Manitoba Hansard — 26 April 1966 (Sitting 101, 27th Legislature, 5th Session)

27-5-101

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2:30 o'clock, Tuesday, April 26, 1966 Opening Prayer by Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: Presenting Petitions. Reading and Receiving Petitions. Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees. Notices of Motion. 2299 Introduct ion of Bills. The Honourable the Leader of the Opposition. MR. GILDAS MOLGAT (Leader of the Opposition) (Ste. Rose): ... . Madam Speaker, be fore the Orders of the Day, if I may .. .. MADAM SPEAKER: I forgot to call the Ord ers. Orders of the Day. MR. MOLGAT: I'd like to addr ess a question to the First Minister.

Could he advise the House as to the procedure regarding Bill No. 41, which is presently in the Law Amend ments Committee? What are the intentions with regard to the bi ll ? HON. DUFF ROBLIN (Premier and Provincial Treasurer) (Wolseley): I'm consulting with my colleagues on that one. And while I'm on my feet, I should say the Honourable Leader has asked on several occasions about Ord ers. We expect to have all those QrdEi!rs ready. before the House rises , and I might say that if they are not ready following our discuss ions in the Rules Committee this Session, we'll send them out just the same. MR.

MOLGAT: Madam Speaker, I want to thank the First Minister f01· that statement. I think that is a very proper course to take and I appreciate that we will get the information we asked for. HON. MAITLAND B. STEINKOPF Q. C. (Provincial Secretru:·y & Minister of Public Utilities) (River Heights): Madam S�aker, before the Orders of the Day I'd like to file a Return to an Order No. 45, on the motion of the Honourable Member for St. George; and al so ar. Order for Return No. 49, on the motion of the Honourable Member for Ste. Rose. HON.

WALTER WEIR (Minister of Public Works) (Minned osa): Madam Speaker, before the Orders of the Day, I'd like to lay on the Table, Returns to Orders of the House No. 10, stand ing in the name of the Honourable Member for Portage; No. 14, in the name of the Honourable Member for Portage; No. 19, in the nru:ne of the Honourable Member for Emerson; No. 24, in the name of the Honourable Member for Gladstone; No. 33, in the name of the Honourable Member for Assiniboia; No. 47, in the name of the Honourable Member for St. George; No. 55, in the name of the Honourable Member for St.

John's; and No. 60, standing in the name of the Honourable Member for Portage. MR. MOLGAT: Madam Speaker, I'd like to ask a subsequent question of the First Minister. What did he say regardi ng Bill 41 ? What was the course? MR. ROBLIN: I'm in consultation with my colleagues on that bill. MR. RUSSELL PAULLEY (L eader of the New Democratic Party) (Radisson): Madam Speaker, may I ask a supplemental question to that of the Honourable the Leader of the Opposi tion respecting Bill 41 of my honourable friend.

Will lhe amendments which were in Law Amendments Committee, that is the Bill 41, amendments to The Election Act, be brought into effect prior to the next general election in Manitoba. MH. ROBLIN: That depends on when the next general election will be, Madam Speaker. MH. PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, before the Orders of the Day, I would like to direct a question to the Honourable the First Minister and/or the Minister of Education. I wonder if either gentlemen might give n:ie any information so that I could give the information to my residents of Windsor and Niakwa Park.

My question is, when will the First Minister be replying to a brief and letters from the Citizens Committee of Windsor and Niakwa Park respecting the building of a so-called French-option school in Windsor Park, St. Boniface ? MR. ROBLIN: Madam Chairman, I have been in correspondenc e with these people with respect to their brief and some of the letters they have written to me. I have not replied to all of them and I shall not be replying in the immediate future. These are matters that will receive 11ome further study before I am able to do so.

MR PAULLEY: .... my honourable friend think about a month is time enough to study a letter? MR. ROBLIN: It may even take longer. MH. PAULLEY: It's und erstan dab le, Madam Speaker, .••. my honourable friend. I'd like to address a question to the Honourable the Minister of Municipa l Affairs. I see that he

Apr il 26, 1966 2300 (MR. PAUL LEY, cont'd) .... is !lot in his seat. I therefore will address the question to the Honourable the First Minister. ·While discussing the Metropolitan Act the other day, the question arose as to further consultations with the Young Women's Christian Association res pecting a grant, and I ask my honourable friend whether the meeting, as indicated by the Minister of Municipal Affairs, has been held and if so, have the results of the meeting been satisfactory to the Young Women's Christian Association? MR. ROBLIN: Madam Chairman, I can't answer for the YWCA - they must do that.

But I understand, although I have. not spoken to my colleague about this, that the meeting did take place and I've heard of no difficulties arising from it, so I trust that all is well. MR. PAULLEY: A subsequent question, Madam Speaker. Can the Honourable the First Minister indicate whether a firm proposition was submitted to the Association? MR. ROBLIN:, I can't give any further information than what I have already done, Madam Chairman. MR.

NELSON SHOEMAKER (Gladstone): Madam Speaker, before the Orders are proceeded with, I'd like to address a question to the Honourable the Minister of Municipal Affairs, but since he is not in his seat perhaps his colleague the Minister of Public Utilities could answer this. The other day we passed Bill 118,

an Act respecting the City of Portage la Prairie, and an amendment was passed to it holding the Municipal Council liable for the actions and the over-expenditures, which I take it was in order, but on checking the statutes last year we passed a bill - Bill No. 93,

an Act to validate By-law 3739 of the City of Brandon - and no similar measure was taken on that one, and I was wondering what is the significance of this. MR. ROBLIN: Madam Chairman, I'll have to take my honourable friend's question as notice. It sounds rather involved. ORDERS OF ·THE DAY MADAM SP EAKER: The adjourned debate on the proposed motion of the Honourable the Member for Elmwood. The Honourable the Leader for the Opposition. MR. MOLGAT: Madam Speaker, as we were ending our morning session, I was on my feet to speak on this resolution.

I can agree with a great deal that has been said by the honour able the member who introduced the resolution. There's no question about it that regardless of what we may be, either professionally or business or whatever our activities are, in the final analysis we are consumers, and it is very important that there be proper consumer protection. The House has taken some steps over past years. My colleague the Member for Selkirk was one of those who many years ago proposed such things as changes in consumer credit and so on, and over the years the House has moved in this direction.

At the moment, the consumer protection matters are mainly in the hands of volunteer organizations such as, oh, the Credit Bureau, the Better Business Bureau and so on, and I do not question in any way the work that they do. I think by and large they are doing a very useful service in this field.

I do believe, though, that there is a possibility of co-ordinating the efforts of the various bodies involved, and possibly getting a better service for all the people of the Province of Manitoba., I don't think that the government effort should be to take over the volunteer organizations, but rather to work with them and co-ordinate their efforts. The resolution before us recommends a Department of Consumer Affairs. Madam Speaker, it seems to me that one of the dangers that faces us in this House is the proliferation of departments.

As I reckoned them the other day, I think we 're up to 17 now, which means 17 potential cabinet ministers, and as I recall - the' debate was not too long ago- the Leader of the NDP himself was saying the same thing, that he doubted the need of further departme,nts, that it seemed that the government had gone a long ways already in establishing departments. I noted this morning in the comments of the Honourable the Member for St. John's, that he said that while he might prefer a department, that he was prepared to consider another alternative to this.

I think, in the long run, what the members of the House are concerned about is that the functions be performed and that they be performed in the best way possible, and I think that at this stage this can be done by the establishment of a branch, and that the responsibilities for co-ordination and for further government action where there is no volunteer action at the moment, could be properly handled by a branch without the necessity of setting up a department with a full-time Minister.

April 26, 1966 2301 (MR. MOLGAT, cont'd) .... So Madam Speaker, I beg to moYe, seconded by the Honourable the Member for Gladstone, that the motion be amended by deleting the words "Department of Consumer Affairs" in the last line thereof, and substituting therefor the following words: "Branch of Consumer Affairs in the Department of the Provincial Secretary." MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, on a question of order, is not the question before the House the amendment as proposed by the Honourable Member from Selkirk. and not the main motion?

MADAM SPEAKER: The question before the House is the main motion. Are you ready for the question? MR. PAULLEY: I'm sorry, Madam Speaker. MR. ROBLIN: Madam Speaker, I'm just going to make a ,·ery few comments on this because this is a subject which the government is very much interested in indeed. We have been giving some consideration to this whole question of trying to find some better way of helping the ordinary citizen who may find himself in' difficulties in the labyrinth of credit dealings that now are part of our urbanized society, and we have been wondering just how best to approach this matter.

Our view at the present time is that we might very well be advised to establish some thing like the Citizen's Advice Bureau, either directly ourselves or in co-operation with some outside organization. You will recall, Madam Speaker, that during the Great War in Great Britain there were organizations sponsored by municipalities.

I think there were 87 towns in Great Britain that had what is called a Citizens Advice Bureau, and if you lost your ration card or if you were bombed out or if you ran into a hundred and one of the different trials that beset the ordinary person in those days, you knew that you could go to the Citizens Advice Bureau in wherever you were located, and get some help, and it seems to us that something along the same lines might very well be worked as an assistant in the field of credit. It might even be expanded to other complexities of life that ordinary citizens have to deal with.

Our view, however, was that this matter probably could be handled more economically and certainly more in touch with the realities of commercial life through some other agency than a department of government or a bureau as has been suggested.

Our thought was that a suitable arrangement might well be worked out with some of the people who are in the business now, to provide a public service which would at least be partially supported by public funds, but supported in part as well by private funds, because it would, I think, be a matter of extreme interest :to the credit granting industry to place their industry on a better footing from a public relations standpoint and to ensure to the general public whom they serve and we serve, that the thing wru; being done properly.

Now, unfortunately, I'm not in a position at the moment to say that we can undertake to do this in the terms outlined in either the resolution or in the amendment. They are asking for the g•o•vernment to undertake this matter as a straight operation of the state, Our feeling is that while that might very well turn out to be the course to follow, we have not yet finalized our studi.es sufficiently to be certain that we would be willing to accept this resolution or the amendment in the terms in which they stand.

So unfortunately we're not going to be able to support either, but I don't wan't the House to interpret that as being a lack of interest in the question,, or an indication that we don't think that something should be done along this line to provide 11ome form of information to the general public in dealing with the complex matter of credit. I shall not speak at length, I have outlined our position very briefly. We are sympathetic to the goal.

We are studying and have fairly close to completion our views as to how the matter should be tackled, but we would ask the House not to tie us to the two particular suggestions that are put before us now. We will vote against them, but we intend to take this whole issue very seriously. MH. MOLGAT: Madam Speaker, would the Honourable First Minister permit a. question? Is he aware that the resolution , also the amendment, goes far beyond the question of consumer credit. It has to do with the whole question of consumer protection. All matters of consumer, not simply consumer credit. , MR.

ROBLIN: I think I indicated that I was considering matters more than consumer credit in this idea.

2302 April 26, 1966 MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. John's. MB. CHERNIACK: Madam Speaker, I am happy that the First Minister entered into debat e even at this late sta ge. He is probably aware of the fact that we've had a number of opportunities to discuss this whole problem, not only this year but- in previous yea rs.

He may not have been awa re, as was indicated by the Honourable the Leader of the Official Opposition, that the proposal that we made in this Resolution .was a much larger one involving all aspects of consumer purchasing, and the original thought that there should be a department was based on the fact that the consumer is the largest entity of society which is not at all organized nor equipped to handle the sophisticated selling methods that are now used, and that of course does not apply to consumer cred it alone.

The Minister was anxious to make the point that they do not lack interest, and Pm certain that the government does not lack interest, but I would invite the Honourable the First Minister to read the report of the Consumer Credit Committee, wl),ich I think completed its deli bera tions some time in Ja nuary, and then review the legislation which was brought forth from that dat e until now, and although I don 't excuse the government of lack of interest, I would like him to form his own conclusion as to the recommendations ma de and the actions which followed it.

