps or staff houses, they have never been instructed that they must make room or rooms available for M LAs. lt is their customary practice to provide accommodation for any MLA if requested by the MLA and provided there is room available. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Elmwood. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the First Minister concerning the comments of the Finance Minister that he's going to introduce a Budget on May 23rd which will be tough but fair.

I assume that if the Budget is simply tough we can add 35 days, but if the Budget proves to be tough but fair, and I emphasize "fair," will the First Minis ter be delaying the proposed June election? SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! Hudson Bay exploration - Impact on environment MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Minister for the Environment. HON. G. LECUYER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also took as notice yesterday, Mr. Speaker, a question from the Member for Lakeside on the offshore oil deve lopments in the Huds on Bay area regarding the environment. I want to indicate, Mr.

Speak er, that the Department of Environment, Work place Safety and Health has been communicating with both Environment 1666

Tuelday, 7 May, 1985 Canada and Canadian Oil and Gas Lands Administration or COG LA for short, since back in 1982, where the previous Minister communicated Manitoba's environmental concern to both the company and the Federal Government, and in spite of strong repre sentations that we have made In asking for repres entation on an advisory committee, the company declined saying that they reserved that, and they would allow only governments north of the 60 parallel to be part of this committee, but agreed to keep Manitoba informed In advance of any dev elopments and has done so.

We have been informed, as promised, about seismic activities and we agree that they did not resolve any significant environmental impact. We were also given assurances that the appropriate environmental issues would be addressed prior to actual drilling programs thr ough the environmental requir ements of the COG LA drilling regulations and we are awaiting further documentation of that.

If explor atory work were to prove positive enough to warrant actual development, then the project would certainly be su bject to an extremely detailed environmental asse ssment, which comes under two federal acts: both the Canada Gas and Oil Act and the Gas Production and Conservation Act. These acts and their regulations, Mr. Speaker, contain extensive provisions for pollution prevention and remedial measures if pollution or marine emergency were to occur. As well, Mr.

Speaker, I might Indicate that In order to be allowed to proceed they have to comply with some fairly stringent conditions, and we are satisfied, we are told by the Federal Government that at this point in time they have met these conditions. PR 547 - construction on MA. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Roblin Russell. MA. W. McKENZIE: Mr. Speaker, some two weeks ago, the Minister of Highways tabled his Highw ay and Public Roads Project Sched ule for 19 85-86, during the examination of his Estimates.

I read from Page 14, it says, "PR 547 - Saskatchewan boundary, 2.1 miles grade and gravel." I would ask the Minister of Highways why he would write the Village of MacNutt, Saskatchewan, who is directly Involved in the construction of this road: "On April 18th, it will be my intention to only consider this project next year when developing the 19 86 construction program." MA. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Highways. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Speaker, the honourable member should clarify the date on that letter. MA. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The time for Oral Questions having expired, Orders of the Day.

The Honourable Member for Burrows. MA. C. SANTOS: Mr. Speaker, I beg the indulgence of the House and respec tfully ask leave that we return for a moment to Item No. 3 of the ordinary routine of business of the House, so that I may be able to present a report a Report of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources. MA. SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have leave? (Agreed) PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES MA. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Burrows. MA. C. SANTOS: Mr.

Speaker, I beg to present the Second Report of the Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources. MA. CLERK, W. Remnant: Your Committee met on Tuesd ay, April 30, Thursday, May 2 and Tuesd ay, May 7, 1985 at 10:00 a.m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building to consider the 1984 Annual Report of the Manitoba Te lephone System. Your Committee received all information desired from Mr. Gordon W. Holland, General Manager and Chief Executive Officer, and members of the staff with respect to all matters pertaining to the Annual Report and the businss of the Manitoba Te lephone System .

The fullest opportunity was accorded to all Members of the Committee to seek any Information desired. Your Committee examined the Annual Report of the Manitoba Tel ephone System for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1984 and adopted the same as prese nted. MA. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Burrows. MA. C. SANTOS: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for St. Johns, that the Report of the Committee be receiv ed. MOTION presented and carried. ORDERS OF THE DAY MA. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr.

Speaker, would you please call the government resolution on Page 3. PROPOSED RESOL UTION NUCLEAR WEAPONS FREE ZONE MA. SPEAKER: The resolu tion of the Honourable First Min ister standing in the name of the Honourable Member for Lakeslde. MA. H. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, I would ask to have this matter stand. I have no objection, of course, if anybody else wishes to speak to it at this time. MA. SPEAKER: Stand. The Honourable Mem ber for lnkster. MA. D. SCOTT: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker . 1667

Tuesc:ley, 7 May, 1985 Mr. Speaker, it is with tremendous pleasure that I rise in this House today as a seconder of the motion to declare Manitoba a Nuclear We apons Free Zone as was moved and presented and initiated to the House yest erday by the Honourable First Minister. Mr. Speaker, the creation of a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone is not something new. They have been created now for a number of years. We will set a course as the first province in Canada to establish ourselves as a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone. As is proposed in the res olution and as shown in the

WHEREAS's in the fifth WHERE AS in the re solution, Nuclear Weapons Free Zones have already been declared in Antarctica in 1959; for Outer Space in 1967 -that one is under some jeopardy at the time being and is up for reaf firmation within two years time; most of Latin America under the Treaty of Tlatelolco in 1967; and the Sea-bed and the Ocean Floor in 1970. I'd like to give a little bit of explanation exactly what a Nuclear We apons Free Zone means to us, where it has been declared In other jurisdictions. Perhaps, I could start with a quotation from the Treaty ofTiatelolco which is the one gove rning Latin America, established in

Article 1,

Section 1A of that treaty states that ". . . the treaty prohibits the testi ng, the use, the manufacturing, production or acquisition by any means whatsoever of any nuclear weapons, and the receipt, storage, installation, deplo yment, or any other form of possession of any nuclear weapon directly or Indirectly .. Mr. Speaker, this has been further emphasized by a recent statement which was published in the Winnipeg Free Press on Sund ay, February 24, 19 85. The statement by the Prime Minister of New Zealand, Prime Minister David Lange.

Prime Minister Larige, in declaring New Zealand a Nuclear Wea pons Free Zone by maintaining that he was staying within the ANZUS Treaty's prerogatives, that the ANZUS Treaty was in no way created under the threatening arc of a nucle ar umbrella, that it Is a non-nuclear treaty and that they in that small nation set a course and established a course of independence which Canada would do very well to follow. In the statement by Prime Min ister Lange, he stated very clear ly, "The bottom line for New Zealand Is simple.

If New Zealand was ever under threat of attack, we would not ask the United States to defend us by thr eatening the use of nuclear forces against the attacker. We will never ask an ally to defend us by annihilating the planet." Mr. Spea ker, since we have entered the nuclear arms race, the whole thinking of mankind, unfortunately , has not changed.

In a statement issued years ago by one of the world's greater philosophers, Bertrand Russell, along with and beside the father of the nuclear bomb, Albert Einstein, they issued a manifesto together in which they implored us to remember our human ity, to recognize that nuclear weapons change ever ything but the way we think. lt is very sad that so often on behalf of both superpowers and other hawks around the world -it's not jus t limited to the superpowers -that they still go back to the old Roman creed which stated, "Let him who desires peace prepare for war." That was stated close to 2,000 years ago.

How many wars have we had as a result of that mentality since that time? Probably the most classic example in this century was the First World War where no nation wanted that war but they were all prepared for war. They had been gearing up for years to fight a war they hoped would never happen. They have a basically meaningless figure, an insignificant political figure, in Archduke Ferdinand, who was ass assinated . That triggered a chain reaction that pulled the war into what could only be described as the First World War; a war that engul fed nearly all the so-called civilized lands of this world.

They lost their civility. They fell Into the depth of a war that was to last almost five years in which tens of millions of people died, in which countries were destroyed , and the end result of it was a division of Europe that could not last, did not last, and barely 25 years later they were back into it again.

The Second World War was really quite different than the First World War, in that the First World War was not so much ideologically based as the Second World War was very clearly a war based against a totalitarian regime that had no respect for human rights, had no respect for national borders and that wanted and bragged of it constant ly, to take over all of Europe and then to move beyond.

They showed their me thodology and in this past week end, past few days and tomorrow for the celebrations that we on this continent, in Western Europe, In Central and Northern Europe, and Northern Asia as well, are celebrating as V-E Day. That was the end of the last war, the last great war Involving civilized countries battling against one another , developed countries may be a better te rminolo gy because countries and nations, in particular, tend to laugh a little bit at this thing called civility. We have now had a period of some 40 years without armed conflict between West ern and Eastern powers directly .

