Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 25 (28th Legislature, 3rd Session)

28-3-25

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Speaker The Honourable James H. Bilton Vol. XV No. 25 8:00p.m., Thursday, March 20th, 1969. Third Session, 28th Legislature. Printed by R. S. Evans - Queen's Printer for Province of Maniroba

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 8 o'clock, Thursday, March 20 , 1969 583 MR. CHAIRMAN: Members of the committee, I'd like to make a little announcement here. I would like to direct the attention of the honourable members to :he gallery. There are 25 members of St. Joseph the Worker Cub Pack under the direction of Cub Master Paynter. This pack is located in the constituency of the Leader of the New Democratic Party. On behalf of all the honourable members of the Legislative Assembly, I welcome you all here today. The Honourable Member of Portage la Prairie. MR. JOHNSTON: Mr.

Chairman, I do not have very much more to say on this matter, but before I conclude my remarks I would like to refer the members to the brief presented by mail, I believe, to the members of the Legislature, March 8th, by a group headed by Dr. Lans down and Dr. McLaughlin from the University of Manitoba, and I would like to read part of this brief into the record, Mr. Chairman, and I will start at the third paragraph.

"We are sure therefore that members of the Legislative Assembly will want to know in considerable detail what the effects of flooding will be, and to investigate fully all of the pos sible alternatives to high level flooding. We suggest that some of the important and relevant points which the members may wish to consider are: "(

a) viable alternatives to high level flooding do exist; "(

b) on the basis of power interest alone, the overall cost of at least one alternative is only marginally higher than the proposed high level scheme." I believe, Mr. Chairman, they're referring to what they call the Swanne Lake diversion; "(

c) Southern Indian Lake has unique and valuable resource potential when one recognizes the increasing pace of development of our northland; ' "(

d) the damage of the flooded district will be unprecedented in magnitude, irTeversible in form, and such that the lake will be useful only to hydro-electric interests for many genera tions to come; "(

e) from (

a) above it is clearly unnecessary to destroy the communities of South Indian Lake and Pickerel Narrows; "(

f) in all of the recent discussions and reports, no evidence has come from any source to invalidate points (

a) to (

e) above. · "Some of these points involve technical arguments which cannot be elaborated in this short statement. We would however be pleased to make ourselves available for discussion of these or any other relevant points. The Southern Indian Lake i!3sue is one which will have major consequences for both the short-term and the long-term development of Manitoba. It has ramifications far beyond hydro-electric power development. It raises such issues as minority rights and the intelligent use o:; our natural resources and questions the whole mechan ism we have in Manitoba for planning our resource development.

It is to be hoped that the proposed new legislation will improve this mechanism by ensuring impartial and complete overall assessment of plans for future development. However, irrespective of any such legis lation it is crucial to Manitoba that it should not herald its second century with the initiation of what is likely tobe the largest example of bad resource planning in the world." Mr.

Chairman, I would like to recommend to the Minister that this matter be referred to the Utilities Committee and let informed groups such as the university professor group, and others, challenge and debate with the hydro engineers, and if the hydro engineers can prove their point to the satisfaction ofthe committee, well then it will have to be done that way.

But surely when such a large numberof people, both singly and in groups, are challenging the government onthis course of action that they're ta..\ing 0:1 the Southern Indian Lake flooding, that! feel that the govern ment have a responsibility to allow these people to speak directly to the hydro planners and the hydro engineers before the issue is decided, whether it's decided by a bill through this House or it's . decided by government action, which was going to be the way it would be handled last year.

When a matter as important as this,dealing with the lives of 650 people, the long-term outlook on the use of land and water for recreational purposes, the long-term outlook on commercial and game fishing, then I think the government have a responsibility to allow all of these groups to be heard and to allow Hydro to defend themselves from the charges that are being made. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Inkster. MR. GREEN: Mr. Chairman, at the outset I would like to wish the Mini ster well in the handling of what is a new department for him.

I want to congratulate his staff for the good work that they have done with regard to the Department of Mines and Natural Resources in the past,

584 March 20, 196 9 (MR. GREEN cont'

d) and I hope that they will be able to have such facilities made avail- able to them in the future so as to make this department a productive one in terms of providing benefits to the people of the Province of M:mitoba. Mr. Chairman, the new Minister was initiated into this department in rather unfortunate circumstanc es in terms of the difficulties which he found himself immediately to be confronted with, and I refer of course, Mr.

Chairman, to the problem that has been discussed by the Hon ourable Member for Portage, that is the high level flooding of South Indian Lake and the diver sion of the Churchill River into the Nelson River to provide the necessary flow of water to make the Hydro project on which this government has embarked into an economic one. I'd like to say at the outset, Mr.

Chairman, that we on this side-- and I'm sure it goes for all of the members of my group -- are at all times hoping and have at all times hoped that the Hydro project, which this government has initiated and which it is involved in, would be I proceeded with in such a way as to provide the hopeful returns that have been promised by the government, and Mr. Chairman, not promised lightly but as a result of looking very intensely into what this project could do for Manitoba.

And when I say that, I hope that the Minister will accept my remarks as being sincere constructive criticism o� what has actually happened in this case, because I think that when this matter was raised in the House last year by the member for Portage, and the question of the high level flooding of the lake was first brought I into issue actually, that it wasn't brought in in my opinion in a negative way. The member for Portage indicated roughly two things; one, that there was to be the di version.

He indicated that he hoped that the Minister at that time, it was the Minister of Pub lic Works, that he hoped that the alternative would be studied. That was No. 1. Secondly, he hoped that the people would be given due compensation. That was No. 2. And thirdly, he hoped that the people would be adequately represented by counsel. And I don't think that there was any intention, .Mr.

Chairman, on the part of anyone on this side of the House to hope that these recommendations, which seemed to be acceptable and reasonable on the part of every member of the Hou.se, would in some way endanger the progressive development of that project. As a matter of fact, the suggestions seemed very reasonable and were acceded to by all members, because, Mr.

Chairman, despite what the Honourable the Minister may think, I think that it was the intention on this side of the House to hope that right was being done to all people con cerned, and that in order to ensure that right would be done, the people would have a lawyer appointed and the alternatives would be studied. As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, that was the way the ma tter was left, and lawyers were appointed. I understand that the lawyers were to be paid for by this government, the lawyers -- pardon me? MR . ENNS: By Hydro. MR . GREEN: By Hydro.

Well, it winds up with the people paying, so the lawyer's work is to be paid for by the government, and better still, there were to be no holds barred; they were to defend the interests of their individual clients. And matters proceeded, Mr. Speaker, until the notice was issued regarding the hearing connected with the high level diversion. And I want to read the frame of reference, Mr. Cha irman, because this is important.

"Notice is hereby given that the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources will hold public hearings on January 7th,"- and I'm summarizing- "at the settlement of South Indian Lake, Manitoba, to hear briefs and presentations respecting the application of the Manitoba Hydro for a licence under The Manitoba Water Power Act to divert water f:rom the Churchill River into the Nelson River and to store water on Rat River, Southern Indian Lake and Granville Lake.

It is pro posed to divert water from the south bay on Southern Indian Lake to Issett Lake and to the headquarters of Rat River, thence into Burntwood River and Threepoint Lake, etc. " Now, Mr. Speaker, the important thing about this notice is that it represents a sugges tion that somebody is applying for a licence and then it invites representations. Now, Mr. Chairman, I suggest to you that the meaning is clear to anybody who can read and write or understand English. A licence is being applied for.