Now Madam Speaker, it is our belief that this ma tter is so important and the interests of the community are so widesprea d in this field, that it is deservi ng of a department to service it, but I indicateli earlier that we would be happy t.o settle for a branch of a depart ment, or indeed I think this morning I sa id an officer in charge of a departme nt, and I have no doubt that that will come and I believe it will come fairly soon.

I think that the Honourable the Provincial Secretary indicated almost as much this morning and on previous occasions, that he sees that this is the tendency ih which this government will eventually go. Pm glad that the Honourable the Leader of the Official Opposition accepted my suggestion which I ma de this morning, that we would accept the idea of a branch of a departm ent, and Pm glad that he tool!: the initiative of presenting the amendm ent so that we· could offer the gov.ernment this lesser, less costly and less elaborate scheme.

I would point out to the House, Madam Speaker, that Nova Scotia has already passed its legislation involving consumer protection - and not only credit protection - and that in the Act there is also provision for an office of the government to be establi shed for the·protection of consumers in the Province of Nova Scotia.

I would also point out, Madam Speaker, that the Tribune report of April 23rd, last Saturday, has a headli ne sta ting: "Ontar io Sets up a New Bureau" and the story is datelined from Toronto and reads in part only, as follows: "Attorney-General Arthur Wishart toda y announced the establishment of a Consumer Protection Bureau and his intention to give it broa d powers by legislation to wipe out consumer frauds, especially by door-to-door sa les men.

" I might ind icate we already have enacted some legislation along the lines of protection for consumer frauds and door-to-door sa lesmen, but we have not yet reached the stage which Ontario reached in the setting up of a government bureau.

We have benefitted from the fact that Ontario st arted its investigations before we did, and indeed we had the benefit of an elaborate, bound book giving the report of the Consumer Protection or Consumer Credit Committee of Ontario in which a bureau or a department of government was recommended, and now we find tha t the Attorney-General of Ontario has announced it in the House. He sta tes further - Pm reading from the news item: ·"Mr.

Wishart sa id that while the govern ment plans to estab lish the Bureau immedia tely, the legislation to be admini stered contains new principles that business people will want to stud y. " Well, we are ahead of them in this respect because we have already had the opportunity of discussing it with business and with consumers, but nevertheless Mr. Wishart, in the way that has already been indic ated by our government, wants to do some more study on the question of the principles.

However, there is no more study required in Ontario before a departm ent of government is estab lished - and I mean department with a small "d" because it says a Consumer Protection Bureau. This, then, means that if we would pass either the resolution or the amended resolution today, we would be the third province in Ca nada, as far as· I can tell, that will recognize the rieed for government to enter into this field, and of course if we dela y longer, as has been suggested by the spo}!;esman for the government, we may no longer have an opportunity to be the third.

We may be fourth, fifth, sixth, I don't know; but this problem is not peculiar to Manitoba; its studies are not limited to Manitoba, and it will be brought into effect elsewhere as well as in Manitoba eventually. All we can do is suggest, prod, suggest and keep on suggesting, and eventually we know it will be there. J

April 26, 1966 2303 (MR. CHERNIACK cont'

d) I am hoping that something will happen about thi s before the next session.

The Honourable the First Minister has already, may I say, stated his intentions in such terms that we can fore cast the result. --(Interjection)--Of Course --well, but still we would know the result today of our resolution, and I think it's unfortunate, and yet it may well be that since the government doesn't need this Legislature's instruction or authority to set up an office wi thin a department today, then I would think that even if they should see fit to vote against the amendment, they can still carry out the intent of the amendment by proceeding to set up an office wi thin the Department of the Provincial Secretary.

So although they may vote against the motion and the amendment, I'm hoping still that before we meet again in Session there will be a department- again, 1 want to correct the word "department''. There will be at least a branch or an office established by government. I assure you that if the next government will be a New Democratic Government, there will be before the next Session. I'm beginning to guess that this might even apply to the Liberals, although their chances I know are poor.

Nevertheless, Madam S'peaker, in spite of what has been said by the Honourable the First Minister, I feel that the Resolution itself is a good one, a correct one, and one which deserves support. The amendment by the Honourable Leader of the Official Opposition is a compromise which I think, too, is better than a whole loaf, and I would urge support of that. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion lost. MB:. MOLGAT: Yeas and Nays, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: Call in the Members. The question before the House, the motion of the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition.

A standing vote was taken the result being as follows: YgAS: Messrs. Barkman, Campbell, Cherniack, Desjardins, Froese, Guttormson, Harris, Johnston, Molgat, Paulley, Shoemaker and Wright. NAYS: Messrs. Alexander, Baizley, Beard, Bilton, Bjornson, Cowan, Evans, Hamilton, Harrison, Hutton, Jeannotte, Johnson, Klym, Lissaman, Lyon, McDonald, McGregor, McKellar, Martin, Mills, Moeller, Roblin, Seaborn, Shewman, Stanes, Steinkopf, Watt, Weir, and Mrs. Morrison. MU. CLERK: Yeas, 12; Nays, 29. MADAM SPEAKER: I declare the motion lost. The adjourned debate on the proposed motion of the Honourable the Member for Elmwood.

MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion lost. M:R. PAULLEY: Yeas and Nays, please, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: Call in the members. The question before the House is the adjourned debate on the proposed motion of the Honourable the Member for Elmwood. A standing vote was taken, the result being as follows: YEAS: Messrs. Cherniack, Guttormson, Harris, Johnston, Molgat, Paulley, Shoemaker, and Wrig;ht. NAYS: Messrs.

Alexander, Baizley, Barkman, Beard, Bilton, Bjornson, Campbell, Cowan, Desjardins, Evans, Froese, Hamilton, Harrison, Hutton, Jeannotte, Johnson, Klym, Lissaman, Lyon, McDonald, McGregor, McKellar, Martin, Mills, Moeller, Roblin, Seaborn, Shewman, Stanes, Steinkopf, Watt, Weir and Mrs. Morrison. MR. CLERK: Yeas, 8; Nays, 33. MADAM SPEAKER: I declare the motion lost. The adjourned debate on the proposed resolution of the Honourable the Member for Seven Oaks and the proposed amendment thereto by the Honourable the Minister of Health. The Honourable the Leader of the New Democratic Party. MR.

PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, I read with interest what the Honourable the Minister of Health had to say some time ago when dealing with the resolution which was proposed by my friend ailld colleague the Member for Seven Oaks, and the amendment that he proposes is really incomprehensible when one considers what is apparently going to be suggested insofar as a Medicare scheme for Canadians. The Medicare scheme as suggested by the federal authority is one which emanates from the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Health Services.

That Royal Commission recognized the impracticability of a voluntary system of Medicare for Canada. The recommendations contained in the proposal of the federal authority is that a prov ince should, in the first year of the adoption of the scheme, have approximately 90 percent of the inhabitants of the said province enrolled for a Medicare scheme, and then, following that year, the amount should increase to 95 percent.

2304 April 26; 1966 (MR. PAULLEY eont'd) ....... . The Honourable the Minister of Health -.and I am sorry he is not with us today while dealing with this important matter - but the Honourable Minister indicated in his remarks dealing with this question that he was going to endeavour to have the federal authority reduce the requirements percentagewise of the enrollment in a health scheme, and he was going to approach Ottawa accordingly.

I think, Madam Speaker, if this were to be the attitude of all provincial governments, then Canadians would not have what they have long strived for, namely a universal comprehensive Medicare scheme. So much for the Minister of Health,. who stated that in his opinion volunteer associations would be sufficient, and as I say, he was going to endeavour to have the requirement lessened at the Federal level. Then, the other day on April 15, Madam Speaker, we heard what the position of the Liberal Party in Manitoba is in respect of Medicare, because the Leader of the Liberal Party took

part in the debate, and I have before me the Hansard of April 15, Page 1848, and I would like to .make a few quotes from the speech of the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition, which indicates to me that he is somewhat of the same opinion as the Minister of Health, that we should continue to muddle along with a voluntary scheme in respect of Medicare.

I quote from. the speech of the Leader of the Official Opposition: ''But I would want to make every effort first to see if we can have a voluntary plan work, and this is why I hope that the Minister having e.nunciated that policy would be in a position to give us more details than what be has given so far. " My honourable friend a little later on goes on to say that "obviously those that need the coverage most are usually the ones that are not covered now.

" What actually, Madam ··Speaker, my honourable friend is saying, that be wants to make a voluntary plan work, and then a little later on says that it's .obvious that those who need the. coverage most are usually the ones that are not covered now. · Well" Madam Speaker, we have had a voluntary scheme here in the Province of Manitoba , for. some considerable years, and it hasn't worked. , The .Leader of the Opposition admits that .it h!J.sn't worked. And yet, after having said that, he still joins with the Honourable the Minis . te:t;,of Health' in suggesting that a voluntary pl1J.n should be followed.

In fairness I will say, Madflm Speaker, to the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition, that eventually he did say, .. •'i)u't,that if a voluntary scheme does not work then maybe we'd better have a compulsory one. " My .friend the Leader of the Opposition on this same page, 1848, states in regard to the rel�� onship between the doctor and the patient: "I think that there will be some difficulties if our doctors were to become civil servants." I wonder, Madam Speaker, whether or not my friend is aware of the considerable number of doctors who, in effect, are civil servants today.

What about the doctors that are in charge of our mental institutions? Are they not in effect civil servants? What about our doctors that are associated with health units? What about our doctors that are associated with the Sanatorium, and other departments; the Department of Health? We have a considerable list of doctors that are in the civil service, Madam Speaker, And I suggest, I suggest that the mere fact that they are members of the civil service in effect does not detract from their abilities and the method, the way they perform their duties. My honourable friend the Member for Ste.

Rose goes on in his oration to say, "I think there would be difficulties in holding many of them. I'm told that the experience in some areas has been that the quality of health care has fallen when thi!' has happened. " Madam Speaker, I suggest this is nonsense. I suggest that if a doctor is qualified, whether he is working under a prepaid Medicare scheme of a universal nature such as in Great Britain, in the Province of Saskatchewan, in Scandinavia or anywhere else, he does not lessen his efforts on behalf of humanity simply because he is working under schemes like that.

And I suggest that to say so, I suggest that to say so is a reflection on the integrity of the medical professio1,1.

Then my honourable friend goes on, on the same page, to say, "We have found for ex ample in the case of the hospital plan, that while there is .universal coverage in the Province of Manitoba, the facts are that not all the people can get hospital coverage, because they can't get into hospitals on many occasions." Well I would suggest, Madam Speaker, if this is the psychology of the Liberal Party inthe Province of Manitoba, then I ask why was it that just prior to the election in 1958 they joined the national hospital scheme and we had, .as a. result of their activities at that time, the hospital plan in the Province of Manitoba.

Indeed, of course, it's universal right across Canada at the present time. It is not my purpose this afternoon, Madam Speaker, to delay the House longer on this important issue. Many speeches have been made; many documents have been written insofar as Medicare services are concerned. I have raised ·on a number of occasions in this House I .... I I I j l

April 26, 1966 2305 (MR. PAULLEY cont'd) .•..• that under our voluntary scheme there are thousands, indeed tens of thousands of people who are not receiving Medicare in the Province of Manitoba. I h ave raised the question of where many people, whose sole income is $75. 00 a month, are not covered under Medicare. Many of our Old Age Pensioners who are in receipt of old age pen sions, which are universal at 70 now, at 69 now, still are not covered by a Medicare scheme. So I say, Madam Speaker, it is time for us to adopt the suggestion of the Honourable the Member for Seven Oaks.

The day of the voluntary scheme as visualized by the Minister of Health, the day of the application of Medicare as practised by the present government of Mani toba, should be finished with, and it should be a right of every man, woman and child, without a means test, in the Province of Manitoba, to be entitled to the fruits and benefits of the ad vances which have been made in medical science.

It is true, Madam Speaker, it is true that if a comprehensive, universal Medicare scheme was brought into effect in Manitoba or in Canada tomorrow, we would be faced with a period of trial so far as the health professions are concerned, because there are so many people in Canada, in Manitoba, who are in need of medical services, who are being deprived of those medical services today, that it would create a burden insofar as the work load is concerned on our professions. I think, Madam Speaker, this is an indication sufficiently enough to indicate the need.

