Manitoba Hansard — 5 October 1989 (Sitting 44, 34th Legislature, 2nd Session)

34-2-44

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thu rsday, Oc tober 5, 1989. The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS INTROD UCTIO N OF BILLS BILL NO . 51- THE MARITAL PROPE RTY AMENDMEN T ACT Hon. Clayton Man ness (Minis ter of Finance) introd uced, on behalf of the Honourable Minister of Jus tice and Attorney General (Mr. Mccrae), by leave, Bill No. 51, The Marital Property Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les biens matrimoniaux. BILL NO. 52- THE FAMILY MAINTE NANCE AMEND MENT ACT Hon. Clayton Mann ess (Mini ster of Finance) introduced, on behalf of the Honourable Minister of Justic e and Attorney General (Mr. McCrae), by leave, Bill No. 52, The Family Maintenance Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur !'obligation alimentaire. INTRODUCTION OF GUE STS Mr. Speaker: Prior to oral questions, may I direct Honourable Members' attention to the loge to my left where we have with us this afternoon Mrs. June Westbury, who is a former MLA who represented the Fort Rouge constituenc y. On behalf of all Honourable Members, I welcome you here this afternoon. Also with us this afternoon, seated in the public gallery, from the Kirkfield Park Christian Academy we have fourteen Grades 10 to 12 students under the direction of Patty Ayer.

This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Assiniboia (Mr. Mandrake). On behalf of all Honourable Members, I welcome you here this afternoon. * (13 35) ORAL QUES TION PERIOD Mikado Mine - Bag Bay Retention Ponds Mr. Harold Taylor (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, there have been concerns on the part of Winnipeggers as to the sanctity of their water supply. This caucus has raised the matters in the House dating back over a year.

We were given reassurances, the Shoal Lake Accord, put in place by the Premier when he was Environment Minister back in'81, was all that we had to be concerned about, because it would answer the needs. Well, answer the needs, it has not. We have a water supply that reaches this city, some 60 percent of the popu lation of the province, and it is served virtually untreated . We all hope that is the way it will remain. There have been recent concerns about mining activity in Shoal Lake, I would say activities that have not had full disclosure, activities that have not had candour and information.

My question to the Minister of the Environment (Mr. Cummings) is: what further has he to report on the findings of his depar tment, in conjunction with Ontario environment, on the retention ponds at the Mikado Mine on Bag Bay? Hon. Glen Cummings (Mi nister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, the question is: what is there to report? We have several times indicated that we, on an ongoing basis, have been working with the Department of Environment in Ontario to make sure this site, along with several others, are monitored on a continuous basis.

I have no doubt that what the Member opposite is wanting to lead up to is there was appar ently a press release this morning, or a conference, where there were accusations of mercury levels that could be discharging into the stream. There is certainly no concern that we have been able to identify that anything is being allowed, in any way, to flow into the drinking waters that are intended for use in Winnipeg. Mr. Taylor: Mr. Speaker, candour, I guess, is what we are looking for on this.

Will the Minister tell the House whether he received a specific response some time back from the Water Protect ion Group asking for information on the results of tests of the retention ponds at the Mikado Mine, with specific reference to mercury, lead and other heavy metals? Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, he asked if I received a response, or if I sent a response, because I think probably the issue that the Member is trying to lead up to is whether or not our department has been, and will be, prepared to share information with WPG.

We have always said that we will share information they ask for, and to the best of my knowledge we have never denied them any informa tion and are more .than prepared to co-operate. I would be a little bit cautious, if I were the Member for Wolseley, in referring to whether or not there is candour in relationship to how our department has been dealing with this. We offered WPG our co-operation from Day One at a meeting that was initiated by us, and we are continuing to stand by that offer. * (1 340) 1609

Thursday, October 5, 1989 Mr. Taylor: I am very pleased the Minister has put that on the record, because it would seem to fly in the face of the press conference tod ay. Is the Minister aware of the findings that were brought forward at that press conference regarding the technical reports on elements, such as mercury, lead, and cyanide in the retention ponds of the mine that would seem to fly in the face of the information being provided by his department? Mr. Cummings: Mr.

Speaker, if the Member is accusing the department of not putting forward information when it was requested , then he had better stand up and say so. Information Release Mr. Spea!<er: The Honourable Member for Wolseley, with a new question. Mr. Harold Taylor (Wolseley): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I recall an ,election campaign in 1988- Mr. Speaker: A new question. Mr. Taylor: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. On a new question, I recall the campaign by the political Party oppo site in 1988 that· talked very much about open Government.

I remember the throne speech after that election which spoke of the same thing. I find, however, that in action open Government is not a practice on the benches oppo site. It is not open at all. In fact, the withholding of information is becoming a rattier serious matter for us on this side of the House and for Manitobans in general. · The question to the Minister of Environment is: did he specifically, or did his staff specifical ly, withhold information on the technical tests which were done on the retention ponds of the Mikado Mine and· in the surrounding area? Hon .

Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, first of all, let me deal with the

preamble. We have pledged ourselves to an open and accountable Government and that is what we are giving. There has never been any instruction to my department from me other than that they shall share information with any interested group tha t wants to know what the status of particular mine sites that we may have information on, samples that we may have information on. We do not go around behind closed doors, as the Member opposite, having samples performed and tested and then using them solely for political purposes. ***** Mr. Harold Taylor (Wolseley}: Mr. Speaker, f irst, on a point of order. Mr.

Speaker: The Honourable Member for Wolseley, on a point of order. Mr. Taylor: That Mem ber oppo site has mad e an allegation of the fact that I took samples off of Stevens Island in the middle of Shoal Lake and took them and used them for other purposes. I think it should be in the record -(interjection)-Mr. Speaker, that- Mr. Speaker: Order , please; ord er, pl ease. The Honourable Member does not· have a point of order. ***** Mr. Taylor: Mr.

Speaker, 'on the supplemental question itself, there is evidence that this Minister or his staff did withhold evidence because I would like. to hear his answers as to why, when specific requests were given for information, results were not forthcoming. When the same results were asked of Ontario, Ontario by phone gave the results that this Minister would not give, or his staff. However, when. Ontario gave it in written form they censured the report. On wh ose request, why was the mercury evidence not in the Ontario report in writing-that was orally. Was it on the instruction of this Minister? Mr. Cummings: Mr.

Speaker, I guess the Liberal Critic in, this House is accusing the Liberal Government of Ontario of giving him misleading information. Very strange, typica l but strange. I make no apolog ies for the manner in which our departn:ient has handled any req uests that have come in. If th ere have been impr opr ieties or dela ys in the pr esenta tion of information it su rely is not by my instruction. It could very well be that we have a very busy department, given the rapid rise of interest in environmental issues. When the WPG phoned my department- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order.

The Honourable Member for Osborne. * (13 45) Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): Mr. Speaker , just to respond to the Minister-,- Mr. Speaker: Order , please; ord er, please. The Honourable Minister of the Environment, to finish his response. Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, I would assume, and because he is not coming out and forthrightly saying what his problem is, that the Member for Wolseley (Mr. Taylor) is referring to the fact the WPG phoned the department yesterday and asked why they had not yet received the answer to a request that they had put in, I believe, about mid-September.

If that is the case, then he should also stand in the House and say how pleased they are that the information was couriered over to them immediately. Some Honourable Members: Hear, hear! An Honourable Member: Oh, no, we would not hear that. 1610

Thursday, October 5, 1989 Information Censorship Mr. Harold Taylor (Wolseley): Yes, Mr. Speaker, this issue is bigger than our confreres in Ontario and the protection of them. This involves the protection of the water supply of 60 percent of this province. Will the Minister exp lain to the House how the requ ested information that was sent by his department, and I believe under his signature, to the Water Protection Group was censured, was precis, and did not have all of the information.

It was only on the oral request on October 2 that the final information on mercury and other heavy metals came, because there was threat of act ion being taken agains t this Minister and his department. Will he exp lain that to all Manitobans and this House? Hon . Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, there was never any censor of any information that went out from my depar tment. The information that they require is presented to them, and will always be presented with complete candour, if I have anything to say about it. Some Honourable Members: Hear, hear! CN Rail Relocation Mr.

John Plohman (Dauphin): For a few months, and particularly the la st few da ys, we have seen an unprecedented loss of jobs in the transportation sector particularly, but in other areas as well, in Manitoba as a re sult of federal Government actions and policies. We have seen the losses at CN, at VIA Rail. We have seen it at Canada Post . We have seen them in the immigration centre, and we have seen them in the military, and in a number of other areas, Mr. Speaker. I ask this Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr.

Albert Driedger) today, in view of the fact that there was a major effort to move the CN headquarters to Edmonton in 19 85, whether he has been advised or has any additional evidence of additional moves to Edmonton from CN regional headquarters here in Manitoba? Hon . Albert Driedger (Minister of Hig hway and Transportation): No, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Speaker, once again, we have a Minister who is operating in a vacuum from total ignorance to information and facts that are taking place in this province.

I ask the Minister, in view of the fact that toda y we have been app rised that the accounting section- 10 positions have been elimi nated in Man itoba, in Winnipeg, and those functions established in Edmonton, whether this Minister will make himself aware of those details and take action to have those people remain in Winnipeg and remain at the regional headquarters here instead of moving to Edmonton under Mazankowski's efforts to build an empire there? Hon . Albert Driedger: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I will. 1611 Mr.

Plohman: Well, we want more than just another paragraph in the letter that he put in yesterday to the federal Government. We have no action from this Minister, no action, nothing substantive. Federal Operations Relocations Task Force Request Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): I ask the Deputy Premier (Mr. Cummings) whether he will establish a task force that will determine precisely what has been taken from Wi nnipeg and moved to Edmonton si nce the Conservative Government came to office in Ottawa. We know of many instances, including in the military, the Kapyong barracks, including as well the immigration centre.

We know now of CN headquarter moves that are continuing to take place. I ask this Deputy Premier if he will undertake to esta blish a task force of all Parties in this House, the City of Winnipeg, the Chamber of Commerce, and labour to determine precisely what jobs and functions have moved in the last five years from Winnipeg to Edmonton so we can make a case to gain that back here in Manitoba. Hon . Albert Driedger (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr.

Speaker, we are in the process of doing tha t right now, but I would like to inform the Member as well that the employment in the province has increased by about 13 ,000 jobs, long -term permanent jobs. That is not in defence of the jobs that we have lost, and we are trying to establish exactly what has happened over a period of time, and when I have that information, I will make the House aware of it. An Honourable Member: Hear, hear! * (1 350) Mr. Plohman: Mr. Speaker, there has been no job growths. Statistics Canada tell us in the first half of 1989 in this province and we have record bankruptcies.

Let this Minister not talk about the economic health and job creation. I ask the Deputy Premier (Mr. Cummings), on behalf of the Premier: will he undertake immediately to give a commitment to this House that he will establish such a task force so that we can find the facts that are being hidden insofar as moves from Winnipeg to Edmonton, under Ma zan kowski's Empir e Building there at Winnipeg's expense, in transportation and other areas? Does this Minister not care to establish that task force to determine those facts? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr.