They have shown the cultural aspects of our society and the cultural Immorality of Caucasian man in being willing to fight battles and skirmishes in other non-Caucaslan states. We have had, I believe, something like 150 million deaths in wars since the Second World War. So, war is not some thing that Is extinct. War is not some thing, I think, shall ever be extinct, unfortunately .

We, as civilized human beings; we who live in a free and democratic society; we who live off the riches that have been developed around us through our economic might, through our Institutions of Parliament and democracy and its evolution in the past almost 800 years, we have a resp onsibility above all others to initiate and to continue actions to prev ent wars not only involving ourselves, but also involving other perso ns. The United Nations recognized clearly that the whole concept of Nuclear Wea pons Free Zones goes a long way towards reaching that goal.

We have under consideration at the current time a proposed broad Nuclear Wea pons Free Zone in the South Pacific that is being initiated by the Government of New Zealand and many of the small islands in the South Pacific who have suffered the ultimate humility of having France and the United States in particular, use their islands as testing grounds for nuclear weapons. Those people are paying for that, paying a price which has been virtually unh eard of in peacetime, of unprecedented rates of cancer among their populations, of people who were once proud, who are now virtually destitute.

The moral fibre of the nature collapsed, the health, not only of the individual but of the society in great sickness. 1668

Tund ay, 7 May, 1985 We have another initiative in what is perhaps a corner of the world that has shown the greatest light, as far as peace and conflict, and that is in the Nordic countries. Sweden recognized the folly of war and in 1825 the people rose against the king, who had just finished conducting extensive campaigns in wanting to expand the great Swedish kingdom of the day. They declared at that time, in 1825, that that should be their last war, that they would not send young Swedes off in battle once again or ever again.

They have been able, since that time, to stay out of conflicts while the world around them has been engaged in conflict, and it has not been at no cost to them whatsoever. Their costs, if anything, have been extensive. Mr. Speaker, in the Second World War, the Swedes lost tens of thousands of their merchant marine to submarine attacks and to surface ship attacks against their merchant marine, tens of thousands. I had the chance, when I was in Sweden a year and a half ago, to go and pay tribute to these men and women who lost their lives on the high seas, in the North Atlantic in particular.

There are just column after column of names of people who lost their lives in a war they were not a part of, in a war that they actually played a fair role in trying to get the sides together and to stop the madness that was a Second World War. To continue on what Nuclear Wea pons Free Zones mean, they mean for the United Nations and they are dealing with nation states and we must recognize, as the Premier clearly did yesterday, that we are not a nation state. We are but a province within a nation state.

For nation states, they stated that to be a Nuclear We apons Free Zone they must be free and remain free of nuclear weapons. Canada fits that category. We are, for the first time in about 25 years or 20 years , now free of nuclear weapons. They must establish eff ective grounds for verification - verification with the satel lite technology that the Eu ropean nations, the United States, the Soviet Union, and even Canada possess today, make verification very, very easy.

One of the things with verification as well, is for any new weapons system to be developed, to have any impact, and to have any faith by the military brass to rely upon it, it must be tested and any test ing can be detected. Any tes ting. The third aspect of the United Nations Declaration for Nuclear Wea pons Free Zones is that an agreement between the nuclear powers that they will never use any of their weapons in that area designated as a Nuclear We apons Free Zone, that they shall not attack and they shall not be, in fact, attacked from that area.

There is currently active discussion in Europe to expand the concept of Nuclear Wea pons Free Zones to include virtually all of the satellite countries of Eastern Europe and the countries of We stern Europe, from the Soviet border to the Atlantic Ocean, from the Baltic Sea right through to the Medi terranean.

There are 30- some nations involved in this proposal at the current time and they already have, in some states, been led by the West German statesmen such as Willy Brandt and Helmut Schmidt, both former Chancellors of that land of West Germa ny, who are leading the proposition in Europe that Europe's - because the Europeans recognize that they are the biggest target around. The recognize fully that they're only - missile -speak ing - six minutes away from launch. They recognize that that's not enough time to counteract, even if counteraction would do any good.

They recognize they're sitting on a powder keg and they recognize that there cannot be any degree of civilization after a nuclear conflict. There's great question whether there can even be life on Planet Earth as we know it now. We have, Mr. Speaker, a position put forward as well by the Canadian chur ches and they have been tremendously active alongside as one of the principle peace organizations and that organization's advocating peace.

Just this past weekend there was a meeting of some 200 people of what was formally called the Inter Church Disarmament Project, now called Project Peacemakers, at West minster United Church. They heard of our reso lution on Saturday and, it's my understanding they adopted it unanimously, to support the province's Initiative to make Manitoba and declare Manitoba a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone.

Other groups that have been very active and I have had the pleasure to work alongside as well as the church groups have be en the Physicians for Social Re sponsibilit y and the Edu cators for Social Responsibility; Pr oject Ploug hshares, more so on communications and writing back and calling back and forth to get information from them, and especially the Winnipeg Co-ord inating Committee for Disarmament.

The WCCD has been working for the past four or five years now as a prim ary organization for co ordination of peace activities within the Province of Manitoba and I think they have done an outstanding job, not simply In the great visible works such as the annual peace marches which have been among the most successful in the whole country - as a matter of fact the whole continent of North America - but as well in setting up speaker's lists and people to go out and to speak to people who are interested in learning more of the role of peace and conflict, to learn as well the consequences of what nuclear war would mean to Manitoba, let alone the world.

The Canadian chur ches , Mr . Speaker , In their declaration of what a Nuclear We apons Free Zone for the country means to them, follows quite closely the United Nations, yet they say that no nuclear weapons shall be stored on Canadian soli; that there shall be no transportation by land, sea or air, across this land of ours.

They call for -no production or testing of components for any weapons systems that deliver or target nuclear weapons, and that is perhaps the principal key to it; for to declare yourself a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone as a nation, as a province, or even as a city, and to encourage or to participate In the development of that technology is, I would say, her esy. Mr.

Speaker, the fourth requirement that they call for is that Canadians, and particularly they're refe rring to members or people who are under the direction of the Government of Canada, be it through the armed forces or External Affairs or whatever, shall not provide any support and participate in the operation of support systems for nuclear weapons delivery systems, no matter where they are in the world. In other words, Canada cannot declare ourselves nuclear free and then go off in another sphere of the world and participate in the arms race, especially to participate In the implementation of nuclear weapons.

So why do we want to call ourselves and move towards deve loping Nuclear Weapons Free Zones? Why 1669

Tueeday, 7 May, 1885 do we want to start that seed and continue the growth really of that seed, because there are some 65 cities across the country who have declared themselves, to this point, Nuclear Weapons Free Zones. But our initi ative in bringing this forward to the House and to the people of Manitoba is to assist in the developing of not only a national, but an international climate where confidence and trust through dia logue can develop, for it is only through that dialogue, it is only through trust and confidence between potential adversaries that we can ever hope to have reductions in the arms race.

So for Manitoba, what does that mean? Is it simply symbolic? Because we fully recognize that, constitutional ly, the Gov ern ment of Canada has responsibility for national defence, but does that mean that the provinces of this land cannot participate in the development of initia tives which could lead to a new and saner policy for Canada in the world community?

Does that mean that because defensive issues are prim arily the constitutional respo nsibility of the Government of Canada that the Province of Manitoba or any other province cannot initiate change, that we cannot lead the way towards a Government of Canada adopting a similar policy for the whole countr y, to lift the head and the name of Canada high, as it was during the '40s, the '50s and the '60s with the creation of the United Nations, with our participation in the settlement of the Suez crisis, with our participation in the stopping of the warring factions on the Island of Cyprus and, more recently, in our efforts and our continuing efforts through the United Nations to get potential adversaries, be they superpowers or not - most of the conflicts we have around the world are not between super powers - but in trying to get parties together, to get discussions going, to get dialogue going, because once you have dialogue you can then perhaps develop the conciliatory gestures that are needed.

Without that, with only rhetoric you can get nowhere, and rhetoric is probably recognized as the most dangerous situation that the world can be in and that adversaries can be In when there's nothing but damning rhetoric between two nations, because they box themselves into positions and heaven only kno ws, we've seen that frequently enough.

So for Manitoba to declare ourselves a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone is a very tangible action. lt shows a clear dir ection of the interest and the intent of this Legislature - and this Legislature's not doing something independent - we are following the wishes of the people of Manitoba, and that Is the key to it.