And when I speak of need in this, I'm not speaking of a need in respect of financial ability, I'm speaking of need in reference to the requirement of being able to obtain, as a right, medical services. 1\>IR. DOUGLAS L. CAMPBELL (Lakeside): Madam Speaker, I'll dispense with the time-honoured phrase this time, but I really wasn't going to speak on this until I heard my honourable friend the Leader of the NDP Party saying why was it that the government of the day entered into the hospital insurance scheme in 1958. Well I can tell him very quickly.

It was because the Federal Government went into the program at that time, and this is one of the things about the combination that we have in Canada, that if the Federal Government institutes a program of this kind and insists on using taxpayers' money that originates in the province of Manitoba that would be applicable to other parts of the country in some one of their programs, if Manitoba doesn't go in then they're still being taxed for their share of the program and they don't participate in the program.

This, I think, contains a lesson for us in Manitoba in more ways than one; that is, if the Federal Government is going to continue to dominate the situation by proposing programs that the province can hardly afford to take

part in and can hardly afford to not take

part in, it poses quite a problem to Manitoba. This is one of the difficulties of the shared programs that we have today, and it's one that has been growing rather than diminish ing, and I have never hesitated to say that I think there was a good bit of political jockeying between the premier of one of the provinces of Canada at that time and the Minister of Health of the Federal Government at that time, which resulted in each one of them pushing the situa tion along, point by point and step by step, to where Canada had a hospital insurance program, perhaps before it was ready for it.

However, that made the decision for Manitoba as far as I was concerned, and while I can asE>ure you that we went into it with misgivings as to the cost, misgivings that have been abundantly justified in light of experience, yet it seems to me that federal programs of this kind make it very very difficult for the province to escape implication in them. Now. if that has any indication of what I think of some present programs that are in the making, I'm expressing a personal opinion alone, but I have not greatly changed my opinion since that time. HON.

GEORG E JOHNSON (Minister of Education) (Gimli): I did not intend to get into this debate, but one statement made by the Leader of the NDP was a little sweeping in nature.

First of all, I can certainly agree with the Member from Lakeside, these all-inclusive, com prehens.ive schemes initiated by the Federal authorities, as they have been in the past, cer tailily I think with the rapid increase in costs that accompany them, unless the continuing resourees are coming from the Federal authorities to shore up those programs, they become extremely costly to the provinces and I can't help thinking, in the course of time are bound to a degree to become partial programs in the course of time. It's eight years now since the hospital scheme was brought in.

Mental Health, TB still has not been tackled. In addition to that, capital grants towards hospital costs have not gone up. I suspect that any increase in capital support from the Federal authorities would create more beds, and every time you build a bed it's $7, 000 a year in your premiums, so the escalators are there. I think in humanitarian terms that universal hospitalization has been a wonderful thing for our people, but I do think that in future programs of this kind, in health and health fields, we should certailily be looking

2306 April 26, 1966 (MR. JOHNSON cont'd) .• ... at the problems that they will entail, and I think the kind of arrange ment suggested by the Minister in initiating a universal program in our province is very worthy. But when the Leader of the NDP makes the statement that there is such a - I forget the words he used ·- such a tremendous hiatus in unmet medical needs that people are not getting essential health services - is that-- I gather he meant, well, I don't know if that will stand the test of real close examination.

I think that across this province, in my experience, essen tial health services are available to the people. The medical profession has traditionally met need both in the field and in the communities and through the teaching wings of our hospitals where the very best in health services is offered.

And these are being enhanced and of course will be enhanced the more universally available our medical services become, But I simply don't believe that there's that amount of unmet needs as stated by the Honourable Member for Radisson, While I don't go so far as my predecessor member from Gimli, who said, "Let us not deliver the last bastion of humanitarian endeavour, the medical profession, into the jaws of the voracious socialistic monster" - a Churchillian phrase - nonetheless I think that the re solution that is before us is timely at this time.

I think we' all believe in seeing the health and hospital needs of our people met. The responsibility of introducing these schemes is weighing heavier on the provinces. We've had the experience of hospitalization and I think the gradual introduction which I believe the Minister of Health has outlined in his resolution here, is in the public interest at this time. MR. J. M. FROESE (Rhineland): Madam Speaker, I'd better not start off the way the other members did that did not intend to speak on it. I had intended to say a few words because.

I hadn't spoken on the resolution so far this year, and this is a resolution that has been brought in by the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks I think on a number of occasions, and while we differ on various matters, and I suppose we differ in principle on this item, I respect him for what he does because these are his beliefs and this is the way he thinks it should be in order to help the people of this province.

Now in my opinion this is something that I have not supported and I don't intend to sup port, that is to have a compulsory medical scheme operated by the government which would be another monopoly for this province. I think we have suff icient monopolies already in exis tence that were set up through legislation here in Manitoba.

We have the various Crown agencies that provide services; we have other commissions such as the Hospital Commission and the Hog Commission, the newly-formed Vegetaple Commission; we have all sorts of organizations of this type which become monopolistic and monopolies, because of their nature and because of the legislation which is passed in setting these commissions up. I prefer to have a voluntary scheme in effect such as they have in Alberta. This scheme has worked very well. In fact, more than 85 percent of the people there subscribe to the plan.

Under their plan they have been able to provide services at low cost, and .they at the same time had com petition. They had a large number of insurance companies which were involved and to which people could subscribe, and in this way the plan remained competitive. Now with the Federal Government coming in with the national scheme, we find ourselves in a position where the provinces will be forced more or less to join if they want to take ad vantage of the financial contributions that are being made available by the Federal Government, and you might find that some of the provinces held out for some time.

I understood Manitoba held out too for a voluntary plan, but when it came to a certain amount of financing, when it came to fourteen bucks, the Minister and the government capitulated and compromised on their principles. I think this is cheap, in my opinion, and I certainly cannot subscribe to the plan which is a comprehensive, universal plan to which everyone will have to subscribe. I think we are going too far in this way, and I would like to. see that if the government wanted to set up a plan, let them do so, but let it be voluntary. I think we have had the MMS operating in Manitoba for a good number of years.

The plan has worked satisfactorily and those that wished to subscribe to it could do so. Those that felt .that they did not like to, or would not, they had the right to refuse, and I- think this is a better situation and this is one that we should follow here in this province. I definitely am opposed to a compulsory plan of this type and also one which sets up a monopoly right across the country. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice declared the motion carried. MR .• PAULLEY: Yeas and Nays, please, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: Call in the members.

The question before the House, the proposed motion in amendment thereto by the Honourable the Minister of Health.

�- ·-- --C"-·-- ----- --- - - - --·---·-�---- ------------ · -··- April 2ti, 1966 2307 (MADAM SPEAKER cont'd) ..... . A standing vote was taken, the result being as follows: YEAS: Messrs. Alexander, Barkman, Beard, Bilton, Bjornson, Campbell, Carroll, Cowan, Desjardins, Evans, Grove s, Guttormso n, Hamilton, Harrison, Jeannotte, Johnson, Johnston, Klym, Lissaman, Mc Donald, Mc Gregor, McKellar, Martin, Mills, Moeller, Molgat, Patrick, Roblin, Seaborn, Sh ewman, Shoemaker, Stanes, Steinkopf, Watt, Weir and Mrs. Morris on. NAYS: Messrs . Cherniack, Froese, Harris, Paulley and Wright . MR. CLERK: Yeas, 36; Nays, 5.

MADAM SPEAKER; I declare the motion carried. The adjourned debate on the proposed resol ution of the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks, as amended . Are you ready for the question? MR . ARTHUR E. WRIGHT (Seven Oaks): Madam Speaker, I1d like to say a few words to close the debate. Before I start, Madam Speaker, I would like to thank you for allowing my resol utiion to be discussed . You had us worried about it for awhile . I believe, Madam Speaker, it is the custom to thank the various honourable members who spoke to this res olution.

I didn •t have thiis difficulty with my res olution in regard to ambulance care, because I want to remi nd this House that not one member spoke to that res olution. This was very disc ouraging because the government had at that time, or were anticipating a report on the survey of the ambulance situation in Manitoba. It seemed as though there was very little interest in matter of health by this government. I think the government have been doing some very fancy skating around the whole issue of health. This was obvious when we saw how the repor t of the Comm ittee on Dental Services was handled .

I've already mentioned the ambulance reso lution. This is somewhat different, Madam Speaker, from the enth usiasm that was dis played by this governm ent when they spoke to the Hoyal Com miss ion on Health Services, because at that time I thought they did a pretty good job in setting out the case for Manitoba.

The Premier, in speaking to that, set out the fact that some 350, 000 Manitobans were not covered by any plan, and while much had been made of the Social Allowances Act, it was pointed out then that only the indigent are taken care, and this is a point we have been trying to make from time to time, that if you are indigent in Manitoba you are looked after, but there are many many people who are yet indigent and who find the cost of me dical insurance too exorbitant.

The Premier rec ognized that when he said the balance of the citizens, approximately 350, 000, have as yet no coverage, and these in dividuals have the same needs and requirements as those covered in the above plan. I think the big issue, the big difference between us, Madam Speaker, is this argument about the voluntary plan and the compulsory plan. We fail to see how they can achieve the requiremen ts of the Federal Government to meet this 90 percent within a year by the voluntary plan. Now I submit that we have good care in Manitoba right now if you can afford to pay for it .

I think we would be letting our doctors and hospitals down if we didn't say a good word about the hig:h standards of care in Manitoba. But the trouble is that far too few people are able to get this kind of care. I think now that the Federal Government has made itself known - and this has taken them since 1919 by the way - they have now stated that they're prep ared to support any provincial government who can meet the full requirements.

This has now called upon our Manitoba: Govern me nt to stand up and be counted, and I can understand they •re quite uneasy about this because what they should do is to come out and meet these .requirements, and I don't think they're going to be able to do it by the half-baked attitude that they are adopting towards this offer by the Fe deral Government. The Honourable Member for Lakeside pointed out the difficulties of provincial governments . When they have attractive offers made to them by the Federal Govern me nt, he said they are having difficulty in making up their mi nd.

Well, what happened in Saskatchewan when they didn't have this sort of offer? They didn't hesitate to invoke a plan that helped their residen ts. I think we have been stressi ng far too much the importance of the payment of fees; who is going to pay the medical fees . My honourable colleague from St. John •s brought this out when he spoke to the amendment . I don •t think it makes much difference to the doctors who pays the fees.

I think what we •re intere sted in is the enlargement of the whole concept of medical care, and I think while this government has been procrastinating, that through the evolution of things we are already passing the concep t of comprehensive medical care, and I think the next step will be preventive me dical services to our people. This is already on the horizon .

2308 . April 26, .1966 (MR. WRIGHT cont1d) ... ... . . The government as yet has not announced who the agent will be. I understand that the Manitoba Medical Service, a non-profit organization, are anxious to become the agent for the government, but I haven •t seen any announcement .about whether or not the government intends to ask them to take it over, because they do have considerable experience. I think that while we have been waiting - and we could certainly see the wri t.ing on the wall - that. we should have been training more personnel, because this naturally is going to involve more people. .

What about costs, Madam Speaker? I would like to read something to the House about the cost of the plan. Far too many people are inclined to forget that the medical services that we ep.joy today is costing money, and I read from The Packing House Workers Magazine from July 1964: "The annual cost of the. proposed Medicare Plan would be 4 billion, 481 mi llion dollars by the year 1971.

This represen ts $19 8. 00 per person, and if we do not get this plan, then we will still have to pay $178 . 00 a person just to continu e the pres ent inadequate system of health services without any im provements to what it is today. " So the increased cost to provide the complete Medicare Plan would be $20. 00 per person. Too many people are inclined to throw up the.ir hands in horror about the cost of the plan when they fail to recognize the amount that is being paid today.