Speaker, after the activities of yesterday which created a lot of concern for many Manitobans, we took certain actions. I also want to indicate, aside from the Member's request for a task force, I met with the Mayor of the City today. We are jointly setting up a meeting with the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce, the City of Winnipeg, as well as Al Cerilli from the union and my department. We will be setting that up to see whether we can plan a strategy to make

Thursday, October 5, 1989 our voice known in a strong way to the fed eral Government. An Honourable Member: Sounds good. An Honourable Member: Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker: Order. Crown Corporation Public Review Act Amendments Mr. John Angus (St . Norbert): Mr. Speaker, this is for the Minister responsible for Hydro and it concerns mega projects.

Tuesday, the Manitoba Courts, in reference to the Crown Corporation Public Review Act said, and I quote, "There is a flaw with this legislation, somebody goofed when they drafted it." Yesterday the Minister stated that he had no intentions of supp orting any move to clarify the situation and force mega projects to public hearings. Is the Minister satisfied that the legislation under which the PUB receives its power provides sufficient protect ion to the consumers in Manitoba? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr.

Speaker, in response to the question, the Act was drafted very intentionally to leave within the hands of Cabinet, decisions with respect to the capital expansion plans of our major Crown corpora tions. Let me also say that when our Crowns engage in capital plans that require billions of dolla rs of spending which have to be guaranteed by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) on behalf of the Government of Manitoba and because Governments have to be acco untable, that is the way the process has to be. Let me also indicate that the Opposi tion, after some amendments, supp orted that legislation wholehearted ly.

Public Utilities Board Capital Projects Crown Corporations Mr. John Angus (St . Norbert): To the Min ister responsible for Hydro (Mr. Neufeld), I suspect, Mr. Speaker, given that the chair of Manitoba Hydro, in a submission to the Public Utilities Board in March of this year, stated his support for the ex amination and review of capital expenditures by the PUB prior to any financial commitment by the Government, why is this Minister and this Government so adamant agai nst providing tha t open type of information? Hon .

Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): The Member's logic behind this question is completely wrong. The Government does, through its Crowns, totally expect capital plans to be reviewed for the purposes of setting rates by the Public Utilities Board. The sanction, indeed, the final decision is ultimately as to whether a capital plan goes ahead or not within the Crowns will remain in the Government because of course the Government is accountable. Mr. Speaker, the Act was intentionally drafted in that fashion. Jurisdiction - Manitoba Hydro Mr. John Angus (St . Norbert): Mr.

Speaker, then to the Minister of Finance, will he in fact support legislation directing Manitoba Hydro to lay before the Public Utilities Board mega projects that involved consumer rates of Manitobans in the future years? Hon . Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, that was the intent of the legislation. Of course, Manitoba Hydro will lay before the Public Utilities Board capital plans that have been entered into by Hydro after the Government of the Day has seen the projects and has made some decision in accordance with public policy. Naturally they will be laid before the Public Utilities Board .

The Public Utilities Board will make recommendations with respect to rates and indeed will make decisions with respect to rates. * (13 55) Mr. Angus: Mr. Speaker, with a new question to the Minister, this is a very serious issue that impacts all Manitobans, and I would respect the tolerance of the Government. When the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Neufeld) refused to place-a nd it was added to by the Finance Minister (Mr. Manness)- mega projects before the Public Utilities Board before they were app roved and rubber stamped by the Government, it was obviously caught off guard.

They obviously did not consider all the information. On June 9, 1989, the chairman of Hydro, in a memo to the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Neufeld), stated, and I quote, "In my view it is entirely appropriate for Manitoba Hydro to be required to defend its major capital expenditure plans before the Public Utilities Board , and to receive their comments and criticisms prior to the Go vernment appr oval. This is very important, Mr. Speaker, with your tolerance- Mr. Speaker: And the question is? Mr. Angus: Mr. Ransom further stated that his position was first- Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please.

I would like to remind the Honourable Member for St. Norbert that the remarks that you have just made are not on Hansard. I was trying to get the Honourable Member's attention so that I could recognize him one more time. Now, will the Honourable Member for St. Norbert kindly put his question? Mr. Angus: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I apolog ize. Mr. Speaker, when the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr . Neufeld) refused to pl ace the Hydro capital expenditures and the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) corroborated that information before the PUB, they obviously caught them off guard.

They obviously did not consider all the information at their disposal . On June 9, the chairman of Hydro -(interjection)- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The Honourable Member for St. Norbert, kindly put his question now, please. 1612

• Thursday, October 5, 1989 Mr. Angus: Mr. Speaker, all right, can the Minister tell this Hous e why he ch ooses to ignore the recommendation of Hydro's highest ranking official, and an individual for whom all Members of this House have the utmost respect? Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, when the legislation was drafted , and I was responsible for the drafting and the guiding of that legislation through the Legislature, I was in constant co mmunicat ion with Mr. Ransom with respect to the legislation.

Let me say that the legislation was written in the fashion such that Government would ultimately make decisions with respect to major projects involving Crown corpora tions, because Government of the Day is totally respo nsible for going to the money markets and guaranteeing the borrowing of literally bill ions of doll ars. Go vern ment-and the NOP Goverment was no different-can in no way remove itself from that responsibility. Once that decision is made, then of course, as Mr.

Ransom indicated by the way in that memo and in many other times, the full capital plan is to be provided to the Public Utilities Board for them to review and recommend, and to indicate what rate should be in place. Manitoba Hydro Capital Projects Review Mr. John Angus (St. Norbert): Mr. Speaker, then would the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) support the comments by Mr. Ransom in that memo that say, I request the Public Utiiities Board undertake a review with public hearings of our major capital expansion plans prior to any final commitment by the Government. Would you comment on that, please? Hon.

Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, that is consistent with what I have been saying all along. If Ma nitoba Hydro enters into a major agreement necessitating a major expansion, a capital expansion, that will be laid before the Public Utilities Board . Public Utilities Board Jurisdiction - Manitoba Hydro Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for St. Norbert (Mr. Angus), with his final supple mentary question. Mr. John Angus (St. Norbert): Mr. Speaker, will the Minister of Fina nce (Mr . Man ness) supp ort the amendments proposed by this Member, and propo sed by Mr.

Ransom, that urge the Government to introduce legislation that will amend this clause to allow the Public Utilities Board to review, as oppo sed to app roving, any major capital expenditures to determine the impact on customers before the Go vernment enters into an agreement? * (14 00) Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, you see you have a Member here who wants it both ways. I have app roached that Government to try and bring in that amendment myself. They turned me down. They turned me down, the Opp osition, they turned me down.

You see, there is a big difference between the words "review" and "appr ove." If the Members are saying now the Public Utilities Board should not have the power to app rove, but only to review, tell us what side of the issue they want to be on because they cannot be on both sides. Manitoba Child Care Association Meeting Request Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (St. Johns): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Acting Premier. As Members of the Government should know, the issues around day care are growing enormously every day.

The Premier was sent a letter yesterday informing this Government of the mandate that the child care association has received from parents, child care workers, community volunteer board members, a mandate that says this budget of this Government is not acceptable and they have asked this Government for a chance to have frank and open negotiations.

My question to the Acting Premier is: what is the reply of this Government to this most serious letter on a most critical issue, what is the answer to this letter and what is this Government prepared to do to add ress the looming walkout and day of protest coming up in the next couple of weeks? Hon. Charlotte Oleson (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, I do not presume to answer letters for the Premier so he will be answering that letter directly to the organization in due time.

However, I should inform the Member that there was a meeting this morning with the Day Care Advisory Committee, the Human Services Committee of Cabinet and the Premier was present at the meeting. Day Care Funding Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (St. Johns): Mr. Speaker, the situation is so critical it demands much more firm action on the part of this Government than that. The sloughing off of a major labour dispute issue, one of the most critical issues facing the province of the day, to a politically appoi nted committee, is not good enough.

My qu est ion to the Acting Premier is: is this Government prepared to negotiate and make changes in this year's budget to meet the requests of the child care assoc iation, speak ing on behalf of day care workers and parents and community volunteer board members. Hon. Charlotte Oleson (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, as I indicated, there was a meeting this morning, a very productive meeting, with child care people from across the province who represent various aspects of child care within the province. It was a very frank, open meeting, it was a planning-for-the-future meeting. Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. The Honourable Member for St. Johns has the floor. 1613

Thursday, October 5, 1989 Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I do not know of any other situation in a labour dispute where a Government is prepared to slough off an issue to a politically appointed body that has no authority to make decisions. It is an abdication of Cabinet responsibility. Manitoba Child Care Association Meeting Request Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (St .

Johns): My question to the Acting Premier is, given the lack of action to date, given the lack of willingness to even sit down and talk with the child care association that represents the parents, boards and volu nteer com munity board members, how far is this Government prepared to go to see disruptions in the labour force in Manitoba, to see disruptions in terms of the family, to see withdrawal of service and, more importantly, to see board of directors resign, to see the whole system come . Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. A question has been put. The Honourable Minister of Family Services. Hon .

Charlotte Oleson (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, by the tone that the Member is taking, she seems to be advocat ing this type of activity. This Government has gone a long, long way in assisting the day care community of Manitoba, 45 percent increase in funding over two budgets, 45 percent, bringing the total child care ded ication of monies to child care in this province to $42 million. ***** Mr. Speaker: Order; order. The Honourable Member for St. Johns. Order, please. On a point of order? Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: On a point of order. Mr. Speaker: On a point of order. Ms.

Wasylycia-Leis: On a point of order, in the middle of the comments made by the Minister of Family Services, the Mem ber for Rhineland (Mr . Penner) shouted out, "Children, where are your parents?" Now, Mr. Speaker, I think that is an insult to all working peop le- Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. There is no point of order. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order , pl ease; ord er, pl ease. The Honourable Member for Ellice. Ms. Avis Gray (Ellice): Thank you - Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order , ple ase. Order!

Honourable Mem bers wish ing to carry on with their priv ate conversations can do so outside the Chamber. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, order! The Honourable Member for Ellice has the floor. Ms. Gray: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This Government has the morals of an alley cat. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! POINT OF ORDER Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The Honourable Acting Government House Leader. Hon . Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr.

Speaker, I have been sitting here listening to Members opposite editorialize after answers have been given, but the Member oppo site saying that this Government had the morals of an alley cat certainly is not conducive at least to trying to ope rate this House in an orderly fashion. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order! The Honourable Member for Ellice, on that same point of order. Ms . Gray: On the same point of order, Mr. Speaker, I would like to make it very clear that in fact those words that I spoke were not my choice.

I was merely quoting the Hansard on the same words that the now Premier (Mr. Filmon) of this province spoke in June of 1986 when he made verbal -(interjections)- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, order! Order, please. Order! For Honourable Members' attention, I would like to quote from our Beauchesne's 410 . It is very, very specific. Television has made a marked impact on the Legislature and the public perception thereof. In the view of the watching public, decorum is of great importance. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please!

On the same point of order, which has been raised, I would remind the Honourable Member for Ellice (Ms. Gray) that we are all Honourable Members in the Chamber. Unparliamentary language may not be attributed to another Member. Therefore, I am asking the Honourable Member for Ellice to withdr aw tha t state ment, please. The Honour able Member for Ellice. Ms . Gray: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I certainly do withdraw that. Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the Honourable Member for Ellice. 1614

Thursday, October 5, 1989 Special Policy Advisor - Health Dr. Lawrence Wiser Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Ellice, with her question. Ms . Avis Gray (Ellice): Mr. Speaker, the Premier also went on to say that Government has said to the people of Ma nitoba and its own civil servants, "Do as I say, not as I do." I hope that the Premier remembers those words, and I am assuming he was looking in a mirror when he said that. Mr. Speaker, we have recently learned that a Dr. Lawrence Wiser has been contracted as a special policy advis er by the Department of Health.