Former President Eisenho wer, prior to his deceasing, said at one time - and I can't remember the exact occasion of the declaration - but he said, "If the people speak strong enough and long enough and if they are determined enough, the politicians, sooner or later, must listen and follow their lead." We are attempting to do that here in Manitoba.

We're attempting to follow the lead that has been given by the citizens not only of this province but of this country, and to start something which will snowball, one hopes, so that we will be able to live in a land that is not only free of nuclear weapons as we are today, but has this firm commitment that we shall continue keeping ourselves rid of nuclear weapons and that we shall move towards a state where this cou ntry shall not participate in an arms race which could trigger the conflagration which would involve nuclear weapons. So what does this mean for the Government of Manitoba? What do we have to do?

I'd suggest that we 've already done a nu mber of things.

You will remember last fall the announcements, and In February as well, I believe, there was a group came through with great fanfare with a former Mini ster - and thank God he's the former Mini ster - Robert Coates, former Minister of National Defence in this country, on which was called the Pentagon Defence Procurement meetings that they had and they set up across the country to try, inevitably , to link Canada's ind ustrial - not only industrial network and ind ustrial base, but also our strategy closer and closer to the wishes of the United States and of the Pentagon In particular .

How could Canada, it has been written by mili tary analysts, not just civilians like myself, how could we ever present a case to the Government of the United States and argue positions, be it acid rain, be it treaties in regard to fisheries, be it lumber exports from British Columbia or anywhere else in the country Into the United States or other trade negotiations as well?

What kind of bargaining power do we have and what kind of trust can we put In ourselves, as far as a position, when we go to the U.S. and they say, if you don't play our game, we're going to cut off the network that you have of $4 billion worth of infrastructure in Canada to supply our military with its equipment; and if you don't play our game, we will cut those contracts off and we will say that you are no longer a preferential nation in regard to defence procurement. What would the Government of Canada do then? it's my understanding it's already been used once.

I saw the Govern ment of Canada's reaction and that was over the testing of the Cruise Missile; and it's my und erstand ing that the United States at the time told Canada that they could not expect a vigorous defence against restrictions of exports of lum ber into the United States, that we could not expect a vigorous defence by the adm inistration before Congress, where there is a strong mood to limit im ports of raw lumber into the U.S. it's my understanding that we were told that we could not expect to have a vigorous defence put up by the adminis tration to maintain Canada's preferen tial trade status in regard to lum ber.

I personally believe that is the reason we tested the Cruise Missile in Canada. At the time, the Prime Minister was not overly anxious about it. He had many members of his Cabinet, it's quite well known the Federal Cabinet was quite divided on it, it's quite well known as well that the Conservative Opposition in the House of Commons was also divided on the issues, with prominent spokesmen like Douglas Roach, in particular, taking a position against the testing of the Cruise Missile.

So there are great risks for Canada to tie ourselves too closely to any nation in terms of their mi litary procurement, for it can be a very deadly association if we were to take that forward too far. But the Government of Manitoba essentially means, in my opinion, to follow the basis of both the Uni ted Nations Declaration and also the Canadian Chur ches Declaration that we, as a province, will not participate and encourage and finance or whatever else projects in this province which are Intended to develop new weapons systems or existing weapons systems which use nuclear weapons. 1670

Tueaday. 7 May. 1985 lt also means, on a parallel with Star Wars - and more and more military analysts who are free to speak and are willing to speak are saying that is probably the most destablilizing initiative that the world has seen in an awful long time. So it means that we will not participate in the development of nuclear weapons and also the deliv ery systems.

As the Member for Radisson says, it's a waste of money and it truly is a waste of mone y. it's the biggest deficit-pr oducing industry in the world today and certainly one of the primary reasons for the collapse of many nations, of their social structures and also of their economies, with high interest rates and high debt charges because they're borrowing so heavily for military purposes. lt means as well, another initiative that the province took, alongside and much prior to refu sing to participate in the Defence Procurement meetings that were held here back in the fall and also during the winter, that we feel that any idea towards dev eloping a civil defence system against nuclear weapons is futile.

As a matter of fact, we feel, not only is it futile and a waste of money, but it is dangerous because it builds a false sense of hope and security in people that think that there is such a thing as the survivability of a nuclear war. lt is with great displeasure that I heard and read in the paper today that somehow or other Manitoba Hydro has a contract to study the effect of the nuclear magnetic pulse on hydro generating capacity. Who is the Department of National Defe nce going to supply for Winnipeg Hydro. Who are they going to supply electricity to?

Now when you're talking in nuclear terms and explosions alongside, you're talking of winds that are in the hundreds of miles an hour and our towers would never even stand that even if there wasn't such a thing as a nuclear magnetic pulse. The technicians wouldn't be around anymore to service or to try to get the mammoth undertakings back. You know how much it is to put up a powerline, to build a powerline from the North to the South. lt takes years to do that.

Even if we had 3 percent or 5 percent of Manltobans or Canadians in North America somehow or other survived, are they going to have the equipment to work with to be able to put this stuff in place? Are there going to be any helicopters around to lift up the booms and to run the lines? it's nonsense! it's patent nonsense to participate in that, Mr. Speaker. There are other initiatives which I hope to see the Government of Manitoba take.

I'd like to see Manitoba take the lead, and it wouldn't be really taking the lead in Canada, because there's already a couple of institutions which I'm going to refer to in Canada; one at the University of Waterloo, which is tied very closely to Project Ploughshares. I'm speaking of the institution and the creation of peace chairs at our universities, or at least at one of our universities, to create an institute such as in Lancaster, England the Richardson Institute for Peace and Conflict Research.

These institutes go an awful long ways to exploring and contributing to the debate in the use and the role of nuclear weapons. They look not only at the nuclear debate, but they look at the whole Issue of peace and conflict in itself, what begets war, what begets peace, should we be expecting more wars at this time in society's evol ution and the ear th's ev olution? Or is what we are going through in a period of relative peace, for we in the Western World at least and also the Eastern Bloc countries; Is it fully predictable?

What has been the incidence of war between developed nations over the past 400 or 500 years? Well, Mr. Speaker, there are various institutes that have started doing work of this nature. I refer in particular to the Richardson Institute for Conflict and Peace Resear ch, which is tied to the University of Lancaster In England. They show quite clearly , by going back into 1500 and graphing out all the major conflicts that have been In Europe, in particular, in looking at the declining rate of conflicts over that period of time. Why has there been a decline incidence of wars?

For one thing as time progressed, the wars got progressively worse. The damage through the advances in technology became monumental compared to what they were just generations previous. The other thing that Is probably more telling is the devel opment of democratic states and the dev elopment of the role of the citizen in society . You remember back up until this century, essential ly, most of the world and the Weste rn World, in particular, was still run almost as fiefdoms. They were run as an evolutionary step away from feudal kingdoms.

You still had princes and kings and principalities who wanted to gain more power, more influence and with that, greater prestige. As those crumbled, as those types of societies and institutions of government crumbled over time, and the citizens became more of a participant and a choice in whether or not to go to war to some degree, or at least a willingness to even speak out against being conscripted and going off to fight In someone else's war, let alone a war in their own home territo ry, that, Mr. Speaker, is the principal reason for the decline in the Incidence of war. lt is the resistance of the citizens.

The citizens are saying rather than us sendin g our sons and daughters off to war, rather than us dying In our beds, rather than us In mass campaigns of death and destruct ion, let us try a different approach, let us move towards dialogue. it's one of the reasons, and the principal reason the United Nations was created. The League of Nations was created previou sly. lt lost respect because the major nations would not follow and give it the respect that it needed. The United Nations, we cannot afford to let it fall into the same fate.

We have to build that institution to make it stronger and stronger, to take away in some instances or to evolve so that it usurps through institutions such as the World Court some of the jurisdiction perhaps of the nation state.

So, the individual in the society , as lke Eisenhower said years ago, "Sooner or later when the people lead, the leaders must follow." 1671 Another initiative besides establishment of a peace chair that I would love to see us do in this Ye ar of Youth, and we must remember that one of the initiatives of the Ye ar of Youth is peace, and I'd like very much to see Manitoba follow up our lead by declaring ourselves a Nuclear We apons Free Zone and, perhaps, enter taining a thought of working with the Youth Council in the province to the establishment of a national conference on the peace issue, on peace and conflict if you wish, and hold it here right in the cornerstone

Tuesday, 7 May, 1985 province of this countr y. For by declaring ourselves a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone, we make ourselves a stronger cornerstone. We show not only resolve on behalf of the people of Manitoba, we show resolve on behalf of people all over the world.