If you are against it you may appear and make representations; or if you are for it indeed, you can come and make representations. And then, Mr. Chairman, the hearings began at the community of South Indian Lake on January 7' 1969, and of course we don't have a transcript of them; all we know about those hearings is more or less what we read in the papers. My understanding is that they were opened by the Minister himself, that he was present, that at those particular hearings he spoke. He didn't speak at the subsequent hearings but at the first hearings he indicated what the hear ings were about to do.

March 20, 1969 585 (:MR. GREEN cont'

d) And then a peculiar thing happened, Mr. Speaker, because at those hearings counsel for the communities involved, for the first time, indicated that their clients were taking the posi tion that the p:roposed diversion was being opposed, objected to, and were also taking the posi� tion they would have a right to cross-examine all of the Hydro witnesses to substantiate their position that this particular diversion was not in the interest of the province or the community concerned. In other � to oppose the granting of the licence.

Apparently the lawyers for the particular communities did an excellent job, because following the closing of the hearings at Southern Indian Lake and South Indian Lake -and I don't know the exact period of time there was an announcemen': in the paper that the Minister ha:l indicated that an interim licence would issue, and basically the hearings would continue but not on the question of whether or not a licence wo'..lld be granted but what compensation would be given. Now I suggest, Mr.

Chair man, that that's a complete divergence from the frame of reference as originally sent out by the Minister in connection with these public hearings. Now immediately, Mr.

Speaker, the community, generally, recognized the injustice of the situation, that hearings were called to determine whether or not a licence should be granted, but before the hearings were concluded the Minister indicated that the hearings were going to change direction, that they were going to be concerned only with the question of compensation and that an interim licence would be granted in the meantime because tenders had to be called, and I think, Mr. Chairman, if I'm right, that tenders were subsequently published in the news paper following the Minister's remarks.

Well, as result of the public outcry from various sources, and from the university and the media generally, within a very short time--and I can't remember the exact time, but it was a number of days --the Minister changed course again and said that now the hearings would continue and the Hydro would have to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt --I'm not sure whether those were the words used --: but the Minis ter left every indication that the Hydro would have to prove its case. Now I quote these facts, Mr.

Chairman, merely to review how we got this matter coming to the Legislature, because I indeed think that we all have to shoulder responsibility for what is occurring, that it's not the government's responsibility but it's now the responsibility of every member in this House, and I accept the fact that whatever occurs now will be the respon sibility of all of us. But how does it get here and what are we expected to do when it comes?

I think that in discussing the estimates of the Mlnister of Mines and Natural Resources we have to see whether indeed we are in the right place and whether the right thing is being do::�.e. At the hearings numerrus presentations were made, no::�.e of which are available to us at the present time, but the Minister has indicated that we will be receiving a transcript. I made a presentation at the hearing, Mr. Chairman, and my presentation was a simple one. I felt that the hearings were useless; I advised the chairman o: the hearings to advise the Minister that a decision couldn't be made by those hearings.

Apparently the Minister has received that advice either from the chairman himself or from his solicitors; it doesn't make any difference which. Apparently he got the same advice as was offered gratuitously and without fee by my self in making a presentation at those hearings. And at that stage I'm sure that what the Mini ster was told is that the only way to clear up this mess - and it is a mess -is to put a Bill through the Legislature. Now, Mr.

Chairman, o::�.e can't really argue that the public representatives of the people shouldn't be responsible for doing this thing, and I think that the public representatives of the people ultimately always have to accept responsibility for what goes on. But democracy is an unusual procedure, Mr. Chairman, in that it brings out both the best in people and the worst in people.

The democratic process is capable of allowing man to rise to his highest possible endeavours --and this has been demonstrated in many Legislatures in the world-- and it's also capable of becoming nothing more than mob rule and rule by brute force.

It's not likely to happen that way, and the fact that it has happened that way in this case becomes regrettable, because I think the Minister would agree that the proper way of determining in a case of this kind whether a licence should or should not be granted would be to have technical people pro viding an independent tribunal with the facts, so that those facts could at least be recommended in some independent form to the Legislature.

That's why we have such things as Royal Co m missions from time to time, because it's recognized that the subject matter at hand is too difficult to be discussed by normal debate in the Legislature without some preliminary fact finding. fnd where has this occurred? It's not something new. When people were having

586 March 20, 1969 (MR. GREEN cont'd) .••• difficulty with labour matters they appolnted the Rand Commission, and Rand was asked to brlng back a brief which was subsequently decided by the Legislature, and the Legislature would then deal with the question.

In this particular case the Mlnister must have agreed, whether I would agree with it or not, the Minister must have agreed that the proper way of dealing with this matter was to set up a water control board, have the water control board hear the representations on both sides, let it determlne the facts, have those facts referred to the Minister, and then subsequently de cided if necessary-- and I'm not objectlng to that-- by the Legislature.

But we don't get it ln the Legislature ln this fashion; we get it lnto the Legislature as a result of hearlngs, which have been initiated by the Mlnister, belng so misconducted as to destroy any confidence what soever by the people concerned, that the hearings can determine the case properly. We had the type of hearlng, Mr. Chairman, which ln effect says that we are going to divert the Churchill River lnto the Nelson River, but ln order to do this we have to have a hearlng, and after the hearings are held, and after the niceties have been observed, we will do what we In tended to do ln the first place.

There's no more clear demonstration that this is the type of hearlngs that took place ln this case than the fact that we are now going to do what we lntended to do, regardless of what the hearlngs decided, and we are not golng to refer it to any other klnd of hearlng or to any other kind of trib unal. Now what we have the government ln effect saying, Mr.

Chairman, and they've been driven to this position-- and I say that this is the basic weakness of the Mini ster's position -- what we have the government ln effect saylng is that we can't give you the facts - and they've told that to us on numerous occasions -th at many of the facts involve interdepartmental cor respondence and that can't be released; tl:at many of the facts lnvolve confidential reports and these can't be relea3ed; our hearlngs have exploded in our face and therefore we have no alter native but say to the people, "trust us, we know what we are doing," because that's what the government is going to do when they present this Bill.

They're not going to present the Legis lature with the reports, they've turned us down on so many occasions that we know that they can't, and Mr. Chairman, to be perfectly fair, maybe there is some reason why these reports can't be released. But if they can·t, then the government is going to, in the last analysis, say to the Legislature whea this Bill is presented, "We know what we are dolng- trust us; we can't give you the Informatio n- trust us; we are not able to properly debate this at this stage - trust us". And sometimes, Mr.

Chairman, a government is in that position, during times of war I assume, during other emergencies, the government will come in and say: This is a matter which is not subject to public debate but we've looked into this carefully- trust us. And I sup pose, Mr. Chairman, that on occasions of that klnd sometimes, although I would think rarely, the Opposition will trust the Minister and trust the government. But, Mr.

C'nairman, on the basis of what is presently intended and on the basis of the Information that is available to the members of the Oppostion, can they expect an affirmative vote on the plea from that side to this side of "trust us". Beca·.1se what are the sta�es involved? Wnat do we have to trust them to do? We have to trust them to elimlnate a community of rough ly 650 people in terms of destroying their way of life, their home, the values which are impor tant to them -- and fuey may not seem important to us but they are important to them -- and as well, Mr.

Chairman, destroy irrevocably a substantial number of natural resources which the Mlnister is the custodian of this House to protect, and we have to do these things on the basis of the Minister saylng "trust us". Mr. Chairman, the Minister must know that there is some thing more lnvolved than what would apply ln an ordlnary expropriation, as I've heard this re ferred to. After all, this is not an expropriation at all is it? The people are legally probably squatte rs; the government owns the land; they could move these people by taklng a bulldozer if they wanted to !llld move them.