It goes on t0, say: 11The cost of health services sounds like a lot of money, but in 1963 Canadians spent $746 mi llion for cigaret tesand tobacco, and $973 million for alcoholic beverages.'' Stewart Chase, the economist, said that jf we can produce a thing we can afford it, and I submit, as l1ve said before, that we can produce a better system of medic al care for our people. As I said, as time wen t on the picture is changing. You take the. cost of drugs today. The Hall Commission recommended, mentioned drugs - include prescribed drugs but the patient would pay the first $1. 00 on each presc ription.

I can remember the cry that went up under the British Health Scheme, Madam Speaker, when they told us that there were 143 mi llion presc riptions issued in one year and this sounded ter- . . rible, but when one .deducted the population of the British Isles into that, it came to about 3 prescri ptions per year .

So we must not be fooled by these large ;figures, .The Hall Commission recommended .a compulsory plan over that of a voluntary plan because it said it would be less costly to administer and would certainly become universal: You'd have everybody in the scheme. . 1 remember in the. �unicipal field, Madam Speaker, when we were trying to sell the idea qfthe Manitoba Hospital Services plan, and how people were so upset about the idea of it be coming compulsory. Well, it's. compulsory now. I think we can look back and think that this . was worthwhile .

We don't frown upon compulsory educati on or compulsory vaccination when ·it's for theeommon good. ·I think this government at the im pending election will have to answer some of these question, and I was dis couraged to find that the Honourable Minister of Health used up 12 lines in Hansard in replying at the in troduction of my res olution. I thought he would have displayed more enthusiasm for the plan that they were about to unveil - which by the way, Madam Speaker, they still have not unveiled. There are a lot of things we would like to know.

The Honourable Minister says that they have agreed to and will be able to meet the re quiremen ts of the national plan. If this is the case, why doesn •t he tell us more about it? We don •t believe that you can acquire the kind or the amount of protection or the number of people necessary to ensure the success of the plan, and still have it on a basis like this. I would have hoped that the Honourable Minister would have told us whether or not they were going to ask the MMS to administer the plan, because July 1st isn't very far away, espec ially when there is talk of an election.

There wouldn't be much time for the government to get down to busin ess and see that this plan san be put into effect. The Honourable Member for Rhineland spoke about monopolies, Madam Speaker, and I've already mentioned the beneficial types of public ownership that we enjoy here - our Manitoba Telephone System , our Manitoba Hydro, which are monopolies; our .Manitoba Hospital Services Plan is compulsory, and yet I think these. things do much to contribute to whatever reas onable standard of living we enjoy in Manito ba. The honourable member likes to raise the question of the Alberta plan.

It just happens that I have a comparison between the Alberta plan and the Saskatchewan plan. I would like to· read it to the House but I don't intend to do it at this late date; but I can give you some of the figures here. The cost in Alberta; It says, assumi ng full coverage at maximum allowable rate the total cost to the people of Alberta would be $55 mi llion or $41 per capita; and in Saskatchewan its $21 mi llion or about $23 per capita. I'd like him to explain that. The benefit s in Albe.rta - they are sim ilar to Saskatchewan except

(1) You have to have a 12-m onth waiting l I

April 2€>, 1966 23 09 (MR. WB.IGHT cont'd) ....... period for psychotherap hy . (2) ·T here is a 24-m onth waiting period for annual health examination.

(3) Pysiotherapy is not covered.

(4) Current MSI con tracts limit X-Ray and Lab to $50 per person per year. But in Saskatchewan there is virtually all physicians services which are not provided under other public programs and physiotherapy is included . So I say there is really very little to be compared between the two. In Alberta the residence requirements are that you have to have 12 of the previous 24 months

whereas in Saskatchewan you are covered after three months . I could go on, Madam Speaker, and talk about the alternatives for doctors and that, but I don •t think I wish to do that at this stage. But I want to point out that the plan in Alberta is not to be compared with a compulsory plan of Saskatchewan. I have another comparison here - Alberta's Medical Care Plan, comments by the Hon. A. E. Le:lgh toh, who was a former Minister of Health in Saskatchewan. He said "it is not easy- I'm quoting Mr.

Leighton now - '' It is not easy to estimate how many people will be helped by the Alberta plan, but it will be a minority of the population. Approximately 400, 000 people or 30 percent of the resi dents have taxable incomes of $500 or less and may therefore be eligible for subsidies if they have resi ded in the province for at least 12 months in the past two years . The subsidies which may be available for these people are very limi ted indeed. A married couple with a total income of only $180 per month would still have to pay up to $95 a year; even with the subsidy.

A couple with children would pay up to $87 a year. This cove rage excludes drugs, dentistry, eye care and many othe r item s. A large number of the people who qualify for the subsidy may well find that they cannot afford to take advantage of it. This is what we have been saying all along, Madam Speaker, and the Hall Commiss ion emphasizes that fact, that these voluntary plans are not to be compared with the type of plan that we recommend.

Many organizations, one can pick up the paper any day of the week now and find out where a certain woman •s group or a federation of labour or agricultural associations have gone on re cord as favoring a comprehensive universal plan of health care, and yet one wonders why the government is so relu ctant to go along with this . It's like trying to hold back the tide . I would suggest, Madam Speaker, that they had better make up their mind pretty soon, about what they are going to do about this scheme for Manitoba and get this unveiling so it will take place before the election.

MADAM SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? Those in favor please say Aye; those opposed please say Nay-- I' ll have to ask for that vote over again please. It's the adjourned debate on the proposed res olution of the Honourable the Member for Seven Oaks, as amended . MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried . MADAM SPEAKER: The adjourned debate on the proposed reso lution of the Honourable the Member for Logan and the proposed amendment thereto by the Honourable the Member for Springfield. The Honourable the Leader of the New Democratic Party. MR.

PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, I won •t be long in dealing with this matter which I consider to be one of the more imp ortant matters to come before the House. That is the ques tion of the effects of automation and cybernation on the well-being of Manitobans, indeed, on the well -being of all who are engaged in industry. I think the Honourable Member for Brandon .. , ...... said the Bogeym an. I want to assure my honourable friend there •s no Bogeyman insofar as the poss ible effects of automation are coneerned.

As a matter of fact I refer my honourable friend to a debate that took place here the othe r day where one. of his colleagues the Honourable Member for Souris-L ansdowne and the Leader of the Opposition were engaged in an exchange because of the effects of automa tion on the pipeline in the Province of Manitoba,

whereas as a result of automation and the use of electrical ener gy rather than diesel energy there was a displacement of some, I believe, 125 workers with a detrimen tal effect on the town of Glenboro. So I use that, Madam Speaker , as an illustration of what can happen to our small towns and villages in Manitoba.

It happened, Madam Speaker, to many of our small towns because of th'e automation in our railroads, Neepawa, Rivers, Gladstone, one could go on listing many places which used to be a railway divisi onal point, now due to diese lization and other mech anical advances in the railroad industry, employm ent is not as wides pread as it used to be. But my main purpose, Madam Speaker, in taking the adjournment of this debate was to deal very briefly with the amendment as proposed by the Honourable Member for Springfield .

This hOIIlOUrable gentleman, Madam Speaker, I presume, was acting for the government and he states in his amendment: "whereas the Speech from the Throne indicated that a new Youth and

2310 April 26, 1966 (MR. PAULLEY cont 'd) .. .... .

Manpower Agency will be established, the duties of which will include co-ordination and development of governmental studies and programs relating to tech.,-. no logical change. 11 And then adding on: 11 This government should continue to study and 'co ordinate along with labour and management repres entatives measures that will. ease the social and economic effects of technological change. '' Now I don •t know whether my honourable friend .the Member forSpringfi eldwas around when the Honourable the Provincial Treasurer compiled his budget speech, because if he was I'm sure that the Member for Springfield could not - and I repeat, could not have come to the conclusion that the establish ment of a Youth and Manpower Agency would have any relationship at all to dealing with the questio n of automation , cybernation or te chnological change at all.

I want to read, Madam Speaker, from the budget speech of the Provi ncial Treasurer on Page 26 wherein reference is made to a Youth and Manpower Agency and what it is to do, and I quote: "A se cond innovation for development is a Youth and Manpower Agency, Here em phasis is. on the opportunity for training our people to meet the nE;eds of expanding potential of our economy. The fun'ctions of the agency are '' staff'' rather than '' line 11 operations. It will endeavour to maximize the use of all our training fac\lities by co-,ordinating the services now avail able.

It will blueprint our youth and manpower problems and needs and aims of proposing new policies to be implem ented by the operating department and agencie s. It will assess pro gram results.

It will also associ ate youth in particular as well as labour, management, agri culture and the community in general with the evolution of policies and programs for the deve lopment of our human resource potential. 11 I respec tfully suggest, Madam Speaker, that there is no relationship at all in the announce ment of the .government i� its Youth and Manpower Agency inso far as the problem that was posed orig inally in the resolution that was introduced by my colleague from Logan.

And while, Madam Speaker, I presume that the amendment to the resolution will be carried by the over whelming majority of the government, I am not satisfied that the Government of Manitoba is yet aware ofthe problems of automation and cybernation and they have not taken any more than feeble steps in meeting the problems which mi ght be faced.

We are convinced that through automation and cybernation there can be and there will be a gr eat future for men and women of this country of ours but only, only if the benefits of automation and cybernation are directed for the benefit s of the people instead of benefits for individu als. MADAM SPEAKER put the -question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried . MADAM SPEAKER: The adjourned debate on the proposed resolution of the Honourable the Member for Logan as amended. The Honourable Member for Logan. MR. LEMUEL HARRIS (Logan): Madam Speaker, I am going to be very short.

When I' m speaking to this motion of automation, and I look back int o time and I see the various governments in the world that were confronted with things that they knew nothing at all about, so they had to go out and plan. I heard the Member from Springfield talking about the wheel _j there the other day. Yes, the wheel came into Europe and is supposed to have pushed our. civili zation ahead, but to give him some thought, there was no wheel here in the Americas - why we had one of the finest civiliza tions down in South America you ever seen in your life.

They had longer roads than the Romans and all the various buildings that went. So when you talk about these things you can see wha:t planning will do. Now here in Canada we talk about automation, we see the effects of automation coming in - but no we want to close our eyes and go to sleep and let these indecisions drown us . Now I say; Madam Speaker, in \'arious parts of Canada they are starting to wake up. I have talked to you people before on this, but I will repeat it again, "Recommendations of the Honourable L. R. Peters on, Q. C.

Minister of Labour, Province of British Columbia in the matter of the di sputes between the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union. 1' It goes on to say how many companies were involved in this - there were about seven - but to go down - Job Secu rity .

In view of the interest and concern by the parties on the im pact of manpower and conditions of employment resu lting from te chnological changes and automation it is recommended that the parties utilize the best advantage. of the company and the employees , all the sci entific improv ements and establish a committee to be known as the _Committee on Automation con si sting of equal repres entation by employer and union. Pending the im plementation of re commendations made by the above committee on automation or the expiration of this agreement, whichever shall first occur, the following provision shall apply: (

a) the company shall notify the union si x months in advance of intent to institute change in working methods or facilities which will involve the disc harge or layoff of any person who was employed by the company on the

April 26, 1966 231 1 (MR. H.AJRRIS cont'd) ..... .. 31s t of August 1965; (

b) the company in co- operation with the government agrees to participate in every possible training and retraining c;>f an}; employ ee ; (

c) any employee who is discharged or laid 'off because of t�chnc;>logical ch�nge or automation shall be entitled to severance pay equival ent to one week's pay for each year of serv:ice in the employ of the company to a maximum of 26 weeks. Now it shows thatt here•s things being done in Canada, but as I, see in this Chamber and as I see hOw things go on, we here in Manitoba. don't wa][it to have no change; we still want to stay in the same old way. :MY f�ther was here 60 years ago and his father. was here before him · and they ploughed with a wociden plough, and· I can go on l.n the same old way.