Here in Canada, we can take the lead that's given to it by the people and Legislature of Manitoba, and we can move with the same sureness as a nation, and we can tell our super powers that no we will not particip ate in your alli ances if you're determined to go down one-way streets. that you must listen to the middle powers as well, and that we middle powers of the world as well as the lesser powers of the world shall have something to say with the destiny of the world. We're not going to leave that up to four or five nuclear powers. When that happens, Mr.

Speaker, the world will be a much safer place for ourselves, the world will be a much safer place for our children. Mr. Speaker, in a spirit of all humil ity, I beg all members of this House to support this resolution; to not only support this resolution, but to vigorously defend this resolution to take it forward as an another example of Manitoba showing our lead not only in Canadian society but in the world. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Brandon West. MR. H. CARRO LL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, too, would like to take this opportunity to speak on this resolution.

I agree that the nuclear arms race and the danger of nuclear war are critical and Important issues. I think that the Premier and his government are sincere in their desire for peace. Having said this, I now say that I oppose this reso lution and that there certainly will not be unanimity in this House on the resolution. The Premier stated that this resolution is a symbolic one. I agree. I further agree that symbolism is very, very im portant. My vote against this resolution is also sym bolic. I am voting agains t the trivializing by politicians of the Anti-N uclear Movement.

I am persuaded that there are certain things better done by the people than by politicians. The Anti-Nuclear Movement is a people movement. The minute politicians get involved, particular at the level of provincial politics, and particularly in the Province of Manitoba, the issue becomes a matter of partisan politics. Mr. Speaker, I would rather hear the sincere voices of our young people than the tiresome tirades of the Premi er. MR. R. DOERN: Hear, hear! Agreed. All in favour? MR. H.

CARROLL: Although I'm sure his horror of nuclear war is sin cere, I suspect that the Premier has smelled the political winds and seen the popularity of this issue, and th erefore has come up with this resolution. I suspect that the Leader of the Opposition will be tempted to follow along like a little puppy dog.

I should caution the Leader of the Opposition not to do this and I'd like to give a quote and I'd like the Leader of the Opposition to consider this. lt's from an English poet, Alexander Pope: "I am his High ness's dog at Kew; Pray tell me, sir, whose dog are you?" All of us in this Chamber are against nuclear war, but for the reasons I have stated , I am against this resolution. Let it be a people's issue, not a politician's issue. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. If there is no other member wishing to state his opinion at this time, the debate will stand In the name of the Honour able Member for Lakeside.

HOUSE BUSINESS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. A. ANSTETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, before I move the motion for the House to go into Committee of Supply, I wish to advise the House that the tentative announc ement of last week can now be confirmed that the Standing Commi ttee on Economic Development will meet this Thursday at 10 :00 a.m., to consider the Annual Report of the Commu nities Economic Development Fund, Channel Area Loggers and Moose Lake Loggers. As well, Mr.

Speaker, since we have completed the departments under consideration both In the House and committee, today we will start consideration in the House of the Department of Urban Affairs and in the Commit tee Room, the

section sitting there will commence consideration of the Estima tes of the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Mi nister of Health, that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve Itself into a Comm ittee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

MOTION presented and carried and the Hous e resolved itself Into a Committee to consider of the Su pply to be granted to Her Majesty with the Honour able Mem ber for River East in the Chair for the Department of Urban Affairs; and the Honourable Member for Burrows in the Chair for the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - CONSUMER AND COR PORATE AFFAIRS MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Santos: This

section of the Commi ttee of Supply will be dealing with the Estimates of the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. We shall begin with a statement from the Honourable Minis ter. HON. R. PENNER: Thank you, Mr. Chai rperson. My remarks will be brief, but nonetheless cogent and convincing. Historical ly, this department has had, as these things go, a brief life, but a checkered career. it's been something of a grab bag. lt's had many functions assigned to it from time to time, but in recent years it has had a reduced, but a much more focused 1672

Tuesday, 7 May, 1985 mandate. The various functions that I will particularly mention: those of the Consumer Bureau, the Insurance Branch, the Corporations Branch, the Public Utilities Board, and the Securities Commission - all of them collectively play something of a hands-on role with respect to transactions having an aggregate value of several billions of dollars per year. I think people don't realize the extent of the regulatory function and the scope of the areas covered by the various components that make up this department.

We are active and have a hands-on role, as it were, in regulating in the main private sector transactions where we seek to protect not only consumers of goods and services general ly, but - and I want to note here particularly and I think it's important to put on the record - we have a very significant role with respect to the consumers of financial services. Here's where, I think, there is a very important mandate and some very important developments. With respect to financial services, there are several areas of concern that should be noted, albeit briefly .

The traditional pil lars, the four pillars of financial services, that is, banks, trust and loan companies, insurance companies and investment dealers, the hitherto fairly sharp lines differentiating them, both in terms of statutory framework , the market operations, and the regulatory framework are breaking down. The Secretary of State for Finance, Barbara McDougall, has within recent weeks tabled a proposal for discussion on the regulation of the Canadian financial institutions. I had an opportunity to meet with her just last week.

The proposals which I'll describe and not really do justice to descri bing, would permit the creation of financial services umbrellas, holding companies, which could hold what is called a

schedule "C" bank, a trust and loan opera tion, an insurance operation and an investment dealer's operat ion and could do so under one roof, as it were. In fact, some of the big four who would benefit most from this devel opment: Crown Life, Trilon, the Power Corporation, Great-West Life is interested, it's part of the Power Corporation, of course; Investors is interested, it's part of the Power Corporation really . They are already beginning to talk in glowing terms of financial boutiques.

In saying it in that way I don't want to be taken as being critical or saying this is a bad thing, but I think we have to realize what is about to happen in the very near future. The di fference, incide ntally, between the

Schedule C banks which might be operated by a financial holding company, a financial umbrella and the

Schedule A banks, which are the big banks about which we know, Commerce, Nova Scotia, Toronto-Dominion, Royal and so on,

whereas there is a limitation on ownership with

Schedule A banks, that is, they must be widely held. No one person or group can own more than 10 percent of a

Schedule A bank. The

Schedule C banks can be closely held. lt could be one family and the moment you beg in to think about it one realizes that there is an increased risk element where you have a small, closely-held operation and we saw that fairly recently in the collapse of the Crown Trust Greymac and Seaway Empire where really the pinnacle of all of that was one person, one family; and with the self-d ealing that went on between these entities, ultimately a great many people suffered loss. The Minister of State for Finance, Ms. McDougall, is aware of that problem and would substitute for the widely-held prov1s1on of the

Schedule A banks, an absolute prohibition - that's her proposal - on self dealing as between the components of a financial umbrella. That is one approach that would be taken by the federal statutes and regulations that are going to be developed very very shortly.

I think that's important and we are encouraging that option, that is, an uncompromising ban on self-de aling; because what happens of course when you get self-deal ing is that it's apt to be dealing at a more advantageous rate than the market warrants, hence putting other investors in the particular component at risk because there's a weak element in the self-dealt element. We are also interested in examining very very closely the proposed supervisory structure which the Minister of State for Finance will put together to deal with this development.

While it is true then that the breakdown of the traditional distinctions between the four pillars of the financial community of financial services poses some opportunities, it is thought that there might be greater competitiveness, there might be made available a capital market that they could not otherwise access. There may be better international competitiveness. There is a risk element and these have to be very care fully balanced.

I'm advised that technical papers, outlining in much greater detail, the way in which this scheme will be elab orated should be forthcoming in the near future and I am promised that there will be close working relationship between the provincial min isters and officials responsible in this area and the federal officials. We simply, of course as I say, cannot play King Canute and try to sweep back the tide of change in the financial market. lt's just as susceptible to change and in a way requires change as much as any other area of the market.

But we must do everyt hing possible to build for our consumers of financial services in this province some secure bridges over these troubled waters - and they are troubled. I should just note that we've seen many people of Manitoba suffer losses with the collapse of Northern Union Insurance, with the Winnipeg Mortgage Exchange and here we're proposing, I might note, to introduce very shortly into the House a much revised Mortgage Brokers and Dealers Act, which will attempt to add the protection to that particular financial services area, which was not there when the Winnipeg Mortgage Exchange collapsed.

We 've seen the collapse of the Saskatchewan-based Pioneer Trust with some losses in Manitoba. There's been a bit of a federal -provincial bail out there and we'll have to see to what extent it's applicable to the few, but important Manitobans, who appeared to have suffered a loss initially in the Pioneer collapse; the collapse of the Commercial Bank, and I mentioned previously, the Crown Greymac Seaway collapse.