But they're not doing that; they have decided that they have to compensate them. Now why have they decided that, Mr. Chairman? MR. ENNS: Moral responsibility. MR. GREEN: Yes, exactly, Mr. Chairman. So we can't dis<Juss this in terms of an ordlnary expropriatio:a.; we've got to look at the situation as it is, that we ourselves recognize ln this case that there is a morality above the law which has to protect these people. MR. ENNS: Natural justice. MR. GREEN: Yes, absolutely. I'm glad that the Mlnister approves of natural justice.

I regret that he doesn't always act in accordance with what I would consider to be natural jus tice, but I'm glad ln any event that he is giving lip-service to the concept. Mr. Chairman, the

March 20, 1969 587 (MR. GREEN cont' d) ... part of this particular problem that !think bothers most people, and bothers most people I think in this House and outside of the House, is that we are contradicting what has been a common ethic amongst people in our community. It's too often that we hear that the native peoples are shiftless, that they're lazy; we hear this from ignorant people, but we hear it widespread, Mr. Chairman. We now have a community which has proved itself not -- or we have at South Indian Lake --not now-- I'm sure that the community has existed this way in the past.

There is at South Indian Lake a community of people who are apparently above the average income earners in the province; there are none of them on welfare rolls, or almost no one on the welfare rolls; they have managed to enjoy their form of life without being a burden on anyone in the community; and we are going to say to these people, "Your way has to be changed in the interests" -- I think Mr. Christians on put it -- "as a sacrifice to the rest of the people in the Province of Manitoba. Well, Mr. Chairman, the Minister before asking these people to make this sacrifice has got to do several things.

He has got to prove, which I submit he hasn't proved, that there are no alternatives; he's got to prove, and I submit that he hasn't proved it, that the people have been given representation and that that representation has been permitted to be effective. As a matter of fact, we have quite the opposite.

Wnen the representations appeared to be effect ive, what the Minister did was to pull the rug from under those who were being effective, be cause we have the lawyers for the Indian community appearing in court a week ago on the basis of obtaining an order preventing the hearing from resulting in a licence being granted and we had the judge at those hearings saying, ''Well, the Legislature is the Supreme Court and there fo::-e yo-:rr position is now that of not being able to do anything." So they haven't had represen tation which ha.s been permitted to be effective. And thirdly, M:�.

Chairman, and I say that this is the most difficult area because we are going to look - I'm sure the community is not yet prepared to look in the proper manner at this aspect of it -- we have to prove that they can be compensated. Now, Mr. Chairman, too many people think that compensation can be made in dollars and cents, and many people will say, "W ell, if they've given a certain amount of money, and the more the better, then what have they got to complain about?" But, Mr.

Chairman, this is not compensation for changing a person's mode of life to one which he can't be expected to make an adjustment to, and to remove the people from South Indian Lake on the basis of monetary compensation is just not the answer. So I say to the Minister that I think that we on this side of the House at all times hoped that the project was being proceeded with on the basis of the interests of all of the citizens of Manitoba, including those directly affected. We hoped that this was taking place, and I for one, Mr.

Chairman, and I'm sure many others, were hoping that the Minister would demonstrate that that was what was oecurring, but unfo::-tunately at every stage the opposite occurred. When we hoped that the hearings would be given an oppor tunity of determining what was the justice of the case, a few days later the Minister indicated that this was not going to take place. Then when the Minister indicated that the hearings would continue, this also indicated that the hearings co:Ud not bring a proper answer.

Then when the hearings were over, the matter was brought into the Legislature, and is the Minister going to make it possible for the Legislature to give a proper answer on this question? Is the Minister going to be able to provide the answers to all of those questions which are raised by the action of the government, or is he goin>J to say: Trust us;· we're doing the right job; we can't give you the answers to the questions that you ask but we are going to use our legislative majority - brute force, Mr.

Chairman-- because we are unable to use any of the other sophistications of our democratic process to accomplish this o':Jjective which we are unable to substantiate by any reasonable arguments. MR . CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for St. George. MR. GUTTORMSON: M:r.

Speaker, two years ago the Department of Mines and Natural Resources opened the duck hunting season but it made it illegal to shoot the mallards, and as a result of this thousands and thousands of birds were destroyed and thrown away by hunters who either shot them by mistake or did so deliberately and didn't want to get caught with the birds by the conservation officer. Anyone who has any experience at all with duck hunting realized that this was just a folly to implement such a policy.

At the last session of the Legislature the then Minister of Mines and Natural Resources confirmed that the policy adopted at that time was a flop. Last year, the same dq>artment wasn't satisfied to have "goofed" badly, they went on to do so again and this time it was in the big game. They opened the season on deer

588 March 20, 1969 (MR. GUTTORMSON cont'd) ..•• in October, before the snow arrived, and the number of deer that were destroyed by the hunter who was unable to track his animal run into countless hun dreds in Manitoba. Not only is it bad enough that we lost these animals, but the terrible suf fering of the deer who were shot and left to die. I'm surprised at the Minister snickering about this because it's no joke. I was just talking to one man yesterday who came across six animals on one stretch of road who had been shot and left to die.

The government has a new program whereby they are spending considerable sums of money on a hunters safety program, and I commend them for this program, but the policy that this government implemented certainly wasn't consistent with their hunters safety program, because what we had last fall, Mr. Chairman, we had the upland game season, which the hun ter is permitted to use a brown garb, clashing with the deer season, in the same area, where the hunter is expected by law, or made by law, to wear a white uniform.

And here we had hunters going after up land game in the very same areas that hunters were shooting deer. I know in one area in my constituency we had a situation where a hunter with his young son, shooting or looking for upland game, and in the very same district we had hunters wearing white uniforms chasing deer.

Anyone knows, that has any familiarity with hunting, that there's a very good reason for the law insisting that the hunter wear the white uniform, and yet in the same area we had hunters after upland game wearing the brown uniform which left them wide open to be shot, and it's just a miracle that we didn't have more accidents than we did. It also posed a big problem to the farmer. Having the season open in October, as we did last year, created a problem for the farmer who wished to graze his cattle as long as there was grass in the meadow. I have a letter which I'd like to read to the House.

It's from a con stituent and it probably will explain just the problem that was experienced in the area. It's addressed to me. It reads: "We know no1hing can be done about the insane early opening of the deer hunting season for this year, but we sure must do something to prevent it happening next year. We had hoped to leave the cattle on the range at least until the grass freezes, but now we don't dare. Not only are they in danger of being shot, they spook at the sight of the damn white suits and no fence will hold them, even though by some miracle the hunters close the gate.

Then there's the soft hay fields that will have ruts like you wouldn't believe. Seventy five percent of the wounded deer will never be found since they can't be tracked down, to say nothing of the spoiled meat in the warmer weather. We are at a loss to see even one good thing about the early opening for hunters or farmers. The middle of November is plenty early enough and all these problems would be solved. Right now we are nervous about leaving the cat tractor, in the brushing overnight. Some gun happy hunters shoot at anything." Mr.

Chair� man, this letter is typical of the feeling of the farming community in my area and I'm sure in most farming areas where they are anxious to keep the cattle out as long as possible. In my area, as I'm sure the Minister knows, they had a hay problem, a hay shortage, and the farmers were most anxious to keep their cattle out grazing as long as possible in an effort to -::on serve the short hay supply; and the policy that this department implemented last year by opening the season in October is just beyond comprehension.

There is no reason in the world why it should be done; not even the hunter was happy with it. Opening the season in November when it is reasonable to expect snow is plenty early enough and I hope that the Mini ster will take steps to see that this is never done again. Not only is it a terrible waste of the animals and the suffering, there is a terrible danger of other hunters being shot who are going after the upland game. For any peopl� who have any knowledge of hunting to implement a policy like this, is just beyond comprehension.