Well surely if we are to go on ;· we hav� to change with th� . world. How many times did we hear in the last war, "Too little 'and too late. " Is the same thing going to happen to us in Manitoba? It's up to us to wake up . Ikn�w that this thing has gone down the road but surely '- surely we can go ahead and we can work things out in our own, minds, not say push it down the road; let somebody else think it mit for ou�selv es. ' MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion, carried. MADAM SPEAKER: The adjourned debate on the proposed res'olution of the Honourabhi the Member for Elmwood.

The Honourable the Member for Elmwood. · · · · MH:. PA ULLEY: Madam Speaker, unfortunately niy colleague from Elmwood is unabl� to be present. We 're prepared to allow this matter to go to a vote·. ' · MB:. HARRiS: In the absence of the Honourable Member for Elmwood, t :wo,uld lik�J, to speak in his place. · Madam Speaker, I would like to say a few words on this amendment. I would like to thank the Minister of Welfare for his kind words about ..... MADAM SPEAKER: .. ...... the wrong resolution . 'M H. HARRIS: I beg your pardon. · MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice' vote declared the motion lost.

MJR. PAULLEY: Yeas and Nays, please, Madam Speaker. , · . · ' , . MADAM SPEA KE R: Call in the members. The question before the Ho�se, the a\fjourned debate 011 the proposed resolution of the Honourable the Member for Elm,wood: .. Those in. favour of the motion please 'rise. ' ' ' MH.

PAU LLEY: Madam Speaker, would you kindly read the motion? .· MADAM SPEAKER: B E IT RESOLVED that the minimum wage in ManHqba,be established at the figure of $1. 50 per hour and that such minimum wa:ge apply equa1ly regar,dless of geo- graphi cal location·or sex. ' ' ' · ' ,' ' ' ' ' , , ' ' , , A standing vote was taken, the results being as follows: . . . , , YEAS: Messrs. Cherniack, Hatri s, Paulley and Wright: . .· . . NAYS: Messrs.

Alexande r, Baizley, Barl9nan, Bear� , Bilion; Bjornson; Cam pbell, Carroll, Co wan, Desjardins, Evans, Grove s, Guttorm soil, Hamilt,on, � �rris(Jn, Button ,, Jeannotte, Joh nson, Johiiston, Klym ; Lissaman, McDonald; Mcl}regor , Martin, Mllls, :Mqeller, Molgat, Patrick, Roblin, Seaborn, Shoemaker, Stanes, st�in'kopf, T�nchak, Watt,, Weir and · Mrs. Mordson. MR. CL ERK: Yeas, 4; Nays, 37. MADAM SPEAKER: I declare the motion lost: The ;d journed 'cfebate on the p:r;oposed resolution of the Honourable the Member for Logan and the proposed arriend�eht thereto by the Honourable the Minister of Welfare.

The Honourable th�, Member f()r � l�:woo(I.<' : .• ·. , MR. HARRIS: Madam Speaker, in the absence of the Honourable 'Member foi: Elmwood, I would like to speak in his place. I apologize for jumi?ing 'u:p too ·�oon the last time. , I ·gu,ess I want to get out of here like the rest of them, I supp ose. . . . . , , . .• . , Madam Speaker� I would like to say a few words oh thi� amendme�t. Iwou ldlik� to . thank the Minister of Welfare for his kind words about my 'speech ,moving" the re�olu tiim. I . only wish he had listened to it a little more closely. I told him in'tnat sp�ech that the. United.

Way institutions that.he had been talking about will oniy hold 'about 220 chlJdren, the cost or' ' which is partially paid by the government. The Minister wants us to be'c onteht with that. I . want to thank the United Way agencies tha:t operate four day nurseries in OUr COI1UDunity. i aii!;. glad to see tHat there are some people in' our community whd are conscious Of the need for · proper eare for children. The Minister shouldn 1t thirik tha( if there was a n�ed for day nur series that a lot of working mothers would get out and ask that they be established.

All the articles that I have read on this subject show that working mothers are afraid or' comphlining about care available to their children, because if they complain it would mean 'to others that they are: willing to let their children have improper care; · · · '

23 12 }\pril 26, 1966 (MR. HARRIS cont'd. ) The Minister sug�ests in his speech that if neighbours or relatives could be found to. care for child ren, then that was all right. Well, I say that we need to have available cei.tres which are properly supervised, which guarantee proper care. Just listen to this quotation taken from a recent magazine articl e : •i in Winnipeg, the Community Welfare Planning Council •s study on day care services for children of working mothers found Bobby M. staying with his grandparents while his divorced mother took a business course so that she could earn their living .

Bobby's grandmother was emotionally disturbed and Bobby developed an eating problem. Both his eating habits and his health, deteriora ted . A social worker decided Bopby should be in a day nursery. Both his eating habits and his health then improved. Bobby and his mother moved out of his grandmother ' s home. Bobby's eating problem was completely eradicated. It was only through the counselling efforts of the day nursery case worker that Mrs . M. and her son were' able to resolve their conflict. 1 1 In another place the same

article quotes a Toronto social worker as saying: "I would really like to know how many factory accidents are caused beca1,1se women workers are wor ried about their childre n. I .know of at least five women.who ha:Ve had nervous breakdowns . You see , all women who leave their children in private homes go to work so worri ed that the children are not getting the food and the special care that they are paying for, and of all the _ women in factories I have talked to, I have never found more than four at any one time who have been able to put their children in day nurseries .

The care provided by friends and rela tiv es. is not always adequate . " I could go on and quote from reports by the Internati onal Labour Organization, national welfare study groups, magazine articles, comments by welfare workers and many other re sources . All of them indicate a crying need for such a service such as could be provided by day nurseries at this ti me. In this Sess ion, however, I don •t think that would be appreciated . All the inf ormation. that I have found, the Minister could also find. His speeches here suggest that he hasn' t looked into this problem at all.

His amendment suggests that he doesn' t even know. the problem exists. My motion doesn ' t ask for much; it asks. for the bare min imum - a mere drop in the bucket . This government won' t even accept that . Well, �· 11 tell you, I really am disgusted. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a. voice vote declared the motion .lost. HON. GURNEY EVANS (Minister of Industry and Commerce) (Fort Rouge): Yeas and Nays please, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: Call in the members . The question before the House, the proposed motion in amendment thereto by the Honourable the Minister of Welfare.

A standing vote was taken, the results being as follows: YEAS: Messrs. Alexander, Beard, Bilton, Carroll, Cowan, Evans, Groves, Hamilton, ·H arrison, Hutton, Jeannotte , Johnson, Klym , Lissaman, McDonald, McGregor, McKellar, Martin, Moeller, Roblin, Seaborn, Shewman, Stanes, Steinkopf, Watt, Weir and Mrs. Morris on. NAYS: Messrs . Barkman, Campbell, Cherniack, Desjardins, Guttormson, Harris, Johnston, Molgat, Patrick, Paulley, Shoemaker, Tanchak and Wright . MR. CLERK: Yeas, 27; Nays, 13. MADAM SPEAKER: I declare the motion carried.

The adjourned debate on the proposed resolution of the Honourable the Member for Logan, as amended. Those in favour of the motion .... . MR. HARRiS: Madam Speaker, to finish this off on the main motion, I have something here that really plugs the hole right up, in a sense of speaki ng.· The problem of Winn ipeg's neglected children. Mothers worry about them . What can they do? Help may be coming. When? Thousands of Winnipeg children are being neglected every day. It Is not that �heir mothers don't care .

They worry about it but they are the sole support of their family, because of death, divorce or desertion, and the only alternative to going out to work, is the humiliating choice of going on welfare. And a lot of these people they 've got too much pride to do that. Four years ago the Community Welfare Planning Council made a study of the situa tion. It found that in Winnipeg alone 6, 000 children needed better care ; about 1, 400 of them were under school age, som'e of them were babie s.

Licensed day nurser�es in the city do not admit infants and are able to take care of less than 200 of these 1, 400 pre-s choolers . Relative s, friends and women in unlicensed private homes take. care of most of the surplus, but the care they provide often is far from ad�quate. One woman, for example, looks after no less than ten.

April 26 , 1966 2313 (MR. HARRIS cont 1d, ) . . . . . babie� and collec ts a fee for doing so. Some of these negle cted children actually don't know how to play . One three year old had neYer seen a picture book until she was placed in a good day care home. And what of the thousands of children, too young to fend for th emse lves properly, who return home from school to an emp ty house because mother has to go out to work? 11Last fall at the request of the Welfare Council, the Family Bureau began a program to show what could be done .

The idea was to find proper care for fatherless children whose mothers had to go out to work. But in practice the program also helped the children who had a parent at home, who however, was linable to look after them adequately because of phys ical or em otional problems. So far the bureau has found day care for six young children after con siderable exploratory work by Miss Frederica C. J. Van de Werve a social worker handling the new program. The daytime foster homes all meet high standards. The youngsters get constant understanding care by emotionally mature women.

You have to do more than just place children . There is a teaching job to be done both with day care mothers and with young mothers who apply for help, she said. Since counselling takes up so much time, whethe r or not mothers decide to use the day care service, Miss Van de Werve finds that 20 children from 15, or 20 families is about all one social worker can look after . " This lady has been trained in this work and as you can see by this report there is very little being done here . We have a population of approximately 500, 000 people here in Winnipeg.

And the people that are looking after these children and the people that are doing the work, it•s just a mere pin prick, you might say, and we have asked this government to go ahead and see what can be done to these children because they are going to be the citizens of tomorrow . And if we don't look after them today, you are going to have to look after them tomorrow because they won •t have the necessary training. So I say, Madam Speaker, this government should turn around and examine all these things that are brought up by the opposition because we 1re not here spouting off hay all the time.

There are some people over here that can use their noodle a little bit too, and I think that they should be listened to. I think, Madam Speaker, at this time, I don •t want to hold the proceedings up too much, I think I have covered the field pretty well . Thank you very much. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. . . . . . continued on next page

231. 4 MADAM SPEAKER: The adjourned debate on the. proposed resolution of'the'Hdnour:ililer the Leader of. the. Opposition� The Honourable: the Member for St' .. . Geerge,, . . . · , • < · " ' MR, ELMAN GUTTO R MSON (St.

Georg e): Madam Speaker; Pm at a loss;to unde'rstand why the governmenLi� reluc tantto equalize rates on electric powenin :northern> Manitoba; ' · People in northern Manitoba because of the location, are forced to··use more electricity;: the<' evenings are shorter ; the winters are longer and consequently• over-;all these peopfe· have to use a lot more electric .power over the cou.rse of a· year. And why · the 'Minister of Welfare who·,r'e presents a. northern seat.pr the Member for Thompson- or Churchi ll, I should sa y;·· :would.•sup part this ·present discrimination; lc an1t understand; .

It seems that· it!s tiine we;m'ade .. the-r ates equal:.on the.basis,o f;·all Manitobans.·.

It has been argued that people:of .southern Manitoba. are • in i![lolated:areas and we don't discriminate against these people,r •and for·.the· same·.reason, •'I>· think .tP.e:people of northern Manitoba who. are strong. users of power: shouW. be' trel!ted on? an.: equal"basis:;• ". .. '' · .. · . -- · · L:� .t ;.· ., ,,,,, ,.·, • ·: I was rather surpri sedwP, Ein•this matter.was·debatt'ldla.Eit.:to'hear the·rLeader of. the ND:i?, say that· they wouldn't support .it" because this resolution a.year: ago; : they did:'support1 -,..;·th'e :. ;,, NDP did•support .this resolution and why they've had a·change,;of>heart:in the•mean time\".i;don.tt know.

In view of the fact thaHhe.te·is a tax on electricity and:the'fact.they.rieed to.use 1t oftener and ·more of it.,: I t hink it's imperative that we g1 ve the norther'ir people. equalization of: power r.at eSI• and.lwould l).rge the· HoliS�! to.considel;' this 'resolution .favourably. . ·; .: }0 ,, '' .:: .' · ,"MADAM;:SPEAKERpuhthe .queEition; ,.;rzL': '· .. , .:s .. : · ··:q :>h '1; :i ' . M:R . . KEJT:H ALE XANDER (Roi!Jlin): . Madam: Speaker, I find<thabl can!t support tlieires'd .- lution aB• it's worded•· .