All of these are indicators that in the volatile times in which we live, with respect to fiscal and monetary transactions, that the waters are troubled and if there's to be any drastic changes in the financial services market of the kind that will be proposed, then Manitoba has a duty to its citizens to make sure that they are protected. We know that the Canadian Deposit Insu rance Corporation has proved inadequa te in many instances and is in trouble because it's being used as a bail out 1673

1\leeday, 7 May, 1985 mechanism, where perhaps it ought not to have been used. We know that regulatory mechanisms, in many instances, are inadeq uate. I've talked about what may we do in our own bailiwick, in mentioning The Mortgage Brokers and Dealers Act. Our superintendent of insurance who is with us today and who we may need shortly, Mr. McGill, is meeting with his peers, other superin tendents of insuran ces, are working very hard on the development of a national protective mechanism In the insurance ind ustry and that, we think, is very very important.

Immeasurable harm can be done if there were ever to be the collapse of a life insura nce component in the Insurance sector. They're looking at both a national insurance fund and solvency testing, much more a hands-on solvency testing to make sure that doesn't happen. In the somewhat less esoteric world of consumer transactions, we are proposing some amendments to The Consumer Protection Act which will deal with variabl e rate credit. But we think that on the whole the time has come to seriously consider some major revision, not for this Session, but for one or another of subsequent sessions.

Dealing with trade practices, we've been watching very closely the Ontario experience with its Trade Practices Act. There are one or two other jurisdictions which have equivalent legislation which would allow us to move from our present, rather passive, but nevertheless effec tive medi ative role In consumer protection, to a more active regula tory role in a whole number of areas where we feel the consumer has been at risk.

We'r e monitoring the Ontario Lemon Law, with respect to automobiles in the mediation of problems as between arbi tration of problems as between purchasers of new automobiles and their dealers.

We are actively supporting the Association of Canadian Travel Agencies proposal for a travel plan, a national travel plan, as a mechanism not only to reimbur se travellers who lost their year's travel savings with the collapse of a travel wholesaler or retail er, but to be able to offer them an alternative travel plan. it's not just a question of getting the money back, but that thing that they've looked forward for the whole year, the trip somewhere, that the other agencies can step In and provide them with the trip. We are an active supporter of that.

We're watching the price wars that have been of considerable concern to many Manitoba ns, both with respect to gasoline and bread, to use two examples. We don't have the existing statutory or regulatory base to do more than meet informally with interested parties and seek to make sure that the consumers are protected to the best extent we can, but we, as I said a moment earlier, are looking at a trade practices act or a trade practices

section in The Consumer Protection Act to give us a somewhat more active role in the marketplace as req uir ed, but no more than required. So, in some, Mr . Chair person, we're consumer protection in every area, both with respect to goods and services, and now increasi ngly important in financial services is something that we're very concerned about, and while this may a bit of a wait and see year, it's also a wait and prepare year.

We will be working, as I've pointed out, with our counterparts in the insurance indus try; we will be working with officials in the federal departments to make sure that the regulatory schemes are adequate. I think that those opening remarks are meant by me not to be an overview of the department as a whole. I think the material that has been circulated is quite detailed, but to identify and focus on some of the major problems about which we're concerned and with respect to which we hope to be able to act in the near future. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr . Min ister.

As is custom ary, the Chair now calls upon the leading opposition critic to make his reply, if he so desires, to the Mi nister's statement. MR. C. BIRT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I welcome the opportunity to become involved in the review of the Consumer and Corporate Affairs Estimates for the upcoming fiscal year. I am pleased to hear that the Min ister is continuing the policy of a hands-on role in the protection and correcting of problems affecting the consumers. I know that although some of the legislation may seem inadequate, it has far-reac hing im plications.

A concern I have is that perhaps we have gone past the time of study and that we should be doing more. I, with the Min ister, share the concerns that it is time to overhaul the principal piece of legislation that we have, The Consumer Protection Act, and either bring out a new omnibus one or perhaps a series of specific acts dealing with specific areas and he touched on two or thr ee of them. So I'm looking forward to hearing about these proposals but I am just, as I've ind icated, disappointed that there is not something coming forward this year.

I welcome the addition of the attempts to prevent a Winnip eg Mortgage Exchange from reocc urring but again I think it is something that in the light of the changing circums tances of the four pillars of the financial community that the Minister dealt with, it would perhaps be just a stop-gap measure. We may be looking at other activities or legislation that will give us greater protection in the other areas. So with that I will just conclude my remarks and we can proceed. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.

At this point in time the Chair now invites the member, the departmental staff to kindly take their respective places. Deferring Item No. 1. (

a) relating to the Mi nister's Salary, we shall start with the consideration of Item No. 1. (b)

(1) Admin istration and Finance, Executive Support: Salaries; 1. (b)

(2) Other Expenditur es - the Member for Fort Garry. MR. C. BIRT: Could the Min ister, through you, Mr. Chairman, advise if he has an executive assistant, who it is, and if he has a special assistant, who he Is? I was a little confused when the namings were given out the other day in the Attorney-Gener al's Estimates and there was some transf erring back and forth of names and I just wonder, is there someone in both of those positions. If so, who are they? HON. R. PENNER: No, there is only a special assistant. A Mini ster is only entitled to have one executive 1674

Tuesday, 7 May, 1985 assistant. The executive assistant, of course, being the Minister's alter ego in the constituency since the Minister only has one constituency and is only entitled to one E.A., but I do have an S.A. with substantial responsibility for Consumer and Corporate Affairs and that is Nancy Alien. MR. C. BIRT: Pass. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (b)(1)-p ass; 1. (b)(2)- pass. Item 1.(c)

(1) Research and Planning: Salaries; 1. (c)

(2) Other Expendit ures - the Member for Fort Garry. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, the question I have, and I'm not sure whether it occurs here or perhaps later on, but as it deals with Research and Planning, the Minister made reference to the federal position paper in dealing with the changing rules for financial dealings in the business community. Is this the department or division that would be preparing either position papers or research in this area? HON. R. PENNER: Yes and we're fortunate in having as our Deputy, Mr. Don Zasada, whom I'd like to introduce.

A person with a strong economic background and he has been invaluable as a resource person in this area and will continue to work very closely with the zone involvement as well as involving the Research and Planning staff. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, there's a reduction of some $1 0,000 in salaries for it. Is it intended that some of this res earch, and especially as it relates to the new federal financial services, is it to be contracted out or is the staff in the department doing it? If so, why is there the $1 0,000 reduc tion? HON. R.

PENNER: The reduction was in a clerical position and some sharing in clerical support, as between the deputy's office and this branch, but it wasn't a reduction in the profes sional staff. Although, let me say for the record, in agreeing with the implied comment of the Member for Fort Garry, that I feel that with what is before us we may have to imminently consider beefing up the profes sional staff in that area. MR. C.

BIRT: I believe that, traditionally, part of the department has been primarily dealing with Corporate Affairs and matters like that, or Consumer Affairs - am I correct? - in really developing pol icy for the department? HON. R. PENNER: That is right, Consumer Affairs. MR. C. BIRT: Then in keeping with the thrust of the Federal Government in this new financial affairs, can the existing department handle this type of research in preparing position papers for the department and, if so, will you be adding or will you be contracting out for those services? HON. R.

PENNER: About one year ago, in anticipation of these devel opments, we formed an interdepartmental group - as have, incidental ly, other provinces - but we are not leaving it solely in the hands of Ministers of Consumer and Corporate Affairs who tend to be relatively uninformed in these areas, but we are involving Finance and Economic Dev elopment. We expect, indeed, that some of our senior people in the Department of Finance will have to play a key role in providing the resources that we'll need to make sure that the Manitoba interests are protect ed. MR. C. BIRT: This interdepartmental group, Mr.

Chairman, will it be primarily civil servants drawn from the different line departments or will they be using outside personnel and experts? HON. R. PENNER: At this time we'll be using people we have within government, senior civil servants. We believe that we're very well served in this area by a number of people in the departments that I have mentioned. If necessary, we certainly are not foreclosing the possibility of utilizing outside consultants, but at the moment that has not become an issue. When we get the technical paper that will be the key to the areas that we'll have to really look at. MR. C. BIRT: Mr.

Chairman, once the technical paper arrives and the province has had a chance to review it, I take it the province, either this Minister or some other Minister, will be making represe ntations to the Federal Go vernment toward whatever standing committee will be considering the proposed legislation? HON. R. PENNER: We most certainly will. MR. C. BIRT: I believe, Mr.