Last fall the Department declared a Wild Game Management area in the Mantagao Lake which as the Minister knows is north of the forestry road that leads between Ashern and Hodg son and I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the Minister's Department on ta.l;: ing this step.

The Ministe:r knows a number of elk were moved in from other parts of Mani toba and had the government not seen fit to declare this as Wild Life Management area, I'm afraid the moving of these animals woul d have been a useless effort, because they would have been destroyed by hunters and they would have left the conservation officers in no position to protect these animals.

The Ashern Chamber of Commerce through a resolution which they forwarded to me with the intention of going to the Minister, was among those who pushed for this move and I am very pleased that the Minister saw fit to implement the suggestion that came from that group. Another matter that is causing me some concern and I believe most hunters, is the

M!l.rch 20, 1969 589 (MR. GUTTORMSON cont'd) ••.• wanton destruction of game by hunters who use motorized vehicles such as planes, motor toboggans and even helicopters. Two years ago I cited an occasion where a helicopter up north was used to shoot moose and I was told by an eye witness who happened to be an employee of the government, who witnessed this and was very disgusted, and brought the matter to my attention.

I know at that time this particular helicopter was on rental to one of the government departments, corporations, although I'm not suggesting they used it for this purpose but in extra curricular hours somebody rented a plane and they dropped in over the moose and just slaughtered them and when the conservation officer attempted to move into the area, a two-way radio warned the pilot to keep away from the camp until the con servation officer had moved on. This again was about two years ago. We also have incidents where hunters are chasing the moose on these motorized toboggans.

It doesn't give the animal a chance. I think that some steps must be taken to insure the safety of these animals from what I would consider most ur:tsportsmanlike people. Some are using aircraft to scare these animals and the men on the ground are chasing them with toboggans and it doesn't give the animal much of a chance. With respect to the duck population, this is an ever increasing problem.

I realize that the Province of Manito'Ja alone cannot take the action that is required but I do believe that this government could take steps to try and encourage other jurisdictions to take steps which will help the duck population. Years ago Minnesota was one of the great breeding gro,mds of the duck and then the waterways, the sloughs in that area were drained and it left areas such as Manitoba, and as the Minister well knows we are gradually losing these areas where the duck can breed.

Unless some steps are taken in the very near future I am afraid that the next gener ation will not have an opportunity to hunt d!lck. I think that if this government CO'lld persuade other bodies that perhaps we may have to consider closing the duck season in North America for a period of a year or so, in an effort to replenish the supply. I realize there is no point in Manitoba doing this alone, that it must be done on a continental basis, but something has got to be done and done fast. I know you will hear hunters say, oh I was shooting in this particular locality and there were plenty of du�k.

This may be true, but the overall picture is serious. I remember hunting a few years ago in my own riding which I knew very well and it was not unusual for me to go out on the opening day to get my limit which was substantially higher than it is today. Today it takes an except ional hunter to get his limit because he doesn't even get a chance to shoot that many birds. There just isn't that type of shooting any more, particularly in the marshes. About the only place where a hunter does get his limit is when he hunts in the grain fields and he happens to get a flight.

It really concerns me that something isn't being done. There again I want to em phasize that I'm not blaming this government. I realize that it is a national problem and the only way we can get it done is with the cooperation of other bodies. I think that the government should look at a policy whereby the farmer should be compen sated for the losses that he has from game.

In my riding, for example, and I think there are other examples of this, we have situations where farmers have grain fields located in sanctu aries which are protected by law and they feed on the farmers fields and yet he is unable to do anything about it. The deer are also feasting on the grain fields. I think that we have got to take a hard look at finding a policy which will compensate the farmer for these losses . I have suggested in the past and I think that the government should look at possibly raising the hunting license to create a fund to pay for these losses.

It isn't fair that the farmer should have to finance the wildlife of the province. Last session the previous Minister indicated that the government was taking a hard look at a policy whereby they would sell Crown land. We haven't seen much evidence of this in the Inter lake. and we have some excellent land in certain areas where farmers wish to buy the land and yet they are hampered by policies which prohibit them from purchasing land that would enable them to make their unit more economical. I know of one case where a farmer ha s been leasing a certain quarter

section of land. It's adjacent to his own farm; he needs it to improve his own holdings. He is allowed to lease this land but he can't purchase it because government officials say that the land isn't any good to him. I suggest to the Minister that the farmer who has been using this land for many years is best qualified to know whether the land is worthwhile or not, and for the government to continually refuse him to buy this land is just preposterous, and unless this policy is changed we are going to drive these farmers right off the land. The farming population in Manitoba as well as other parts of Canada is depleting

590 March 2 0, 1969 (MR. GUTTORMSON cont'd) •••• already too fast. The Minister-- I don't believe he touched on the fish marketing situation, although he may have, and if he did I wish to apologize. I am looking forward to seeing the legislation dealing with the Fresh Fish Marketing Board. The fishing situation in Manitoba, particularly on Lake Manitoba v.hich I know best of the commercial la.\es in Manitoba, is among the worst in history. The fishermen in this area just find it almost hopeless to go out on the lake and to fish on Lake Manitoba for most of them is just a losing proposition.

We are hoping that the implementation of the Fish Marketing Board will do something to help the plight of the fishermen which is certainly in a sorry state. I don't really know what can be done other than the establishment of this board to help the fishermen, which they have been waiting for for a number of years, but I'll be kinder to this government than the opposi tion of some 12 years ago was when they condemned the fishing industry in Manitoba. I can assure the Minister that the fishing industry in those days wasn't nearly as critical as it is to day.

I'm disappointed the government hasn't taken steps to promote the fish products we have in this province. There are millions of people starving all over the world and yet we allow the rough fish in many of our lakes to go to waste; fishermen are unable to find a market for it. The last number of years I have been urging this government to explore the possibility of esta blishing a cannery and until this time it has fallen on deaf ears. They indicated a few years ago that they would establish a fish processing plant in the Inter lake and it appears that that's as far as it went because we have seen nothing of it.

If the fisherman could find a market for his rough fish, he would certainly find his economical position much better than it is today. One of the items I would like to ask the Minister about is the shooting preserves or game preserves as they are known. In United States I believe there are 40 states which permit game preserves. Ontario has them and I believe Quebec does also. A situation where farmers can raise pheasants and charge the hunter for hunting on his property, and from reports that I have read they have been quite successful in many of the states and Ontario.

It also provides an in- come for the farmer, and today the areas where the hunter can shoot is diminishing every year. More farmers are posting their land and consequently the areas that are left open are becoming overcrowded. I would like to suggest to the M:.nister that he explore the possibility of having shooting preserves in Manitoba. As I said, it would improve the hunting situation and would also open up fields where farmers could make extra money. I think that everyone would be well served by such a program.

I will probably deal with other aspects of the Department when we get to the item, but I wish the Mlnister would consider some of the items that I have mentioned and when he replies I would ask him to give us a statement with respect to the Churchill Forest Products. I don't be lieve he touched on that in his opening statement. MR. CHAmMAN: The Honourable Member for Churchill. MR. BOROWSKI: Mr. Speaker, I'm not going to make a speech tonight. I know the Mini ster is anxious to get up and answer some of this unfair criticism against his depart'Jlent, so I have a couple of questions to ask him.