My question to the Minister of Health is: can he tell us what Mr. Wiser's job function is, how long is he being contracted for and what is he being paid? Hon . Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Yes, Mr. Speaker. Ms. Gray: With that non-answer, Mr. Speaker, we would assume- Mr. Speaker: Or der, pl ease. I will rem ind the Honourable Member that we do not comment on answers either given, taken as notice, or not answered. * (1 410 ) Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Ellice, with her supp lementary question. Ms . Gray: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for your advice. I have a supplementary to the same Minister.

I would assume that a special policy adviser is certainly the same job that Sonny Arrojado held as a senior adviser with the Depart ment of Health and the same job where she was turfed out by this now Minister of Health. My question to the Minister is: can the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) tell this House why he has hired a special policy adviser when his own Deputy Minister publicly indicated in Janua ry of this year that we would not be hiring a replacement, we have no use for an adviser? Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order. The Honourable Minister. Mr. Orchard: Yes, we have hired Dr. Wiser.

No, he does not have the morals as attributed by my honourable friend from Ellice. Mr. Speaker, the individual has a record of distinction in terms of his clinical practice, his dedication to various research projects in terms of the effica cy of emerg ing health technolog ies and practices of care and has a very valuable role to contribute to the ministry of Health as a physician with not only field exper ience but admin istrative and research experience.

If my honourable friends find objection to hiring expertise in the medical field, then I suggest that they would have no idea or concept of what is- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The Honourable Member for Ellice, with her final supp lementary question. Ms. Gray: I have a final supp lementary to this same Minister. How can the Minister of Health justify bringing in this high-priced help when they said that they did not need these people, when we feel it is an indication of propping up the fading ima ge of the Minister of Health?

How can he justify this when you are not prepared to even consider increases in salaries for day care workers? Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to some of the cat calls from the New Democratic back bench but that would be unparliamentary. Members in the New Democratic Party are referring to alley cats. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The Honourable Minister of Health. Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, it is of the utmost ease with which I justify the hiring of a policy adviser to the Deputy Min ister of Healt h.

It is for the very pu rp ose of formulation of policy which will lead the ministry of Health and in co-operation with the Manitoba Medical Association, College of Physicians and Surgeons, the Faculty of Medicine, the major institutions that consume a substantial amount of the budget of the Province of Manitoba, so that we can assure that the policies that emanate from this Government are appr opriate for continuing quality care well on into the future. Mikado Mine - Bag Bay Mercur y Contamination Ms . Maureen Hemphill (Logan): Mr. Speaker, my qu est ion is for the Minister of Environment (Mr . Cummings).

On August 17 , the Water Protection Group took samples from the holding pond at the Mikado Mine site. This is within 30 metres of Shoal Lake and their an alysis showed that there were high cyanide levels. At the time the Minister said that they were going to do retesting, wanted to do their own testing, which they did. On August 24 the province confirmed that there were cyanide levels in that area, but they were at a lower level than had been said before and that they would break down with the sunlight. The Minister indicated both to the public- Mr. Speaker: And the question is? Ms.

Hemphill: That was a very short

preamble. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The question? Ms. Hemphill: Yes, Mr. Speaker, would the Minister please tell us why, when he gave the information to the' public through the press conference, and why, when he wrote the Water Protection Group on September 16 with information, that he only indicated that there 1615

Thursday, October 5, 1989 were cyanide levels in the testing and did not give any indication of the mercury levels at 4. 72, which is five times the allowable levels? Hon . Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, that does not indicate mercury or cyanide levels in the lake. That is a settling pond where you might expect to find something, a settling pond which, by the way, is fully retained and, according to Ontario officials and my own, has no chance of allowing material to leach or flow into the lake. Mr. Speaker, the Member for Wolseley (Mr.

Taylor) raised a question of similar circumstance earlier in the House. The drinking water of half the population is being questioned by these fearmongers on the other side. POINT OF ORDER Mr. Speaker: The Honou rabl e Opposition House Leader, on a point of order. Mr. Reg Alcock (Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. I can understand why the Minis ter of the Environ ment (Mr . Cummi ngs) is uncomfortable, but he should not respond to legitimate questions by the Opposition by impugning motives, and I would ask that he withdraw that remark. Mr.

Speaker: The Honour able Minister of the Environment, on that point of order. Hon . Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): On that point of order, Mr. Speaker, I would quite willingly withdraw the word "fearmongers." Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the Honourable Minister of the Environment. The Honourable Minister can finish his answer. ***** Mr. Cummings: The information was sent forward to the WPG as soon as the work was done due to the complexity of the chemical work that had to be done for heavy metals. That work was finished on September 21.

It was then forwarded to our dir ector of Environmental Services, who I believe had it on his desk until yesterday. When he received a request asking where it was, immediately couriered the information over. Ms. Hemphill: Mr. Speaker, I do not think that in all the answers the Minister has given that he has yet told us why he did not tell the public and the City of Winnipeg why there was mercury contamination in the holding pond. The tests also showed very tiny levels very close to the lake which he has not also add ressed yet. Why did it require this Citizen Advocacy Group to do the testing in the first place?

Why was this not found and done by the Government and reported to the public in. tne City of Winnipeg, and has there been any subsequent monitoring then to keep track of the levels of contami nation in the pond and in th.e area surrounding the la ke? Mr. Cu mmings : Mr. Speaker , th ere has been subsequent testing in relationship to cyanide. There has been a dropping level of the amount of cyanide that is in that pond.

But the problem that the public has to be able to unde rstan d, has to have the information on, is that we are talking about a mine process pond that is now out of service, one that is fully retained with a plastic liner, has two further retention ponds before anything could reach the drinking water of this province. I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, and the Opposition, that this is not an issue that we take lightly, and I do not think that it is appropria te we be bringing forward any information that would smear the intent and the honour of the Civil Service within my department. Ms .

Hem phill: Nobo dy is trying to smear his depar tment; the report has come from his department that shows the high levels of contamination. We are asking why he did not tell anybody about it. Winnipeg Water Protection Group Funding Ms. Maureen Hemphill (Logan): Mr.

Speaker, my question is: since the water protection group seems to be the agency in the group that has brought this information to the attention of the people of .Manitoba and to the City of Winnipeg, and since they are playing such an obviously necessary role in both advocacy and protection of the city's water, will this Government give funding to this organization so they can continue this vitally necessary advocacy and protection role? Hon . Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr.

Speaker, I answered that question yesterday when I stated that I believe the people of this province, and the people of Winnipeg, do not intend to pay three times to have expert ise brought to the hearings that will eventually come to Winnipeg. But I have to reiterate that at my request I met with the WPG shortly after the y were est ablished . I offered them the total information tha t we have in our depar tment, any technical backup that they would request, and I said if they had concerns that they wanted to bring forward, please contact me so I could deal with them.

The only time the y contacted me was that meeting. They have not directly brought information to me except through the press since then. Mr. Speaker: The time for oral que stions has exp ired. * (14 20) ORDERS OF THE DAY Hon . ·Clayton Manness (Aeling Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, before I move the moving into Supply motion, I understand. that at 5 p.m. we will move into Private Members' Hour to consider Bills. That being the case, I move, seco nded by the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings), that Mr.

Speaker do now leave th.e Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider the .Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. 1616

• Thursday, October 5, 1989 MOTION presented . MATTER OF GRIEV ANCE Mr. Paul Edwards (St . James): I rise on a matter of grievance. Mr. Speaker, I want to grieve toda y the increasingly gloom y labour situation in this province and the ineffectiveness of this Government in dealing with the cut which has been made by the other level of Government but as well with the changing economic environment in this province. Mr. Speaker, it is my view that we are in a critical phase in Manitoba's economic history. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order.

We are having some difficulty in hearing the remarks being put forward by the Honourable Member for St. Jam es (Mr. Edwards). Honourable Members wishing to have their private conversations can do so outside the Chamber. The Honourable Member for St. James. Mr. Edwards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I was saying, I believe that Manitoba is entering a critical era in its economic development and its economic history. I think that the response of Government is more critical toda y than perhaps it has been certainly since the Second World War but one of the most critical times in our history as a province. Mr.

Speaker, we have seen over a number of years in this province the erosion of our economy through a declining in the manufacturing industry in this province and a declining in the jobs which provide the best employment oppor tunities for our people. Those are the jobs that provide stability, they provide high paying wages and they allow people to stay in this province and raise their families and reach their aspirations which I think we all hope to do for all people who chose to work in this province.

However, we have now entered the free trade era in this country and despite the predictions of the Liberal Party that the Free Trade Agreement would not be good for this country, we have seen the Government, both at the federal level and here at the provincial level, forge ahead on the free trade front. It is certainly my view and that of my Party, that that was an error. It was something which I think was done because of the leadership which happens to see our economy as inextricably linked, and indeed our nation inextricably linked, to that of the United States.

I think that is a mistake because we are seeing very early on in the experience of the Free Trade Agreement that this is indeed part of the manifest destiny theory behind the United States' desire for expansion and growth, both economically and politically in the world. That is not to say that the United States is our enemy. I do not, by any stretch of the imagination, mean that. I do though think that we have to acknowledge that we are different.

We have to acknowledge that we are next to an economic giant, and we have to acknowledge that reality and prepare to defend as much as possible and as much as necessary our own cultural integrity 1617 and our own ability to define and work out what we as a nation want to be. That as a nation from coast to coast to coast, committed to the principle of equalization between those coasts and committed to the idea that we all should share in prosperity, and we all should share in times of recession or depression.

The Free Trade Agreement in the most recent decision over the pork subsidy I think points us in the direction that the Americans intend to take on this agreement. It is very clear to me, and I think to most who have watched in the past months, that the United States sees our entire system of equal ization in this country, and our entire system of, even within provinces and within regions, supporting farmers groups, to give one exam ple, but cer ta inly others, thr ough su bsidy programs, as an affront to the free market.

If it is an affront to the free market, and I do not bel ieve it is, but if in fact it is, I would continue to argue that It is a necessary incursion by Government into the free market to protect what we want to see this country be. (Mr. Harold Gilleshammer, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) We do not want to see unrestrained development in certain parts of the country at the expense of other parts of the country.

We all want growth, but as a national Government I think it was incumbent upon our present national leader to recognize that this country has grown up despite the natural economic tendencies in this continent which flow north-south, rather than east-west. We have always gone against the grain, we have always gone against the odds. It is something that I think we have championed, and quite correctly, through successive Governments. I might add that started with John A.

Macdonald, the Conservative who stood up and said that we would not allow what was then the Northwest Territories, which included this province and Al berta and Saska tche wan and the North west Territories to become part of the United States even though the Great Lakes stood between the East- Lower Canada and Upper Canada-a nd the West. He went ahead and he took enormous risks and he made enormous efforts to secure the financing and the support from the mother country, the United Kingdom, to go through with the national dream.

That national dream took the form of a railroad first and later on a highway, but initially the railroad was what linked this country from coast to coast . • (14 30) Today we see the desecrat ion of that dream and the desecration of that railroad by a Government of the same Party coincidentally; ironically that has chosen to turn that dream, in the words of John Turner, "into a nightmare." The fact is that a railroad is a link like no other. It is more of a link than a highway. It is far more than any air route can ever give.

It is a link which I think is in the subconscious of every Canadian in this land and certainly any Canadian who has ridden that railroad as I have as a child many, many times.