Chairman, that when these changes are brought about it will require, perhaps, some corresponding changes to provincial legislation because, I believe, they're sort of a hand-in-g love effect here, that the Federal Government may make changes that will require, either us to adapt concurrent legislation or complementary legislation. Is the government now revie wing what legislation or what changes they might have to make, or will it have to wait until this technical paper is tabled? HON. R. PENNER: lt will have to wait for the technical paper.

The member is quite right though that there is, in the area of financial institutions, an overlap between federal and provincial jurisdiction; and the proposal issued by the Secretary of State for Finance, Ms.

McDougall, takes that into account, does make specific mention of the fact that there will have to be a very close working relationship between the Federal Government and the provinces. lt's also been suggested by organizations which have commented on this matter to date, the banks, for example, on making submission to an Ontario task force on financial institutions have proposed that there be, in fact, an ad hoc continuing working group of fed eral-pro vincial officials until the wrinkles are ironed out. MR. C. BIRT: Mr.

Chairman, is it the province's intention to solicit public input before it finalizes its position or develops its position in response to the federal initiative? HON. R. PENNER: No decision has been made on that, because I think that at the moment, as far as I can 1675

Tueeclay, 7 May, 1985 see, any changes in provincial legislation -and there may not have to be changes in provincial legislation, but changes perhaps In the role that we play -any changes in provincial legislation will, to a considerable extent, have to mesh with federal proposals. One area where there might have to be some considerable changes.

We've thought about it where, indeed, we would cer tainly consult with the industry and to the extent necessary with the public, would be some greater regulations of trust and loan operations, and we were concerned about that and we've been sort of following and tracking that since the Seaway Greymac Crown fiasco. We're aware of the fact that vitually all of the trust and loan operations are feder ally Incorporated and only licensed and registered here, but we feel that the sections of our legislation that deal with trust and loan companies will have to be looked at. MR. C.

BIRT: The Minister made reference to one of the aspects of the federal paper dealt with the deposit insurance and the current limit is $60,000, and I think the Minister made reference to it, sort of as a bailout agency at the moment. I believe the Federal Government has created either a review team or a task force to study it and Its merits. Have they consulted the province and, If not, or if they have, has the province made any represe ntation to this committee? HON. R. PENNER: No, we haven't been consulted and, accordingly, we haven't made representat ions.

I believe that's very much, in terms of the federal proposal, in its Infancy. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, the concern I have is that I don't think the $60,000 limit is sufficient in today's world.

When a couple sells their home they can often get, in addition to the $60,000, and it's one thing to tighten up regulations and improve solvency tests but, as the Minister outlined in his opening statement, I would think In the last three years the number of institutions that have gone under, and the amount of rescue work that has gone on would seem to indicate that, I would think for a great number of Canadians, that $60,000 limit is not sufficient; and I realize the astute one will put $60,000 In one name, and In the husband's name, and then joint and then you get a multitude of that, but most people don't think of that and I'm wondering if the government is contemplating making· any request of the Fed eral Government to raise that limit.

HON. R. PENNER: I certainly share the concern. We know that with the collapse of Pioneer -at least I've been advised, I shouldn't say know, I know secondhand -I've been advised of the case of an elderly couple in the Dauphin area who, in fact, had just sold a farm, a substantial farm, and had placed something in excess of $300,000 with Pione er. Now they were not a sophis ticated couple. I mean, you think, well that much money, that's sophisticated and it's not these days when you sell a lifetime's investment in a farm.

I haven't had any recent information as to what extent that couple will be protected ; but if it was strictly within the CDIC limit, then they would lose $240,000, and they wouldn't know about placing $60,000 here and $60,000 there, that never occurred to them. They would have dealt with their local friendly financial institution and probably placed it there on the short term while they're thinking about how to deal with that money and, lo and behold, there's a collapse and it's gone, so it is a problem. The difficulty, of course, is this, that the banks who are the main contributors to CDIC are raising cane.

They seem to be taking the line that Indeed we are dealing with sophisticated investors, If you're dealing with anything In excess of $60,000.00. They're looking at it with some degree of selfinterest since they're the ones who have to anti up the bulk of the CDIC funds and they, In a sense, are being heard to say, well let people take the risk, once they go into the financial marketpla ce. I don' t think people who go into the financial marketplace should be called upon to be at risk anymore than I think consumers of goods and services should be called upon to be at risk where government can play a role.

The principal role, however, does have to be front end; tha t is, solvency testi ng , close regulation, tight regulation, In terms of scope of investment, self-dealing and things of that kind. MR. C. BIRT: Then I take it from the Minister's answer that there is a concern and If, and when, an opportunity presents itself, the government will be making a statement to affectively either increasing that limit, in addition to some of the other suggestions he has just made. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1.(c)(1) to 1.(e)( 1) Financial Services: Salaries were each read and passed . 1.{e)

(2) Other Expenditu res -the Member for Fort Garry. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, my next question relates to (e), (

f) and (g). The department, by Itself, is not terribly large, I think there are some 99 or 100 people in it and, in comparison to other departments, it's quite small as far as number of people are concerned. I'm wondering why the department would have these three services in them and perhaps they wouldn't be provided by the Civil Service Commis sion or some other agency; in other words, I feel there might be a little bit of dupli cation in here considering the size of the department. HON. R.

PENNER: I think probably I may have missed the fine tuning in the ques tion, but I think, as the member knows, that we do administration and financial services not only for Consumer and Corp. but for the Department of Legislation and for Co-op Development. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, could the Minis ter advise then how much work load is done for the other departments, 50-50, how does it . . . ? HON. R. PENNER: Fred Bryans, in fact, is the genius - I almost said evil genius, but he's anything but that -the jolly genius who services and does so very well the needs in this area of the three departments.

He advises me that it's about 50 percent Consumer and Corp. and 50 percent between the other two. I would 1676

Tueaday, 7 May, 1185 think that would likely be an equal division. The financial requir ements of the Legislative Assembly management group, is really what we're talking about, has increased somewhat in recent years. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, is there then recovery cost to the department because you're doing work for the other department? HON. A. PENNER: No, we're just the Santa Claus of government. We do so gratuitously and never even get much of thanks from the Minis ters. I don't even know that we'd bear the burden. lt's part of the responsibility of those who would build an empire.

A MEMBER: Is it part of being a nice guy? HON. A. PENNER: lt's part of that, you know, one of the torches I've had to bear. You know, I mean you go around smiling - (Interjection) - a lot, too. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1.(e)( 1)- pass; 1.(e)(2)-pass. 1.(f)

(1) Personnel Services: Salaries-pass; 1.(f)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass. 1.(g)( 1) Admin istrative Services: Salaries- pass; 1.(g)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass. We shall have no resolution until we come back to the Minister's Salary. Item No. 2.(a). MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, not knowing what our future is, perhaps we could go down to 3.(d). MR. CHAIRMAN: We will reach that one if we pass 2. MR. C. BIRT: No, I have a number of questions. MR. CHAIRMAN: You want a reverse order? MR. C. BIRT: Just a reverse order down. HON. A. PENNER: I agree. MR. CHAIRMAN: With the consensus of the committee, I shall be calling Item No. 3 ahead of Item No. 2. Item No. 3.(a)

(1) Corporate Affairs, Corporations Branch: Salaries. MR. C. BIRT: Could we go 3.(d). MR. CHAIRMAN: All right, right to 3.(d). Item No. 3.(d)

(1) Public Utilities Board: Salaries; 3.(d)

(2) Other Expenditures -the Member for Fort Garry. MR. C. BIRT: The annual return for 1984 filed on behalf of the Public Utilities Board deals with, and I'm ref erring to Page 7 of that report , the cost of natural gas to each of the provincial natural gas utilities. lt primarily deals with the mechanism of passing through the costs to the consumer and how the board adjudicates on it. lt says that the board's principal role on these occasions is to ensure that the adjustment to the price of gas is fair and equitable. My question to the Minister, Mr.

Chairman, is: this report deals only with in creases, are there any mechanisms whereby that if there Is a decrease a board automatically can review and pull it forward and adjust the price downward? HON. A. PENNER: In fact, the experience has been that in some instances the utilities have voluntarily come to the board. The board has then been able to deal with the issue clearly in that way.

The board does have the power to call in where there's been a request, let's say, on the part of the users of the service of the utility where there have been some Indications that there ought to be a review, but this has not proved necessary in recent years. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, I believe that there is a new National Energy Agreement in effect.