The first one - he mentioned some kind of a three year geological survey that they are conducting. I'm wondering if he could tell the House a little more about it. My second question is, before the '66 provincial election the former pre mier came up to Thompson with some of his Ministers and they promised to establish a great fish plant for Thompson. I wonder if he could tell us what happened to that fish plant? . . . . • . • Continued on next page I

March 20, 1969 591 MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister of Mines and Natural Resources. MR. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, let me then briefly reply to some of the questions raised and as I have indicated to you at the outset Mr. Chairman; that I intend to confine my replies to those concerning the estimates before you. Let me at the same time quietly assure the House that they should not take this to mean that I' m not prepared, at the time the Bill is before me, to discuss most fully any of the remarks that have been centred upon this government or myself personally regarding the South Indian Lake.

I recognize of course the prerogative of the members opposite to, at the time when they're dealing with this Minister's salary and his conduct as Minister responsible for the Department of Mines and Natural Resources, to take in whatever area they so choose. The Honourable Member :fi:'om Portage - most of his remarks fall into this former cate gory and I do not really intend to take up too much of the committee's time in reply to those remarks.

I point out quite specifically to him such individual detailed remarks as might con cern me as Minister concerned and involved about water, water supplies -I believe he men tioned particularly the water supply in Churchill. I point out to him the fact that despite what is being proposed in the diversion, the community of Churchill will have a water supply that would supply roughly a hundred times the size of the City of Winnipeg after and when the diversion takes place, quite recognizing that there may well be some difficulties with respect to relocation of where the source or supply is taken from.

But if he's not prepared to, I'm certainly prepared to accept that the Crown agency responsible for this disruption certainly as corporate citizens of this province would assume as natural that this is part and parcel of their responsibility, and for this reason I am not going to fault the Crown corporation in this instance for perhaps not doing their PR work as well as they should have. But this simple fact remains, Mr. Chairman, that for anybody for one moment to consider that a Crown corporation of this province would cut off the water supply of another community of this prov ince- well, Mr.

Chairman, it's too ridiculous to consider in this House. - (Interjection) - The Honourable Member from Portage suggested it; I'm trying to reply to questions that he raised to me. MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Chairman, that's not a true statement. I did not say that. MR. ENNS: I accept that certainly, that correction. I would look forward to seeing the correction in Hansard tomorrow.

The other matters dealing particularly - I find it difficult to reply specifically to the questions that he raised because again, most of them I expect to reply to more fully and com pletely at the time the Bill regarding the diversion of South Indian Lake is before the House. The Honourable Member speaking next, the Member from Inkster, and I'd like to recip rocate the fact that I did detect a note of compassion in his remarks to this beleaguered Minister for which I thank him kindly.

I say this with the full knowledge that this will not in any way take any of the sharpness of the knife or the thrust of the punch that he will be delivering to me on other occasions, on many occasions as the debate rolls along. He asks a few significant questions that I think he answered himself, and one point that I'd like to make with respect to the remarks that he made, and a correction that I want to make on his behalf is simply that the question of the high level diversion was not brought into this House for the first time by the Honourable Member from Portage in the last session.

It in fact was brought in this House and fully explained before a Public Utilities Committee two sessions ago, or three sessions ago in 1966; and that is a fact of record and that is a fact that is before us. The question relative to the kind and type of public hearings were brought into this House by the Honourable Member for Portage. This is a small point, I don't belabour it. He answered his own question because there were specific points, suggestions or actions that we deemed right, that the community at South Indian Lake should be represented by capable legal counsel and I can stand before you, Mr.

Chairman, and attest to the fact that they are indeed represented by capable legal counsel, so that the progression of things were in order and that hearings did take place. I intend to deal again more fully and completely with the other matters that he raised, particularly with respect to the conduct of the hearings, the events leading up to the hearings, and the manner and way in which the question now is before us in this legislature. Again, Mr. Chairman, I think I am reasonably within the bounds of the rules and regula tions that we operate under, that these are not matters for concern before you, Mr.

Chairman, in dealing with the estimates of my department.

592 March 20, 1969 (MR. ENNS cont'd.) Mr. Chairman, the Honourable Member from St. George did get to my estimates and he made numerous comments beginning with our, what he called "disastrous efforts" in the manner and way in which we arrived at our regulations regarding various forms of hunting in this province. And let me say this very clearly, and I know that I say this with the support of those of my staff that are responsible in advising this government in this matter, that I make absolutely no apology for our efforts to experiment, if you like, to some extent in certain of these areas.

We're going to make our share of mistakes. We possibly have made some mistakes; very likely that is the case, but we are attempting to inject a new attitude within the department, if you like, and that is to maximize those natural resources that we have in this province - and I'm referring particularly to the wildlife ones that the Honourable Member from St. George spoke about - in reference to such things as changing of times, early openings of seasons of the big game.

I'm well aware, being a cattleman myself and residing in the area that he speaks of, or very close to that part of the country, that it represented and did present specific or certain problems to the farming community and that it did present some problems, or appeared to present some problems from a safety point of view. I noted though that he was careful not to list any pertinent rise in accidents or hunting fatalities or of that kind in his comments, because to the best of my knowledge these did not occur.

I might also say that it may be a challenging and a difficult task that the department is undertaking, but I throw out the challenge to him that if we could in fact induce our hunters to shoot more accurately, or to make sure what they're shooting at, that it n;tight well be a desirable aspect of our hunting to stroll through our autumn woods rather than when we're already into the cold weather. I just throw out this possibility. This is some of the thinking in our department. The matter of having big game hunters and fowl hunters in the field at the same time is not something new.

It is being practised in other JUrisdictions, with reasonable degrees of success. I'm not saying that we have the answers. I think that we have to recognize that we have specific problems unique to our province. Some of the very points that he raises, the condition of our farm lands, our farm fields, our hay meadows, are things that we have to consider and perhaps in drawing up these regulations these haven't been given significant or serious enough consideration.

What I'm suggesting to you, what you're experiencing is a more flexible attitude within my department, an attitude which I welcome, and I think most members of this House would welcome, and in that era of experimental work, in that era of trying to maximize or to gain the optimum use of our natural resources, our wildlife resources from a hunting point of view, it should be kept in mind that we're doing this only for this purpose, that is to give the hunting public maximum and optimum opportunities for those that enjoy this form of recreation, to indeed have every opportunity to enjoy it.

I'm not going to attempt to defend particular dates of closing seasons. I have a degree of sympathy with what the Honourable Member from St. George said with respect to the concern 1hat he legitimately raises about the deer. The fact that if you're opening deer season before the first snow, you have the incidence of injured deer dying in the bush unnoticed, no doubt arises.

I'm suggesting to him that perhaps a great deal of our other associated problems with hunting, that is the indiscriminate hunter that is allowed to go into our bush, who finds a great deal of diff iculty in discriminating between a deer and, you know a 40 by 80 foot barn or a cow or what have you, that there's another area altogether that we should be, and are in fact, addressing ourselves to in our education programs towards the hunting public.

And if in fact we are successful in these areas, that we can very well consider and should be considering changing some of the traditional hunting patterns that we have grown to accept in this province. Archery hunting, for instance, is a young and growing sport. With archery hunting it offers some of the finest recreational, you know, outlets in this particular degree. You're in the woods at the most favourable time. We have few weeks in this province where we really and truly enjoy our outdoor life, where the fauna and flora is at its most magnificence.

To say unilaterally that it can't be done, that opening dates have to be fixed by statute to the first snow fall - unfortunately we can't predict the first snowfall - you know, I don't accept that as neces sarily being true. I recognize the points that the member raises, that in these experimental efforts we have no doubt raised all kinds of particular problems and my people and the depart ment I'm sure will be re-examining some of these. We've had problems associated with other big game areas; the elk hunt of the national parks haven't been entirely successful.