Thursday, October 5, 1989 In any event, getting back to the specific situation in Manitoba, Mr. Acting Speaker, as I said, it is my view that we are entering a critical time, fi rst because of free trade, but I think also because of a federal Government that really does not want to work with Manitoba to provide a strong economy for future years and for our children and our grandchildren. The most effective and the most obvious sign of that is that the federal Government has not chosen even to spread the federal dollars which it has to spend anyway, and I am speaking, of course, of the defence cutbacks.

We know that the cuts here in Manitoba are not going to save the Government any money. That has been proven I think quite effectively and quite soundly. Yet, even though the dolla rs have to be spent, we have seen a choice on the part of the federal Government to withdraw from the smaller provinces, the pr ovi nces that need that inves tment, and in particular of course Prince Edward Island and Manitoba.

We certainly, along with Prince Edward Island, are a province that is very vulnerable to what may seem like small dollars to a province like Ontario and Quebec, but in Manitoba it is pretty big bucks when we lose 800 workers at Kapyong and another 800 at Portage la Prairie. That is big news in Manitoba. That is going to affect our overall provincial economy, not just the economy of the areas in which those people worked and lived. Mr.

Acting Speaker, I want to refer at the outset of my gr ievanc e to the Man itoba La bour Rela tions Information Bulletin for the second qua rter of this year, and I think that is an interesting and instructive bulletin in that it specifically says, with respect to federal budget impact, that the budget, the federal budget, that is the budget of April of this year, is acknowledged to be inflationary, contributing about three-quarters of one percentage point to consumer price index growth in 1989 and a further half percentage point in 1990.

Then the report goes on to state, under the heading, Medium Term Outlook to 1993, over the next four years, that lnformetrica predicts that we will be expe riencing a rate of growth of . 7 percent per year compared with 2. 7 percent in the rest of Canada. So we are virtually a quarter-we are going to have one quarter of the growth rate that the rest of this country has. Now those figures are available to our federal representatives, yet they have seen fit to ignore those in their decisions about federal spending. I lived for six years in Ontario, right in the heart of southern Ontario.

I lived in Peterbor ough, and Toronto, and Kingston-cities that have traditionally had a manufacturing base, although Kingston, of course, has as well a very large Government presence through the Corrections, and the university, and the various other governmental institutions there. I have seen the dolla rs that are spent in southern Ontario, and I went down there because those are my roots and I do not say anything about Ontario that reflects badly on them as Canadians. That is not my intent.

My intention is to make the point that our federal Government has spent billions and billions and billions of dollars .in that sector of this country, and of course, as well in the oth er- what is co mmonly cal led heartlan d-a nd that is Quebec. The reg ions, the outlying regions have never experienced the same rate of input from the federal Government, and I guess, Mr. Acting Speaker, if you want to be crass, you would say it is politics.

The federal politicians look at the population bases in this country, and that is where they put the bucks, and that is a very cynical view of it, but quite frank ly, I certai nly expect mor e from a federal Government. I would expect that we in Manitoba and in Prince Edward Island and in Newfou ndland and in Saska tche wan, provi nces tha t are at the outlying regions, that maybe do not have the popula tion base of the other areas but nonetheless represent significant areas in this country and represent individual provinces in this country, would get more than their fair share of federal spending.

It seems to me that they should get federal spending above and beyond what is their percentage of the population. That is my view of what equal ization should mean. When taken not just with respect of the equal ization payments, but with respect to what our Government spends each year in this country, and let us be clear, this Government, this federal Government spends billions and billions of dolla rs every year. We have very rarely, Mr. Acting Speaker, ever received our share even. Far from more than our share, we have very rarely received our share in terms of population of federal spending.

One notable exception to that, when I believe we actually reached what was our percentage of the population, around 4 percent, was when we had Lloyd Axworthy in Ottawa, who in fact went down to Ottawa and did stand up for Manitoba, and he did get the mo ney to come to Ma nitoba. We have not seen anywhere near the same success from our Tory Cabinet Ministers in the last five years, Mr. Ac ting Speaker. People say, well, Axworthy was bringing money to Ma nitoba and th ey sug gest that was someho w politic king, and that he was doing things that were not in keeping with what we deserved in Manitoba.

But let us face it, what he got as a percentage of our popula tion, as a percentage of the rest of the country, was what we deserved. What we do not realize, people think, oh, we have all kinds of things from the federal Government, we must be getting more than we deserve. We were not. What we do not realize is how much money they spend in Ontario and Quebec. You go down there and live there for awhile and you see the investments that are made in those parts of the country. It is phenomenal how much money is spent down in those population bases of our country.

Going on, referring to the labour information bulletin for the second quarter of this year, it is interesting to note that it is pointed out in that bulletin that Labour Canada reported having surveyed collective bargaining wage settlements covering 500 or more employees in Ma nitoba, in the first qu arter of 19 89 tha t wage increases averaged 3.9 percent annually over the term oft hose agreements. Now that compares with. a Canadawide average of 4.3 percent annually. So we are falling behind in terms 1618

Thursday, October 5, 1989 of our wage se ttlements in this province while at the same time it is acknowledged in this report that the consumer price index, what it is going to cost to live in this province, is going up. The growth rate in this province, as well, is only one-quarter of the growth rate nationally, which is forecast by lnformetrica tor the coming four-year term. Mr. Acting Spea�er, finally, in respect to this report, the average weekly earnings in Manitoba, in April of 1989, were $44 1.6 6.

That compares again with the Canadian weekly average of $480.84, and that ranks us sixth in the country, and again I think that adds to the overall impression that Manitoba is behind and is going to fall further behind. We know from experience in the last year we cannot look to the federal Government to in any way help us. They are intent, it .appears, on ignoring us. I am not sure if it is ill will-I doubt it. I think it is just blindness. I just think they do not see Manitoba and whatever is here they see as being up tor grabs. Mr.

Acting Speaker, I do lay blame at th� door of the provincial Government, I do not buy their strong words about doing things in Ottawa. The tact is -(interjection)-that is right, maybe they do not have the jurisdiction to change those things, but let us face it, they have not gone near far enough in making their case known. They do not even know what the effect of the VIA Rail cuts are going to be in this province, VIA Rail cuts that have been rumoured for months, and known quite clearly at least for a couple of weeks, and we finally get the word yesterday.

They still have no idea about what the actual impact of those job losses will be ip this province. • (14 40) I find that astou nding. I find that negligent. I find that depressing for all Manitobans. Manitobans who are losing their jobs are losing some of the best jobs in this province. They are losing the jobs with secure collective agreements. They are losing the jobs with relatively high wages and in many cases we are losing the jobs in the outlying areas outside of Winnipeg. That is especially tragic, Mr.

Acting Speaker, as we see the rur al depop ula tio n continue, and it is ext remely concerning to the official Oppo sition that trend does not seem to inspire this Government to do everything possible to ensure that a successful case is made to the federal Government. If you make your case, if you are adamant, if you are strong and you lose, you can come back to this province and at least you can hold your head high and you can look to the people and say, I did everything in my power. But the tact is that has not been done. Time and again things have been left undone. Mr.

Ghiz seems to have gotten replacement investment, absolute repla cement investment tor Summerside, Pri nce Edward Isla nd, that is what he got. He seems to have gotten the Minister to visit him in Prince Edward Island . She went down to a meeting, she said: No problem, Jo e, we will give you replacement investment. He th reatened to sue the federal Government. He said, you cannot do that. Wha t did our provincial Government do? Very, very little. He went down, did not see the Prime Minister, saw the Minister of Defence, seemed to have taken "no" for an answer and left.

He came back in here and said, I got no tor an answer. We have seen some replacement investment. It is a pittance compared to what has been promised the Liberal Premier of Prince Edward Island. It is an insult to the people of this province in respect of the overall cuts, which have been made in Manitoba by the federal Government. Mr. Acting Speaker, it seems to me, aside from the economic factors which are looming in our future in this province, we also have to acknowledge that the world is drama tically changing.

In order to prepare for that in this province I have said many times in this House, and put directly to the Minister of Labour (Mrs. Hammond), we need to establish a labour adjustment strategy that does not just have to react to plant closures and job loss but can be proactive, can try and predict what those job losses are going to be in the wake of the Free Trade Agreement, and in the wake of our changing economy in this province. In fact we know that those changes mean, in terms of employment in this province, the new jobs are going to be the low-wage service sector jobs.

What we have lost in the last year are the high-wage manufacturing industry jobs, and that is exactly the wrong way to be going. You cannot raise a family on five bucks an hour. I would assume that speaks for itself. I have people in my constituency, and probably many of us do, who try to do that. It is absolutely impossible for them to achieve a decent standard of living with a family with that kind of pay . I had the enlightening but somewhat depressing opportunity last week to attend at Rossbrook House with the Minister, and also with the critic from the New Democratic Party, the Member tor Thompson (Mr.

Ashton). That was a forum in which certain people were invited to talk about their difficulties in the labour force in Winnipeg, the relatively untrained, unskilled, labour force in Manitoba and of course, in particular, in the inner city. It was spons ored by the Inner City Voice, and I want to thank them tor sponsoring that occasion, because it was very educational tor me, very instructive, and I think it was instructive tor all members who attended. We heard tales of people who were trying to do the right thing in this society. They were trying to go out and work. They did not want a handout.

They were trying to raise their families. They were trying to give their families the basic requirements which they needed to live, give them a good education, and give them a good life. They could not do it. They made that very clear. They brought the numbers to us. You cannot do it. None of them were ·spending money frivolously. Nobody was an alcoholic, nobody was taking lavish trips, nobody was buying brand new TVs. You just cannot do it on five bucks an hour, you cannot raise a family in this city. The fact is tha t the jobs you get-in one case a women spoke up, the job you get is at Salisbury House, 1619

Thursday, October 5, 1989 it is the night shift. Night shift requires you have to do something .with your kids during the day. You have to pay for day care, and the saga goes on and on and on. What they eventually do is break down. They say, I cannot get a better job, and I cannot see a future for me getting a better job. I have no choice but to go on welfare, and that is what ends up happening, Mr. Acting Sp eaker. That is indeed a tragedy. Those are the kinds of jobs that we are talking about coming to this province. We are talking about the low wage service sector jobs.

When the free trade proponents say jobs are coming to this province, that is what they mean. They mean service sector jobs which are the lowest paid jobs in this province. Wha t we have lost in the last year are the manufacturing sector jobs. The jobs that pay $13, $14 , $15 , $16 an hour and that allow you to live the kind of life that we all want to live, and that allow you - (interjection)-well, the Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Praznik) says 50 new jobs.

Perhaps if he had been listening he would realize that I, in fact, acknowledged that What I am pointing out to him is in the last three months .since the federal budget, we have lost 1,600 federal jobs. On top of those we have lost many hundreds more throughout this province in rural Manitoba. The Member is from rural Manitoba and you would think that he would understand the need to protect those jobs if anywhere in rural Manitoba, in Brandon, in Dauphin, and all over this province. The Member asks how often I ride the train, and I am glad the Member did ask that question.

I ride the train often and I always have. When I was a child growing up in various western provinces, all over the West, all through western provinces, my family's vacat ion was always in Ontario, and I always took the train. My family still takes the train. In fact, my brother came to visit me just a month ago -he is a lawyer in Regina-o n the train with his children. We take the train because we like ttie train. I think the train, as I have said, is an important part of-even if Canadians do not use it, they are subconsciously attached to the train.