I'd like: to: :point out to· the members that :the present cbst' of supj)'lying'; ,, electricity to those .:areas· in the ·.n.or:th.which are supplied by· diesel. untts ;repriesents a: subsidy' to the system of $22 1, 60 0 for this current year, based on cl1rrenr rt:ttes·i :and:'I think !tnnas 'a;l•!.i ready. been pointed ouUh af·the .policy:o f the Hydro and• of tht! :gove:tnm:e'nt:has 10een'to 'try and lower these rates ·oy;er the. year.ii .as much: as· is pra6ticiable,: and 7I Hiil1k tliis•.rs:'me •p6Uuy1 '4ti fr view of these figur;es, ·that shoU:I:d·be·.cotitbmed. • ,, ., .• .. :.:··,q P.? .I'i ' .•.. , ::i .C .. ,,,. ,r . . , · ,• Sd therefore; :•MridamSpeaker:; I inove, seconded by tlie Hol'lourable ::MeinWr"froiiFVil,;den, that the� resolu,tion'be• runen8ed "Qy: stl;'iking out' all the words' aftierirhe firsV"whe iiea.St''{ilhd'tliat .: the:following·•werds:be•sub sti:tuted• therefor: .

"The supply of 'electiriC•.:ser\rie\31fii:·'viHtfa{tyC all towns and villages in northern Manitoba has previously been, or is currently being undertaken by Manitoba Hydro; AND

WHEREAS in those northern communities where Manitoba Hydro is providing electric service by means of diesel electric generators, the cost of such generation is greatly in excess of the cost of generation on the balance of Manitoba Hydro's system; and

whereas notwithstanding that much higher cost of generating electricity by means of diesel electric generators, Manitoba Hydro have progressively reduced the rates applicable for ser vice provided by this means; THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this House commend the policy of Manitoba Hydro in bringing the benefits of electric service to the communities in northern Manitoba that cannot be supplied from its transmission network, and that this House commend the actions ofManitoba·iHydroin progressive ly reducing their rates for service in those 'areas supplied by means of diesel electric generation, and that this House reco=end to Manitoba Hydro tb,at a continuous policy of reducing rates for service in areas served by diesel electric generation toward .the rates for service on our southern rural system.

MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. STEINKOPF: Madam Speaker, this question is not new before the House and I don't think that we will hear the end of it until some time next year, late in - not next year, 1968 - when the transmission line will be built to The Pas and the announced plan of taking the last step to reduce the rates in that area so that they will be the same as they are in the southern rural system. _ The question is resolving itself into a rather simple one.

Whether or not the government should make a direct subsidy to the Manitoba Hydro or whether the Hydro should increase the amount of subsidy that the Hydro is now paying for the power that it is supplying through its generating station - diesel generating station in northern Manitoba. As the Honourable Member for Roblin has just said, the amount of that subsidy in the books of the Hydro or the Power Co=ission, is $221 ,0 00. This is a substantial amount 3lld is being borne by the customers of Hydro that reside in the southern parts of the province.

I think if you were to ask the customers if they were to object to them carrying the load and pay ing this subsidy, I am pretty sure that if it were possible to question them, that they would say that they don't object and th�t they wouldn't mind paying the subsidy. But the subsidy over the J

April 26, 19 66 231 5 (MR. STElNKOPF cont'd) .•. years has increased because of the fact that the rates have been lowered each time it was possible to lower them and very substantia lly since the time that the Power Commission took the system over from the Town of The Pas , and the. people I think, in the northern areas have appreciated the fact that there has been a consistent plan of rate reduc tion. Their final plan is now to equate the rates grad ually.

There has just been another reduc tion that's just recently been put into effect .that brings the rates reasonably close to the south ern rural rate and the announced pla n to take that final step on December 1st, 196 8, certainly has been welcomed by the people in the north. I think they would like to see it a little sooner but in the interests of running a good power operation for all of Manitoba, the Directors, the people who have the responsibility for running the affairs of the Hydro have dec ided that this was as far as they could go at this time.

They have plans afoot to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars more in the north, maylie to the extent of millions, in conjunction with the recently announced policy of the FeQ.eral Gov ernment in connection with their community development on Indian Reservations and a large part of th:is planned development is to bring power to almost every community - every Indian reservation in northern Manitoba.

I think the intensity of the drive to bring this electrification to all of the Indian Reservat ions will rival the drive that was put on by the Manitoba Government of earlier days in the electrification program they had for rural Manitoba which was very success ful and which did so much to bring the rest of rural Manitoba on a par with the amenities that we have here in the City. Therefore, I strongly support the amendment to tb,e resolution that has just been put forward. MADAM SPEAKER: Are you read y for the question? MI!.

GUTTO RMSON: Madam Speaker, I was just looking at the journals - I want to make a correction on something I said a few minutes ago with regard to remarks made by the Leader o:f the NDP. The Member for Brokenhead voted with us last year but the Leader of the NDP and the rest of his group voted against the sub- amendment which was proposed and I want to make that clear, that I didn't misrepresent his stand last year. Mit FROESE: Madam Speaker, I wasn't sure whether I had spoken on the ma in motion before so now that we have an amendment before us, I'm quite in order to get up and make a few rem��rks.

It has been pointed out that the Manitoba Hydro , or the government is subsidizing the Hydro electric power being used in northern Manitoba. Well, Madam Speaker, I don't think there is :anything wrong with this because in so many other cases we subsidize people where you have isolation. I know when it comes to the teachers salaries they get extra pay for being isolated and certainly when we have a utility such as this, I think it should be operating at the same cm;t for all of us so that no one would have to pay more than the next person just because he's living in a dif ferent locality.

I would support the resolution that we should have uniform rates for all people across this province even though 1t meant subsidizing in some instances. MADAM SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? MH. MOLGAT : Madam Speaker, before the question is put, I would like to say a few words on the amendment that has been proposed by the government. This is the same amend ment, Madam Speaker, as was proposed in past years when I've introduced this resolution. I think it1EI now the third time that the government has amended it in this way .

They've chosen different numbers on dif ferent occasions but the result is the same, they amend the resolution simply patting themselves on the back for what they have accomplished supposedly in the reduc tion of ractes, but we still end up with the same situation that the people in northern Manitoba are payio.g more for their electric power than the people in the bala nce of the province.

Madam Speaker, the government says that the reason that nothing can be done about it is that this would involve a subsidy and they say that they are alread y subsidizing the northern system lln any case and that they cannot go any further.

Well, Madam Speaker, the point really is that because of the policy established, there is a subsidy in any case in the southern balance of the system, because one need only look at a map of Manitoba to consider where our generating power is and it is obvious that by establishing one rate for all of the southern block, when you consider that the power is produced only in certain centres, basically the Winnipeg River system, the steam plant at Selkirk, the steam plant at Brandon, and Grand Rapids . What h��e we done in that southern system? We .have said we will pool all of the costs of distribution.

We will not assess the people in the consti tuency o•f Roblin- the member for which constituency we have just heard moving an amendment. We won'l tell the people in Roblin up here, well we're going to charge you for the distri bution

2316 April 26, 19 66 (MR. MOLGAT cont'd) ... system to serve Roblin. We haven't said to them because you happen to be living there and the power is produced here and we have to transport it from there· to there then the cost of the transportation system is going to be charged to you. If we were to follow the principle the government establishes there would be a base cost for power at each plant, then you would charge people across the province that base cost plus ·whatever it cost to transport it to them because the whole of the transportation S:J;Stem is part of the cost. But long ago, Mr.

Chairman, or Madam Speaker, this matter was resolved in Manitoba, it was resolved that all of the people who are on the southern system would have one basic rate depending on the category in which they felL If they were on the farm rate then it was the same farm rate if they lived in Beausejou r, or right nexL to the power plants or close to them or if they lived in Roblin or if they lived in Swan River or Mafeking. This was established as a matter of poli cy. They were not charged for the distribution system. Well then, let's go to the northern area. I agree that the costs are higher in the northern area.

I agree that the power is produced in a different way. But it's the same thing, Mr. Chair man, to say that it costs more to deliver power to Swan Hi ver than it does to deliver it to Beau sejo ur, and the same principle applies - and I think that the time is far past. I've said this in the House several times now - the answer that I get particularly from the Minister from The Pas is why didn't you do it when? That's the regular answer each year. Mr. Speaker, I'm not in terested in the days in which J was not responsible for the policy that was followed. What I'm . concerned about is the situation today.

I've been concerned about the situation for the residents in the north now for ·some years and I've introduced this resolution for some years, because I think that they are being charged a higher rate which they should not be charged, their costs are already higher and this is one service that could be given to them on the same principle of equal ization as we give to the bulk of the provinc e. I don't believe that an argument can be made that this is something that is beyond the capacity of the system to CO\'e r it.

If we were dealing with a very large hock of power in the north, if this meant 10 percent or 20 or 40 percent of the total productive capacity of our system, one could say well , this is going to affect completely the rates in the balance of the province. But that is not the case , Mr. Chairman, because the figures that we have - the latest that we have from Hydro indicate that the total northern pro duction of Manitoba Hydro as distinct from the balance of their system amounts to something like one-half of one percent of the total generated capacity.

We're dealing here with a very very small proportion of the total·- one-half of one percent. And to equalize the rate on that portion it seems to me is certainly not beyond the financial ca�)acity of the system. You're not loading the balance of the system with an impossible cost. It seems to me th<tt in any case by their statement the government have accepted the principl e because they say that they are red�:�ci ng rates. Well , I say to them if you're able to start' reducing .them -- you're doing a subsidy now, why not establish as has been establ ished in the balance - one plan, one system. So, Mr.

Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honou rable the Member for Lak eside, ihat the amendment be further amended by adding the following words at the end thereof: "And be it further resolved that this House request the government of Manitoba to speed up the policy of reducing rates for service in northern areas to equalize them with the rates in the remainder of the province at the earliest possible opportunity and in any case no later than December 31 st, 196 6, " MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. STE INKOPF: Mr. Chairman, I would like to just say a word.

The statements just made by the Honourlilile Leader of the Opposition by thl'lmselves can't be refuted but if taken in the whole, taken as part of the business of trying to operate the Hydro, the Power Commissi on, on a profitable and an economic and at the same time a well-run basis, then one can see some of the flaws in his argument. The statement that we are now subsidizing the power in the north -- I presume he means that - we are indirectly, that the Hydro, the Power Comm ission are doing the subsidy --(Inter jecti on) -- Well , I think that he meant that it was being subsidi zed by the Manitoba Hydro.

It's still the taxpayer -- it's still the customer that's doing it. I guess we're all in the same boat but we try to keep the government and the day to day ope.rations of these utilities at arm's length. The amount of the subsidy is usually consi dered in the ove r-all statement - in the over all profit and loss basis sheet of the Hydro and as the other income of Hydro increases, so can the amount. of subsidy in another part of the system be increased - one balances the other. If that was not done, we would have a very illogical way of doing business because everyone would

April 26, 1966 231 7 (MR.

STEIN KOPF cont'd) . .. then have a cl aim for his own generating plant no matter where he was located without any limit to the number of people who would have to be attached to that genera t1ng plant and you can see what chaos would result - what fantastic costs would be unde r- . taken by the hydro system and of course this would then be an added burden to the greaL majo rity of the customers of Hydro because you would be having plants by the hundreds all over Mani toba in areas that are not now being serviced or as you've heard we've had a lot of requests du ring this Sessi on for gene rating plants or power to be put into isolated camping locations where people have summer homes and the amount of power that they actually use doesn't even begin to justify the intere st on the cost of taking the power into these areas.

So one can't just segre gate the problem of rates. One must take a look on the whole oper ation of the Hydro. The Hydro realize the importance of equa ting the rates in the north. And when we're talking about a very Bmall area in the north; we're not talking about all of the north by any mea ns ; we're only talking about the areas that are now being serviced by diesel generating power.