I think we have to work out more equitable means of recognizing the immediate concern of the adjacent

March 20, 1969 593 (MR. ENNS cont'd. ) •.•.. farmer who feels he has some preferred posi tion in this regard. I can understand that. I'm a farmer, I can understand that if I have to watch a herd of elk eating off my alfalfa field all year and nibbling at my stacks of hay that I with a great deal of effo rt put up for my winter supply, that perhaps I should have, you know, preferred treatment, and I think the department is prepared to look at it in this light. He made mention of the game management areas and I'm happy to note the remarks that he made about the game management areas.

This I think augers in a new era of game manage ment in this province. I should report to him that hopefully within a very short time that significant increases in the number of game management areas right in the Interlake area for instance, will be established. I think it's impo rtant that we set aside those lands, that habitat that is ideally suited for sustenance of our wildlife resources, that these should be set aside in perp etuity for that purpose and that we can exercise a degree of management on them.

It's not closing the area off to hunting by any chance; just putting us in a posi tion where we can manage wisely to the best of our knowledge the game that's in that area. He made note of a question that is const antly in front of us, and that is the judic ious use of the power toboggan. We have had some success in this area. I mention to him that in the north we've been able to establish trails where the toboggan is permissi ble as a method of conveyance to get into a hunting area and I'm pleased to report that in some of these areas we've had excellent cooperation by the res idents of that area.

I don't suggest by any means that we have overcome all the problems and I would hope that working in concert with the Minister of Transpo rtation that whatever reulations we eventually may wish to apply to the manne r and way in which these new vehicles of this desc ription can be used in the proper manner, not only for hunting but of course for the other uses that they are being put to. He made particular note to the problem that I suppose is one that is not raised for the first time in the House, and that is the matter of our policy with respect to Cr own lands.

I feel that the member probably isn't fully appreciative of the significa nt changes that have been made in the last few years· in our Cr own land policy, that in fact some of the options available to farmers and ranchers in the use of Crown land have become much more attractive than they were even just a few short years ago..

You can ask yourself the question, where should you be putting your emphasis on, in trying to overcome again a degree of tradition here of land owner ship and in that way pe rhaps saving the farmer or the rancher from investing badly needed capital into land when he could be investing it into cattle, into machinery, into development of his land. I suggest to you that these things are all possi ble, but I'm also prepared to agree with the Honourable Member for St.

George that we haven't an entirely satisfactory situation, that the long held tradition of land owne rship is a very difficult one to overcome and perhaps, pe rhaps one that we should not attempt to overcome in this particular area, and that we should be looking to means of considera bly liberalizing our policy with respect to sales of Crown land.

I think that the posi tion of this government and past and pr evious ministers in this po rtfol io have taken is that we should know first, at least to the best of our wisdom and that of profes sion al people working with us in this area, what in fact is the best use of any of our lands that are under our JUris diction as Crown lands, to avoid mistakes that have been made in the past in the indiscriminate sale of Crown lands, and that then to act boldly and firmly along the lines that these studies and land use studies sugge st.

I think that the member will be the first to agree that in a province as large as this province - I don't know offhand but I know that I am custodian of over a million acres of Cr own lands, you know that's just off the top of my hat -:-that to get this kind of analysis, get this kind of information, takes considera ble degree of effort, time and money in the kind of data collection that we are curr ently underway in the Canada land inventory program and other asso ciated program s; but that we are moving progress ively, we have freed up in the southwest in two po rtions of the pr ovince, we have come to a moment of decis ion, if you like, with respect to certain Crown lands.

I think if the honourable member wants to check the records, the amount of Cr own lands sold in the last 12 months or in the last two years has been steadily increasing and I'm suggesting to him that given the time to work out these policies that this is ce rtainly an area that we are prepared to look at very seriously. He makes further comment about setting up shooting reserves, pri vate game preserves. I should point out to the Honourable Member from St. George that just recently regulations, or an Order-in -C ouncil was passed making it possi ble for us to do this anywhere in the province.

He may not have known this but there have been areas desi gnated in and about the city of Brandon and Winnipeg whe re this was possi ble for some year or two at any rate. I can't recall

594 March 20, 1969 (MR. ENNS cont'd. ) ••••• precisely when the date of these first shooting preserve areas were established but they have been established. There were special areas des ignated in and about Brandon and Winnipeg where this was first the case; we just recently passed further regula tions that on certain conditions being met these were available and possible to consider the setting up of these shooting reserves in other parts of the province.

I close with this last remark with respect to the problem of ducks and I know that he appreciates that Manitoba is not the sole custodian of the ducks that fly through our skyways. I share his concern about ducks, I feel that I should bring to his attention the concern that this department has with respect to possible Federal action in this matter regarding the Game Migratory Birds Act.

Nobody in this department or in this government has ever taken the position that would deny any of our native population the right to take game at any time for sustenance, that is when it is needed for their way of life and for food on the table, but we are concerned when the privilege of shooting ducks, fowl, is extended unilaterally applying to all portions of the province, ju st what this means to our efforts to cooperate with those of other provinces, with that of United States, with that of Mexico, in the unique agreement that we have on this continent in our efforts to preserve the duck population.

I point that out to him. The Honourable Member from Churchill asked me for more specific details with respect to the geological survey that's undertaken at Southern Indian Lake. I think I probably indicated to him, if he prefers to check my opening remarks, pretty well what there is to say about it. It's a very intensive survey that will supply this department with the complete and up to date knowledge, maps, of the area which will be available for us at all times in the future for any future development that may occur. This is an expensive project.

It's a project that we would undertake normally in a period of perhaps 12 to 15 years but are condensing it to cover a period of the next three years. The project will cost some one million dollars. Funding arrange ments for this project are being arranged through Manitoba Hydro. In this particular area, the specific question that he asks, we are making very sure that we know precise ly, or at least have available to us all the pertinent data with respect to minerals in that area, that I'm sure the member will agree we should have before any action takes place in that part of the province. MR.

CHAffiMAN: Pardon me. I have an announcem ent to make. I would li ke to direct the attention of the Honourable Members to the gallery on my right here, where there are 24 ladies of the Newcomers Group of the Univers ity of Manitoba Faculty of Women under the dir ection of Mrs. Morrish. This group is located in the constituency of the Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce. On behalf of all the Honourable Members of the Leg islative Assem bly I welcome you all here tonight. • . • . • . • • . . continued on next page

March 20, 1969 595 MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party . MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Chairman, from time to time in this House we honour a group who perform in Manitoba who bear the honourable name of the Royal Winnipeg Ballet. We honour them because of the fact that they "trip the light fan tastic ", and tonight we have heard a past master at the game and he's not going to get away with it.

Because never in the years that I have been in this House have I heard a Minister attempt to evade the issue of South In dian Lake, or any other issue, as the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources attempted to do tonight. And I say to you, Mr . Minister, you may shrug your should ers and wave your hands , but I say to you, you are not going to get away with it. If you think for one moment that the important matter of South Indian Lake .... MR. ENNS: I'm not running away. MR.

PAULLEY: You certainly are trying and I'm telling you you are not going to run, you are going to be kicked out, and I suggest as a first step because of your inept handling of the matter of South Indian Lake that you should tender your resignation to the First Minister and to this Asse mbly. You constantly have attempted to evade the issue so important to the next generation and generations not yet born insofar as South Indian Lake is concerned.

For mer Deputy Ministers and Directors of the Department that you now lead have indicated to us the devastation that will take place if the proposed program at Southern Indian Lake takes place. -- (Interjection) -- I say you all should be left alone because you have jo ined him in an endeavour to thwart the democratic process of government. You hav en't the gumption, any of you, to await the report of a committee that was set up to hear representation on the question of Southern Indian Lake. -- (Interjection) -- I beg your pardon ?