The train is something that has bound this country together and it is not just freight. When I was growing up, part of my life in Swift Current, Saskatchewan, I can remember the train came in at ten o'clock at night. On a summer night we would go and walk down to see the Canadian come in, and to see people get on and get off the Canadian. That was a link and it is hard to explain. I was listening to someone from Moose Jaw talk about this on the radio this morning and I identified with that. There is a link, when you have lived in a small prairie town that the train goes through. It is a link to the outside world.

Let us face it, we are pretty isolated in this country. When you go down, in a small town you can see the link from coast to coast to coast and it inspires you. The Member says I should support the GST to support this. His Government has given us both, a GST which is going to cause furtherjob loss in this country, which is going to cause inflation, . .whic!J is going to · cause recession quite likely, a recession. in this co4ntry. He says that the same Government gives us the VIA cuts. It is interesting to me, and I will entertain questions from the Member because I want the Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr.

Praznik) to put on the record what he has been saying, in support of both the GST and cutting VIA Rail. Those sentiments are entirely contradictor y to what not only his Premier (Mr. Filmon), but the Minister of Transport (Mr. Albert Driedger) has said. He says these things seem to have to be taken by Manitobans, we have to bite the bullet. That is what the Me mber for Lac du Bonnet intima tes by his question.-(interjection)-He asks, where do we get the money? If he had been here earlier he would know that Manitoba gets dinged every time.

Manitoba has been hammered since his Party came into power in this province, again and again and again they have been hammered. He is scrambling, Mr. Acting Speaker, and I want to answer every one of the things that he brings up. He says we voted against tax cuts. We have never said we would vote against tax cuts. We suppor t tax cuts. The fact is, what we do not support is a slush fund, a slush fund of $200 million, and who is going to write the cheque-the Cabinet. That is the kind of irresponsibility that this Government stands for.

They stand for the politic ization of every thing, including monies which could be going to child care workers to develop a strategy to pay them better, including monies which could be going into a labour adjustment strategy. How about that?

How about going into a labour adjustment strategy that would keep high paid jobs in Manitoba, maybe attract some to Manitoba to enlarge our tax base with people who can pay taxes? * (14 50) The fact is, having gone to that di scus sion at Rossbrook House last week, it is abundantly clear that there are growing numbers of people working in the service sector in this province who are not paid well enough to feed their families. Those people are not taxpa yers, they are not going to be supporting this tax base because they cannot. They absolutely cannot.

We have an absolute disgraceful lack of training programs for people to get the high paying jobs. We do not have the high paying jobs to give, that is the fact, and the Free Trade Agreement is going to exacerbate that problem in this province. We are not even making the attempt to help people who have been in highly paid jobs to get another job of the same calibre and stay in this province, which is what the vast majority of them want to do. They do not want to leave this province. We are very fortunate in that regard. I have lived in a number of provinces.

I have never lived in a province where there was such loyalty to the province. That is true of Manitobans and something we can all be proud of, but we need as a Government to respect that and to protect the right to stay in this province. The federal Government l)as absolutely no intention of doing anything for Manitoba now or in. the . future. That is abundantly clear. "fhere may be a few tidbits come three years down the toad when ·they come to 1620.·

Thursday, October s, 1989 have to get elected agai n. We saw that last time. The federal Government is an absolute fraud, and the provincial Government is useless beyond belief in dealing with their federal counterparts. They seem to have no sway, let alone any results, to show the people of Manitoba. It is so ironic that the Premier of this province stood up in a debate in the last election and said, he will listen. I just got a call. He is going to listen. He likes me. He does not listen. He probably does not like him. He sure as heck does not read his press clippings. Mr.

Acting Speaker , an inte rest ing report came forward recently from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. It is specific to the issue of Small Business and Training in Canada, Skills for the Future. I think it is commendable that this group took the initiative to attempt to put forward their ideas about training in the future for this country. They state at page 22 of their report that there is a need for better communication in this area. Governments should review and revise their methods of disseminating information • on wha t funding assistance is available to firms that ' train.

In this context, special mention should be made of the initiative of the Ontario Government, and they point to the Skills Development Offices and the Ontario Skills Development officers that have greatly assisted these labour adjustment strategies in the Province of Ontario. The province that has the highest percentage of manufacturing jobs in this country knows exact ly what it is doing on the issue of labour adjustment. They do not want to lose those highly paid jobs, because they have them now and they know the value cif those jobs.

They know the value of a strong manufacturing sector where jobs are generally better paid and where the jobs are, in fact, created far more than in the primary industries, the natural resources industry, and other industries in which goods are taken out of the ground or off of the ground. The Canadian Federat ion of Business goes on to state that the program in Ontario is being widely used and is a low-cost means of delivering information and • expertis e in this vital area of skills development and ' training.

They have set up a series of street-front locations througho ut the Province of Ontario to assist small business in training their workers and preparing them for the future in their province and in this country. Clearly, Mr. Acting Speaker, this is the type of thing we should be looking at. We need to be looking seriously at the changing economy in this province and taking seriously the role that small business can play because as much as we all, and in particular the third Party, likes to point the finger at big business, we know that the engine of the Manitoba economy is small business.

Small business employs more Manitobans than any other sector in this business sector in this province, and in my view is definitely the engine of our economy and we need to protect the profitability of small business any way we can. I was pleased , of course, in that regard to see the tax breaks given small business last year by this Government. The fact is tha t those tax breaks were by no means enough, given that they were limited to the first year, the first short period of time that a business comes into existence.

In fact, a business in that period of time has a tax holiday anyway under the federal income tax scheme. We need to do more in assisting business to deal with the changing economy and train workers and retrain workers as they lose jobs in our changing economy. Of course, we all know that is likely to continue in this province. Finally, the Federation of Business goes on to state that the training policy reform should go hand in hand with U.I. reform and they point to the need to incorporate further training programs in U.I. reform.

That is another example of how this federal Government is bankrupting Manitoba and Manitobans. * (1 500) We have seen a U.I. proposal which, in my view, would punish Manitoba worse than any province in this country. Manitobans are going to be divided into sectors, geographical sectors, and given certain U.I. policies per sector, dependent on what the statistics in that area happen to be. That, in my view, will punish rural Manitoba. I think rural Manitoba is going to suffer worse than any part of this province, and this province is going to suffer worse than any other province in the country.

For that reason, these changes in the Unemployment Insurance proposals have to be fought, and I have absolutely no confidence in this Government in doing that. It is very unfortunate to have to say that, but that is the bald truth. Mr. Acting Speaker, an interesting report called the . Western Perspectives put out by the Canada West Founda tion, ta lking about Western Diversificat ion indicates that with 29 percent of Canada's popula tion, the west represents only 18 percent of Canadian manufacturing activity.

Presumably what we are going to get from free trade, we are going to get some further manufacturing jobs in this province. I remember when we were first elected, I was first elected back in 1988, we had the Chamber of Commerce come and visit us and they held out the hope. The promise they made to us was, we are going to get manufacturing jobs in this promise. That is what free trade is all about, we are going to get manufacturing jobs.

Well, listen, we are waiting and I would be more than happy to eat crow on my predictions about free trade if we could get some manufacturing jobs in this province because the bottom line is we need them, they are the best jobs available. But we have not been successful at all in maintaining the jobs we have or certainly not in growing in that area. Mr. Acting Speaker, interestingly that report from Canada West Foundation recommends that we invest more in human resources through better education and training, as well, that is consistent with the view put forward by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business.

The Canada-West Foundation goes on to state that we need to generate a more skilled and mobile labour force for key areas related to science and technology fields, and high tech is an area in which we, in Manitoba, have again been losing and no help from the federal Government on that one. 1621

Thursday, October 5, 1989 I just need to point no further than the CF-18 for that, but again, that is the growth area that we as Manitobans need to be looking to. Unfortunately, our labour adjustment branch has a total increase this year of $60,000 and it makes an absolute mockery of the state ment that was made in the Speech from the Throne, which indicated , I think acknowledged, that the world was changing and that Manitobans were going to need some new strategy to deal with the changing economic environment in this province.

We see $60,000 put aside for new programs, 10 cents per worker in the Province of Manitoba to deal with the changing economic climate in this province. Well, my answer is: Big deal. Mr. Acting Speaker, I see the nod coming from the Chair and I assume that means that my time has expi red. Let me conclude by saying that we, in Manitoba, need a comprehensive though tful pro-active labour adjustment strategy in this province; we have not seen it come forward. At the very least. this Government must take that initiative.

If they are not going to take the federal Government to task, they have to at least be prepared to deal with the reality of the cuts that we have faced in this province and our changing economic climate. Thank you, Mr. Acting Speaker. QU EST ION put, MOT ION carri ed and the House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty with the Honourable Member of Minnedosa (Mr. Gilleshammer) in the Chair for the Depar tment of Highways and Transporta tion; and the Honourable Member for Swan River (Bu rrell) in the Chair for the Department of Agriculture.

CONCURRENT COMMI TTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY- HIGHW AYS AND TRANSPO RTATION Mr. Chairman (Harold Gilleshammer): I would like to call this

section of the Committee of Supply to order to discuss the Estimates of the Department of Highways and Transportation. When the Committee last met we were considering Item 6 Driver and Vehicle Licensing; 6.(

c) Safety; 6.(c)(

I) Salaries, $3,909,900.00. Shall the item pass -the Member for Assiniboia. Mr. Ed Mandrake (Assiniboia): Mr. Chairman, prior to recessing last time, I had brought the attention to the Minister of the tinted glass in the car. I have before me a news

article by Mike Ward whereby a particular person was assessed two demerit points for tinted windows on his 1980 Cadillac Eldorado. I find that to be a little bit autocratic to say the least. As I said, I do not think that should be happening. Would the Minister now consider retrieving that demerit points? Mr. Albert Driedger (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Let me maybe correct the record a little bit. In the case that the Member is referring to, the individual pleaded guilty to the charge. The Registrar has. no option when an individual either pleads guilty or is found guilty but to assess, accord ing to the Act and the regulations, certain demerits . for that. If the

interpretation of the judge or the individual is tha t he was not guilty, he should not have plead guilty in that case. However , I ind icated there seems to be some vagueness on the aspect of the tinted glass. We have now set up, as I indicated last time, a committee that will be deal ing with exactly that aspect of it, together with the manufacturers, the law enforcement people, the Registrar and his people. We are trying to see whether we can establish a standard that will be acceptable. Mr. Mandrake: I have just one final question on that, Mr. Chairman.

As of when will no charges be laid because of tinted windows? Mr. Albert Driedger: After this incident came forward this last spring, since then no charges have been laid. * (15 10) Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): Last day we were also discussing off-road vehicle exempt ions. The Minister had indicated to the committee that he had undertaken some major exemptions for northern Manitoba after consideration by, I believe, a committee of his colleagues and himself.

I believe he said there were exem ptions made for fishermen and trappers and farmers, but that was originally in the Act as well, those exemptions for fishermen, farmers and trappers, as I recall, un less this went beyond that. In addi tion, he also made across the board exemptions for registration, licensing requirements, age restrictions, helmets, completely in the North. He said it was because, I paraph rase something to the effect that it is the only form of transportation they have in the North and so on. I did not really understand the rationale there.