As they see the income , as they can project the profit and loss statement of the Hydro, so can they project the amount of subs idy that they can afford to take insofar as the north is concerned and they have stated that their projec tions show that within a short peri od they will be able to bring the rates down the last step so that they will be equated with those of the southern rural system. So I think that the gove rnment has , and as this reso lution states, done everything it can do to encourage Hydro within the bounds of good business to bring those rates down just as fast as they can.

And they 've done it in a per iod of the last three or four years , that is at a rate that ev€m Hydro at the start didn't think that they could accomplish and only were they able to bec ause the rest of the system projected and brought forward a larger profit than was anticipated. MR. DEPUT Y SPE AKER: Are you re ady for the question ? HON. J. B. CARROLL (Minister of Welfare) (The Pas): Mr. Chairman, maybe I should just say a word.

You know I really think the reason why we get this reso lution ea ch yea r by the Opposition is that I think they are fe elin g very guilty about their performance in the years in which they had res ponsibility for extending Hydro.-(Interject ion)- Here we have the Leader of the Official Opposition who sat in this House from 1953 to '58 - and what was his concern at that time about power for northern Manitoba? How many exten sions were made during those years in that part of Manitoba which lies north of the 53rd par rallel? Well I think the answer's very simple.

There was only one extens ion in all of that peri od of time and that was only bec ause there was very subst antial political pressure put on the government to try to get them to take over a utility at The Pas which of course was beginning to fail and which the resources of the community could no longer support. So we did finally get one extens ion of power in over 14 years of oper ation of the power utility by the then gove rnment; and of course there was cer tainly no cry at that time from the present Leader of the Opposition who has since become very concerned about services of this kind for northern Manitoba.

I also recall very carefully list ening to the explanation or the negotiations that went on on and the request of the people of The Pas to try to get some kind of a better rate once the utility was established at The Pas . That was the year 1957- 1957. You weren't leader of the government at that time but I always recall that you say backbenchers have a responsi bility for governm en t policy and I'm inclined to agree with that, that they do, and if you thought your policy was wrong at that time I think you should have made it known.

You should have come forward with some of your vision you now have with respect to power exte nsion. But I recall the rates were very high at that time. They had been twelve , ei ght and four and I think were reduced to something like ten, eight and four and of course the government would at that time give no assurance that the rate would be changed. So obviously they wanted full rec:overy from that system. Full recovery. Pres uma bly that was the policy which was su pported at that time by the Lea der of the Opposition.

I would like to say that the policy changed completely when this government took over be cause we became active right away with the Federal Government, with Indian Affairs, to try to es ti:tblish a policy of extending power service, not only to other northern communities - and this ha�> happened each year in which the system has been in opera tion - we have had I think better than one extension a year on the average and we've arrived at the point now where there will be very substantial extensions in many of our very remote settle men ts.

So I think there was a eomplete change of policy in the year 1958 with respect to power exte nsi on, and the consci ence of my honourable friends are bothering them so much that they feel they must now swing full way and of course try to make amends for their negli gence during the yea rs in which they were in office.

23 18 April 26, 1966 >' ,.· I 'MR. DEPUTY SPEAKE R: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. CAMPBEL L: Mr: Speaker, whim my honourable fri�nd the Minl.ster :of w�ifare discus ses people being bothered'by their consci Emces, I am afriUd thli.(it tippll�s' n�forily'on this s{de of the Hou se but likely' on the other because it seems difficult for m,Y hon�rirable frie'tid to sit there and oppose the resolution that's before us.

To use the' term: that is sometim.�s ili:lEid in this Hous e, "e xamine your 6onscie.nces" - examine your conscienc�s<- 'and'ddn•t' look 'at the' past only in examining your consciences, look at the presenC This i-esolutiori, this aineildihent to the amendment is dea1ing with the present. It's saying get ali)tig. If tny hon'ouraBieirietid -· thinks the consci ence of some other people should be bothering them', T gue!is thlit'we· offerrded my honourable friend so fJ:equently and SO long that probably W� got i:>ur 'consCienc es under . pretty good control. ' · · ..

But my honourable friend's conscience is bothering himnow greatlfhY this situatlon:Be"" cause here's the Manitoba Hyd ro'i n'a very different position to WhaPit wds years ago wheri my' honourable friend is talking about it; Do you know, Mr.

Chairman:, that a few Years before" my honourable friend was talking about it, that the Manitoba Pow�r Conii'nissiori, liB it Waath�n, .. rather than, the Manitoba Hydro , was actually fighting for its life here in tli� �rovincie OfMani.:. toba. · Do you know that lt actually went broke one time, if you take Just the bate financial si tuation ? ·D o you know that it took it a long tbne to come back, arid 'a.bi:llit the time it was starting to collie back well that it hit the tough years; the really tough yea:is'? -.

The tough times tllat my honourabfe friend Who' is now the First Minis ter of this provinc e; reffiinded us ofwhen he satd a few years ago, "Be ca.refulthis Commission may need a prop ot two ·�orn� day". That's:h oW bad my honourablefdend the First Mi nister remembered thositiiDes' wherihe wa� s;aying that · the Telephone System or the Hydro Power Commission �ig ht need i:q:irop ·o r' two: . 'People · ·. · might take out their telephones, he was saying.

This was becali.se00fthe tiiries ithad gohe through'. ·. ·· ·. · ·· · · · . , < ·' -' · .• .. ·! ·· " ·' -' · .i c•.: ' Does my horiourltble friend re�ember that the former admirilstiaHoir that;hets talking about :...'h e gives them at ieast cl-edit for having a consci ence j buf doks he 'remember When he is talking !!bout 1t that it w!!B the f!>:rlller administra tion that· reorg�hi��d the. elee't:dba.i ind*sh.Y' fn this province and put it in a position to make the forward strides 'thaHtts 'been· able to: Diake?

Does he think it didn't take some courage to organize the industry at'tliafti hll:i �afilst a good deai of opposition ? ·And it was fi.om then on that it started to reaily ;go and it wfiB' at that tinie that we went 'up into my honourable friend's territory and at least ga.'ve them 'a stah 'oh good electrical service up tliere.

But my honourable fd end's conscience' bothers him now because . here's this mighty utllity that really has developed, after the stai-t that it got from the former administration, arid having developed to where it now is a giant,. then niy' honourable frten:d can be pardoned for having his consci ence bother him, because here lie si ts as ·a repres.entaHve of' that area arid apparently is not going to support the proposition' thatthey get triclated like the ' rest ofthe people of Manitoba. ' · " ' · lost. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER presented the motion and after ' a voic e vote declared the inotion MR.

MOLGAT : Ayes and Nays, Mr. Speaker. MR. DEPUTY SPE AKER: Call in the members. All those in favour ptease"rtse. A counted standiU:g vote was taken the result being as follows: . · - YEAS: Messrs . Barkman, C ampbell, Desjardins , Froese, Johnston, Molgat; Pairick, Shoemaker and Tanchak. NAYS: Messrs. Baiz ley, Beard, Bilton, Bjornson, Ca rroll/ Cherniack, Evans, Groves, Hamilton, Harris, Ha rrison, Button, Jeannotte, Johnson, Klym, Llss aman; tyori, McDonald, McGregor, M �Kellar, Martin, Mills , Moeller, Paulley, Seabbrn; Shewinan, Smellie, Stanes, Steinkopf, Watt, Weir and Mrs. Morrison. MR.

CLERK: Yeas; 9; Nays, 32 •. MR; DEPUTY SPEAKER: The motion is lost. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER put the questi on re the amendment, and after a voice ·vote de clared the' motion carri ed. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER put the question re the resolutioir as' ame\.ded arid after a voiCe vote declared the motion carried. MR. DEPUTY SPE AKER: Adjourned debate on the propo8ed resolution Of the Honourable MeiDber for Portage la Pr!lirie , and the proposed motion in amendment of the Honourable Mem ber for Assi niboi a. The Hoaourable Member for Portage la Prairi e. '

April 26, 1966 2319 MR. GORDON E. JOHNSTON (Portage la Prairie); Mr .

Speaker, when I first proposed this resolu1tion, I would be the first to admit that it is not of prime .importance to. all of the people of Manitoba, but it is of prime importance to some thousands of people who are loc ated from the border at North Dakota up to Lake Manitoba and perhaps even further north; beca use the people in this area from Portage south feel quite strongly that there should be , _ _: it's about time that there should be a direct connection to the trunk highways of the United States instead of having to go ten or twenty miles either way laterally across the province that is , east and west. ' I mentioned before that there have been meetings held where representatives of Chambers of Comme�:rce, representa tives of Municipal Councils, MLA's of the area, have all met arid at one particular meeting Where there were about 400 people in attenda nc.e, people of all parties were unan.imous thaJ this action should be taken, so I do not intend to take the time of the House today in going over old points as to why this highway should be constructed at this time, but I would like to m�e two points: One is that I have in my hand here I believe it's a 1962 traffic count map that originated from the Department of Public Works, now the Department of High ways, and it shows that even at that time , leaving Portage la Prairie daily and heading south and east there were 3, 097 vehicles.

By the time they had got onto the highway that goes by the south port this had reduced down to 435 vehicles per da y. Now that leaves a balance of approximately 2, 665 vehicles of which a great many no doubt, turn into the south port because there are many airmen and civilians who work there; but there are a great number of vehicles that daily make the trip to what is now a provincial road, but has a very poor road over to St. Cla ude and further on south.

So I would urge on the members to support this resolution, be' cause the usage in rily opinion has already been established and if the road is upgrade.:l to a highway it will be of major service to the south central

section of Manitoba. I had laid on my desk today an Order for Return that I had asked of the Minister of High ways and the Order asked in part the number of highway signs in the Province of Manitoba ad vertising highway construction and bearing the name Walter Weir. This Order is now in and I find that in add ition to the $10 , 414 worth of ad vertising spent on No. 1. highway between Portage and Winnipeg - I think it was worked out by a newspaper as $212 per mile - in add ition to this, there are 30 pther signs scattered around the province at an additional cost of approxi mately $1.4, 000.

So we have the Highways Department in a position where they think they are able to spend $24, 000 a year on highway signs. I would ask them to perhaps cut down on Lhe propaganda and let's build the highway s where they are needed. In my opinion this highway is · needed. Thank you. MR. SPEAKER p1.1t the question and after a voice vote declared the motion lost. MR. CAMPBEL L: The yeas and nays pl ease, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Ca ll in the Members. MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if you would kindly state the motion that is before th1a House. MR.

SPEAKER: The motion before the House is the amendment of the Honourable the Member :Eor Ass iniboia that construction be started in 19 66. A counted standing vote was taken the result being as follows: YEAS: Messrs. Barkm.an, Cam pbell, Desjardins, Froese, Guttormson, Johnston, Molgat, l�'atrick, Shoemaker, Tanchak. NAYS: Messrs. Beard, Bilt�n·, Bjornson, Carroll, Cherniack, Evans , Groves, Hamil ton, Harris, Harrison, Hutton, Jeannotte, Johnson, Klym, Lissaman, Lyon, McDonald, McGregor, McKellar, Martin, Mills, Moeller, Paulley, Seaborn, Shewman, Smellie, Stanes, Steinkopf, Watt, Weir and Mrs. Morrison ..

ME: .. CL ERK: Yeas, 10; Nays , 31. . Mlt SPEAKER: The amendme nt is lost. The adjourned debate on the proposed resolution of the Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie. Are you ready for the question? The Honourable the Minister of Highways. ME: .. WEffi: Mr. Speaker, I think that I would like to say just a word or two on the motion that's before us.