You didn't have enough in testinal fortitude to even consider or wait for the report of Mr. Weber. And why didn 't you ? Because you didn't know, I would suggest , what his report may be as a result of the hearings before the commission. You even attempt, and have succ eeded Mr. Chairman, in thwarting democracy through our courts by pres enting a Bill in this House granting a license, the pur port of which appears to be the granting of a lic ense, to prevent the courts from dec iding whether or not an injunction should be placed in respect of the flooding of South Indian Lake. And then, Mr.

Chairman, the Minister has the gall in this co=ittee to turn around and say I'm not going to discuss the matter until the Bill comes before us . Have you no understanding of the diff erence between discussion under a bill and the discuss ion in a free ·open committee like we have here at the pres ent time, where you have to answer questions and we have an op portunity of replying to your questions ? -- (Interjection) -- Law Amendments ?

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if there wasn't an endeavour by this government to attempt to do the same with the Southern Indian Lake Bill as they attempted to do with Bill 22 recently and keep it in this Hous e. MR. CARROLL: That's hogwash. MR. PAULLEY: Hogwash ? You 're darn right it's hogwash. Every action of the govern ment opposite constitutes hogwash, ineptitude and a lack of understanding of the democratic process . Why are they bringing it in by bill ? Becaus e of the fact that they've got a majority; and I' ll bet you, Mr.

Chairman, whether they like it or whether they don't every Jack man and woman on that side of the house will support the bill. -- (Interj ection) -- What about me sup porting the bill ? I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that if this government gives those of us on this side of the House every fact , the results of every survey that has been made in respect of Southern Indian Lake and Manitoba Power development in the north, we might vote for the bill, but they have hid behind their so-ca lled privileged right of non-disclosure. They have done it consiste ntly. As a matter of fact Mr.

Chairman, I publicly asked the government that a tri-party committee be set up in equal numbers to go over the report, and not a word. The answ er is , "we with our majority in the House will decide this issue. " My honourable friend the Attorney-General sits behind his cigar smirking. I say to my honourable friend .... MR. LYON: It's only a small cigar. MR . PAULLEY: Yes , and sometimes small men smoke small cigars . MR. LYON: Small smirk, too. · MR. PAULLEY: But I say, Mr. Chairman, this issue is of far more importance than that of being decided upon by a majority of governm ent.

The Minister as I said, has attempted to hide behind the issue here tonight, and I say to him, come out from under, for once in your cotton pickin life as Minister - and I admit that you haven't been Minister very long - be a little more revealing, be a little more -- (Interjec tion) -- - yes you I' m speaking to - give us

596 March 20, 1969 (MR. PAULLEY Cont• d. ) •••• the facts , give us the facts. And if after having all of the facts you can so incline our minds to agree with this -- (Interjecti on) -- yes it will be pretty tough we may agree with you. -- (Interjection) -- I doubt it, too. Because you haven't got the in testinal fortitude to give us the facts , you hide behind your privileged, so-c alled privileged right in this Hous e. Have you something to say ? MR. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, just one interj ection with your permission. I'm certainly prepared to give him the facts.

I only hope you have the comprehension to compr ehend them. MR. PAULLEY: My honourable friend doesn't need to worry about whether I' ve got the comprehension or not. At least I have the guts enough to reveal to the public -- (Interj ection) - Well I'm telling you. I'd have enough guts to reveal to the public and those conc erned and in terested in this affair the facts , which you haven't got. We'v e had such pa=y whammy from you ever since you took over the department it is an abolute disgrace to the process of de mocracy here in the Provinc e of Manitoba.

What concern have you exhibited for the people in South Indian Lake ? What concern have you for the possibility, as Fred Malaher and others suggested, of cr eating an area that will take hundreds of years before it is productive onc e again, if indeed it ever becomes productive. My honourable friend , I realize and I recognize that you are a comparative rooky in this House. I realize that you haven't really had time, with all of your ability , to comprehend what is the requirem ents of a Minister of the Crown in the interests of democracy and the people of Manitoba.

I realiz e that despite your knowledge of ducks and deer and elk that you haven't very much knowledge of the requirements of people , as exhibited by your apparent reluctanc e to discuss in this commit tee, thus far, the problem of South Indian Lake. I suggest to you my honourable friend that maybe as time goes along, at least until this House is dissolved, that you use your faculties in an endeavour to absorb some of the knowledge required of a Minister to deal with people .

We know full well that Manitoba Hydro is faced with problems ; we know that they are charged with the responsibility insofar as their phase of the development is concerned with producing the cheapest power that they can, and this is their jo b and I don't fault them. I fault you, Mr. Minister , I fault all your colleagues in the Cabinet bec ause you have insisted on that being done without concern for peo ple, an honour able group of people who have taken care of themselves over the years . MR. CARROLL : That's not true. MR. PAULLEY: It is true and you know it, and I am so surprised, Mr.

Chairman, to hear a bearded repres entative from the north attempt to defend the government in this particu- lar ..... . MR. CARROLL: I'm just telling you you are not telling the truth , that's all. MR . P AULLEY: I obje ct to my honourable friend on this matter of truth, and I dare my honourable friend - I dare my honourable friend, who is so knowledgeable in this instanc e, to stand up and decry and declaim whether I said rightly or wrongly.

I dare my honourable friend to come to the defence of the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources with productive argu ments instead of sniping and chirping like he is doing at the pres ent time. MR. CARROLL: I' m just telling you you are wrong, that's all. MR. P AULLEY: Of course I'm wrong, Mr. Chairman. Of course I' m wrong. Only the mi ghty are right, only the mighty - 31 of the mighty are :right because the 31 refuse, the 31 refuse to put on line and on rec ord their ineptitude and their lack of concern in this instanc e. MR. CARROLL : No lack of concern. MR. PAULLEY: Oh, stop your chirping.

And talking of chirping, according to Fred Malaher there might not be very much chirping on Southern Indian Lake if the plan goes through because there will be no wildlife around there to chirp , and the only chirping that will be left, until this House is dissolved, will be my honourable friend from The Pas. At that time he too will ce ase being a Member of this House and we might have a government that has some con cern for people . MR. LYON: Tell us who . MR. PAULLEY: Yes , laugh - laugh. Imagine that, Mr. Chairman, another one - Minister of Transportation .•.. MR.

CHERNIACK: Everybody exc ept the Minister concerned, eh ? IVIR. PAULLEY: Yes. Laugh -- fools can laugh and I think they are. MR. LYON: You really don't believe that now. MR. PAULLEY: No, I really don't because it might be unparliamentary , but I know my honourable friend the Attorney- General knows that what I say is correct.

March 20, 1969 597 MR. LYON: Oh, I don't know that at all. MR. PAULLEY: One more chirper. You know, Mr. Chairman ..• . MR. LYON: Tell us more about who is going to win the election; that's what you were on a minute ago. MR. PAULLEY: I know one thing, Mr. Chairman, my honourable friend the Attorney General wonders who is going to win the election. MR. LYON: No, you were. MR. PAULLEY: I know that if this government stays in office much longer who is going to lose, not win, and that is the whole Province of Manitoba, because we are going backwards rapidly. Imagine, Mr.

Minister, a statement the other day that instead of the level of South ern Indian Lake being 35 feet , it is now going to be 31. Holy smoke! -- (Interj ection) -- A statement attributed to responsible authorities . It can't have been a statement from the Honourable the Minister because he said tonight he is not going to make any until we deal with the Bill . -- (Interjection) -- Yes , let's have the facts first, the government knows they've got the facts; let us have the facts , that's all we are asking for. MR . LYON: You'll get them . MR. PAULLEY: Will we ? MR. LYON: On the Bill . MR.