I think it is even more reason if it is the only form of transportation in the North that safety be a primary concern since it is the main form of transportation. There is no other alternative. There is that much more oppor tunity for people to be injured and hurt through the use of these vehicles. It is very important to have a very positive attitude towards safety and the things that can happen, the negative impact of using these machines improperly. It seems that the Minister, in making these across the-board exemptions, really gave up any hope of following up with safety for these people.

Obviously we were not putting this Act in place initially because we wanted to impose reg ulations on people. It was desig ned to assist in the saving of lives and preventing of injuries, and associated with that, of course, the pain and suffering and the cost to medicare. All of those things are reasons why this Act was put in place. Of course, the Manitoba Medical Association was very much a proponent and they also felt very strongly that there should be an age restriction. They wanted it at 14 years, I believe.

But we went with 16 because we felt that it was legitimate, or I believe they wanted it at 16 and we wanted it at 14. I am not certain which one it was, but we did have a different one than they did. It was important to remember that children cannot handle these machines safely in many cases. 1622

Thursday, October 5, 1989 As a matter of fact, some of the studies that have been undertaken and accidents involving off-road motor vehicles in a northern community, a clinical study was done by Paul Haslbeck and Helen Rosa Wilding in Hudson Bay, Saskatc hewan, that I think I mentioned, during 1985. The records of victims of all motor vehicle accidents were seen at the Hudson Bay union hospital. Almost half of the victims of off-road vehicle accidents were under 16 years of age.

The poor adherence to Go vernment legislation and manuf act urers' recommendation was evident in the number of people who did not wear helmets or use headlights. It also found that children under the age of 16 years accounted for 45 percent of the people involved in off road vehicle accidents, and only 33 percent of the people involved in off-road vehicle accidents had been wearing helmets. So there seems to be a correlation between requirement for helmets and the attitude towards safety of people using them.

That is borne out by other information that we receive from the MMA that at Baker Lake in the Northwest Territories, I believe, it is where helmets are strictly enforced, the number of ac cidents was ten out a thousand per popula tion. At Eskimo Point, another remote community, where no helmets were enforced at all, the number of accidents was 17 per thousa nd. Almost, well, getting clo se to dou ble. Yet you would think, what do helmets have to do with accidents? Obviously, it is in the attitude towards the operation.

So I think it is very important-I can understand that maybe the Minister did not want to upset the people in remote communities for various reasons, politically or otherwise. Maybe he thought the enforcement would be very difficult and so on. That is why we made provisions in the Act for exemptions in case some of these eventualities develop. But we also envisaged working closely with those communities, with the bands and other people of authority, to develop safety programs and attitudes of safety for the good of their children, for the good of their communities and including them in that.

I could see including them on a safety committee that they would administer with support services from the department so that they could actually self administer and enforce these kinds of requirements because they believe that it is in the interests of their children and it is going to save their lives, it is going to prevent injuries and so on. It seems to me even more important in remote communities because they do not have access to hospital facilities in many cases readily.

So obviously, a lot of them where there are air strips, they have access to the air ambulance, but you know, these accidents happening in remote areas, it makes it pretty difficult. They are doomed to much more serious consequences from an accident than a person in the City of Winnipeg, for example, who can readily be taken to a major hospital and the best health facilities available. For example, I had a brother who was killed in the power take -off of his tractor in 19 74 on a farm somewhere out away from traffic and so on in a relatively remote position.

If this had happ ened close to hospital facilities, perhaps he could have been saved. However, he died , and no one found him for a while and he had 1623 a long distance to be transported by truck over to the nearest hospital and then by ambulance and he did not make it. That is the kind of thing that can happen when there is so much distance, and try as we might to try and equalize services, medical services, it is even more important because of the remoteness that safety programs be put in place to prevent these accidents.

I know that the Minister may have felt that this was going to be difficult to enforce and there would be a reaction to it, but I wonder if he has just capitulated completely insofar as safety in these areas, or does he recognize this importance. More than that, because it is nice to give platitudes and say it is recognized, but is he doing anything to actually start to redress the problem of accidents on off-road vehicles in these remote communities now, since he has thrown out the whole law to apply in those areas? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the Member has all his questions forward now.

I am trying to keep track as he rambles on with his questions. He started off by asking whether the exemptions, there was provision for them. Well, the exemptions that we made in the three initial categories went beyond what he had been discussing and, yes, we made a further exemption for remote communities. Unfortunately, maybe he should have caucused with his colleague, the Member for Churchill (Mr. Cowan), who was here the other day when we were discussing this issue and applaude d the exemption for remote communities outlining the concerns of why they should be ex empted.

So we do not have necess arily a consistent approach here. At that time, and I can -(interjection)-that is fair enough, and if the Member wants he can either take the comments out of Hansard as they were made last time, or I can go through this whole thing again explaining exactly the process that we went through, why we went through this thing and- Mr. Plohman: A point of order, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman: On a point of order, the Member for Dauphin. Mr. Plohman: I asked a specific question, of what is he doing to add ress the issue of safety. I did not ask him to go through how he got to make the se exemptions.

When I said provision for, I meant that we put in a clause in the legislation which allowed for exemptions in any form for the whole Act, even. That is what enabled the Minister to do it without coming to the Legislature, so that provision was there. Mr. Chairman: A dispute over the facts is not a point of order. Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, I find it very interesting.

Here it is a year and five months since we took Government and every time we have moved on some thing, this Mem ber, whether it was in the Department of Natural Resources or the Department of Highways, has already initiated that and just did not quite get it done.

Thursday, October 5, 1989 As far as this legislation was, this legislation was pa ssed , we pr oclaimed it, and then after it was p roclaimed , then we had to go back and make provisions which we thought were necessary, and we had a committee of four Ministers who basically were involved in that. We did the first series of it and then we went to the next step which was when we had the complaints, and found the enforcement problems we had in the remote communities.

We then reconsidered, and if the Member feels so strongly that we should be applying the legislation to those communities as well, possi bly he should consult with some of the chiefs in communities that we have been in touch with that have res ponded very str ongly about the posi tion, and appr eciate the fact that they have the exemption as we have it now. I also ind icated the other da y that we will be monitoring this to the best of our ability. It is difficult to do but we will be doing that and watching it.

If there is going to be a rash of accidents that we can statistically show, to some degree, that the lack of the appl ication of legislation in these communities has an impact, then we will be prepared to readdress it again. At the same time, I also tal ked about the possibility because we are now registering, getting revenue out of the registrations, et cetera, that we would be probably looking at dev eloping either cou rses or trai ning progr ams th at we should maybe be offer ing to communities of this nature. So I indicated that last time, and will aga in, that we will be looking at this very closely.

At the present time we have made these exemptions, we will look and see what the reaction is, we will be continuing to consult with the communities. If there is even an indication that they would be receptive to having this applied, aside from the difficulties of actually doing the registration, then we would do that. This is not cast in stone, we have made these four exemptions at the present time, and I am prepared to take and review it if the situation calls for it. * (15 20) At the present time this is how we have it, and we will keep on watching it and seeing how this develops in terms of injuries.

Naturally safety is a major concern, but these are communities when we talk of having a limit of 14 -year-olds driving off-road vehicles in the North, the Member full well knows if he wants to state stat istics from Eskimo Point, and Bakers Lake, I have been up in those communities. There are four- and five-year-old kids driving the machines. I am not saying that is necessarily safe or should be done that way, but tha t is what is happening out there. When we talk about remote communities, we spent a lot of time not with just the politicians who were invol ved in the decision making.

There were representatives from MP IC, from our safety people, from Northern Affairs, and enforcement. We had a lot of people who were involved in making these decisions. We did not just off the cuff decide all of a sudden we were going to make a further exemption to remote communities. In view of that we will continue to look, together with these various departments, to see where there is a need for further change. Mr. Plohman: Well, the Minister is choosing to take my comments out of context. I actually played down his decision making on a political basis and so on.

If I want this implemented now, he says that I should say it or whatever. I never said that I wanted this Act implemented in its entirety. That was still out. The jury was still out. As a matter of fact, we tried to consult with the northern Chiefs and their organizations. They did not respond when we did our consultation. So we knew there had to be an aggressive effort made to consult before this could be implemented. That is why we have made the provision in the Act for exemptions if a Minister or Government at any time decided to put those exemptions in. That is what I said to the Minister.

He should not take out of context my statements about exemptions. I am not taking credit, nor do I want to take credit, for all the exemptions the Minister announced in Ju ly. The fact is he was able to do that without coming to the Legislature because there was a provision for blanket exemptions. That is all that I said insofar as I am not taking credit or trying to for those. What I am saying is that he has to do more than just say, well, if it can be shown statistically that there is a rash of accidents or whatever-i t is just st alling the whole thing.

He knows that there are serious problems with these when children are operating them. He has a responsibility to ensure that safety programs are put in pla ce in an aggressive way, not looking at putting, I heard him say, safety programs or whatever. He should be putting in place safety prog rams now in conjunction with the Native groups and the bands, not imposing them, but discussing with them the need and developing with them the kind of program that would suit their community, and their children, and their people. That is what I am suggesting to the Minister.

It Is an honest suggestion made with the greatest sincerity. I believe that it is not proper to generalize. The Minister sa id, I have been up in tho se communities, and there are five year olds, and some of them do, because of their elders in the Bands and the people in authority, because of their attitude towards this, and because they realize it is so necessary to have safety programs, they do in fact enforce, and they find that there are a lot fewer accidents in those communities where they enforce, because people are more aware of the dangers of these things.

So that is all I am saying to the Minister, that he could consider moving as quickly as possible into some type of safety, in lieu of the fact that he has no legislated requirement to legislate safety in those areas, which is a difficult thing to do anyway. It is attitudes and education th at are the prim ary importance, but sometimes if you do not have it as law as well, legislated, then it tends to get ignored. Now it can be ignored . There is no enforcement at all, and ther e is no requirement. Does he agree that it is a. major problem? Boes he agree that he should und_ertake to put in place safety programs?

Thursday, October 5, 1989 Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, as I indicated before, we are looking at developing some programs. What we will continue to do is consult with the remote communities to see whether we can come up with some that will be acceptable to them in terms of safety as well as in terms of implementation. That is the assurance that I can give the Member. Mr. Pl ohma n: Well, thank yo u, Mr. Chairman, I apprecia te that from the Minister.

Once again I just re emphasize the importance of it and clarify clearly with him that I felt that there was a lot of work to be done in consultation before this could be legislated and imposed in the remote communities. So I understand that he took a different tack there with southern Manitoba, but it means there is all the mor e reason why it is so urgent to have safety programs put in place. Mr. Mandrake: Mr. Chairman, I have just a couple of short questions on the all-terrain vehicles.

There is a present regulation that I think is 250 cc's- anything over 250 cc's, does it require insurance or some type of regulatory regulation? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, every off-road vehicle is required to be registered except for those four sets of exemptions that I have indicated . Mr. Mandrake: The Member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) makes a very, very valid point, and I app reciate what the Minister says that he will maintain the statistical information for us, but is this going to mean medical statistical information? That is what I think we would be most interested in.

Accidents is all good, but I would prefer to see the medical statistics, plus the accidents. Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, it would involve both. I would also indicate that, based on the position that the Manitoba Medical Association has taken with this, I will be meeting with them in the near future to discuss their position on this. They necessarily do not agree with the exemption that we have created for remote communities, and we will be sitting down with them, discussing it with them and trying to work out something that could be agreeable to them as well as to the remote com munities. Mr. Plohman: Mr.