I'm ha ppy that the Member for Portage clarified the situation a little when he spoke a few minutes ago, beca use my original thought as I read the resolution was that the im pression was being left that there was no north-south road in south central Manitoba; and of course, the fact 1s that there are two roads and quite good roads, Highway 34 and Highway 13, 3 and 32 which do connect in this area. It's quite true that there's no provincial trunk highway straight through from Portage la Prairie south but the dis tance between those two arteries is

2320 April 26 , 1966 (MR. WEffi cont 'd. ) . . . . . not all that great. \\'e have areas in Manitoba where the distance between roads is greater than this I think. It 's also quite true, Mr. Speaker, that the roads in question themselves have not been brought up to the standard that we \\•ould like to see the:in in 1966. It•s also a fact that there is a considerable expenditure of money listed in the Highway program of 1966 for Highway No . 13 and Highway No. 34 .

There is also the carry-over of expenditure from last year on Highway 32 down in my honourable friend's area, which represents a pretty good contribution of the tax dollar of 19 66 in providing north-s outh arteries in the south central portion of the Province of Manitoba. It 1s very difficult to be against the whereases in this resolution, Mr.

Speaker, because I think it 's true to say that it would be very desirable to have a first class highway in this area of Manitoba; but I think it shouldn't go unnoticed the fact that through all the years the area south of the airport in Portage la Prairie has never really received a great deal of benefit of the municipal int,erest of the area in the Municipality of Portage la Prairie .

The roads were developed a little better further south in some of the other municipalities, but even though it was a main market road the municipality didn't in the earlier days under the old system place that much importance on this road, that they were prepared to contribute their 40 percent in the development of it. Since the provincial road program has come in -- and I'm the first to admit, I'm the first to admit, Mr. Speaker, that it's not a high class road -- but, Mr. Speaker, there 's an awful lot better road there now than there was just about a year or so ago.

It's true 4 the _expenditures aren't that great but there 's a gravel road which connects Highway No. 2 and the airport south of Portage la· Prairie and the road carries on down and there are other pro- vincial roads in the area which do provide links. Admittedly, Mr. Speaker, not the kind of links that the Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie is talking about - and I recognize this fact. He talks about the signs that are up and the fact that it wouldn •t hurt the Highways De partment to cut down a little on the propaganda and build this road. Well, Mr .

Speak er, the best indication that I have had of the value of the signs which is poipting out really what it costs to build roads in the Province of Manitoba is the fact that the honourable member feels that a reduction in a $40, 000 figure or something of this nature would be of significant benefit in the construction of the type of a road that he is talking about between Portage la Prairie and Windygates . The fact is that it really wouldn •t go very far. It would sure help maintain it once you got it there, but it wouldn •t go very far as far as putting it th ere .

This is a pretty good indication that a few signs of this nature might go a long way to improving the picture that the Honourable Member for Portage has of road construction costs . So without any further comment, Mr. Speak er, I may say that I don't intend to support this motion at this time. MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Speaker, it's always intriguing to hear discuss ions in the House in regard to road construction in our province.

At the present time as you are well aware, we have two resolutions before us for our .consideration, and also on many occasions during a Session, particularly when we are considering the estimates of the Department of Highways, members want to talk about roads in various areas within the province . Also .this year, Mr.

Speaker, we have had a number of Orders for Returns which have been submitted by members dealing with road counts or traffic cotints which have been rejected by the Minister, and the government of course, basically because of the fact that it •s privileged information and should only be the property of the government . I must frankly confess, Mr . Chairman, that it's rather hard for one at times to assess the program that the government has insofar as priorities of road construction. I confess, Mr.

Chairman, that dealing with the resolution that we have before us on the highway from Windygates to Portage la Prairie, I confess that I am not too well up on my Prov�nce of . Manitoba because I really haven't looked up where Windygates is in the province. However it does seem to me that it must be a road of prime inte�est to the Honourable Member for. Portage la Prairie, otherwise the resolution would not be before us.

I may say I voted against the re quest for construction to start in 1966 because I realized that the programs are planned in ad vance and this one apparently is not in the program - as did the government previously to the present one, programs were laid out, at least the expenditures of mon(;!y. · But I am not satisfied, Mr . Speak4;lr, that the government is really operating on a plan ned program of highway construction in the province. It does seem to m·e that it•s sort of a helter- skelter system without rhyme nor reason. I would like to suggest that we bring in a

,�-" ! April 26, 1966 232 1 (MR . PAULLEY cont' d. ) little reason in the planning of highw ay construction in the Province of Manitoba. I do not intend to ask for setting up a separate department or a se parate agency of the Department of Highways, Mr. Speaker, but w� have set up this Session, or had the propositions before us this Session, to set up some ten or twelve various commi ttee s, and I feel that it might be in order just to set up one more . So I would like to suggest, Mr .

Speaker, that the governm ent consider setting up a Com mittee of the House with repres entatives of all parties to consider road priorities based on a proper evaluation insofar as use and need of the roads are concer ned . . I think if the House would be: prepared to accept my recomm endation or my suggestion then we would be sure we would take road construction, highway rebuilding and the likes of that, we would take it out of the realm of politic s, we 'd be able to assess the need for roads in the respec tive areas. Therefore, Mr.

Speaker, I move, seco nded by the Honourable Member for Logan, that the motion be amended by striking out all words after the word "Manitoba" in the fourth line, and adding the following: 11And

whereas it is esse ntial road construction be based on an orderly and progressive program, therefore be it reso lved that the government give considera tion to the advisability of setting up a Comm ittee of the House to consider priorities of road construc:tion based on a proper evaluation of use and need . " MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER pres ented the motion. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Boniface. MH. LAURENT DESJARDINS (St. Boniface): Mr . Speaker, ..... just make a suggestion. I don 't want to make a long speech. I would like to make a suggestion to the members of the government though .

In view of all the different commi ttees we' d have , I wonder if we can have the same people on this comm ittee -- I understand that the Traffic Comm ittee will sit tonight , so it mig·ht be an idea, they would just have a day nr so to meet before the election so we could speed up things if the same commi ttee would meet tonight on all these different matters before you call the elect ion. MR. GORDON W. BEARD (Churchill): Mr. Chairman, I might suggest to the Member for Radisson, if we appointed the Minister for life, probably that would satisfy him . MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable the Leader of the Opposition, MH. MOLG AT: Mr. Chairman, before the question is put, I' d just like to say that I regret that the amendment that has been proposed by the Leader of the NDP removes the opera tive part of the reso lution pres ented by my colleague the Member for Portage la Prairie. This is unfortunate, in my opinion, because the particular piece of highway that my honourable friend the Member for Portage la Prairie was proposing is one that I think has some very definite benefits .

I had the opportunity of travelling on the proposed route of the highway at the request of the municipalitie s of that area. They met in a de legation in the Village of St. Claude ; we travelled, up and down the proposed route and it did appear to me to be a sensi ble connection onto the American high way. We went down as far as the next town in the United States, met there with the mayor and some of the members of his council who were most enth usiastic about having this as an over-all connection.

So I regret that the proposed amendment is going to remove the particular proposal that was in the first - in the main motion. Howeve r, I gather from the statements made by the government that they were not going to accept our motion in any case, and that they were simply going to vote it down; so rather than simply have that situation, I think that the amendment proposed by the Leader of the NDP is worthy of consideration.

It seems to me that this would bring out the facts and figures that we have been trying to get; it would get out in the public the information regarding traffic counts and the proposals of the government as to why they want to build a certain highway rather than another. At the moment all that the House gets are the sheets prepared by the Minis ter . They 're depos ited on our desks during the discuss ion of his estimates; there is really no op portunity for members of the House to determine if the priorities are right or wrong.

We have attempted to get information on traffic counts, which certainly are one item that should be con sidered in establishing high ways, The government has refused to give these to us. Then I think that we should consider having a Commi ttee of the House, having the facts and figures brought before that commi ttee, have the governm ent make its proposals and back them up with their reasons for wanting to proceed that way. MADAM SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? MH.

FROE SE : Madam Speaker, I think the proposal put forward by the Leader of the New Democratic Party is quite an interesting one and might have merit. However, I would hasten at the same time to _make a comm ent or two on what the Minister of Highways said here

(MR; FROESE cont'd. ) thls . afternoon, and th;lt is that we have, '.!or'w:iH ha've Fti ke} �t'; .' once: Highway. 32 is ·completed ,. that we will have a fairly goOd road'rui:ming/nohh 'alltl 'sbiith' '' '2' from the U. S. to Highway No. l, >which is at a point somethihg·ltke 'twelve'mil·es e·asf oCPb:rtage la Prairie.

So that .U this .othert hing should come·about; the '·'request 'contaJined: i:ri'ththn'ain '';·':. motio n that we are also considering, this would be a se cond road' running riortl� arid'sotith jllSt a little west of the City of Portage. la Prairie .· ,, · · · ··' i ' · ·� I have no objection to having many more and goOd roads in ilouth�rn Manjitdba: Ii!n ail'' ' for it.B ut•I nat urally' ai:n more for having Hi ghway 32, 13 and part of N'O :' 3'whiCI{constitutes· the north�sotith road east of Portage., to . having that completed fi'fs(before We 'start · a ri�'* 'olie on·the west si de of Portage li1 'Prai rie . . . ,,· .MADAM .SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the 'mbtion hist'. · MR. .MOLGAT: Yeas and,nays; please, Madam Speaker> .' · · '' ·' 'f.' MADAM SPEAKE R: : Call in the members ..

The que stion befdre the House, ''the propos� motion of the Honourable the :Leader of the New Democratic Party'; · · -' · ·.:" ... ''< A standi;IJ.g vote· was taken, the result being as follows : ···:, · · ·· ·' ·· · : . ·' ' ' ' · . · · ' YEAS: Messrs ; Barkman, Campbell, Cherniack, Des jai�di i1s '/ Giltt otm sori', 'Har'ris ; · · · ' Johnston, Molgat, Patrick, Paulley; Shoemaker and Tanchak: - - !, ''· ,,. < · '' : ., NAYS: Messrs . Beard, Bilton, Bjornson, Carroll, Co'Wan'.: Evahs; Fi-6ese, ' Gto�es, Hamilton, Harriso n,. Hutton, Jeannotte, Johnson, Klym; Lissamflrt;' Lyon, 'Mcb orlald,' ', . McQregor.

McKellar, Martin, Mills, Moeller' Se�bo:rn, 'shewlriati; ' s.fu:ellie, 's't�D:es, . Ste inkopf, Wattj. Weir and .Mrs.: Morrison. : ' ' · · ·· ' .. · ·"-' ' MR. CL E�:· Yeas; 12; Nays ; 30. '·· ' ' " · ,, , , .. , : ··MADAM'·.SPEAKER ·: ] deClare the moti on -lOst . ··,._;_,,u E---<- ···:--_-,__. <_�: , --· _.d-1 · . The•adjour ned.c debate on the proposed resolution of the Horiolii ablil the: Mi\in b'�r' for''' ( �. ' Portage la :Pr.airie. Ate you ready for the q ues ti on? ' :;, D'Y. • ., ,._ ·. . , ·.£ ":•:: 'c MR.

JOHNSTON: Madam Speaker, I would like to speak at some lengtli 'onthis" 'wouhi' you car,e: to call. it 5: -30? . , . .. >:: '"'; ·1· : .,, • MR. EVA:NS: ,Madam Sp�aker, I beg to move, seconded'hy th� 'Honourable th�'Ml ki Jte:f1 ' of Education, that, the House do riow adjourn-. . et,; ' .' · , r ·.: ;· . r--: · :: . 1 • ':.

MADAM SPEAKER : ·B efore we place the motion; I would' agilin '!i�k the ·ii\� znB�rs t� make sure :that you keep our Orders of the Day for our sitting this ',e veriing· . .. ' · '· ! ·. '' : ' · MADAM:SPEAKER prese nted the motion and after a voice vote: declared 'the hwt'ioil' ·ca:rvied. and the House adjourned until 8: 00 o'clock Tuesday evening·> · ,, '' ·· ·. •• ']. : ::.:.: ;·· .. _. _; ; :_ ; ,. ": � ": -.'·') . . ,. � . . •. : -� '>:;.: .. .. � .·.; - '"' ·. -···. ·..' -� \ -i i J .....

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	27-5-101
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	27th 5th hansardpdf 101.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	128a1778186bda943e535d4b1bc315fa31e16cf8

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