Though it only deals with oil, it may have an Impact on the price of ga s and there's reference on Page 8 saying: "Currently dis cussions at the federal level are being carried out with a regard to the future of this agreement." I realize that the current gas agreement between the producers and the Federal Government have not been revised , but I think the general principle has been that natural gas is roughly 65 percent of the oil price. The reason I asked my earlier question is that it would appear that the price of oil is either stabili zing or will be reducing.

Will the board be monitoring the price of gas and would they then intervene to pass on these reduced prices to the consumer should this occur? HON. A. PENNER: Yes , the board will be monitoring what might well be - this is not an intended pun - a volatile area or can be. lt hasn't been recently. There's been an element, comparatively speaking, of stability in world energy prices for the last several months. That, of course, can be upset at any time. Who knows what will happen in the Iranian and Iraqi conflict that could upset the supply situation?

The supply situation worldwide has improved to the point -you know, North Sea oil. Now with some of the longer-range prospects in Canada beginning to produce that even a drastic upset of the kind we used to fear, living in darkness and in cold, Is not now as likely, and extrapolating from that very drastic changes in world prices suddenly are not really anticipated. But let's hypothesize should that happen, since we're now much more closely tied Into world price -indeed we will be tied into world price by the agreement -there is a drastic movement one way or another.

The PUB is prepared to move in as quickly as it can. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, there Is a reference in the last sentence on that page. lt says, "The anticipated February 1, 1985 increase has been postp oned, as the date of this writing, 60 days pending review of the agreement." Two questions flow from that. Has there been an agreement? lt makes reference to the Alberta price of natural gas. So has there been any change in that agreement? HON. A. PENNER: No. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, is the increase being continually postponed? What was the ultimate decision of the board? 1&n

Tunday, 7 May, 1985 HON. R. PENNER: My information is that it's frozen until at least August. MR. C. BIRT: Is it the intention then of the board to continually postpone that increase until the agreement has been changed or at least some word is at least stated that it's going to be in existence for some time? HON. R. PENNER: Ye s, the agreement between the feds and Alberta freezes that price pending some renegotiations.

Our hands are tied, in a sense delightfully so, because things have a habit of going up rather more frequently than they have of going down and we'll just have to wait till the fall to see what emerges from those discussions. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, the reason for the postponement is to do with what the cost has not gone through and this had been an earlier award to the producers? Oh, I'm sorry, I guess the distributors of the gas. HON. R.

PENNER: Ye s, there are discussions perhaps, rather than negotiations taking place between the feds and Alberta to replace the tax and that may have some bearing. lt may be that in effect nothing happens. MR. C. BIRT: But the proposed increase though will just be put on hold until something happens? HON. R. PENNER: Ye s. MR. C. BIRT: Then currently there is nothing that will justify giving this increase to the distributors? HON. R. PENNER: Not of which we're presently aware. MR. C. BIRT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We could pass (d)(1) and (2). MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(d)(1)- pass; 3.(d)(2)- pass. HON. R.

PENNER: I don't know if I introduced Murray Donnell y, an esteemed member of the Faculty at the University of Manitoba, who is the chairperson of the Securities Commission; and G. Barron, who is the Executive Director of the Public Utilities Board - the executive secretary. MR. G. BARRON: Thank you, Mr. Minister. MR. C. BIRT: What's our status with time? HON. R. PENNER: Is there any1hing we can do in five minutes? MR. C. BIRT: I've got one or two questions on insurance here. HON. R. PENNER: Okay, sure. Let's do insurance. MR. CHAIRMAN: I'll call Item No. 3.(b)( 1) Insurance Branch: Salaries; 3.(b)

(2) Other Expenditures - the Member for Fort Garry. MR. C. BIRT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe the Insurance Agents' Association of Manitoba has been pressing the Provincial Government to impose licensing standards and I'm wondering if the Minister can advise what, if any1hlng, is being done in this regard. HON. R. PENNER: it's been a little while since I met with the representative of the agents but I did, and this is one of the topics that was discussed.

There has been a committee struck bet ween the industry and the agents to try to develop some consensus with respect to testing and with respect to some licensing controls. Our Superintendent of Insurance Ed McGIII, whose - Earl McGill - why does that other name always stick in my mind - Earl McGill who is with me is working closely with the committee in this respect . MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, is it the intention that they will end up either having their own act or that they will be licensed, much like the real estate salesmen, or entered in another department? HON. R.

PENNER: I think as the member knows the agents are licensed now under the provisions of The Insurance Act and there's been no request for a change and there's no proposal for change pres ently under considerati on. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, then as I take it from that answer, the thrust then of the agents is to merely Increase the criteria or standards for the licensing that they now get, only there would be some additional requir ements to that licence. HON. R. PENNER: That is right. MR. C. BIRT: Mr.

Chairman, in relation to something that the Minister made earlier in relation to insurance companies, I know there are two areas of request that the agents seem to be zeroing in on errors and omission insurance and a fidelity bond on the chief agent and all staff. That seems to bring home the fact that it's a protection of the public against any potential errors or problems created by these agents. Is there any intention by the department to either requir e that or have that brought in, either this year or in the very near future? HON. R. PENNER: lt is under active consideration.

Saying that, I can't put an immedia te time line, but I think the key word there is "active." 1t is under active consideration. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, would this require a legislative change or can it be done by regulations through the licensing process? HON. R. PENNER: lt could be done either way but I think it would be preferable to eventually, in any ev ent, give it a statutory base. MR. C. BIRT: Mr . Chairman, the Mini ster made refe rence to est ablishing - my wording may not be quite right - but a national projector to develop a mechanism for t�e p·otoction of life insurance companies. I believe 1678

'niHd8J; 7 � 1115 there was the establishment of a solvency testing or more stringent testing for solvency, and some sort of national fund or protection fund. I'm just wondering if the Minister could elaborate on what he means by both those areas. HON. A. PENNEA: Ye s, let me just speak a wee bit slower, although time has ef fluxed. MA. C. BIAT: Mr. Chairman, I'm dealing with those two and then that will be it for the insurance. HON. A. PENNEA: Okay, it'll just take me one minute.

Ye s, there has been meetings of insurance and superintendents of insurance and the solvency tes ting means just a more hands-on approach, so that a mechanism is set up, both with respect to federally regulated companies and work ing through the provinces.

So companies doing business in the Insurance field can be, in a sense, audited much more closely to make sure that they have the requisite reserves and are dealing with insurance premiums in a responsible way, particularly looking at the elements of risk that they may have assumed in terms of reinsurance and all of the things which might affect the solvency of an insurance operation. The compensation fund is one that - my most recent report isn't in my file - but the thrust there is to have contributions from the insurance indu stry in each province based on its premium income.

That would be fed into a national fund and administered by federal provincial agreement, so that if a company went belly up and left a lot of people hanging loose, the industry itself would be able to step in and both compensate and reinsure. MA. C. BIAT: Mr. Chairman, then they become a self insurer. Is that the idea being forced through, either by provincial and/or federal legislation then. Another quick ques tion, if I can. Is it anticipated that this would result then in national and provincial leg islat ion, much like we have The Federal and Provincial Corporations Act?

Is this the idea behind both the fund and the solvency testing? HON. A. PENNEA: Ye s, it would require both federal and provincial legislative changes. MA. C. BIAT: Okay. Is there any contemplated time when this might be coming forward? HON. A. PENNEA: I think within a year. MA. C. BIAT: Okay. Mr. Chairman, I'm prepared to stop at the moment or proceed as the case might be. MA. CHAIRMAN: The hour being 4:30 p.m., we are interrupting the proceed ings of this committee for the Private Mem bers' Hour. We may or may not be back, depending - but in any case we shall be back at 8:00 p.m. SUPPLY - URBAN AFFAIRS MA.

CHAIRMAN, P. Eyler: Committee, come to order. We are considering the Depart ment of Urban Affairs. Does the Minister have an opening statement? The Honourable Minister. HON. L. DESJAADINS: Mr. Chairman, I don't intend to make a statement at this time; I'll try, instead, to answer the questions that I will be asked by the members of the committee. I'd like to say that this department, of course, is rather new for me, I am still learning, probably will for quite awhile. There's more than I thought there would be before accepting this respo nsibility. Although, Mr.

Chairman, a few weeks ago I think all the members of this House, in probably one of the most emotional days that I've witnessed in my time in the House, paid respect to the late Minister of Urban Affairs, Mary Beth Dolin. I do not want to repeat what I said at that occasion, but I would like to go on the record, Mr. Chairman, to say that I think I should recognize that she laid the groundwork with the di scussion with the City of Winnipeg to make my respo nsibilities that much easier.