Chairman, I think this Member for Assiniboia highlights the reason why the Minister has got himself in a dilemma here and created a lot of difficulty in get ting sta tistics, because tha t is the problem that we ha ve had all along. When you are dealing with remote communities, no one knows how many machines there are out there. They are not registered and licenced , and there is just no way of keeping track of all these things, unless there are specific studies done in a community where it is an intense type of study where everyone is monitored.

What the Minister will be able to do is get medical reports when there is a serious accident or serious injuries resu lting from tha t accident, and the air ambulance, for example, is used or they are flown out for medical treatment, perhaps there would not even be the records to the nursing stations very easily 1625 available to the Minister; but in the nursing stations where minor injuries are treated, that would be possible perhaps to get that kind of report. He certainly will not be able to get the record of ac cidents, because a lot of them will go completely unreported , no one will ever know.

Therefore, unless it is of a real serious nature, where the individuals had to have been flown out for medical treatment, no one will ever know. So it is very difficult then to quantify this kind of thing. But where they have done studies- and that is why I quo ted from th ose stud ies in Hudson Ba y, Saskatchewan. The comparison that was made at Eskimo Point and Bakers Lake, they see that there is a correlation and that it is a serious issue.

That is why I think the Minister should, at least, consider-if he is not going implement immediately at least consider an education program initially at least for helmets. * (1 530) The other one is consider the age restriction, because it is quite clearly shown scientifically that children who just do not have the strength-seven years old, and the Minister talks about five and six years old-to handle those machines in any way in a safe way. Those children are no stronger in those remote communities, no more developed than the people anywhere else in Manitoba.

For the reasons I stated earlier, it is so important, because they cannot get medical attention perhaps, and so on, that this be considered. So I think those two the Minister should give special consideration to moving on. Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, at the present time we have a system that we are working on together with MPIC in terms of trying to track these accidents, but this is done at the present time under a manual system. We are trying to develop a computer system to be able to track this. We are in the development stage of that program right now.

We will be working together with the MMA to try and get some more precise information because the MMA- basically where we have hospital stations, the reports of somebody getting hurt come in, and we will try and develop that, in conjunction with MPIC and in conjunction with my staff, in terms of being able to start devel oping tha t compu terized program which will allow us to track this more precisely. We will be watching it very extensively, as I indicated last time the committee met. We are not treating this in an off-hand manner. We are very concerned about it. We will be watching it very closely.

That is why we are developing this program, to do that. Certainly we are very concerned about the safety aspect of it. What we are trying to do, we have made these provisions at the present time. If actions call for it to change we certainly are not going to be hesitant about changing some of these things. We want to develop something that we can go back to the communities and exp lain to them as well, in terms of maybe developing safety programs in conjunction with them. We have not done this in an arrogant type of way that we imposed something or made an exemption.

A lot of time was spent in terms of considering this

Thursday, October 5, 1989 exemption for remote communities, and many people are going to be very much concerned and watching this. We know the kind of pressure we, are under in this respect and that is why we are trying to develop something that we can take and use for information purposes . Mr. Plohman: Just one small last point on this, and that is, it is going to be very difficult for MPIC to have accurate records , automated or otherwis e, if there is not a requirement for registration and licensing , because they a~e just not going to have a reco rd of the machines in the North .

They will get it for the rest of Manitoba but they will not have it for there . It is kind of a vicious circle. If you do not have that requirement, then you cannot g13t the statistical information to determine whether you need the other , the helmets , the age restrictions and so on. That is the difficulty. Mr. Chairman: Item 6.(c)(1)-pass . Item 6.(c)

(2) Other Expenditure s, $719,300-the Member for Assiniboia . Mr. Mandrake: I just have one question here . Recoverable from Canada of $40,000, what is that for, please? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, National Safety Code . Mr. Chairman: Shall the item pass-pass . Item 6.(

d) Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Cost-Sharing Agreement , $2,912, 100-the Member for Dauphin . Mr. Plohman: I just want to ask the Min ister to clarify the change there of some $200 ,000 .00. Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, $170,000 of that is in commissions, increase in commissions, and also flat fees allowed for incremental costs of 5 percent file growth of $15,000 .00. Mr. Plohman: So there is no change in the formula of the agreement? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman , no. Mr. Mandrake: The Member just mentioned something that caught my eye-Agreement .

I am sorry, I am sure the Member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) knows wha t the agreement is, but I do not. Cou ld the Honourable Minister please provide me with that agreement? Mr. Albert Driedger : Mr. Chairman, vehicle insurance registration system , Manitoba Public Insurance Corpor .ation pays vehicle agents commission for each new issue or renewal of a vehicle registration insurance certificate. The rate of commission paid to agents by MPIC is equal to 5 percent of the basic insurance IJ'emium assessed on the certificate . DDVL reimburses MPIC a set rate for each certificate handled by agents .

Current ly it is $2.99. This rate is increased each year by the amount of the consumer price index. ***** An Honourable Member: Point of order, Mr. Chairman . Mr. Chairman: The Member for Assiniboia , on a point of order . Mr. Mandrake: Thank you, Mr. Chairman . I am not asking for him to recite it, please table it for me. Mr. Chairman: The Member does not have a point of order. The Honourab le Minister has a certain amount of time to respond . ***** Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, this is not a long "' answer . I am just trying to-the Member asked a question and I insist on answering that question.

The price index, CPI, for the City of Winnipeg , the terms of the agreement requires the Government of Manitoba to reimburse MPIC $2,600,000 for collecting approximately $22 million in vehicle registration fees in 1987-88. Under the driver licence and insurance system , DDVL pays driver licence agents a commission for issuing drivers ' licences. The rate of the commission paid to the agents is 80 cents for each licence issued. MPIC reimburses DDVL 40 cents for each driver licence issued by agents for which an insurance premium was collected.

The terms of the agreement require MPIC to reimburse the Government of Manitoba the paltry sum of 86,000 for collecting $36,500,000 in vehicle insurance and driver surcharges in '87-88 . Mr. Chairman : Shall the item pass-pass. 6.(

e) Transport, Safety and Regulation :

(1) Salaries $149,000-the Member for Assiniboia. Mr. Mandrake: I just wanted to ask the Minister as to the ruling . Has it been tabled about those two companies that had applied for a licence in Manitoba? Mr. Albert Driedger: I am sorry, I wonder if the Member could repeat the question . Mr. Mandrake : There were two trucking companies that were not granted a licence under the Motor Transport Board. Has this problem been resolved or is it still in the courts? Mr. Albert Driedger: That comes unde r the next page where we have the Motor Transport Board.

If the member would have patience to wait until then, I will have my chairman of the board here and we can deal with it them. Mr. Chairman, while I hav_e the floor, I have some informat ion here that I would like to table, basically the additional safety code for commercial trucks and 1626

Thursday, October 5; 1989 buses, for the Members. This is a status report of the implementation of the National Safety Code standards for the Province of Manitoba. Basically that indicates, under the National Safety Code Program, which was developed for the Members' benefit, the standards and if th ey have been implemented, implementation source, deviation from National Safety Code standard and the comments. I think that question was raised earlier. I thought I had actually submitted that, but I guess I had seen it and I had not tabled it, so information is available now. *

(1540) Mr. Mandrake: Under that particular section, I noticed approxima tely $20,0 00 has been increased in salaries. Could he exp lain that then, please? Mr. Albert Driedger: I am informed that is an increase in increments, the merit increases that are allowed, and the payout is for a retirement pension payout for one � employee. Mr. Mandrake: How much was that? Mr. Albert Driedger: Approxima tely $7,500.00. Mr. Plohman: I thank the Minister for the update on the safety code.

It seems that most of the various compo nents of it have been implemented with only two remaining and they are to be implemented by 1990, I guess one March, and one that is the carrier profiles and the facility audit standards by October. So there has been a lot of progress made and I just want to exp ress my satisfaction in seeing that. I know that the staff probably feel very good about it as well, because it was a very difficult process to develop and to implement and yet has been done very quickly. So everyone who is involved with it deserves a great deal of credit for that. Mr.

Albert Driedger: The expression of gratitude is noted , and I certainly support that aspect of it. We have a very capable staff and have done a tremendous job. Mr. Mandrake: Under 8, unable to legislate for roadside blood samples to test for drugs. Why was tha t mentioned? That is against the Constitution to take blood out of a person. I do not even know why it would even be mentioned. You cannot take blood out of a person. Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, I will try and explain this to the Member. At the present time we have provisions to give a breathalyzer test on the highway.

We do not have the equipment available to do a capable blood test on the road side. So that has to be done in a hospital or with the qua lified equipm ent and doctor available. So that is why it is there. Mr. Mandrake: What happens if the driver says, no? Mr. Albert Driedger: No to what? 1627 Mr. Mandrake: No to the blood test. Mr. Albert Driedger: There is legal provision that if an individual does not want to have his blood test taken, for the authorit ies to take him to the hospital and have it taken. Mr. Mandrake: Could the Minister please table that legal authority for me, ple ase? Mr. Albert ·o riedger: Mr.

Chairman, staff advises me that we will be prepared to table that. We do not have it right here, but we will get that for the Minister. Mr. Chairman: Shall the item pass -the Member for Dauphin. Mr. Plohman: Ju st another ques tion, the Other Expenditures under, or are we on Salaries yet? Mr. Chairman: Yes. Mr. Plohman: Pass. Mr. Chairman: It em 6. (e)

(2) Other Expen ditur es $99,700-the Member for Dauphin. Mr. Plohman: I just wanted to ask the Minister the 99,0 00 that did nothing in there the year before, what are we dealing with here? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, part of the program that we have not completed is the carrier profile. This money in there is the provision for developing that profile, and we do not know yet whether we will do that in-House or out-House, whether we will do that within the department or whether we will go outside for that. That is the provision for it there. Mr.

Mandrake: Ju st one question: Recoverable from Canada $223,000, what is that for? Mr. Albert Driedger: That again is for the National Safety Code. Mr. Chairman: Shall the item pass- pass. Resolution 77:

BE IT RESOLVED that there be gr anted to Her Ma jesty a sum not exceed ing $1 4,456,0 00 for Highways and Transportation, Driver and Vehicle Licensing, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March 1990- pass. No. 7, Boards and Committees: provides general supervision over motor carriers and operation of public service vehicles and commercial trucks; administers The Hig hway Protec tion, Hig hway Traffic and Snowmobile Acts; provides an appeal procedure for citizens whose driving privileges have been suspended and regulates taxicab, limousine and handi-van licensing within the City of Winnipeg. Item 7.(

a) Motor Transpor t Board ,

(1) Sal aries, $549,7 00, shall the item pass? The Honourable Minister. Mr. Albert Driedger: For the benefit of those who maybe are not aware, I would like to introduce Don

Thursday, October 5, 1989 Norq uay who is the chairman of the Motor Transport Board and also the acting chairman for the Taxicab Board. Thank you. Mr. Mandrake: First of all, I will start off by asking: there was an increase of $19, 200 on salaries, could he exp lain the increase or is this-wha t is it for, increments? Mr. Albert Driec:lger: That is the merit increment increases. Mr. Mandrake: Before I go into questioning, prior to our recess on Tuesday I mentioned to the Minister that I would get him a copy of the Manitoba Environment Research Council letter that I had.