PAULLEY: Facts on the Bill. Let us get the facts of all of the reports, the in vestigations that have been made into the whole proj ect. Let you, Mr. Attorney-General - and what your capacity is insofar as this is concerned I don't know, other than being one of the smiling chirpers across the way - what part are you playing ? Have you read the reports ? Have you? No, of course he hasn't. I bet he didn 't even read the report that we did get, the interim report back in 1965 or 1967 which paid passing reference to other alternative methods of the development of the Ne lson River. MR . LYON: Mr .

Speaker, I didn't have to read that report, I was chairman of the committee when it was given . MR. PAULLEY: See that's what I mean. My honourable friend knows so much about so little that he doesn't even have to read the reports to know what's in them , and that is just ex actly what he said. I have got news for my honourable friend . I'm prepared to vote for the Bill on South Indian Lake providing - providing the facts are laid before this House and the facts will substantiate the necessi ty and the desirability of the flooding of Southern Indian Lake, and I defy you to do it. MR. ENNS: They will. MR.

PAULLEY: They will ? When ? MR. ENNS: When the Bill is ·introduced. MR. PAULLEY: When the Bill is in committee. MR. ENNS: When the Bill is introduced. MR. PAULLEY: Why not give us the opportunity of studying them before ?

As I said in my opening remarks, you are trying to hide behind procedure, and I say to you again, as I said at the offset of my remarks, you are not going to get away with it , because if necessary we will talk and talk until we ferret you out of your hole to give us the facts in this House or until you take my advice and tender your resi gnation to the Fi rst Minister because of your handling of this matter of Southern Indian Lake from the start. Because of your incompetence in this respect , I suggest that you should resign. I have no control, Mr.

Chairman, over whether or not my honourable friend resig ns or not, but I do want to make a real protest to my honourable friend and there is only one way that I can do it , to have it established on the record, Mr. Chairman, that we are thoroughly disgusted and we are thoroughly disappointed with the government's handling of this issue. The only way in which I· can do that is to propose a motion reducing the salary of the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources . And there are others involved as well. I appreciate the Minister in charge of Public Utilities has his part to play in this.

I don't know whether my cigar smoking friend the Attorney-General had anything to do with it or not, he didn't read the reports before because he was chairman of a committee. MR. ENNS: He gave me the legal advice. MR. PAULLEY: He gave legal advice? God help anybody who takes his advice on any thing. I' d hate like the dickens , Mr. Chairman, to be before 'any court of law and have him defend me. I' m sure that if there ever was a railroading job done my honourable friend would do it, as indeed the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources is attempting to do a railroading

598 March 20, 1969 (MR. PAULLEY cont'd. ) .•... jo b of Southern Indian Lake, and he is not going to get away with it if I can help it. MR. LYON: I' ll defend you anytime Russ. MR. PAULLEY: Yes , and I'll defend the rights of the people in Manitoba to continue a dec ent pe aceful existenc e, and I'll defend the rights of those people as long as I'm a member of this House; and when I ce ase to be, I'll defend them outside as well, and that's what I'm asking you on that side of the House to do , and the Minister tonig ht has said, ''Please fellows , let's not discuss this until I bring in my Bill.

" First of all, we don't know when the Bill is going to come in. We have been here for three weeks now and we have had one Bill that the government didn't want to go out of the House but reluctantly agreed to it going out of the House. We have had no further legislation of any item contained in the Throne Speech, and the Minister says, "Please leave me alone" ... MR. LYON: Well, not quite. MR. PAULLEY: ..... "until the Bill is introduc ed.

" Knowing the past record of many on that side of the House - there are some new rookies over there - but knowing the rec ord sinc e they took over in 19 58, chances are that the Bill on Southern Indian Lake and a few other Bills will be attempted to be stuffed down our throats in the dying days of this session. It's happened before, Mr. Chairman, and you know that it's happened, don't you ? You don't have to answer, I know.

The Attorney- General knows, the Provincial Treasurer knows, and I tell all the rest of you over there that don't know, that this is the methodology used by this govern ment in order to cut off debate. Guarantee us , Mr. Minister , that you will bring in the Bill tomorrow for first reading on Southern Indian Lake, with sec ond reading on Monday or Tues day. MR. ENNS: .... tomorrow, but I think I can assure you next week possibly. MR. PAULLEY� That's it you see, Mr . Chairman, see the answer I got ? I asked him to bring it in. He 's not sure whether he can bring it in, then he says next week possibly - possibly.

It's like my honourable friend the House Leader when he's asked what he's going to do - soon, hopefully. Oh, that's the Minister of Consumer Affairs and Recr eation - hopefully. Well I haven't got much hope for that government opposite, and while they are in office I haven't got much hope for the pe ople of Manitoba. I haven't much hope for fair treatment to the people of Southern Indian Lake. So , Mr. Chairman .... MR. LYON: Would my honourable friend permit me to help him advance his arguments ? He was asking about first reading of the Bill and I just wanted to bring him up to date.

The Bill had first reading a week ago . MR. PAULLEY: Fine , I' m glad. I' m glad and ! thank my honourable friend. I thank my honourable friend for informing me that it was given first reading a week ago. I apologize to the Minister for indicating that I'd like to have the Bill introduced. Now will the Minister tell me when the Bill will be before us for our consideration, along with all of the reports pertaining to Southern Indian Lake and the Hydro development on the Nelson River , so that we "' can consider the Bill and consider the reports from the various agencies that have compiled them .

Can I have that on Monday ? The Minister says poss ibly next week. We want them now. MR. ENNS: Soon. MR. PAULLEY: Soon - yes . - The sooner you are out of there the better it will be for Manitoba. Let's not forget that. I am so dis gusted with the handling of this affair by the Minister of Mines and Natural Resourc es , and as I have said, Mr .

Chairman, I cannot force him into resign ation from that portfolio but I can propose a motion, and the historic motion is that the Minis ter's salary be reduc ed to a dollar, but I don't think that because of his handling in this particular case it's worth a dollar, so therefore, Mr. Chairman, I move, sec onded by the Honourable Member for Ethelbert Plains , that Resolution 72 (a) , Minist er's Compensa tion, be reduced from $15, 600 to 98 cents . MR. CHAIRMAN pres ented the motion. MR. LYON: Mr . Chairman, I think this would be a convenient time at which to rise.

The Li eutenant- Governor is coming in to give Royal Assent to a Bill. MR. MOLGAT: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if I mi ght ask is he also going to give assent to the motion that's on the floor ? MR. LYON: I think in the next day or two we can probably spare him that problem. MR. CHAIRMAN: Committ ee rise and report. Call in the Speaker. Mr. Speak er, the Committ ee of Supply has adopted certain resolutions . and asks leave to sit again.

March 20, 1969 599 IN SESSION MR . M. E. McKELLAR (Souris-La nsdowne) : Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Winn ipeg Centre, that the report of the Committee be received, MR . SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. DEPUTY SERGEANT-AT-AR MS: His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor. MR . SPEAKER: May it please Your Honour, the Legislative Assembly at the presen t sessi on passed a Bill, No. 22,

An Act to Amend The Public Schools Act, which in the name of the Assembly I prese nt to Your Honour and to which Bill I respectfully request Your Honour's assent. MR . CL ERK: In Her Majesty's name, His Honour the Lie utenant-Governor doth assent to this Bill. MR . LYON: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, that the House do now adjourn. MR . SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried and the House adjourned until 10 :00 o'clock Fri day morning.

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	28-3-25
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	28th 3rd hansardpdf 25.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	13b8527754b7889864326deeb1a87b42c561f2c6

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