I might say that what I have tried to do in the short time that I've been there is es tablish a good rela tionship with city council and the mayor. There has been very good co-operat ion on the part of the mayor and the members of the committee. That's not to say that there's not going to be some disagreement, of course. When you're talking about different levels of government there's always some disagreement but, all in all, I think that there's been co-opera tion and I hope that we continue to co-operate as we have. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. MA. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G.

HAMMOND: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I had been hoping that the Minister might make an opening statement, but I guess he's been too busy grappling with Health in the last few weeks. I wanted to put a few things on the record that I feel about the City of Winnipeg and how this government has behaved. In spite of the fact that the Minister is new, a new Minister takes on the respo nsibilities of that particular portfolio.

This government - and I'll hold it up, as we have often, in the promises - they promised to ease the property tax burden on the City of Winnipeg taxpayers, and what we have now is the highest property taxes in Canada. There have been increases, in the four years from '77 to'81 the property taxes went up $78.03.

Now we repeat this time and time again, but it's very important, for people to understand that under the NDP Government, in their fourth year, $349.92; since 1981 the ambulance charges in the city have increased from $75 to $10 0; transit fares have gone from 60 cents to 80 cents for adults, everywhere we turn around in the city there is an increase in fees. The core area Initiative, the assistant general manager is quoted as saying that a major reason the job creation efforts are lacking Is the failure of the Logan Industrial Park to attract a single tenant.

Surely, the major emphasis in the core area Initiative was to create jobs, to provide training. Ye t this govern ment single-handedly got the other two to agree; they wanted to change the course of the agreement which was aimed at creat ing jobs. They are using money from the Jobs Fund, and they reduced the size of the industrial park and, Instead , 1679

Tueaday, 7 May, 1985 emphasized the housing component which was a purely political decision. Now everything I read about the core area initia tive, going back to the time when it was first thought of, when the Memb er for St. Norb ert was the Mini ster at the time who signed the agreement, the very first component was jobs. Yet, here we have a government who, instead of doing something that could have been great in the core area and creating jobs, where better are they needed, instead they have created a vacuum; not one single business is in that industrial park, and that's a dis grace.

What we have in the core area - what was it? The Education Mini ster during the winter is starting a "No Child Shall be Cold" campaign. What kind of an ind ictment is it on this government that we have the Minister of Education out begging for clothes for inner city childr en? Now there is something drastically wrong with the programs of this government when they have to do something as callous as that. She said the chil dren can't wait while we solve the big social issues. Well, they are not solving the little issues, and they are certainly not solving the big ones.

The failure of this government's efforts to create jobs is shown clearly by the staggering increase of the people in the City of Winnipeg forced to go on welfare. In 1980 there were 2,207, and that was bad; but in 1985 there are 7,259, and that's counting single households and heads of families, it's not counting the depend ants, which brings it closer to 15,000, and that's dis gracefu l. What we have had from this government are promises and no fulfillment. I think that the Min ister had better start paying attention to the City of Winnip eg because things are pretty bad there.

With all the money that has been put into the core area, the one action of the government, which was the Logan development, the ind ustrial site, probably was their giant mistake and cost the people in the Inner city jobs. I just want to say to the Min ister that I hope that things will pick up, but I certainly doubt it from the way I see things going now. MR. CHAIRMAN: Would the Mini ster like to bring in his staff? The Member for Ellice. MR. B. CORRIN: Mr.

Chairman, I would be remiss if I didn't point out to the honourable member that the indus trial park, which she so loathes and which she's so concerned about, in terms of the high vacancy rate, was promulga ted and promoted and put in place indeed by her government. I omitted to mention one factor, and it's relevant, that the indus trial park component was to be much larger.

Now If she thinks that the indu strial park occupancy rate, that low rate - at present I think it Is true that there have been no rentals in that particular area - is simply premised on the fact that the park is smalle r, as opposed to a bigger one, which was originally planned by her government. I think she is in error; I think her judgment is mlsapplied. lt seems clear to me that one of the initial problems with this particular project was the very fact that there was an indus trial park proposed for an area where there was no commitment or inter est from the private sector in locat ing busine sses.

I p ut this on record now because if this is going to be a major point of contention between the opposition and the government the member should be aware that there is very little factual basis to believe that the larger park, as proposed by her government, would have had any more success than the smaller park which, from our point of view was a remedial step, is now enjoined. I think that should be taken Into account. Also, there is no evidence upon which she could propound a belief or propose . . . MR.

CHAIRMAN: Order please. was g1vmg the Mem ber for Ellice the benefit of the doubt that he was raising a point of order . lt is customary under the procedures of com mittee after the Mini ster's int roductory statement that the opposition critic gets to make a response. I had thought that the Memb er for Ellice was going to make a point of order, but it seemed to develop into a debate. The Min ister's staff are present now, so I would call Item 1. (

b) Executive Support, Admi nistration and Finance - the Member for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Mr. Chairman, would the Min ister ind icate if there has been any changes in the Executive Support in Urban Affairs? HON. L. DESJARDINS: No, Mr. Chairman, it would be the same staff, the same num bers. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Mr. Chairman, could the Min ister Ind icate what Mr. Sanders is doing now in Urban Affairs and what his respons ibili ties are? HON. L. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, I think that was covered quite well last year. If you'll remember, there was the discussion on the contract that was signed between Mr.

Sanders, who is an advisor to the Min ister, and he's been working mostly with the Deputy Min ister at this time, and it's the same contract that was discussed quite extensively last year. There is no change in this situation. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Is Mr. Sanders working on any particular project? Is he working with the City of Winn ipeg Review Comm ittee, with North Portage Development, with the Core Area? Is there any particular area that he's working on in his contract? HON. L. DESJARDINS : Mr . Ch airman, the main responsibility of Mr. Sanders Is with the review of The City of Winni peg Act. MRS. G.

HAMMOND: What exactly is he doing with that review committee? I know they have a secretary to the committee. I was wondering what Mr. Sanders is doing? HON. L. DESJARDINS: As I said, this was covered . This is a contr act that was signed on November 9, 1983 for two years, and according to the terms of this contract, it provides analytical technical research to The ' ·t of Winnip eg Act Review Commit tee to assist in the r:essful completion of its mandate. He also help� to dent ify the priorities and issues requiring an 1680 City successful to id

TUHday, 7 May, 1985 in-depth analysis. He might be involved in assi sting in the final drafting of the Report of the Committee of Review and his contract goes on until November 9th of this year. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Mr. Chairman, if it's all right with the Minis ter, will we deal with just this

section as a whole, and I'll just go on to the next area. HON. L DESJARDINS: You mean on administration? MRS. G. HAMMOND: Ye s. HON. L DESJARDINS: Okay. MR. CHAIRMAN: That would be excluding the Minister's Salary, I take it. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Yes . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, I think that perhaps under Executive Support there are a significant number of issues that we should deal with in this particular area because they simply don't come up as specific items in the rest of the Estimates. My first question, Mr.

Chairman, would be with respect to The City of Winnipeg Act review. Could the Minister of Urban Affairs give us his vision of what he wishes to accomplish for the City of Winnipeg through a review of The City of Winnipeg Act? HON. L DESJARDINS: Wel l, Mr. Chairman, there is no way that I'm going to try and give you the answer before I've seen the report. That would be rather unusual.

I think this task force was set up to review the, as is customary, especially when there have been changes going from the metropolitan form of government to the total amalgamation and the change in the makeup of the different wards. 1 have met with some of the members and certainly the Chairman, Mr.

Cherniack, and I can tell you that I'm impressed by the quality of the people who are on this review committee and their dedication to the responsibility they have and their determination to make sure that their recommendations are meaningful; and also to try to assist the province and the city of being able to manage the affairs of the city somewhat better. I'm looking forward to the recommendation that we should be getting some time in August and then, of course, we look at the recommendations.

I'm told that we'll be given different options, and then it would be the proper time to comment on it and see if there are going to be any changes. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Mem ber for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Mr. Chairman, I recognize that the Minister is waiting for the report. Has he not got some thing in mind? Surely when they called for a rev iew, there must have been something in mind. There must have been some reason that you just don't call a review because, you know, well it looks like it's time.

So there must have been some areas of dissatisfac tion, something that the gover nment was looking at in the way of policy or some ways they wish to see change. We'd like to hear what the government's thoughts are on this. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, I think I've explained this. I think the situation - I don't remember exactly how many years - but it started with the metropolitan form of government; then the total amalgamation. lt's obv

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-4-43a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 4th hansardpdf 43a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	126dfba171387ce8119f2e637ee7931967144898

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