I said I would table it for him and I would like to now give it to the Minister. Mr. Albert Driedger: No pictures? Mr. Mandrake: The Minister says no pictures. Unfortunately not this time, but I will get some for him next time. That is about the only thing he understands is pictures. There are several. trucking companies that applied for licensing in Manitoba. It went before the courts. Has it been resolved and what is the status of these trucking companies? Mr. Albert Driedger: Both the cases have been dealt with in court and in both cases licences are being issued.

However, I might indicate that we are looking at the advisabil ity of appe aling that decision to the Supreme Court. Mr. Mandrake: The Motor Transport Board held hearings on signs last year. Could we be provided with what this was all about, what is the final decision? The other thing, too, is . that I would like to know what it cost to the Manitoba taxpayers to have this travelling show band going throughout Manitoba? * (1 550) Mr. Albert Driedger: Well, Mr. Chairman, the Mem ber makes reference to this travelling show band going and what it costs to the ratepayers in Manitoba.

It appears that the Liberal Party has been noted for its travelling showcase ill the Province of Manitoba. Aside from that the question that the Member raises deals with the Highway Traffic Board . I have the Chairman here for the Motor Transport Board and the Taxicab Board . I wonder if we could deal with those first. Then I am prepared to deal at whatever length the Member wants with the Highway Traffic Board , who basically deal with the signs. Mr. Mandrake: I want something on record here, Mr. Chairman. The Member says that we do a lotof travelling.

It comes out of my pocket , not out of the people of Manitoba; so let us get that on' the record, please. Mr. Chail"man: ,Shall the item. pass '--'-the Member for Da uphil1. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Chairman, I just wonde� if the Minister could indicate the current number of cases backlogged at the Motor Transport Board , the number of months that appl ications have to wait, and the assessment of the procedures at the present time in terms of hearings. Are there hearings being held for all the cases, or are most of them being eliminated as a result of a

summary proced ure with a written procedure that takes place to reduce the number of hearings that are req uired? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, in view of the anticipated question, I would like to indicate for '88 and '89 the appl ications that were filed and how they were dealt with. In 19 88 we had 398 applica tions filed, and pehding at the end .of 19 88 was 214 , granted in- An Honourable Member: What is that, 398, you say? Mr. Albert Driedger: 398, yes. An Honourable Member: 214 Mr. Albert Driedger: Were pending, a decision not made on, that was the backlog including the carry over.

There were 218 granted in full; 218 granted in part; one was denied. Now for 19 89, we had 29 1 appl ications, and we presently have 18 8 that have not been dealt with, pending. We have 17 3 that have been granted in full; we have 43 granted in part; and two have been denied. Mr. Plohman: Yes, Mr. Chairman; I asked about the number of fullfledged hearings that were held. I would assume that all of these were not hearings before the board, that some were determined on the basis of a

summary process. Maybe there is another word the Minister will use. Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, the vast majority were dealt with without the public hearing. Mr. Plohman: So, Mr. Chairman, how many public hearings were there? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, we do not have that information available right now. We will be prepared to forward that. Mr. Plohman: Yes, Mr. Chairman, were the majority of these from out-of-province carriers? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, over 60 percent were . from out of province. Mr. Plohman: Yes, Mr. Chairman, there are a couple of denials in 19 89.

Can the Minister just summarize briefly what the reasons for denial w.ere? Is it based on fitness or on detrimental impact on the public interest? · Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. fhairman, detriment to the public interest . Mr. Plohman: ThaUs very interesting. l would like to find. out .""'ore about those,, and I do not expect the '1 628

- • Thursday, October 5, 1989 Minister to explain that in full detail here, but perhaps he could give us a copy of some of the rationale because certainly that is what we envisage. It is a very small percentage here of those that are being denied, but still there are some denials and they are still on the basis of the public interest. That means that there is some kind of a test still prevailing. The Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey) said, are you suggesting that we should not consider the public interest, or something to that effect?

Well, he should consider tha t his colleagues in other provinces have done pr ecisely tha t. That is no longer a consideration. They do not consider the public interest. It is simply a matter of a fitness test, whether they are willing and able and financially able, and so on. So clearly, it is this province that has pr otected the public interest in this regard and something that I am pleased to see is continuing, and that is why I am raising this matter, contrary to what the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey) maybe thinks are the reasons for it.

The fact is that it seems that in two cases in 19 89, there was enough consideration of the impact of public interest that they were denied. I just want to get some of the background for the reasons to have a better understanding of how that is being appl ied and would be satisfied simply with a written response to that because it is of very deep concern to a lot of people, perhaps other provinces who do no t want to see this kind of a test applied.

I am wondering at this time whether the Minister can clarify whether any other provinces are continuing with what we might call a meaningful test for entry into the trucking business, or whether all those provinces now have gone to simply a fitness test only. Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, I want to maybe just do a bit of a summarization of exactly what has happened.

First of all, I want to indicate that our position has not changed at all from the posit ion tha t the previous administration had when the chairman of Motor Transport Board , together with the Minister at that time, felt that the fast deregulation would hurt the trucking industry in Manitoba, su bsequent to that raised the case and got federal legislation passed to allow a five-year transition period. * (1 600) There has been tremendous pressure com ing down, as I indicated previously already, in terms of other provinces.

Like, Al berta for example, has never been regulated, I suppose, to any degree, certainly not to this extent. So some of the provinces are totally deregulated at the present time. We have been hanging on to our position. I suppose maybe I, myself, without fully understanding at a certain stage of the game earlier on, did not have a comfort level because of the pressures I was getting, feeling that we were maybe not complying with the desi res of the federal Government and the federal Minister.

However, once we got into the nuts and bolts of it, to some degree, I took the issue back to my colleagues and the position of Manitoba has been unchanged in that we want to follow the federal legislation that is provided for, to take as much time as we can in terms of deregulating the trucking industry. There are two sides to the coin. There is the group that lobbies exte nsively even within the province. Certainly the industrial people are lobbying extensively for instant deregulation.

However, when you consider the fact that we have 19 out of the 40 national carriers stationed in Manitoba, that we are exporters -p ossibly the biggest exporters of transportation services in Canada, ourselves, and I bel ieve New Bruns wick-w e felt th at instant deregulation or escalated deregulation at this stage of the game would create all kinds of confusion in the industry. So our position has remained that we will take-and the Member is probably aware that we have certain carriers that are opposing these applic ations. So that it has actually slowed the process down to some degree.

We will do everything possible to keep on the track that we are on now to take the maximum time to allow the industry to adjust to the deregulation. As indicated by the figures that I gave, the majority of the applications of course come from outside the province. Everybody wants to get into the action here. Further to that the Member asked whether there are still other provinces that still have hearings. There are four pr ovi nces -Ne w Bru nswick, Ontario, Saskatchewan, and B.C. -that still have a hearing process in the broadest sense.

However, I think full truck loads are deregulated pretty well across the country. For all practical purposes, truck loads basically are already deregulated everywhere but here. So we are probably the slowest guys on the block and we hope to stay in that position. Mr. Plohman: I have just a couple more short questions. I understand from the Minister that he will give us some of the reasons why two were denied. I am not arguing with why they they are denied. I do not need that again verbally. It might get rather complicated . A written response would be satisfactory. I just want the Minister to confirm.

I would just ask him though if the decisions were reached then on a reverse-onus context? That means that the interveners had to prove that it was not in the public interest to allow these carriers to be granted the authority. Is that the basis for the decisions? So therefore, the board found that it was not in the public interest based on the intervener's evidence? Just a confirmation or very short answer on that would be satisfactory, if the Minister is going to provide more details in written form. Mr.

Albert Driedger: Mr, Chairman, without going into detail at this stage of the game, I am prepared to try and provide the member with the principles of the reasons for the decision at a later time. Mr. Plohman: Well, I appreciate that and I appreciate that the Minister is continuing to implement a program of slow transition. I think that the industry appreciates 1629

Thursday, October 5, 1989 that and needs that time, as was planned for and as we struggled for over the years. The real test will be in the evaluation. I mentioned this to the Minister the other day, but the Motor Transport Board chairman was not there at that time. That is, does he feel that there will be a chance of having a meaningful evaluation process, and is there any chance of extending the transition time, or will it be unnecessary in his mind, in this province? In other words, we have a five-year transition· period which could be extended by Order in-Council? Mr.- Albert Driedger: Mr.

Chairman, it is our feeling that the possibility of extending that is virtually nil because the federal Minis ter, al ready on a few occasions, has indicated he would like to see Manitoba escalate the activity. In . fact, there have been some efforts i:nade by the federal Government and certainly supp orted by the other provi nces that we should be escalating. our activity., So based on that, we will try and pont lnue to follow the federal legislation as I indicated before, but we are not hopeful at all of any extension whatsoever with the pressure that is on right now. · · · · · Mr. Plohman: Mr.

Chairman, one last point. I would encou rage the Minister to push for a meaningful evaluation at the end, at least in terms of its impact here in Manitoba, which is going to be a unique case then in terms of its implementation right across the country thoug h, so that there is an effort made to determine if in fact what the impact was on the trucking industry and on the public, on rates and everything concerned and associa ted with it. So I just encourage the Minister to pursue that, and that Js all I have to say at this time in the interest of time. Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr.

Chairman, it is my understanding that the federal Government will be doing an ev alua tion at the end of the legisla tion. How meaningful that will be, that is anybody's guess. Mr. Plohman: Try and do something. Mr. Albert Driedger: Well, we will certainly have our input into it, and I have to indicate that we have been strongly resisting the attempts to have an escalated deregulation take place . . 1 feel real comfortable with it. I. also hav:e the full confidence in the chairman in terms of how he is directing this activity at the present time.

There is tremendous pressure on the chairman as well, certainly from the trucking industry. You know there is· a good portion, even within the province, that would like to see this deregulation take place. It has been a very difficult and trying course, I guess, for the Motor Transport Board and the chairman to direct it.

I cannot applaud him too much because he might want a raise, not that it is not deserved either, but most certainly I think that Manitoba can be· proud of the way our Motor Transport Board has been dealing with the issue, compared to some of the difficulties in some of the othe r provinces, the way they dealt with · it and interpreted it. So there have ·been some very, very challenging times� · · Mr. Plohman: Mr. Chairman, just one more.

I would like to concur with those comments and add my appr eciation to the chairman's job, that he has been doing right across this-in a leadership role, I think, in his position in this country. Mr. Chairman: 7. (a)( 1)- pass. 7. (a)

(2) Other Expen ditures, $1 13,90 0-th e Member for Assiniboia. Order, please. Mr. Mandrake: Ju st one question, Mr. Chairman. Could the Minister- Hon . Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): NYPD. Mr. Chairman: Order, please; order, please. Mr. Plohman: We have got the Minister of Health again raising- An Honourable Member: He sure gave you a . . . yesterday. Mr. Chairman: Order, please. Mr. Plohman: I do not think he did, he distorted facts as usual. Mr. Orchard: I just . . . at the truth. Mr. Plohman: . . . lied as usual. An Honourable Member: Point of order, Mr. Chairman, withdrawal. Mr.

Orchard: Obtuse comment. Mr. Chairman: The Honourable Member for Assiniboia. Mr. Mandrake: Mr. Chairman- POINT OF ORDER Hon . James Downey (Minister of Northern Affairs, and Native Affairs): A point of order, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman:

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	34-2-44
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	34th 2nd hansardpdf 44.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	16dad0db355eddee41265845ca2bc46df8faf776

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